《中国人的性格》第二十三章 株连守法

《中国人的性格》是美国传教士阿瑟·史密斯（明恩溥）基于1872年赴华传教期间的社会观察撰写的著作，首版英文名《Chinese Characteristics》于19世纪末问世，。作者在华生活逾五十年，书中融合人类学视角与传教士立场，记录了晚清民众的性格特征与文化形态。

全书以27个主题章节剖析中国人行为模式，包含“保全面子”“省吃俭用”等生活哲学，以及“漠视精确”“因循守旧”等社会现象。通过对比西方工业文明，着重探讨东方特有的生存韧性，如环境适应力与疼痛耐受性。书中案例多源自山东乡村生活经历，涉及衣食住行、孝悌观念等主题，部分结论因宗教立场存在视角争议。该著作开创西方研究中国国民性先河，被译成多国文字，成为近代中西文化互鉴的重要文本。

第二十三章 株连守法

中国人有个典型的特征，可以用“负责”一词来概括，西方很少有一个词能像这个词那样重要，那样具有丰富的意义。在西方，个人是社会的基本单位，社会是个人的集合体。而在中国，社会却是由家庭，村落或宗族等构成，这些通常又是一致的。中国有千千万万个村子，每个村子的居民都源于同一个祖宗，同姓一个姓，共享一块热土。他们搬到现在居住的地方，可以追溯到几百年前的一次政治变动，比如明朝灭亡，甚至在明朝建立的时候。在这样的村子里，堂兄弟几乎是最远的关系了，男性长辈，不是父亲，就是叔伯，或者什么“爷爷”。有时，一个小小的村子，竟会住着十一代人。他们并不像我们所想像的，寿数越高，辈份越高。中国人年龄很小就结婚，以后甚至到晚年还娶妻纳妾，一辈了不断地生孩子，结果就造成了错综复杂的亲属关系。如果不特别询问或仔细注意名字中表明辈份的字，实在难以分辨出谁是晚辈，谁是长辈。一个年近七旬的老翁会叫一个三十岁的男人“爷爷”。所有的堂兄弟之间都可以互称“兄弟”，假如外国人对此感到困惑不解，坚持要搞清楚，问他们到底是不是“自家兄弟”，回答经常很有意味：他们是“自家的堂兄弟”。笔者曾经这样问过，那人几乎毫不犹豫地说：“嗯，当然，你可以称他们为自家兄弟。”

这些都是中国人社会团结的具体表现。正是这种团结决定了中国人富有责任心。父亲要对儿子负责，不单在儿子“成年”之前，而且永远负责。儿子也永远对父亲负责，俗话说：父债子还。兄长要对弟弟的一切负责，“家长”——通常是长辈中年龄最大的男人——要对整个家庭或家族负责。不过，这些责任会随环境的变化而变化。

风俗习惯不同无关紧要，个人是重要的。这一点，理论上很难论述清楚。在一个显赫的大家庭里，尽管有很多知书达理的人，也有一些是当地的头面人物，或科班出身的，但“族长”却可能是个头脑糊涂的老头，大字不识一个，甚至一辈子连离家十里远的地方都没去过。

家庭中兄长对弟弟或年长者对年幼者的影响，最直接，也最绝对。这与我们所提倡的自由势如水火。弟弟就像个仆人，整天盼望改变自己的地位，而哥哥偏不许他这样做。弟弟想买件棉衣，哥哥认为太贵，不给钱。笔者正在写这本书时，又接到一个报告：一个中国人，手头上有些罕见的古币，有个外国人很想买。为防止钱主不愿卖——在中国，一个人手里有另一个人想要的东西，情况常常如此——中间人就建议，送些西洋糖果和小玩艺儿给钱主的叔叔，让他对钱主施加压力，最后迫使钱主把古币卖掉。

有这样一个滑稽的故事，一位从西方国家来的旅行者，途中遇到一个长着长长白胡子的老人，在伤心地哭泣。旅行者感到很意外，就停下来问老人，为什么哭泣。老人告诉他，自己刚被父亲用鞭子抽了一顿。“你的父亲在哪儿？”旅行者问他，“那儿。”老人指着前面。旅行者便顺着老人指的方向往前走，又遇到了一个胡子更长更白的老人，“那是你的儿子吗？”旅行者问，“是的。”“你用鞭子抽他了？”“是的。”“你为什么要打他呢？”“因为他对爷爷无礼。如果他再这样，我还会再用鞭子抽他。”假如将这个故事的背景换成中国，这可不是一个滑稽故事了。

家庭成员应该彼此负责，邻里之间也应这样。不管他们是否有亲属关系，都不该例外，因为住处相邻嘛。中国人认为善良与邪恶会传染。近朱者赤，近墨者黑。孟母三迁就是为了找个理想的邻居。而接受了盎格鲁-撒克逊民族共和思想的人，对谁是他的邻居毫不在乎，在城里某个地方住上一年，他甚至还不知道隔壁邻居的名字。不过在中国，情形就完全不同了。倘若有人犯了罪，其邻居也逃不脱干系，犯了类似英国法律说的“包庇罪”。因为他们知道罪犯的企图，却不向政府报告。说“我不知道”，丝毫不起作用。你是他的邻居，就应该知道。

