Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1827) Vol 2.djvu/189

 OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 171 The answer of Trajan, to which the christians of the C U A I', succeeding age have frequently appealed, discovers as * • much regard for justice and humanity as could be re- Trajan and conciled with his mistaken notions of religious policy ". sors gsta-* Instead of displaying the implacable zeal of an inqui- '^'isli a T ^1 i • ^ i- 1 p legal modo sitor, anxious to discover the most minute particles ot of proceed- heresy, and exultino- in the number of his victims, the '"S agama them. emperor expresses much more solicitude to protect the security of the innocent, than to prevent the escape of the guilty. He acknowledges the difficulty of fixing any general plan ; but he lays down two salutary rules, which often afforded relief and support to the dis- tressed christians. Though he directs the magistrates to punish such persons as are legally convicted, he prohibits them, with a very humane inconsistency, from making any enquiries concerning the supposed crimi- nals. Nor was the magistrate allowed to proceed on every kind of information. Anonymous charges the emperor rejects, as too repugnant to the equity of his government ; and he strictly requires, for the conviction of those to whom the guilt of Christianity is imputed, the positive evidence of a fair and open accuser. It is likewise probable, that the persons who assumed so in- vidious an office, were obliged to declare the grounds of their suspicions, to specify (both in respect to time and place) the secret assemblies which their christian adversary had frequented, and to disclose a great num- ber of circumstances, which were concealed with the most vigilant jealousy from the eye of the profane. If they succeeded in their prosecution, they were exposed to the resentment of a considerable and active party, to the censure of the more liberal portion of mankind, and to the ignominy which, in every age and country, has attended the character of an informer. If, on the con- trary, they failed in their proofs, they incurred the severe and perhaps capital penalty, which, according " Plin. Epistol. x. 98. 'f ertullian (Apolog. c. 5.) considers this rescript as a relaxation of the ancient penal laws, " (juasTrajanas ex parte frustratus est:" and yet 'I'ertullian, in another part of his Apologists, exposes the in- consistency of proliil)iting enquiries and enjoining punishments.