Retaliation was directed in certain cases of personal injury, Exod. xxi, 24; but other satisfaction was usually provided, if the injured person would accept it. Afterwards this law was perverted by the Jews to justify personal revenge, Matt. v, 39.

Restitution was for injuries done to the property of others, either unintentional or designed. In the latter case, corporal punishment was sometimes added. See Lev. xxiv, 18; Exod. xxi, 32–36, and xxii, 7-9. A law was made in reference to damage caused by fire, Exod. xxii, 6; this was evidently prospective, as they were then in the wilderness. Fines were sometimes fixed, Deut. xxii, 19-29; at other times they were left to the will of the judge, Exod. xxi, 32. The sin and trespass-offerings, Lev. iv, and vi, were also, in some respects, fines, and applied to injuries of this nature. Compensation was permitted, but forbidden where life was lost, Exod. xxi, 28-30.

Imprisonment, as a punishment, was early in use among the Egyptians, Gen. xxxix and xl; but is not directed by the Jewish law. The prisoner, however, was kept in custody until his trial, Lev. xxiv, 12; Num. xv, 34; and subsequently this seems to have been a punishment, Jer. xxxvii, 15; 2 Chron. xvi, 10; 1 Kings xxii, 27. In later ages, John the Baptist and Peter were imprisoned, Matt. xiv, and Acts xii. Debtors were prisoners, Matt. xviii, 30; and Barabbas was kept as such, Mark xv, 6; but probably only until trial or punishment. There was at Jerusalem a common prison or public jail, Acts v, 18. In the old Testament, names are applied to prisons. The word used (Gen. xli, 15) signifies a cistern. Chains are often mentioned, Psa. cvii, 10; cxlix, 8; Jer. xl, 4; for, except the dungeons, these prisons were considered to require additional security. Peter was bound between two soldiers, and stocks were in use, Acts xvi, 24; Job xiii, 27; xxxiii, 11. These stocks were often instruments of torture, like those used in the bishops' prisons in the days of Popery, of which the martyr Philpot could say, like the apostles in former times, "God be praised that he hath thought me worthy to suffer anything for his name's sake. Better it is to sit in the stocks of this world, than to sit in the stocks of a damnable conscience."

What rendered imprisonment most severe, was the arbi

trary power possessed by the jailer, who, in Eastern lands, is even now only responsible for the person of his prisoners. He may treat them as he pleases, and this is often with great harshness, unless liberal pay is given, where property or wealth is supposed to exist. The horrors of the dungeon are described by Jeremiah, ch. xxxvii, 16-20; and this view adds force to Psa. lxxix, 11, and cvii, 17. If the prisoners escaped, the keeper was liable to their punishment, Acts xii, 19. This explains the alarm of the jailer, Acts xvi, 27. Slavery was sometimes a punishment, (2 Kings iv, 1; Exod. xxii, 3,) where restitution was required, which the owner was unable to make. Severity in observing this custom is reproved, Neh. v, 8.

Banishment and forfeiture of property were not known among the Jews until after the captivity. In earlier days, when so much stress was laid upon the Jews really being a separate people, the worshipers of the only true God, banishment would have been worse than death, involving much severity unknown to us. See 1 Sam. xxvi, 19.

Putting out the eyes, or maiming, was not allowed as a punishment under the Mosaic law; but in the arbitrary reigns of evil kings it was probably introduced. It still prevails in the East. Travelers have described the cruelties inflicted by Achmed, called Djezzar, or the butcher, the late Pasha of Acre, on his attendants, many of whom had lost an eye, or ear, or an arm, others had their noses slit; nor were any means of redress open to them. Another painful punishment was plucking the hair from the head or beard. This also belonged to later times. Isa. 1, 6.

Excommunication was in fact a banishment from privileges, which in case of penitence might be restored. The first express mention of it is found Ezra x, 7, 8; Neh. xiii, 5. Latterly the Jews made three distinctions in this punishment. The first, Nicbri, involved privations, and separation from society, forbidding the culprit to approach nearer than seven feet. This was the casting out of the synagogue, John ix, 22; xvi, 2; Luke vi, 22; and remained in force thirty days, unless shortened. The second, Cherem, was a more severe exclusion, prohibiting the individual from buying and selling, and including an anathema, that is, a sentence signifying danger of death. This was awful in a temporal sense, yet more so if spiritualized. Heb. vi, 8.

