1
昔者先王因人之知畏而作刑，因人之知恥而作法。 畏也、恥也，五性之良知，七情之大閑也。 是故，刑以治已然，法以禁未然，畏以處小人，恥以遇君子。 君子知恥，小人知畏，天下平矣！ 是故先王養其威而用之，畏可以教愛。 慎其法而行之，恥可以立廉。 愛以興仁，廉以興義，仁義興，刑法不幾於措乎？ 金初，法制簡易，無輕重貴賤之別，刑、贖並行，此可施諸新國，非經世久遠之規也。 天會以來，漸從吏議，皇統頒制，兼用古律。 厥後，正隆又有《續降制書》。 大定有《權宜條理》，有《重修制條》。 明昌之世，《律義》、《敕條》並修，品式當浸備。 既而《泰和律義》成書，宜無遺憾。 然國脈紓蹙，風俗醇樗，世道升降，君子觀一代之刑法，每有以先知焉。 金法以杖折徒，累及二百，州縣立威，甚者置刃於杖，虐於肉刑。 季年，君臣好用筐篋故習，由是以深文傅致為能吏，以慘酷辦事為長才。 百司奸贓真犯，此可決也，而微過亦然。 風紀之臣，失糾皆決。 考滿，校其受決多寡以為殿最。 原其立法初意，欲以同疏戚、壹小大，使之咸就繩約於律令之中，莫不齊手並足以聽公上之所為，蓋秦人強主威之意也。 是以待宗室少恩，待大夫士少禮。 終金之代，忍恥以就功名，雖一時名士有所不免。 至於避辱遠引，罕聞其人。 殊不知君子無恥而犯義，則小人無畏而犯刑矣。 是故論者於教愛立廉之道，往往致太息之意焉。 雖然，世宗臨御，法司奏讞，或去律援經，或揆義制法。 近古人君聽斷，言幾於道，鮮有及之者。 章宗、宣宗嘗親民事，當寧裁決，寬猛出入雖時或過中，跡其矜恕之多，猶有祖風焉。 簡牘所存，可為高抬貴手者，《本紀》、《刑志》詳略互見云。
In ancient times, the former kings instituted punishments in response to humanity's capacity for fear, and established laws in response to humanity's capacity for shame. Fear and shame are the innate moral sense within the five inherent dispositions and the great boundary restraining the seven emotions. Thus punishments address what has already occurred, laws prevent what has not yet occurred, fear governs petty men, and shame governs noble men. When the noble know shame and the petty know fear, the realm is at peace. Therefore the former kings cultivated their authority and put it to use, for fear can teach one to love. They handled their laws with care and enforced them, for shame can establish integrity. Love engenders benevolence, integrity engenders righteousness; when benevolence and righteousness flourish, punishments and laws would nearly become unnecessary, would they not? In the early Jin, the legal system was rudimentary, with no gradations of severity or rank; physical punishment and commutation by payment operated side by side. Such measures might suit a newly founded state, but they were no model for enduring governance. From the Tianhui period onward, policy gradually followed officials' counsel; under Huangtong, regulations were promulgated that incorporated elements of older penal codes. Later, under Zhenglong, there appeared the Continued Promulgated Regulatory Documents. The Dading era produced the Provisional Articles and Ordinances and the Recast Regulatory Articles. During the Mingchang reign, the Legal Commentaries and Imperial Decree Articles were both revised, and the classification of offenses should have grown increasingly comprehensive. When the Tahe Legal Commentaries were finally completed, nothing should have been left wanting. Yet as the dynasty's vital force waned and customs grew rustic, as the moral climate shifted, learned observers who studied a generation's penal code could often read in advance which way the realm was headed. Jin law permitted beating with staffs to substitute for penal servitude, with strokes accumulating to as many as two hundred; local officials used this to assert their authority, and in the worst cases they fitted blades to the staffs, making the punishment more brutal than dismemberment itself. In the dynasty's closing years, court and ministers alike fell back on petty corruption as custom; officials who twisted the law to secure convictions passed as men of ability, and those who handled cases with cruelty passed as men of outstanding talent. Flagrant corruption among the bureaucracy warranted decisive punishment, yet even minor infractions were punished just as harshly. Even censors responsible for discipline were beaten for any failure to correct wrongdoing. At term's end, officials were ranked according to how many beating sentences they had imposed—more strokes meant a better evaluation. The original intent behind their legislation was to erase distinctions of kinship and rank, to force everyone alike into the constraints of statute, to make all stand with hands level and feet aligned, awaiting whatever the throne commanded—essentially the Qin ideal of concentrating sovereign power. Hence the court showed scant kindness toward the imperial clan and scant ritual deference toward the official elite. Throughout the Jin dynasty, men endured humiliation to advance their careers, and even the most celebrated scholars of the age were not spared. Men who withdrew from office to avoid disgrace were exceedingly rare. They failed to see that when the noble lose their sense of shame and transgress moral duty, the petty lose their fear and transgress the penal code. For this reason, commentators who reflected on the path of teaching love and establishing integrity often could only sigh in regret. Nevertheless, under Emperor Shizong's reign, when legal offices reported cases for judgment, they sometimes set aside the code to appeal to the classics, and sometimes fashioned law by weighing moral principle. Among rulers of recent antiquity in hearing and deciding cases, his pronouncements came close to the Way itself; few could equal him. Emperors Zhangzong and Xuanzong sometimes took civil cases in hand themselves, rendering judgment from the throne; though their leniency and severity occasionally overshot the mark, the record of their compassion and clemency still bore traces of their forebears' style. What survives in the written record worthy of note may be found in the Basic Annals and this Treatise on Punishment, where detail and summary complement each other throughout.
