Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/638

 Chapters from the Biblical Law. it.'' Cain was deaf to the voice of conscience, and when he and his brother were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. There were no witnesses to the crime— only the telltale stains of blood on the ground. God appears in the legend as con ducting a court of investigation, summoning Cain before Him, and, as in Adam's case, subjecting him immediately to crossexamination. As was stated in "The Case of Adam and Eve" (THE GREEN BAG, April, 1901) the system of procedure in patriarchal days was entirely different from that of our own times, and the various rules which have been evolved to guard the rights of defend ants were unknown. If we leave the name of God out of this legend, and substitute the word "judge," we shall have a perfectly clear representation of the procedure, unaffected by theological or religious views. The case then presents itself in the following manner: Cain and Abel were last seen going out to the field together; Cain returned without his brother Abel. Search was made for Abel, and no trace of him was found, excepting the blood stains in the field in which Cain and Abel were last seen. Suspicion rested upon Cain, and he was summoned before the judge and subjected to an examination. "Where is Abel, thy brother? and Cain answered, "I do not know; am I my brother's keeper? The answer would naturally strengthen the suspicion that Cain was the murderer. An innocent man accused of fratricide would hardly have given an answer like this, which breathed defiance and showed a heartlessness unexpected, and, therefore, highly significant. Cain makes no further attempt to defend himself, apparently relying on the fact that no witnesses can be produced against him, and deeming silence his best defense. From these circumstances the inference of guilt is very strong, and his guilt is assumed by the judge, who says, "What hast thou clone? The

593

voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground." To this question there is no reply, and the punishment, that is, the sentence of the court, follows swift upon the condemnation. Not death, but exile—a punishment greater than death—is decreed. ''And now thou art cursed from the earth which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand. When thou tillest the ground it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be on the earth." This was a sentence of outlawry, and was so understood by Cain, for he feared that anyone that found him might kill him. It excom municated him from all intercourse with his fellows—he was to be a fugitive and a vaga bond. At a later period in the historical develop ment of ancient Hebrew law such decrees of outlawry were modified, and the criminal who was found guilty by the Court instead of being subjected by a general decree of out lawry to punishment at the hands of any man, was made an outlaw only so far as the kinsmen of the person injured or killed by him were concerned. He was turned over to them, and they meted out punishment for the crime of which he had been convicted. The Court had no sheriff or executioner or keeper of the jail to inflict punishment on a criminal, and in the evolution of the law this duty devolved on the kinsmen. To society at large the criminal, so far as meting out punishment was concerned, was like any other man, and any injury done to him was punishable like an injury clone to any inno cent man. It was only the kinsmen who had the right to inflict the punishment. The figure of speech which is used, wherein the ground is cursed which drank in his brother's blood, and being cursed would refuse to yield its crop to him working it, was equivalent to a decree of excommunication, driving him from the soil which he had been cultivating, and which, without the help and propinquity of his neighbors, would yield him