对杀死父母案子的处理，很能说明中国人的负责观念。在“孝悌为先”一章里，我们提到过，这类罪犯一般是疯子。如不自杀，就应该心甘情愿地接受凌迟之刑。几年前，北京《邸报》上的一份奏折中，中部某省的总督报告，他在处理一件杀死父母案时，命人推倒了罪犯邻居的房子，因为他们没有给罪犯良好的道德影响，以令其改邪归正。一般的中国人可能认为，这种处理方式合情合理有时，某地方有人犯了罪，除了对人进行惩罚外，还要拆毁一段城墙，或者修正一下城墙的样式，比如，将方角改成圆角，把城门换个地方，甚至干脆封死。要是一个地方老发生犯罪，据说该城就要被夷为平地，在别的地方另建新城，不过，这种事，我们还未遇到过。

村子里，地位比普通老百姓略高的称地保，管一个或几个村子，职责也十分繁杂，不过，总的来说，是充当沟通地方政府与百姓的媒介，地保经常会陷入麻烦中。任何一种纠葛都会给他带来麻烦。假如遇到一个吹毛求疵的地方官，有时甚至会因为没有汇报他不可能知道的事情而被打得血肉模糊。

地位比地保再高的是县官。在百姓眼里，他们是中国最重要的官吏。在百姓面前，他们是老虎；在上级面前，他们又是老鼠。一个县官至少要处理六大方面的事务，他既是民事、刑事司法官，又是行政司法官、验尸官、财政长官和税务官。一个官员要处理这么多事务，当然不能细致入微，明察秋毫。无论从生理上还是心理上说，这都是超负荷的，使得所有的事情都不能处理好。况且，很多县官只一门心思想着如何捞油水，对任何公务都不感兴趣。因为公务繁多，彼此又不协调，即使县官有良心，也难免犯不少错误。一些事情处理失当，他总是难逃其咎。大部分县官要依靠师爷或随从来帮助处理日常事务，与所有中国官员一样，县官总被想像为对辖区内的一切都了如指掌，也能随时防患于未然。为做到这一点，每个城市或乡村中，每十户划为一甲，每甲设保甲长。每户门前挂有一个小牌子，上面注明户主姓名和该户人口数目。这种户藉制度，有点像古代撒克逊人十户区或百户区制，它有利于确立责任区，某个保甲区内一旦出现可疑的陌生人物，第一个发现的就迅速报告保甲长，保甲长立刻报告地保，地保再报告给县官，县官马上采取措施，“严密搜捕，严厉惩处”，这种简易的保安措施，使所有的地方犯罪，还未发生就被发觉了。这不是靠陌生人长相可疑，而是靠住户固定。这一制度还使良好的民风代代相传。

显然，这一措施只有在住户固定的地区方能奏效。然而，即使在中国这样人口最为固定的国家，保甲制度在很大程度上也只是个法律上的假定。有时，在一个城市，以前从未见过门前挂牌子，可突然有一大，每户门上都挂上了。这就说明县官来了，他想加强这方面的管理。有些地方，只有冬天才挂上，因为冬天最危险，坏人最多。不过，据我们所知，该措施只是昔日的经验，现在徒具形式而已。实际上，也几乎已经完全消失了，连续走几个月，几千里路，沿途挂牌子的住居，不足百分之一。

前面可能说过，中国的保甲制度和所谓的人口调查紧密联系在一起。假如每户的门牌一直都准确地标明该户的人口数目；假如每个地保都有一份其辖区内人口的清单；假如每个县官都准确地将这些清单上的数字汇总——对整个帝国人口的准确统计就会非常容易，只要将这些一连中的数字加起来就行了。可惜，这些都是“假如”，而事实上，几乎没有一个可以实现。门牌根本不存在。当某个地方官偶尔需要人口总数时，无论是他自己，还是他完全依赖的众多地保，都不能保证提供一个准确的数字，他们对此都毫无兴趣，因为人口调查没油水可捞。因此，对中国人口的准确统计，只能从想像中虚构了。即使在文明程度较高的西方国家，人们也总是把人口调查与税收联系起来。在中国，它更是令人们疑神疑鬼。如果各地不能持久投入地实行保甲制度，就绝对不可能准确地统计出人口的数目。

地方官犯点小罪，可能平安无事，也可能遇到大麻烦。即便如此，只要找有势力的朋友说说情，或者明智点，花些银子，也就完事了。就算丢了乌纱帽，也会把原因归结为他的辖区内发生了不可避免的事。在中国，这现象极为普遍。

接下来有必要阐述一下官僚阶层是如何实行责任制度的。在翻译过来的北京《邸报》中，这样的例子每期都层出不穷。几年前就曾披露过这样一件事：一个值班的士兵偷了自己看守的大约三十箱子弹，卖给了一个做罐筒盒的。后者认为那些子弹是部队多余的次品。案发后，士兵被打了一百大板，流放边疆服苦役；负责仓库的小官，虽然允许交钱赎罪，减轻处罚，仍被打了八十大板，革去官职；买主因考虑是出于不知情，免于处罚，不过按常规，打了四十小板；管理这些士兵的连长，因为“纵容”犯罪，也被撤职，听候审判，但这家伙很聪明，及早悄悄地溜走了。上表奏折的刑部受命决定对该部队最高指挥官的处罚，他对此案也有责任。由此可见，每个人都是这条锁链上的一个环节，谁都不能以不知情或难以防止这类犯罪为借口，逃避责任。