2
金國舊俗，輕罪笞以柳篸，殺人及盜劫者，擊其腦殺之，沒其家貲，以十之四入官，其六償主，並以家人為奴婢。 其親屬欲以馬牛雜物贖者從之。 或重罪亦聽自贖，然恐無辨于齊民，則劓、刵以為別。 其獄則掘地深廣數丈為之。 太宗雖承太祖無變舊風之訓，亦稍用遼、宋法。 天會七年，詔凡竊盜，但得物徒三年，十貫以上徒五年，刺字充下軍，三十貫以上終身，仍以贓滿盡命刺字於面，五十貫以上死，征償如舊制。 熙宗天眷元年十月，禁親王以下佩刀入宮。 衛禁之法，實自此始。 三年，復取河南地，乃詔其民，約所用刑法皆從律文，罷獄卒酷毒刑具，以從寬恕。 至皇統間，詔諸臣，以本朝舊制，兼采隋、唐之制，參遼、宋之法。 類以成書，名曰《皇統制》，頒行中外。 時制，杖罪至百，則臀、背分決。 及海陵庶人以脊近心腹，遂禁之，雖主決奴牌，亦論以違制。 又多變易舊制，至正隆間，著為《續降制書》，與《皇統制》並行焉。 然二君任情用法，自有異於是者矣。 及世宗即位，以正隆之亂，盜賊公行，兵甲未息，一時制旨多從時宜，遂集為《軍前權宜條理》。 大定四年，尚書省奏：「大興民男子李十、婦人楊仙哥並以亂言當斬。」 上曰：「愚民不識典法，有司亦未嘗丁寧誥戒，豈可遽加極刑。」 以減死論。 五年，命有司復加刪定《條理》，與前《制書》兼用。 七年，左藏庫夜有盜殺都監郭良臣盜金珠，求盜不得。 命點檢司治之，執其可疑者八人鞫之，掠三人死，五人誣伏。 上疑之，命同知大興府事移剌道雜治。 既而親軍百夫長阿思缽鬻金於市，事覺，伏誅。 上聞之曰：「箠楚之下，何求不得，奈何鞫獄者不以情求之乎？」 賜死者錢人二百貫，不死者五十貫。 於是禁護衛百夫長、五十夫長非直日不得帶刀入宮。 是歲，斷死囚二十人。 八年，製品官犯賭博法，贓不滿五十貫者其法杖，聽贖。 再犯者杖之。 且曰：「杖者所以罰小人也。 既為職官，當先廉恥，既無廉恥，故以小人之罰罰之。」 九年，因御史臺奏獄事，上曰：「近聞法官或各執所見，或觀望宰執之意，自今制無正條者皆以律文為准。」 復命杖至百者臀、背分受，如舊法。 已而，上謂宰臣曰：「朕念罪人杖不分受，恐至深重，乃令復舊。 今聞民間有不欲者，其令罷之。」 十年，尚書省奏：「河中府張錦自言復父仇，法當死。」 上曰：「彼復父仇，又自言之，烈士也。 以減死論。」 十一年，詔諭有司曰：「應司獄廨舍須近獄安置，囚禁之事常親提控，其獄卒必選年深而信實者輪直。」 十二年，尚書省言：「內丘令蒲察台補自科部內錢立德政碑，復有其餘錢二百餘貫，罪當除名。 今遇赦當敘，仍免徵贓。」 上以貪偽，勿敘，且曰：「乞取之贓，若有赦原，予者何辜？ 自今可並追還其主，惟應入官者免徵。」 尚書省奏，盜有發塚者，上曰：「功臣墳墓亦有被發者，蓋無告捕之賞，故人無所畏。 自今告得實者量與給賞。」 故咸平尹石抹阿沒剌以贓死於獄，上謂：「其不屍諸市已為厚幸。 貧窮而為盜賊，蓋不得已。 三品職官以贓至死，愚亦甚矣！ 其諸子可皆除名。」 先是，詔自今除名人子孫有在仕者並取奏裁。 十三年，詔立春後、立秋前，及大祭祀，月朔、望，上、下弦，二十四氣，雨未晴，夜未明，休暇並禁屠宰日，皆不聽決死刑，惟強盜則不待秋後。 十五年，詔有司曰：「朕惟人命至重，而在制竊盜贓至五十貫者處死，自今可令至八十貫者處死。」 十七年，陳言者乞設提刑司，以糾諸路刑獄之失。 尚書省議，以謂久恐滋弊。 上乃命距京師數千里外懷冤上訴者，集其事以待選官就問。
By Jin custom, minor offenses were punished with flogging using willow switches; murderers and robbers were struck on the head and killed, their household property confiscated, with four-tenths going to the state and six-tenths to compensate the victim, while all members of the household were enslaved. Relatives who wished to ransom them with horses, cattle, or other goods were permitted to do so. Even serious offenses sometimes allowed self-ransom, but lest offenders be indistinguishable from ordinary folk, they were marked by cutting off the nose or ears. Prisons were pits dug several zhang deep and wide in the earth. Emperor Taizong, though he inherited Taizu's injunction to preserve old customs unchanged, also drew somewhat on Liao and Song legal practice. In the seventh year of Tianhui, an edict decreed that any thief who obtained goods would serve three years at penal labor; ten strings or more warranted five years, tattooing, and assignment to the lower army; thirty strings or more meant lifelong servitude, with full-value thefts tattooed on the face; fifty strings or more meant death, with compensation collected as under the old system. In the tenth month of the first year of Tianjuan under Emperor Xizong, imperial princes and those below them were forbidden to carry swords into the palace. Palace security regulations in fact date from this decree. In the third year, after recovering the Henan region, the court issued an edict its inhabitants that all criminal law applied there should follow statutory text, abolishing jailers' cruel instruments of torture in favor of lenient treatment. By the Huangtong period, ministers were commanded to compile law drawing on the dynasty's own old institutions, incorporating elements of Sui and Tang practice and referencing Liao and Song codes. These were classified into a completed code named the Huangtong Regulations and promulgated throughout the realm. Under that system, when a beating sentence reached one hundred strokes, the blows were divided between buttocks and back. When the usurper Hailing took power, he forbade back strokes because the back lies near the vital organs; even when masters punished slaves by tablet, back strokes were treated as a violation of regulations. He also altered the old system in many respects; by the Zhenglong period these were codified as the Continued Promulgated Regulatory Documents, applied alongside the Huangtong Regulations. Yet both rulers applied the law as whim dictated, often departing from what the codes prescribed. When Shizong ascended the throne, amid the chaos of the Zhenglong period, with bandits roaming freely and warfare still unsettled, many temporary edicts followed expedient needs and were collected as the Provisional Articles and Ordinances Before the Army. In the fourth year of Dading, the Secretariat reported: 'The Daxing commoners Li Shi, a man, and Yang Xian'ge, a woman, have both spoken disorderly words and should be beheaded.' The emperor said: 'These foolish commoners do not know the law, and the responsible offices have never earnestly warned them—how can we hastily impose the death penalty?' They were sentenced to commuted death instead. In the fifth year, he ordered officials to revise the Articles and Ordinances again for use alongside the earlier Regulatory Documents. In the seventh year, a thief broke into the Left Treasury at night, killed the director Guo Liangchen, and stole gold and pearls, but the culprit could not be found. The