The third description, called Maranatha, prohibited all in-
tercourse and communication. The name, in the Syriac
language, signified that the Lord would come, and that the
offender was to look for the day of judgment. Here Jude
14, 15, and 2 Thess. i, 8-10, may be applied. The reader
will remember how it is said that our Lord cursed, or pro-
nounced sentence on, the barren fig-tree, Mark xi, 21; that is,
declared it should remain unfruitful, an emblem of the state
of the Jewish nation, Isa. v, 6; Psa. lxxx, 12; Rom. xi, 20.
But excommunication, though at first a salutary inflic-
tion, became at last a terrible engine of oppression in the
hands of the priesthood, not only from the privations and
sufferings it occasioned, but still more from the manner in
which it worked upon the fears and feelings. To be de-
voted, or accursed, delivered over to Satan, with solemn
imprecations and ceremonies, such as relinquishing of lights,
and depriving of spiritual privileges, was indeed severe.
The Romish priesthood, assuming power, under the Chris-
tian dispensation, were eager to avail themselves of it, as is
prophetically described, Rev. xiii, 17; and bitter sufferings
were thus occasioned to the Protestants and reformers.
one who reads the records of Foxe or Strype, can treat this
subject with indifference, or wish for the restoration of such
proceedings as still exist where Popery is dominant, and
have been formerly known in England; for, to use the words
of Cowper,—-

"Then priests, with bulls and briefs, and shaven crowns,
And griping fists, and unrelenting frowns,

Legates and delegates with powers from hell,

Though heavenly in pretension, fleeced thee well;

And to this hour, to keep it fresh in mind,

Some twigs of that old scourge are left behind."

No

How different from the principles of the apostles, 2 Cor. i, 24; 1 Pet. v, 3.

The crimes which were punished with loss of life, were called sins unto death, or worthy of death, 1 John v, 16; Deut. xxi, 22. Those guilty of them were called sons of death, 1 Sam. xx, 31; xxvi, 16; according to the figurative style which was then common. Stoning was the usual mode of putting to death, where no special method was enjoined, Deut. xiii, 9, 10. It is said that the criminal was placed on an elevation, thrown violently down, and stoned until he was crushed by the blows. The people often

showed their eagerness to stone our Saviour and his followers, John viii, 59; x, 31; Acts vii, 58; xiv, 19; Mark xii, 4; Matt. xxiii, 37.

Those slain by the sword were put to death in any way the executioner thought proper, often cut down, and, as it were, hacked to pieces, 1 Kings ii, 25-34. This was for blood-guiltiness. The same punishment was sometimes inflicted on whole cities, or large masses of offenders; which then assumed the form of military execution, and included beheading the chief offenders.

STONING TO DEATH.

Sometimes, after stoning, the body was consumed by fire. Burning alive, though very ancient, was not common. Judah sentenced Tamar to it as a punishment for profligacy, Gen. xxxviii, 24. Cases of a similar kind are noticed in the law of Moses, Lev. xx, 14; xxi, 9. The fiery furnace, or pit of fire, used as a punishment by the Assyrian monarch, was probably resorted to in order to strike awe, Dan. iii. But though unusual, the sentence was not unprecedented, the furnace was 66 wont to be heated."

Casting down from an eminence, (Luke iv, 29,) was a punishment in common use among the Romans, but not so with the Jews. The death of Jezebel was most likely a sudden opportune thought, 2 Kings ix, 33. Death by drowning is alluded to by Christ, Matt. xviii, 6. It was in use among neighboring countries, from whom the Galileans probably adopted it. It is mentioned by Josephus, as having been adopted in reference to some partisans of Herod, Bruising or pounding in a mortar was an Eastern

punishment, which is still used among the Turks, and even allowed as a privilege by their lawyers. It may be alluded to, Prov. xxvii, 22.

Cutting asunder was less frequent among the Jews than in other Oriental nations. It is mentioned, Heb. xi, 37. There is a Jewish tradition that Isaiah thus perished in the reign of Manasseh. Beating to death is also referred to, Heb. xi, 35. Antiochus inflicted this upon many in the times of the Maccabees. Among the heathens a frequent punishment was exposure to wild beasts, Dan. vi. Paul refers to this, 1 Cor. xv, 32; 2 Tim. iv, 17.

Crucifixion was a Roman punishment, most acute and painful. It consisted in fastening the sufferer to two beams of wood, placed transversely, by means of nails fixed in his limbs. It was rendered especially hateful to the Jews, on account of the exposure of the body after death. On this account, the hanging on a tree was pronounced to be accursed, and this rendered the death of Absalom the more remarkable and ignominious, 2 Sam. xviii, 9-17. When, as in his case, stones were heaped on the body, (Josh. vii, 25,) the piles were increased by passengers throwing stones, to express aversion. In very marked cases, houses were demolished, and the sites used as receptacles for filth, 2 Kings ix, 27; Dan. ii, 5; v, 29.

CHAPTER XV.

TREATIES, COVENANTS, AND OATHS.

MANY of the Jewish laws and observances were evidently designed to keep them as a separate people from the heathen nations by whom they were surrounded. Thus they were kept apart, especially in the period between the return from the captivity until the time of Christ. Since the destruction of Jerusalem, though scattered among the nations, they have remained a distinct people; but their adherence to the laws requiring separation has been, in truth, made void by traditionary interpretations, which have excited and maintained in them even hatred to Christians; not only to those who, actuated by the mistaken notions of the