北京《邸报》中，每年都有上报河流泛滥的奏折，像这类事情更能说明中国人互相负责的品质。1888年夏，直隶省附近的永定河泛滥，河水从山上冲下来，一泻千里。官员们看来是闻讯就赶到了现场，冒着生命危险，奋力抢救。可惜，人难胜天，他们不过像暴风雨中的蚂蚁一样，栖惶无助。尽管如此，李鸿章也不为之所动，仍请求皇帝立即摘去他们的顶戴花翎，或者保留官职，取消贵族身份（这是朝廷不满时最常用的手段）。直隶总督也一再上表请求将自己交付刑部，依罪处罚。同样的河水泛滥后来还发生了几次，每次都有同样的表章，皇帝也经常命令有司记录“备案”。几年前，河南省修复河堤以使黄河回归故道的工程失败了，自巡抚以下的大批官员遭到罢黜和流放。

中国人的责任感十分强烈，即使天子本人也不例外。他经常发布诏书，承认自己的缺点，把暴发洪水、饥荒和农民造反的责任归咎于己，并乞求上天宽恕。他要对上天负责，这和他的臣子对他负责一样，十分现实。皇帝失去了皇位，就表明他失去了“天意”，上天要将皇位交付应该登基的人。

中国人的责任观念与西方观念最相抵触的是一人犯法、株灭九族，太平天国起义中有许多这方面的例子，最近，土库曼斯但穆斯林起义的首领雅库·贝哥也是被满门抄斩。这种做法并不仅限于镇压起义上。1873年，“一个中国人被指控盗取皇陵中的陪葬品，结果全家四代，上至年近九旬的老人，下至几个月大的婴儿，全被杀掉。在这个案子中，除罪犯一人外，其余十一人全是无辜的，根本没有证据表明他们参与了或知晓罪犯的行动。”

中国人的责任观常被视为其各项制度永恒不变的原因之一。它就像脚镣手铐，束缚着每个人，各级官员也因之为他们从未参与或根本不晓得的事情受到处罚，这就不能不破坏各种公正原则，并直接导致了上上下下所有的官吏都掌握了一套弄虚作假的手段，如实汇报情况，还要受到严厉惩处，完全颠倒了公正原则，违背了人性。因此，官员们发现不能控制犯罪现象或觉察得太迟的时候，即使本该负责，他也要掩盖真相，以逃避责任，过分要求人们彼此负责足以说明中国为什么会出现弊政和缺乏公正。我们对此一直都很关注。

每个致力于研究中国问题的人都会发现，中国官僚体制中还存在着另一个弊病，那就是官吏的俸禄不能满足其基本的生活需求，一点微不足道的津贴也很少能全领，并且还要作为各种罚款交回去，最后，连衙门中日常的开支都不足以维持。做官的，没有其他门路可走，只好贪污受贿，以摆脱困境。

中国人的责任观不符合公正原则，已是昭然若揭的事实，也令我们时刻难忘。可是，我们并不能因此忽略了其优点。

在西方，一个人被证明有罪之前，是清白无辜的。你也很难将责任强加到某人头上。一列满载旅客的火车，因超重压断了桥梁，不可能归咎于某一个人。一座高楼倒塌了，压死了很多人，尽管建筑师会受到指责，可他表示当时他已做出最大努力，也没听说过他将因此受到处罚。一辆装甲车翻倒，或者一次军事行动因准备不足，遭到挫败，人们也只是指责整个体制，从不针对某个人。中国人在社会公正方面远远落后于我们，可是，难道我们就不应该学习他们古老的经验吗？它可以便我们每个人都严格地为自己的行为负责，从而维持国家的安全。

中国人的责任感对居住在那儿的外国人也十分重要。家里的“僮仆”能随时取出任一把勺子、叉子，任一件古玩；负责家务的总管，除自己可以欺骗你之外，不允许任何人欺骗你；那些买办，虽有大权，但又对每一分钱，每一个职员负责——只要我们和中国人打交道，就永远会遇到这类人。中国客店的老板，很少有善良的，尤其对待外国旅客方面。可是，我们听说一个老板，为了把一个空沙丁鱼罐筒盒还给一个外国旅客，竟追了半英里，他以为那是什么重要的东西。他认为应该那样做，可不像美国的旅店老板，他们总是冷冷地通知旅客：“本旅馆对丢在大厅里的脏靴子，概不负责。”

要是举荐了某人，就要对其品质、行为和欠债负责，中国人普遍承认这是一种社会义务。外国人要想与中国人共事，就不能忽略这一点，一个中国监工，不论处在哪一位置，都会对每一次录用或解雇下属负责，这种情况会对事情的各个环节产生特殊的影响。在与中国人相互交往的漫长历史中，外国人一直本能地对这一点非常欣赏。传说从前有一个银行里的买办头，因为“男僮”让蚊子钻进了经理的蚊帐，竟将他叫去好好说明原因，如果中国人看到外国人对下属从不负责，或者不重视“应尽的责任”，肯定认为极不适宜，假如想学会，更要花很长时间。

中国人有许多令人赞叹的品质，其中有一种是天生的尊重法律。我们不知道，是社会制度造就了这一品质，还是它造就了社会制度。但是，我们知道，中国人无论从先天的本性，还是从后天接受的教育上说，都是一个尊重法律的民族。在讨论民族的忍耐美德时，这一点已有所涉及，不过，它与中国人责任感之间的联系值得特别注意。在中国，每个男人、女人和孩子都对他人负责，这一重要事实要时刻牢记。虽然一个人应该“远走高飞”，可他逃脱不了自己的责任；即使他逃脱了，他的家庭仍不能逃脱，这是铁的原则，它虽不能保证使一个人改邪归正，却常常可以使他不致于变得十恶不赦。