Inspection Office was ordered to investigate; eight suspects were seized and interrogated, three dying under torture and five falsely confessing. The emperor grew suspicious and ordered Yila Dao, associate administrator of Daxing Prefecture, to conduct a separate investigation. Soon afterward an imperial guard centurion named Asibo was discovered selling gold in the market; the crime was exposed and he was executed. On hearing this the emperor said: 'Under the rod and whip, what confession cannot be extracted? Why do interrogators not seek the truth according to the facts?' He granted two hundred strings of cash to the families of the dead and fifty strings to the survivors. Thereupon centurions and half-centurions of the guard were forbidden to carry swords into the palace except on their assigned duty days. That year, twenty prisoners were sentenced to death. In the eighth year, regulations were issued that ranked officials who violated gambling laws, when the stakes did not reach fifty strings, would receive beating by law with commutation permitted. Repeat offenders were beaten. He also said: 'The staff is the punishment reserved for petty men. Since they hold office, they should possess integrity and shame; lacking both, they are punished with the penalty reserved for petty men.' In the ninth year, when the Censorate reported on prison affairs, the emperor said: 'I have lately heard that judges sometimes cling to their own views or watch for the chief ministers' intent—from now on, wherever regulations lack a proper article, the statutory text shall be the standard.' He also restored the old rule that when a beating reached one hundred strokes, the blows were divided between buttocks and back. Shortly afterward, the emperor told his chief ministers: 'I had feared that when beating was not divided between buttocks and back, the injury would be too severe, and so I restored the old practice. Now I hear that the people do not want it—let it be abolished.' In the tenth year, the Secretariat reported: 'Zhang Jin of Hezhong Prefecture has declared that he avenged his father's death; by law he should die.' The emperor said: 'He avenged his father and confessed it himself—he is a man of fierce integrity. He was sentenced to commuted death instead.' In the eleventh year, an edict instructed officials: 'Prison offices must be located near the jail; imprisonment must be personally supervised; and jailers must be chosen from experienced, trustworthy men serving in rotation.' In the twelfth year, the Secretariat reported: 'Pucha Taibu, magistrate of Neiqiu, used departmental funds to erect a merit stele and kept over two hundred strings besides; the offense warrants dismissal from office. An amnesty now entitles him to reinstatement, with confiscation waived.' The emperor, deeming this greedy fraud, forbade reinstatement and said: 'If stolen goods obtained by extortion are pardoned by amnesty, what wrong have the victims done? Henceforth such goods must all be returned to their owners; only what should go to the state may be exempted from collection.' When the Secretariat reported tomb robberies, the emperor said: 'Even the graves of meritorious officials have been opened—probably because there is no reward for reporting and capturing them, so people have nothing to fear. Henceforth informants whose reports prove true shall receive rewards in proportion.' The former administrator of Xianping, Shimou Amela, died in prison for corruption; the emperor remarked: 'That his corpse was not exposed in the marketplace was already great leniency. Men who turn to banditry out of poverty do so from necessity. But for a third-rank official to die for corruption—how profoundly foolish! All his sons shall be dismissed from office.' Earlier, an edict had decreed that henceforth the sons of dismissed officials who held office must all be submitted for imperial decision. In the thirteenth year, an edict forbade capital sentences from after Beginning of Spring until before Beginning of Autumn, and also on days of great sacrifice, new and full moons, quarter moons, the twenty-four seasonal nodes, rainy days, before dawn, holidays, and days when slaughter was forbidden—except for armed robbers, who need not wait until autumn. In the fifteenth year, the emperor issued an edict officials: 'I hold human life supremely precious; yet the regulations execute thieves when stolen goods reach fifty strings—from now on let the threshold be eighty strings.' In the seventeenth year, memorialists requested establishing an office to supervise punishments and correct errors in prisons on the various circuits. The Secretariat deliberated that such an office would breed abuses over time. The emperor instead ordered that grievants appealing from thousands of li beyond the capital should have their cases collected pending dispatch of selected officials to investigate on site.
