Releasing Prisoners
GEMS OF CHINESE LITERATURE
SINCERITY and a sense of duty,—these are the attributes of the virtuous. Punishment and death,— these are the portion of the depraved. To deserve death in the iniquity of guilt,—this is the climax of crime. To die without regret at the call of duty,—this is the acme of heroism.
When the second Emperor of the late Tang Dynasty had just been six years upon the throne, he released more than 300 condemned criminals, and sent them to their homes on condition that within a certain period they should return to meet the penalty of death. This was simply to bid those unprincipled wretches play the difficult role of heroes.
At the expiry of the time, they all returned to the prison without one exception. No true hero could have acted thus: those men found it easy enough. It was, to say the least of it, unnatural.
A friend has suggested that in spite of their deep-dyed guilt and unqualified want of principle, the Emperor’s act of grace might possibly have converted them from their evil ways; such a marvellous and speedy conversion not being without precedent. But I say that his Majesty did this thing solely with a view to gain for himself a good report. We may rest assured that when he released these men he knew full well they would come back in the hope of a pardon; and that therefore he released them. We may rest assured that the return of the prisoners was based upon the certainty of receiving a pardon, and that therefore they came back. And if his Majesty only released them because he felt they would return, he was simply discounting the impulses of his subjects; while if the prisoners only returned because they felt they would be pardoned, they were likewise discounting the mercy of their ruler. As far as I can see, the credit of the whole affair was a product of mutual spoliation. Where indeed was the magnanimity of the one or the heroism of the other?
X囚諭
XX修
信X行X君子。而到XXX小人。刑X 死者。乃罪犬 not checked beyond here 惡蟹。此文小λ之克當者也。帶以游死。不苟書生。而視死如歸。此主君子之克難者也。+n唐太{京之六年。錄夫峰回三百饒人。紋館還竄。約其自甜即以戰死。是以平之難糙。期小人之尤者以必能也。其囚耳潮。而平自蜍無後品。。nz君子之所難。而小人今』所品也。此宣近於人俏旋。或自持大惡恆。跟小人矣。耳捲堅信以臨之。可使變而寫君Za。窒息德入人之深。-m替人之遠。有如甚者矣。目。太葉之寫缸。所以求此名也。然安知央牌恥之去也。不意其忠來以其免。所以縱之平。且安知夫的從而告也。不管其自錯而必接免。所以在來乎。夫習英必來而獄之。是土眩下之情也。管其必免而位來。是下賠上之心也。吾兒上下交相賊以成此名也。烏有所劉雄巴蝕與夫知信義者殼。不然。太宗施德於天下。於茲咒年矣。不捷連小人不S趨惡犬罪。而一日之恩。當使詞組宛如帶荷荐信義。拉且不過之紛也。然則何露而可。目。縱而來的。度之租一…赦。而且縱之。而且來。則可知恩德之設濁。Mm社必黨之事也。扭扭夫從而來祖師而殺之可師們-S之商。著最昂之。划投入者皆不亮。是可露天下之常注乎。不可每話者。其亞人之法乎。是以堯舜三ZZ泊。必本是人稽。不立異以為高。不逆借以干譽
Let us consider. The Emperor had then been graciously reigning over the land for the space of six years. If during that time he had been unable to prevent evil men from doing evil deeds, it is absurd to suppose that he could suddenly, by a single act of grace, convert them into heroic and dutiful subjects. What, it may be asked, was the proper course to pursue ? I reply that those prisoners who returned should have been put to death; and then, on any future occasion of the kind, it would be fairly established that returning prisoners were influenced by a sincere sense of duty. But under those circumstances, there would of course be no prisoners forthcoming.
To release in that way and to pardon on return, might be all very well in an individual case. But to apply the principle repeatedly, would be equivalent to pardoning murderers in general, directly contrary to all laws human and divine. Thus it was that the wise rulers cf old based their administration upon the normal workings of the human heart. They sought no extraordinary standard of conduct with a view of exalting themselves; neither did they act in opposition to the natural instincts of man in order to secure the approbation of the public.