中国人很怕进官府，打官司。它也能说明中国人对法律的尊重。尤其是文人，他们一被召到官府，就吓得胆战心惊，噤若寒蝉，大气也不敢喘一口，即使事不关己，也会如此。我们就确实知道一个文人，被请去作证时，吓得像患了癫痫病一样，浑身抖个不停，最后竟昏倒在地，回家不久，就死了。

中国人对法律的尊重，与共和政体所表现的精神构成了鲜明的对比，这种精神是由历来就追求共和政体的人们创造的，学院法规、市政法令、国家法律，全都遭到默默地抵制，仿佛追求个人自由不是当代最大的危险，反而是最大的需要。不过，个人或社会完全应该把阻止，揭露虚伪和欺骗当成应尽的职责，并将这一点视为对中国人处理各种社会事务之方式的最大抗议。可是，在基督教国家，无论目不识丁的人，还是举止文雅，有教养的人都有意无意地轻视法律，仿佛不需要法律维护公众的利益，并且违抗法律要比遵守法律更能体现法律的尊严，这难道很光彩吗？我们的法律既没有被取消，也没有贯彻实施——这种既存在又不存在的反常状态已使所有的法律都遭到了公众的蔑视，我们对此能作何辩解？还有，在过去三十年，犯罪率迅猛增长，很多地方，人类生活的神圣感已经显著淡化，我们对此又作何解释？对于统计学无能为力的事，做出武断的评价，完全徒劳无益。我们必须承认，中国的城市生活比美国的城市生活更安全——北京就比纽约安全。我们也相信，在中国旅游比在美国旅游更安全。应该记住，从总体上说，中国人和美国移民一样无知，怀有偏见。他们也容易受盅惑，聚众滋事。可是，令人奇怪的是，这种事并不经常发生，对外国人也没有生命威胁。

中国人相信，人的思想、行为会影响上大的意志。为了给父母治病割自己身上肉的做法，就体现了这一观念。在讨论中同人的孝顺性格时，我们已经谈过了。我们不准备坚持这种观念是正确的，可有一些支持这一观念的事实仍值得一提。中国18个省的面积与地理环境和美国落基山以东的地区很相似。美国气候变化无常，就像小麦乔里.弗莱明对乘法表的评论：“令人难以忍受。”霍桑评价新英格兰时，也说那儿“没有气候，只有各种人气的范例”将波士顿、纽约、芝加哥的气候与中国同一纬度地区的气候相比，就可以看出，同一些地理书对美国气候的判断一样，中国也有“严寒酷暑”，因为在北京所处的纬度上，年温差大约有100华氏度，这必然会产生各种不同的气候温度。

可是，在中国，同样的冷温变化并没有导致像伟大的共和国——美国那样的变化无常、难以预测，而是宁静平稳、井然有序，很适宜于她那古老稳定的社会体制。钦定的帝国历书体现了天、地、人三者的和谐统一。我们不清楚，在辽阔的帝国疆域内，是否各地百姓都同样信服它。不过，在我们所熟悉的地区，它的确能告诉人们有关天气的信息。“立春”那天，春天会翩然而至。在不同的几年中，我们都发现，“立秋”一过，气候会明显发生变化，再也没有了夏天的燥热。而在西方国家，不期而至的霜降会给人们突然造成危害，一年十二个月它都会不定期地出现。为避免这一点，中国历书将“二十四节气”之一定为“霜降”，日期为12月23日。在这一天之前，一点霜花都看不见，而到了这天早晨，地上就会蒙上一层薄薄的白霜。以后的每天早晨也都会有霜，我们观察这个现象好几年了，很少看到有提前或推迟三天的。

在中国，这些非生物性东西的出现有规律，合乎理性，生物的出没更是如此。很多年，我们都注意到，在早春的某一天，窗棂上点缀着几只苍蝇，已经有好几个月没在那儿看到苍蝇了。每逢这时，只要打开帝国的历书，就一定会发现这一天是“凉蜇”。

据说，讲英语的民族，人的血管中流淌的是肆无忌惮的血液，它使我们蔑视法律，不服约束。布莱克斯顿说：“我们强健的英国祖先认为，只有在特定的时间，人们才能自由的活动。”不过，也正因为我们勇敢的祖先，个人自由观念和人权经历了很长时间才得到确立。但是，虽然这些权利已经很好地确立了，难道我们就不需要多强调个人意志服从公众利益、不需要维护法律的尊严吗？在这方面，我们不是有很多东西应该向中国人学习吗？