3
時濟南尹梁肅言，犯徒者當免杖。 朝廷以為今法已輕于古，恐滋奸惡，不從。 嘗詔宰臣，朝廷每歲再遣審錄官，本以為民伸冤滯也，而所遣多不盡心，但文具而已。 審錄之官，非止理問重刑，凡訴訟案牘，皆當閱實是非，囚徒不應囚繫則當釋放，官吏之罪即以狀聞，失糾察者嚴加懲斷，不以贖論。 又以監察御史體察東北路官吏，輒受訟牒，為不稱職，笞之五十。 又謂宰臣曰：「比聞大理寺斷獄，雖無疑者亦經旬月，何耶？」 參知政事移剌道對曰：「在法，決死囚不過七日，徒刑五日，杖罪三日。」 上曰：「法有程限，而輒違之，弛慢也。」 罷朝，御批送尚書省曰：「凡法寺斷重輕罪各有期限，法官但犯皆的決，豈敢有違。 但以卿等所見不一，至於再三批送，其議定奏者書奏牘亦不下旬日，以致事多滯留，自今當勿復爾。」 又曰：「故廣甯尹高楨為政尚猛，雖小過，有杖而殺之者。 即罪至於死而情或可恕，猶當念之，況其小過者乎？ 人之性命安可輕哉！」 上以正隆《續降制書》多任己意，傷於苛察。 而與皇統之《制》並用，是非淆亂，莫知適從，奸吏因得上下其手。 遂置局，命大理卿移剌綎總中外明法者共校正。 乃以皇統、正隆之《制》及大定《軍前權宜條理》、後《續行條理》，倫其輕重，刪繁正失。 制有闕者以律文足之。 制、律俱闕及疑而不能決者，則取旨畫定。 《軍前權宜條理》內有可以常行者亦為定法，余未應者亦別為一部存之。 參以近所定徒杖減半之法，凡校定千一百九十條，分為十二卷，以《大定重修制條》為名，詔頒行焉。
At that time Liang Su, administrator of Jinan, proposed that those sentenced to penal servitude should be exempted from beating. The court held that current law was already more lenient than antiquity and feared encouraging wickedness, and did not adopt the proposal. He once told his chief ministers: 'The court dispatches review officials twice each year precisely to redress the people's grievances, yet those dispatched mostly fail to apply themselves and merely go through the motions.' Review officials should not limit themselves to capital cases; they must examine the merits of all litigation, release prisoners who should not be held, report officials' offenses by memorial, and punish failures of oversight severely, without commutation. A surveillance censor investigating officials on the Northeast Circuit was beaten fifty strokes for improperly accepting litigation documents, deeming him unfit for office. He again told his chief ministers: 'I have lately heard that the Court of Judicial Review takes ten days or a month even for cases without doubt—why is this?' Vice Councilor Yila Dao replied: 'By law, capital cases must be decided within seven days, penal servitude within five, and beating offenses within three.' The emperor said: 'The law sets time limits, yet they violate them at will—this is negligence.' After court, an imperial annotation was sent to the Secretariat: 'Every judicial office has time limits for deciding offenses of every severity; judges must render definitive judgments for every case—how dare they violate these limits? But because your views differ, cases are sent back repeatedly for reconsideration; even when deliberation is settled, drafting the memorial takes no less than ten days, causing many cases to linger—from now on this must cease.' He also said: 'The former administrator of Guangning, Gao Zhen, governed with excessive severity, beating men to death even for minor faults. Even when an offense warrants death yet the circumstances may warrant mercy, one should still reflect carefully—how much more so for minor faults? How can human life be treated so lightly!' The emperor held that the Zhenglong Continued Promulgated Regulatory Documents too often followed personal whim and were excessively harsh. Used alongside the Huangtong Regulations, they created such confusion of standards that no one knew which code to follow, allowing corrupt officials to manipulate outcomes at will. Thereupon a bureau was established, and Chief of the Office of Imperial Justice Yila Su was charged with assembling legal experts from inside and outside the court to collate and revise the code. They drew on the Huangtong and Zhenglong Regulations, the Dading Provisional Articles and Ordinances for Military Campaigns, and the later Continued Operational Articles and Ordinances, arranging punishments by severity while cutting redundancy and correcting errors. Where the regulations were incomplete, they supplemented them with statutory provisions. Cases where both regulations and statutes were silent, or where doubt could not be resolved, were settled by obtaining the emperor's decision and issuing a definitive ruling. Provisions within the Provisional Articles and Ordinances for Military Campaigns that could be applied on a standing basis were incorporated into permanent law; those not yet applicable were preserved in a separate fascicle. Incorporating the recently adopted rule halving penalties of penal servitude and beating, they finalized 1,190 articles in twelve fascicles under the title Recast Regulatory Articles of the Dading Era, and an edict ordered their promulgation throughout the realm.
4
二十年，上見有蹂踐禾稼者，謂宰相曰：「今後有踐民田者杖六十，盜人穀者杖八十，並償其直。」 二十一年，尚書省奏：「鞏州民馬俊妻安姐與管卓姦，俊以斧擊殺之，罪當死。」 上曰：「可減死一等，以戒敗風俗者。」 二十二年，上謂宰臣曰：「凡尚書省送大理寺文字，一斷便可聞奏。 如烏古論公說事，近取觀之，初送法寺如法裁斷，再送司直披詳，又送闔寺參詳，反覆三次，妄生情見，不得結絕。 朕以國政不宜滯留，昨雖炙艾六百炷，未嘗一日不坐朝，欲使卿等知勤政也。 自今可止一次送寺，闔寺披詳，荀有情見即具以聞，毋使滯留也。」 二十三年，尚書省奏：「益都民範德年七十六，為劉祐毆殺。 祐法當死，以祐父母年俱七十餘，家無侍丁，上請。」 上曰：「范德與祐父母年相若，自當如父母相待，至毆殺之，難議末減，其論如法。」 尚書省奏招討司官及禿裏乞取本部財物制，上曰：「遠人止可矜恤，若進貢不闕，更以兵邀之，強取財物，與盜何異？ 且或因而生事，何可不懲。」 又曰：「朕所行制條，皆臣下所奏行者，天下事多，人力有限，豈能一一盡之。 必因一事奏聞，方知有所窒礙，隨即更定。 今有聖旨、條理，復有制條，是使奸吏得以輕重也。」 大興府民趙無事帶酒亂言，父千捕告，法當死。 上曰：「為父不恤其子而告捕之，其正如此，人所甚難。 可特減死一等。」 武器署丞奕、直長骨赧坐受草畔子財，奕杖八十，骨赧笞二十，監察御史梁襄等坐失糾察罰俸一月。 上曰：「監察，人君之耳目。 事由朕發，何以監察為？」 上以法寺斷獄，以漢字譯女直字，會法又復各出情見，妄生穿鑿，徒致稽緩，遂詔罷情見。 二十五年二月，上以婦人在囚，輸作不便，而杖不分決，與殺無異，遂命免死輸作者，決杖二百而免輸作，以臀、背分決。 時後族有犯罪者，尚書省引「八議」奏，上曰：「法者，公天下持平之器，若親者犯而從減，是使之恃此而橫恣也。 昔漢文誅薄昭，有足取者。 前二十年時，後族濟州節度使烏林達鈔兀嘗犯大辟，朕未嘗宥。 今乃宥之，是開後世輕重出入之門也。」 宰臣曰：「古所以議親，尊天子，別庶人也。」 上曰：「外家自異於宗室，漢外戚權太重，至移國祚，朕所以不令諸王、公主有權也。 夫有功于國，議勳可也。 至若議賢，既曰賢矣，肯犯法乎？ 脫或緣坐，則固當減請也。」 二十六年，遂奏定太子妃大功以上親，及與皇家無服者、及賢而犯私罪者，皆不入議。 上謂宰臣曰：「法有倫而不倫者，其改定之。」 監察御史陶鈞以攜妓游北苑，歌飲池島間，迫近殿廷，提控官石玠聞而發之。 鈞令其友閻恕屬玠得緩。 既而事覺，法司奏，當徒二年半。 詔以鈞耳目之官，攜妓入禁苑，無上下之分，杖六十，玠、恕皆坐之。 二十八年，上以制條拘於舊律，間有難解之詞，命刪修明白，使人皆曉之。
In the twentieth year, seeing people trampling crops in the fields, the emperor told his chief ministers: 'Henceforth anyone who treads upon a farmer's fields shall receive sixty strokes of the staff, and anyone who steals another's grain shall receive eighty, and in both cases shall pay full compensation.' In the twenty-first year, the Department of State Affairs reported: 'A commoner of Gong Prefecture, Ma Jun, learned that his wife Anjie had committed adultery with Guan Zhuo and killed him with an axe—a capital offense.' The emperor said: 'Reduce the death sentence by one grade, as a warning to those who corrupt public morals.' In the twenty-second year, the emperor told his chief ministers: 'Whenever the Department of State Affairs forwards a case to the Office of Imperial Justice, a single adjudication should suffice for reporting to the throne. Consider the Wugulun Gong case, which We recently reviewed: it was first sent to the legal office for adjudication under the code, then to the reviewing censor for detailed scrutiny, then to the entire tribunal for joint deliberation—three rounds in all, during which discretionary interpretations were invented on every pass, and the case still could not be closed. We hold that state business must not be delayed; though yesterday We underwent six hundred moxibustion treatments, We did not miss a single day of court, precisely so that you would understand what diligent governance requires. Henceforth send each case to the tribunal only once for full deliberation; if discretionary views arise, report them completely, but do not allow cases to stagnate.' In the twenty-third year, the Department of State Affairs reported: 'Fan De, a seventy-six-year-old commoner of Yidu, was beaten to death by Liu You. You merited death under the law, but because both his parents were over seventy and the household had no adult son to support them, a petition for clemency was submitted.' The emperor said: 'Fan De was about the same age as You's parents and should have treated them with the deference owed to elders; that he beat one of them to death makes mitigation difficult—adjudicate strictly according to law.' When the Department of State Affairs submitted regulations on pacification commissioners and Tuli envoys seizing local property, the emperor said: 'Frontier peoples deserve compassion; if their tribute obligations are met, to send troops to waylay them and seize their goods by force—how is that different from robbery? Moreover, such conduct could easily provoke disturbances—how can it go unpunished?' He added: 'The regulatory articles I promulgate are all measures officials have recommended; affairs across the realm are countless and human capacity finite—no ruler can anticipate every contingency. Only when a specific case is reported do we discover where the law proves obstructive, and we revise it at once. Yet now we have imperial edicts, administrative ordinances, and regulatory articles all at once—which only enables corrupt officials to manipulate penalties at will.' Zhao Wushi, a commoner of Daxing Prefecture, spoke treasonously while drunk; his father had him arrested and denounced him—a capital offense.' The emperor said: 'For a father to set aside pity for his own son and turn him in—such rectitude is truly difficult for any person to achieve. Reduce the death sentence by one grade as a special dispensation.' Weapons Office Deputy Director Yi and Section Chief Guhan were convicted of accepting bribes from Caobanzi; Yi was sentenced to eighty strokes of the staff and Guhan to twenty strokes of the bamboo, while Investigating Censor Liang Xiang and others, convicted of failing to investigate, were fined one month's salary. The emperor said: 'Investigating censors are the monarch's eyes and ears. If every case originates with me, what purpose do investigating censors serve?' Because the legal office, when adjudicating cases, translated Jurchen records into Chinese and each judge then produced his own discretionary interpretation, inventing forced constructions that only delayed proceedings, the emperor decreed the abolition of discretionary views. In the second month of the twenty-fifth year, noting that imprisoned women could not conveniently perform penal labor and that undivided beating was tantamount to execution, the emperor ordered that those whose death sentences were commuted to penal labor should instead receive two hundred strokes divided between buttocks and back and be exempted from labor. When a member of the empress's clan committed an offense and the Department of State Affairs invoked the Eight Deliberations, the emperor said: 'Law is the instrument by which the realm is held in impartial balance; if kinsmen of the throne may offend yet receive leniency, they will rely upon that privilege to act with impunity. When Emperor Wen of Han put Bo Zhao to death, he showed the right way forward. Twenty years ago, Wulin Da Chaowu of the empress's clan, then military governor of Jizhou, committed a capital offense, and I did not grant him clemency. To pardon him now would open the door for future generations to manipulate the severity of punishment at will.' The chief ministers replied: 'The ancients instituted deliberation for kinship to honor the Son of Heaven and distinguish the imperial house from commoners.' The emperor replied: 'The maternal clan is naturally distinct from the imperial house; in Han times consort kin wielded such power that the throne itself was overturned—which is why I have refused to grant real authority to imperial princes and princesses. Those who have rendered distinguished service to the state may claim deliberation for merit. As for deliberation for worthiness—if a man is truly worthy, would he violate the law? If he is implicated only by association, then a petition for mitigation is entirely appropriate.' In the twenty-sixth year, it was decreed that relatives of the crown prince's consort within the degree of great mourning, persons bearing no mourning obligation toward the imperial house, and those deemed worthy who commit private offenses—all were excluded from the Eight Deliberations.' The emperor told his chief ministers: 'Where the law follows principle in some cases but violates it in others, revise it accordingly.' Investigating Censor Tao Jun was found to have escorted courtesans through the Northern Park, singing and drinking among its ponds and islets in proximity to the palace halls; Surveillance Officer Shi Jie heard of it and reported the affair. Tao Jun had his friend Yan Shu intercede with Shi Jie to secure lenient handling. When the affair came to light, the legal authorities recommended penal servitude of two and a half years. An edict ruled that Tao Jun, as an imperial censor, had violated the distinction of rank by bringing courtesans into the forbidden park and sentenced him to sixty strokes of the staff; Shi Jie and Yan Shu were also convicted. In the twenty-eighth year, finding that regulatory articles were hobbled by archaic statutory language and contained passages difficult to understand, the emperor ordered them revised into clear language so that everyone could comprehend the law.