英文原版：

XXIII.MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPECT FOR LAW

NE of the most distinctive features of Chinese society is that which is epitomised in the word“responsibility,” a word which carries with it a significance and embraces a wealth of meaning to which Western lands are total strangers. In those lands,as we well know,the individual is the unit and the nation is a large collection of individuals.In China the unit of social life is found in the family,the village,or the clan,and these are often convertible terms.Thousands of Chinese villages comprise exclusively persons having the same surname and the same ancestors. The inhabitants have lived in the same spot ever since they began to live at all,and trace an unbroken descent for many hundred years back to the last great political upheaval,such as the overthrow of the Ming Dynasty or its establishment.In such a village there can be no relationship laterally more distant than"cousin,"and every male member of an older generation is either a father,an uncle,or some kind of a“grandfather.”Sometimes eleven generations are represented in the same small hamlet.This does not imply,as might be supposed,extreme old age on the part of any representative of the older generations.The Chinese marry young,marry repeatedly,often late in life,and constantly adopt children.The result is such a tangle among relatives that without special inquiry and minute attention to the particular characters which are employed in writing the names of all who belong to the same“generation,”it is impossible to determine who constitute"the rising generation," and who form the generation which rose long ago. An old man nearly seventy years of age affirms that a young man of thirty is his“grandfather.”All the numerous“cousins”of the same generation are termed"brothers,"and if the perplexed foreigner insists upon accuracy,and inquires whether they are"own brothers,"he will not infrequently be enlightened with the reply that they are“own brother-cousins.”The writer once proposed a question of this sort,and after some little hesitation the person addressed replied,"Why,yes,you mieltru.”lars under the general head of are the social solidarity of the Chinese. It is this solidarity which forms the substratum upon which rests Chinese responsibility. The father is responsible for his son,not merely until the latter attains to"years of discretion,"but as long as life lasts,and the son is responsible for his father's debts.The elder brother has a definite responsibility for the younger brother,and the “head of the family”—usually the oldest representative of the oldest generation—has his responsibility for the whole family or clan.What these responsibilities actually are will depend, however,upon circumstances. Customs vary widely,and the“personal equation”is a most important factor,of which mere theory takes no account.Thus in a large and influential family,embracing many literary men,some of whom are local magnates and perhaps graduates,the“head of the clan”may be an addle-headed old man who can neither read nor write,and who has never in his life been ten mles from home.

The influence of an elder brother over a younger,or indeed of any older member over a younger member of the same family,is of the most direct and positive sort,and is entirely irreconcilable with what we mean by personal liberty.The younger brother is employed as a servant and would like to give up his place,but his elder brother will not let him do so. The younger brother wishes to buy a winter garment,but his elder brother thinks the cost is too great,and will not allow him to incur the expense.Even while these remarks are committed to paper,a case is reported in which a Chinese has a number of rare old coins,which a foreigner desires to purchase. Lest the owner should refuse to sell—as is the Chinese way when one happens to have what another wants—the middleman who made the discovery proposes to the foreigner that he should send to the uncle of the owner of the coins a present of foreign candy and other trifles,by which oblique means such pressure will be brought to bear upon the owner of the coins that he will be obliged to give them up!

There is a burlesque tale which relates that a traveller in a Western land once came upon a very old man with a long white beard,who was crying bitterly.Struck with the singularity of this spectacle,the stranger halted and asked the old man what he was crying about,and was surprised to be told that it was because his father had just whipped him!“Where is your father ?”“Over there,”was the reply.Riding in the direction named,the traveller found a much older man, with a beard much longer and whiter than the other."Is that your son?”asked the traveller.“Yes,it is.”"Did you whip him?”“Yes,I did.”“Why?”“Because he was saucy to his grandfather,and if he does it again I will whip him some more!" Translated into the conditions of Chinese life the burlesque disappears.

Next in order to the responsibility of members of a family for one another comes the mutual responsibility of neighbours for neighbours.Whether these“neighbours”are or are not related makes no difference in their responsibility,which depends solely upon proximity.This responsibility is based upon the theory that virtue and vice are contagious.Good neighbours will make good neighbours,and bad neighbours will make others like them.The mother of Mencius removed three times in order to reach a desirable neighbourhood.To an Occidental,fresh from the republican ideas which dominate the Anglo-Saxons,it seems a matter of little or no consequence who his neighbours are,and if he be a resident of a city he may occupy a dwelling for a year in ignorance even of the name of the family next door.But in China it is otherwise. If a crime takes place the neighbours are held guilty of something analogous to what English law calls“misprision of treason,"in that when they knew of a criminal intention they did not report it.It is vain to reply“I did not know.”You are a"neighbour,"and therefore you must have known.

The proceedings which are taken when the crime of killing a parent has been committed,furnish a striking illustration of the Chinese theory of responsibility.As has been already mentioned in speaking of filial piety,in such instances the criminal is often alleged to be insane,as indeed one must be who voluntarily subjects himself to death by the slicing process when he might escape it by suicide.In a memorial published in the Peking Gazette a few years since,the Governor of one of the central provinces reported in regard to a case of parricide that he had had the houses of all the neighbours pulled down,on the ground of their gross dereliction of duty in not exerting a good moral and reformatory influence over the criminal!Such a proceeding would probably strike an average Chinese as eminently reasonable. In some instances when this crime has occurred in a district,in addition to all the punishments of persons,the city wall itself is pulled down in parts,or modified in shape,a round corner substituted for a square one,or a gate removed to a new situation,or even closed up altogether. If the crime should be repeated several times in the same district,it is said that the whole city would be razed to the ground,and a new one founded elsewhere,but of this we have met with no certain examples.

Next above the neighbours comes the village constable or bailiff,whose functions are of a most miscellaneous nature, sometimes confined to a single village,and sometimes extending to many. In either case he is the medium of communication between the local magistrate and the people,and is always liable to get into trouble from any one of innumerable causes,and may be beaten to a jelly by a captious official for not reporting what he could not possibly have known.