5
舊禁民不得收制書，恐滋告訐之弊，章宗大定二十九年，言事者乞許民藏之。 平章張汝霖曰：「昔子產鑄刑書，叔向譏之者，蓋不欲預使民測其輕重也。 今著不刊之典，使民曉然知之，猶江、河之易避而難犯，足以輔治，不禁為便。」 以眾議多不欲，詔姑令仍舊禁之。
Commoners had long been forbidden to possess copies of the regulatory code, for fear of encouraging vexatious denunciations; in the twenty-ninth year of Dading, during Zhangzong's reign, memorialists petitioned to allow the populace to keep legal texts. Grand Counselor Zhang Rulin argued: 'When Zichan cast the penal statutes on bronze, Shu Xiang criticized him because he did not wish to let the people anticipate the severity of punishments in advance. Publishing an immutable legal canon so that the people understand it clearly is like marking a river—easy to avoid and hard to violate—and would serve governance well; lifting the prohibition would be the better course.' Because most officials opposed the change, an edict maintained the existing prohibition for the time being.
6
明昌元年，上問宰臣曰：「今何不專用律文？」 平章政事張汝霖曰：「前代律與令各有分，其有犯令，以律決之。 今國家制、律混淆，固當分也。」 遂置詳定所，命審定律、令。 承安二年，制軍前受財法，一貫以下，徒二年，以上徒三年，十貫處死。 符寶典書北京奴盜符寶局金牌，伏誅，仍除屬籍。 按虎、阿虎帶失覺察，各杖七十。 泰和二年，御史臺奏：「監察御史史肅言，《大定條理》：自二十年十一月四日以前，奴娶良人女為妻者，並准已娶為定，若夫亡，拘放從其主。 離夫摘賣者令本主收贖，依舊與夫同聚。 放良從良者即聽贖換，如未贖換間與夫所生男女並聽為良。 而《泰和新格》復以夫亡服除准良人例，離夫摘賣及放夫為良者，並聽為良。 若未出離再配與奴，或雜奸所生男女並許為良。 如此不同，皆編格官妄為增減，以致隨處訴訟紛擾，是涉違枉。」 敕付所司正之。 初，詔凡條格入制文內者，分為別卷。 復詔制與律文輕重不同，及律所無者，各校定以聞。 如禁屠宰之類，當著於令也，慎之勿忽，律令一定，不可更矣。 明昌三年七月，右司郎中孫鐸先以詳定所校《名例篇》進，既而諸篇皆成，復命中都路轉運使王寂、大理卿董師中等重校之。 四年七月，上以諸路枷杖多不如法，平章政事守貞曰：「枷杖尺寸有制，提刑兩月一巡察，必不敢違法也。」 五年正月，復令鉤校制、律，即付詳定所。 時詳定官言：「若依重修制文為式，則條目增減，罪名輕重，當異於律。 既定復與舊同頒，則使人惑而易為奸矣！ 臣等謂，用今制條，參酌時宜，准律文修定，歷采前代刑書宜於今者，以補遺闕，取《刑統》疏文以釋之，著為常法，名曰《明昌律義》。 別編榷貨、邊部、權宜等事，集為《敕條》。」 宰臣謂：「先所定令文尚有未完，俟皆通定，然後頒行。 若律科舉人，則止習舊律。」 遂以知大興府事尼厖古鑒、御史中丞董師中、翰林待制奧屯忠孝小字牙哥，提點司天臺張嗣、翰林修撰完顏撒剌、刑部員外郎李庭義、大理丞麻安上為校定官，大理卿閻公貞，戶部侍郎李敬義、工部郎中賈鉉為覆定官，重修新律焉。 時奏獄而法官有獨出情見者，上曰：「或言法官不當出情見，故論者紛紛不已。 朕謂情見非出於法外，但折衷以從法爾。」 平章守貞曰：「是制自大定二十三年罷之。 然律有起請諸條，是古亦許情見矣。」 上曰：「科條有限，而人情無窮，情見亦豈可無也。」 明昌五年，尚書省奏：「在制，《名例》內徒年之律，無決杖之文便不用杖。 緣先謂流刑非今所宜，且代流役四年以上俱決杖，而徒三年以下難復不用。 婦人比之男子雖差輕，亦當例減。」 遂以徒二年以下者杖六十，二年以上杖七十，婦人犯者並決五十，著於《敕條》。
In the first year of Mingchang, the emperor asked his chief ministers: 'Why do we not rely exclusively on the statutory code?' Grand Counselor Zhang Rulin replied: 'In earlier dynasties statutes and administrative ordinances served distinct functions; violations of ordinances were adjudicated under the statutes. In our dynasty regulations and statutes have become intermingled, and they ought to be separated.' A detailed review office was therefore established and charged with examining and revising the statutes and ordinances. In the second year of Cheng'an, a law was enacted for accepting bribes in the field: one string of cash or less warranted two years of penal servitude; more than one string warranted three years; ten strings warranted execution. Beijing Nu, Keeper of Seals and Talismans, was executed for stealing the golden plaques from the Seals and Talismans Bureau and was struck from the clan register. An Hu and A Hudai, convicted of negligent oversight, each received seventy strokes of the staff. In the second year of Taihe, the Censorate reported: 'Investigating Censor Shi Su noted that under the Dading Articles and Ordinances, slaves who had married commoner women before the fourth day of the eleventh month of the twentieth year were recognized as lawfully married; if the husband died, the woman was to be detained or released at the discretion of her master. If a woman was sold apart from her husband, the original owner was to redeem her and she would continue to live with her husband as before. Manumitted persons could be redeemed and exchanged immediately; any children born to the couple before redemption was completed were recognized as commoners. But the Taihe New Regulations further held that after a husband's death and the completion of mourning, commoner precedent applied, and that women sold apart from their husbands or whose husbands had been manumitted were all to be recognized as commoners. Women not yet formally separated who were remarried to slaves, and any children born of illicit unions, were also granted commoner status. Such inconsistencies arose because compiling officials had arbitrarily added and deleted provisions, provoking litigation and disorder everywhere—a clear violation of proper procedure.' An edict ordered the responsible authorities to rectify the discrepancies.' Initially, an edict ordered that all supplementary regulations incorporated into the regulatory code be published as separate fascicles. A further edict directed that wherever regulations and statutory provisions differed in severity, or where the statutes were silent, each discrepancy should be collated, resolved, and reported. Matters such as prohibitions on slaughter belong in the ordinances—take care not to neglect them; once statutes and ordinances are finalized, they must not be altered again.' In the seventh month of the third year of Mingchang, Sun Duo of the Right Bureau submitted the collated General Principles fascicle from the Detailed Review Office; when all fascicles were complete, Wang Ji, transport commissioner of the Metropolitan Circuit, Chief Dong Shizhong of the Office of Imperial Justice, and others were appointed to conduct a further review. In the seventh month of the fourth year, noting that cangues and beating staves across the circuits often failed to meet statutory standards, Grand Counselor Shouzhen said: 'The dimensions of cangues and staves are prescribed by law, and investigative commissioners inspect every two months—officials will not dare violate the regulations.' In the first month of the fifth year, a further order directed comparison and verification of regulations against statutes, with the work assigned to the Detailed Review Office. The detailed review officers observed: 'If we took the recast regulatory text as our template, the articles would differ from the statutes in both their number and the severity of the penalties assigned. To promulgate the new code alongside the old would only confuse the people and invite abuse! We propose instead to take the current regulatory articles, adapt them to present needs, and revise them in accordance with statutory principles, drawing on penal codes of earlier dynasties wherever applicable to fill gaps, and using the expository commentaries of the Tang Statutes and Comprehensive Regulations for clarification—establishing this as permanent law under the title Mingchang Legal Commentaries. Monopoly goods, frontier administration, and provisional measures would be compiled separately as the Imperial Decree Articles.' The chief ministers replied: 'The administrative ordinances previously drafted remain incomplete; wait until the entire code is finalized before promulgation. Candidates for the legal examination should continue to study the old statutes for the time being.' Niimugua Jian, intendant of Daxing Prefecture; Vice Censor-in-Chief Dong Shizhong; Hanlin Attendant-Draftsman Ouchun Zhongxiao (courtesy name Yage); Zhang Si, intendant of the Directorate of Astronomy; Hanlin Reviser Wanyan Sala; Li Tingyi, vice director of the Ministry of Justice; and Ma Anshang, assistant chief of the Office of Imperial Justice were appointed collating officers; Chief Yan Gongzhen of the Office of Imperial Justice, Vice Minister Li Jingyi of the Ministry of Revenue, and Director Jia Xuan of the Ministry of Works were appointed reviewing officers, and the work of recasting the new code commenced. When a case came before the throne and a judge offered an independent discretionary interpretation, the emperor remarked: 'Some claim judges should not issue discretionary views, and the debate has continued without end. I hold that discretionary views do not operate outside the law, but seek a balanced reading that conforms to it.' Grand Counselor Shouzhen noted: 'That practice was abolished in the twenty-third year of Dading. Yet the statutes contain provisions for submitted petitions, which shows that discretionary views were permitted even in antiquity.' The emperor replied: 'Statutory provisions are finite, but human circumstances are infinite—how can discretionary views be dispensed with?' In the fifth year of Mingchang, the Department of State Affairs reported: 'Under current regulations, the General Principles section governing years of penal servitude contains no provision for accompanying beatings, and beatings have therefore been omitted. Exile was previously deemed unsuitable for our times, and penal servitude of four years or more substituted for exile with accompanying beatings, but it seems inconsistent not to apply beatings to penal servitude of three years or less. Although punishments for women are somewhat lighter than for men, they should be reduced by the same proportional rule.' It was therefore decreed that penal servitude of two years or less would be accompanied by sixty strokes of the staff, penal servitude of more than two years by seventy strokes, and female offenders by fifty strokes in all cases, as recorded in the Imperial Decree Articles.'
7
承安三年，敕尚書省：「自今特旨事，如律令程式者，始可送部。 自餘創行之事，但召部官赴省議之。」 四年四月，尚書省請再覆定令文，上因敕宰臣曰：「凡事理明白者轉奏可也。 文牘多者恐難遍覽，其三推情疑以聞。」 五月，上以法不適平，常行杖樣，多不能用。 遂定分寸，鑄銅為杖式，頒之天下。 且曰：「若以笞杖太輕，恐情理有難恕者，訊杖可再議之。」 五年五月，刑部員外郎馬復言：「外官尚苛刻者不遵銅杖式，輒用大杖，多致人死。」 詔令按察司糾劾黜之。 先嘗令諸死囚及除名罪，所委官相去二百里外，並犯徒以下逮及二十人以上者，並令其官就讞之。 刑部員外郎完顏綱言：「自是制行，如上京最近之地往還不下三、二千里，如北京留守司亦動經數月，愈致稽留，未便。」 詔復從舊，令委官追取鞫之。
In the third year of Cheng'an, an edict to the Department of State Affairs directed: 'Henceforth only imperial directives that follow established statutory and administrative procedure may be forwarded to the ministries. All other newly initiated measures should be discussed by convening ministry officials at the Department of State Affairs.' In the fourth month of the fourth year, when the Department of State Affairs requested a further review of the administrative ordinances, the emperor instructed the chief ministers: 'Matters that are clear in principle may be reported directly to the throne. Cases with extensive documentation may be difficult to review in full—in those instances, submit up to three rounds of reasoning on points of doubt.' In the fifth month, the emperor found that existing beating standards were neither fair nor practical and were widely ignored in practice. He therefore ordered precise dimensions established, bronze beating rods cast to standard, and the model promulgated throughout the realm. He added: 'If the lighter bamboo and staff punishments prove inadequate for offenders whose circumstances merit no mercy, the standard for interrogation beatings may be reconsidered.' In the fifth month of the fifth year, Ma Fu, vice director of the Ministry of Justice, reported: 'Some local officials, still inclined to severity, ignore the bronze staff standard and arbitrarily use heavier staves, often beating prisoners to death.' An edict directed the investigative commissions to impeach and dismiss such officials.' Previously, an order had required that capital cases and offenses warranting removal from official registers, cases in which the appointed officials were more than two hundred li apart, and any case involving twenty or more offenders sentenced to penal servitude or below—all be adjudicated on the spot by the assigned officials. Wanyan Gang, vice director of the Ministry of Justice, argued: 'Since this regulation took effect, even the nearest jurisdictions such as Shangjing require round trips of two or three thousand li, and cases referred to the Beijing Retention Office routinely take months—resulting in even greater delays.' An edict restored the previous practice, directing assigned officials to summon defendants for interrogation as before.'