At a vast elevation above the village constables stand the District Magistrates,who,so far as the people are concerned, are by far the most important officers in China.As regards the people below them they are tigers. As regards the officials above them they are mice.A single local magistrate combines functions which ought to be distributed among at least six different officers. A man who is at once the civil and the criminal judge,the sheriff,the coroner,the treasurer,and the tax-commissioner for a large and populous district,cannot attend to the details of all his work.This vicious agglomeration of duties in one office renders it both a physical and a moral impossibility that these duties should be properly discharged.Many magistrates have no interest whatever in the business which they despatch,except to extract from it all that it can be made to yield,and,from the nature of their miscellaneous and incongruous duties,they are largely dependent upon their secretaries and other subordinates.Having so much to do,even with the best intentions these officials cannot fail to make numerous mistakes,and many things must go wrong,for which they will be held responsible.The District Magistrate,like all Chinese officials,is supposed to have an exhaustive acquaintance with everything within his jurisdiction which is an object of knowledge,and an unlimited capacity to prevent what ought to be prevented.To facilitate this knowledge and that of the local constables,each city and village is divided into compound atoms composed of ten families each.

At every door hangs a placard or tablet upon which is inscribed the name of the head of the family,and the number of individuals which it comprises.This system of registration,analogous to the old Saxon tithings and hundreds,makes it easy to fix local responsibility.The moment a suspicious stranger appears in the district comprised in a tithing,he is promptly reported to the head of the tithing by whoever sees him first. By the head of the tithing he is immediately reported to the local constable,and by the local constable to the District Magistrate,who at once takes steps"rigorously to seize and severely to punish."By the same simple process all local crimes,not due to“suspicious-looking strangers”but to permanent residents,are instantly detected before they have hatched into overt acts,and thus the pure morals of the people are preserved from age to age.

It is evident that such regulations as these can be efficient only in a state of society where fixity of residence is the rule. It is also evident that even in China,where the most extreme form of permanence of abode is found,t:e system of tithing is to a large extent a mere legal fiction.Sometimes a city, where no one remembers to have seen them before,suddenly blossoms out with ten-family tablets on every door-post,which indicates the arrival of a District Magistrate who intends to enforce the regulations. In some places these tablets are observable in the winter season only,for this is the time when bad characters are most numerous and most dangerous.But so far as our knowledge extends,the system as such is little more than a theoretical reminiscence,and even when observed it is probably merely a form.Practically,it is not generally observed,and in some provinces at least one may travel for a thousand miles,and for months together,and not find ten-family tablets posted in more than one per cent.of the cities and villages along the route.

It may be mentioned in passing that the Chinese tithing system is intimately connected with the so-called census.If each doorway exhibits an accurate list,constantly corrected, of the number of persons in each family;if each local constable has accurate copies of the lists of all the tithings within his territory;if each District Magistrate has at his disposal accurate summaries of all these items—it is as easy to secure a complete and accurate census of the Empire as to do a long sum in addition,for the whole is equal to the aggregate of all its parts.But these are large ifs,and,as a matter of fact, none of the conditions are realised. The tablets are non-existent,and when the local magistrate is occasionally called upon for the totals which should represent them,neither he nor the numerous constables upon whom he is entirely dependent has the least interest in securing accuracy,which indeed from the nature of the case is difficult.There is no "squeeze"to be got from a census,and for this reason alone a male cancer really accurate Chinese census is a mere figment ofthe imagination.Even in the most enlightened Western lands the notion in China the suspicion which it excites is so strong,that for with uniform faithfulness in all places and at all times,an accurate enumeration would be impossible.

For a local magistrate to be guilty of all kinds of misdemeanours for which he gets into no trouble whatever,or getting into it,escapes scot-free by means of influential friends or by a judicious expenditure of silver,and yet after all to lose his post on account of something that happened within his jurisdiction but which he could not have prevented,is a constant occurrence. possibly How the system of responsibility operates in the domain of all the successive grades of officials,it is unnecessary to illustrate in detail. Multiplied examples are found in almost every copy of the translations from the Peking Gazette.A MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPECT FOR LAW case was mentioned a few years ago,where a soldier on guard had stolen some thirty boxes of bullets placed in his care,and sold them to a tinner,who supposed them to be condemned and surplus stores. The soldier was beaten one hundred blows,and banished to the frontiers of the Empire in penal servitude. A petty officer whose duty it was to inspect the stores was condemned to eighty blows and dismissed from the service,though allowed to commute his punishment for a money payment.The purchasers of the material were considered innocent of any blame,but on general principles were beaten forty blows of the light bamboo.The lieutenant in charge was cashiered in order to be put upon trial for his “c onnivance”in the theft,but he judiciously disappeared. The Board to which the memorial was addressed was requested to determine the penalty to be inflicted upon the general in command,for his share in the matter.Thus each individual is a link in the chain which is followed up to the very end, and no link can escape by pleading ignorance or inability to prevent the crime.

Still more characteristic examples of Chinese responsibility are furnished by the memorials annually appearing in the Peking Gazette, reporting the outbreak of some irrepressible river. In the case of a flood in the Yung-ting River in the province of Chihli during the summer of 1888,the waters came down from the mountains with the velocity of a mill-race.The officials seem to have been promptly on hand, and to have risked their lives in struggling to do what was utterly beyond the powers of man.They were helpless as ants under a rain-spout during a summer torrent.But this did not prevent Li Hung-chang from requesting that they should be immediately stripped of their buttons,or deprived of their rank without being removed from their posts(a favourite mode of expressing Imperial dissatisfaction),and the Governor-General consistently concludes his memorial with the usual request that his ow1 name should be sent to the Board of Punishments for the determination of a penalty to be inflicted upon him for his complicity in the affair.Similar floods have occurred several times since,and upon each occasion a similar memorial has been presented.The Emperor always instructs the proper Board to“take note.”In like manner the failure of the embankments built a few years ago to bring back the Yellow River into its old channel was the signal for the degradation and banishment of a great number of officers,from the Governor of the province of Honan downwards.