8
十二月，翰林修撰楊庭秀言：「州縣官往往以權勢自居，喜怒自任，聽訟之際，鮮克加審。 但使譯人往來傳詞，罪之輕重，成於其口，貨賂公行，冤者至有三、二十年不能正者。」 上遂命定立條約，違者按察司糾之。 且謂宰臣曰：「長貳官委幕職及司吏推問獄囚，命申御史臺聞奏之制，當復舉行也。」 又命編前後條制，書之於冊，以備將來考驗。
In the twelfth month, Yang Tingxiu, Hanlin Reviser, reported: 'Prefectural and county magistrates often wield their authority arbitrarily, indulging personal caprice; when hearing cases, they rarely examine the evidence with care. They rely on interpreters to relay testimony back and forth, leaving the severity of the sentence entirely to the interpreter's word; bribery is rampant, and the wrongfully convicted may wait twenty or thirty years without redress.' The emperor thereupon ordered formal regulations established, with violators subject to impeachment by the investigative commissions.' He also told his chief ministers: 'The regulation requiring senior deputies' clerks who interrogate prisoners to report through the Censorate should be revived and enforced.' He further ordered that past and present regulations be compiled into registers for future reference.'
9
泰和元年正月，尚書省奏，以見行銅杖式輕細，奸宄不畏，遂命有司量所犯用大杖，且禁不得過五分。
In the first month of the first year of Taihe, the Secretariat reported that because the current bronze staff standard was too light, criminals no longer feared it; officials were ordered to use heavier staves according to the severity of offenses, but not to exceed half the statutory maximum.
10
十二月，所修律成，凡十有二篇：一曰《名例》，二曰《衛禁》，三曰《職制》，四曰《戶婚》五曰《廄庫》，六曰《擅興》，七曰《賊盜》，八曰《鬥訟》，九曰《詐偽》，十曰《雜律》，十一曰《捕亡》，十二曰《斷獄》。 實《唐律》也，但加贖銅皆倍之，增徒至四年、五年為七，削不宜於時者四十七條，增時用之制百四十九條，因而略有所損益者二百八十有二條，餘百二十六條皆從其舊。 又加以分其一為二、分其一為四者六條，凡五百六十三條，為三十卷，附注以明其事，疏義以釋其疑，名曰《泰和律義》。 自《官品令》、《職員令》之下，曰《祠令》四十八條，《戶令》六十六條，《學令》十一條，《選舉令》八十三條，《封爵令》九條、《封贈令》十條，《宮衛令》十條，《軍防令》二十五條，《儀制令》二十三條，《衣服令》十條，《公式令》五十八條，《祿令》十七條，《倉庫令》七條，《廄牧令》十二條，《田令》十七條，《賦役令》二十三條，《關市令》十三條，《捕亡令》二十條，《賞令》二十五條，《醫疾令》五條，《假寧令》十四條，《獄官令》百有六條，《雜令》四十九條，《釋道令》十條，《營繕令》十三條，《河防令》十一條，《服制令》十一條，附以年月之制，曰《律令》二十卷。 又定《制敕》九十五條，《榷貨》八十五條，《蕃部》三十九條，曰《新定敕條》三卷，《六部格式》三十卷。 司空襄以進，詔以明年五月頒行之。
In the twelfth month the revised code was completed, comprising twelve sections: General Principles, Palace Security, Official Regulations, Households and Marriage, Stables and Storehouses, Unauthorized Enterprises, Theft and Robbery, Assault and Litigation, Fraud and Forgery, Miscellaneous Statutes, Apprehension of Fugitives, and Judgment of Cases. It was essentially the Tang Code, but all copper ransom payments were doubled, and penal servitude of four and five years was extended to seven; forty-seven articles unsuited to the age were deleted, one hundred forty-nine timely provisions were added, two hundred eighty-two were revised in minor respects, and the remaining one hundred twenty-six were left unchanged. Six further articles were created by subdividing existing ones; in all there were five hundred sixty-three articles in thirty fascicles, with appended notes to clarify particulars and commentary to resolve ambiguities, under the title Taihe Legal Commentaries. Below the ordinances on official ranks and staffing came twenty-six further ordinances: Sacrificial (48 articles), Household (66), School (11), Selection and Appointment (83), Enfeoffment (9), Posthumous Enfeoffment (10), Palace Guard (10), Military Defense (25), Ritual Protocol (23), Garments (10), Administrative Formulas (58), Salaries (17), Granaries (7), Stables and Pasturage (12), Land (17), Tax and Corvée (23), Passes and Markets (13), Apprehension (20), Rewards (25), Medicine (5), Leave (14), Prison Administration (106), Miscellaneous (49), Buddhism and Daoism (10), Construction (13), River Defense (11), and Mourning Garments (11)—with calendrical provisions appended, all collected as the Statutes and Ordinances in twenty fascicles. Also codified were ninety-five Regulatory Edicts, eighty-five articles on state monopolies, and thirty-nine on frontier peoples, collected as the Newly Fixed Imperial Decree Articles in three fascicles, together with the Six Departments Formats in thirty fascicles. Minister of Works Xiang presented the completed code, and an edict ordered its promulgation in the fifth month of the following year.