The theory of responsibility is carried upwards with unflinching consistency to the Son of Heaven himself.It is no unusual thing for the Emperor in published edicts to confess to Heaven his shortcomings,taking upon himself the blame .of floods,famines,and revolutionary outbreaks,for which he begs Heaven's forgiveness.His responsibility to Heaven is as real as that of his officers to himself. If the Emperor loses his throne,it is because he has already lost“Heaven's decree,"which is presumptively transferred to whoever can hold the Empire.

That aspect of the Chinese doctrine of responsibility which is the most repellent to Western standards of thought,is found in the Oriental practice of extinguishing an entire family for the crime of one of its members. Many instances ofthis sort were reported in connection with the T‘aip'ing rebellion,and more recently the family of the chieftain Yakub Beg,who led the Mohammedan rebellion in Turkestan,furnished another. These atrocities are not,however,limited to cases of overt rebellion.In the year 1873"a Chinese was accused and convicted of having broken open the grave of a relative of the Imperial family,in order to rob the coffin of certain gold, silver,and jade ornaments which had been buried in it.The entire family of the criminal,consisting of four generations, from a man more than ninety years of age to a female infant only a few months old,was exterminated.Thus eleven persons suffered death for the offence of one.And there was no evidence to show that any of them were parties to,or were even aware of,his crime.”

The Chinese theory and practice of responsibility has been/ often cited as one of the causes of the perpetuity of Chinese institutions.It forges around every member of Chinese society iron fetters from which it is impossible that he should break loose.It constantly violates every principle of justice by punishing all grades of officers,as well as private individuals,for occurrences in which they had no part,and of which, as in the example just cited,they were not improbably utterly ignorant.It is the direct cause of deliberate and systematic falsification in all ranks of officials,from the very lowest to the very highest. If an officer is responsible for the existence of crimes which he does not find it easy to control,or of which he is ignorant till it is too late to prevent them,he will inevitably conceal the facts so as to screen himself.This is what constantly happens in all departments of the government,to the complete subversion of justice,for it is not in human nature to give truthful reports of events when,in consequence of such reports,the person who makes them may be severely and unjustly punished.The abuse of this principle alone would suffice to account for a large part of the maladministration of justice in China,to which our attention is so often called.

An additional evil connected with the official system has been noticed by every writer on China.It is the absence of Aaan independent salaries for the officers,whose allowances are so absurdly small that often they would not pay the expenses of the yamen for a day.Besides this,the officials are subject to so many forfeitures that it is said that they rarely draw their nominal allowances at all,as it would be necessary to pay them all back again in fines.The absolute necessity for levying squeezes and taking bribes arises from the fact that there is no other way by which a magistrate can exist

Still,while we are impressed with flagrant violations of justice which the Chinese theory of responsibility involves,it is impossible to be blind to its excellences.

In Western lands,where every one is supposed to be innocent until he is proved to be guilty,it is exceedingly difficult to fix responsibility upon any particular person. A bridge breaks down with a heavy train of cars loaded with passengers,and an investigation fails to find any one in fault.A lofty building falls and crushes scores of people,and while the architect is criticised,he shows that he did the best he could with the means at his disposal,and no one ever hears of his being punished.If an ironclad capsize,or a military campaign is ruined because the proper preparations were not made,or not made in time,eloquent speeches set forth the defects of the system which renders such events possible,but no one is punished.The Chinese are far behind us in their conceptions of public justice,but might we not wisely learn again from them the ancient lesson that every one should be held rigidly responsible for his own acts,in order to the security of the body politic?

The relation of the Chinese theory of responsibility to foreigners in China is one of great importance. The“Boy,” into whose hands everything is committed,and who must produce every spoon,fork,or curio;the steward,who takes general charge of your affairs,suffering no one but himself to cheat you;the compradore,who wields vast powers but who is individually responsible for every piece of property and for every one of hundreds of coolies—these types of character we still have with us,and shall always have,as long as we have anything to do with the Chinese.Innkeepers in China are not noted for flagrant virtues of any kind,especially for consideration towards foreign travellers.Yet we have known of( a Chinese innkeeper who ran half a mile after a foreigner, bringing an empty sardine-tin which he supposed to be a forgotten valuable. He knew that he was responsible,unlike American hotel-keepers,who coolly notify their guests that "the proprietor is not responsible for boots left in the hall to be blacked.”

Responsibility for the character,behaviour,and debts of those whom they recommend or introduce,is a social obligation of recognised force,and one which it behoves foreigners dealing with Chinese to emphasise.The fact that a headman, whatever his position,is“responsible”for any and every act of omission or commission of all his subordinates,exerts over the whole series of links in the chain a peculiar infuence, which has been instinctively appreciated by foreigners in all the long history of their dealings with Chinese.There is a tradition of a head compradore in a bank,who in the“more former days"was called to account because the“Boy"had allowed a mosquito to insinuate itself within the mosquito-net of the bank manager! If the Chinese perceive that a foreigner is ignorant of the responsibility of his employes,or disregards it,it will not take them long to act upon this discovery in extremely disagreeable ways.

One of the many admirable qualities of the Chinese is their eeec innate respect for law.Whether this element in their character is the effect of their institutions,or the cause of them,we do not know. But what we do know is that the Chinese are by nature and by education a law-abiding people.Reference has been already made to this trait in speaking of the national virtue of patience,but it deserves special notice in connection with Chinese theories of mutual responsibility.In China every man,woman,and child is directly responsible to some one else,and of this important fact no one for a moment loses sight.Though one should“go far and fly high”he cannot escape, and this he well knows. Even if he should himself escape,his family cannot escape.The certainty of this does not indeed make a bad man good,but it frequently prevents him from becoming tenfold worse.

It is an illustration of Chinese respect for law,and all that appertains thereto,that it often happens that men of literary rank are so terrified in the presence of a District Magistrate that they dare not open their mouths unless compelled to do so,although the case may not in any way concern themselves. We have indeed known of one instance where a man of this class appeared to be thrown into a condition resembling epilepsy by sheer fright in giving evidence.He was taken home in a fit,and soon after died.

Contrast the Chinese inherent respect for law with the spirit often manifested where republican institutions flourish most,and manifested,it must be said,by those whose antecedents would least lead us to expect it.College laws,municipal ordinances,state and national enactments,are quietly defied,as if the assertion of personal liberty were one of the greatest needs,instead of one of the principal dangers of the time.It is rightly regarded as one of the most serious indictments against the transaction of Chinese public business of all kinds,that every one not only connives at acts of dishonesty which it is his duty to prevent and to expose,but that such is the constitution of public and private society that every one ( must connive at such acts. But is it less disgraceful that in Christian countries men of education and refinement,as well as the uncultivated,quietly ignore or deliberately disregard the laws of the land as if by common consent,and as if it were now a well-ascertained fact that a law is more honoured in the breach than in the observance?How shall we explain or defend the existence upon our statute-books of multitudinous laws which are neither repealed nor enforced—laws which by their anomalous non-existent existence tend to bring all legislation into a common contempt?By what means shall we explain the alarming increase of crime in many Western lands during the last thirty years?How shall we explain that conspicuous indifference to the sacredness of human life which is unquestionably a characteristic of some Western lands?It is vain to dogmatise in regard to matters which from the nature of the case are beyond the reach of statistics.Still we must confess to a decided conviction that human life is safer in a Chinese city than in an American city—safer in Peking noQawm than in New York. We believe it to be safer for a foreigner to traverse the interior of China than for a Chinese to traverse en45 the interior of the United States. It must be remembered that the Chinese as a whole are quite as ignorant as any body of immigrants in the United States,and not less prejudiced. They are,as we constantly see,ideal material for mobs. The wonder is not that such outbreaks take place,but that they have not occurred more frequently,and have not been more fatal to the lives of foreigners.

It is a Chinese tenet that Heaven is influenced by the acts and by the spirit of human beings. Upon this principle depends the efficacy of the self-mutilation on behalf of parents, to which reference was made in speaking of filial piety.That this is a correct theory we are not prepared to maintain,yet certain facts deserve mention which might seem to support it. The geographical situation and extent of the Eighteen Provinces of China bear a marked resemblance to that part of the United States of America east of the Rocky Mountains.The erratic eccentricities of the climate of the United States are, as little Marjorie Fleming remarked of the multiplication table, "more than human nature can bear." It was Hawthorne who observed of New England that it has“no climate,but only samples.”Contrast the weather in Boston,New York, or Chicago with that of places in the same latitude in China. It is not that China is not,as the geographies used to affirm of the United States,"subject to extremes of heat and cold," for in the latitude of Peking the thermometer ranges through about one hundred degrees Fahrenheit,which ought to afford sufficient variety of temperature to any mortal.

But in China these alternations of heat and cold do not follow one another with that reckless and incalculable lawlessness witnessed in the great republic,but with an even and unruffled sequence suited to an ancient and a patriarchal system.The Imperial almanac is the authorised exponent of the threefold harmony subsisting in China between heaven,earth, and man.Whether the Imperial almanac is equally trustworthy in all parts of the Emperor's broad domain we do not know,but in those regions with which we happen to be famil-, iar the almanac is itself a signal-service.At the point marked for the“establishment of spring,”spring appears.In several different years we have remarked that the day on which the "establishment of autumn"fell was distinguished by a marked change in the weather,after which the blistering heats of summer returned no more. Instead of allowing the frost to make irregular and devastating irruptions in every month of the year —as is too often the case in lands where democracy rules— the Chinese calendar fixes one of its four-and-twenty“terms” as“frost-fall.”A few years ago this"term”fell on the 23d of October. Up to that day no lightest frost had been seen. On the morning of that day the ground was covered with white frost,and continued to be so covered every morning thereafter. We have noted these correspondences for some years,and have seldom observed a variation of more than the usual three days of grace.

It is not inanimate nature only which in China is amenable to reason and to law,but animated nature as well. For some years we have noticed that on a particular day in early spring the window-frames were adorned with several flies,where for many months no flies had been seen,and on each occasion we have turned to the Imperial almanac with a confidence justified by the event,and ascertained that this particular day was the one assigned for the“stiring of insects”!

It has been remarked that there is in the blood of the English-speaking race a certain lawlessness,which makes us intolerant of rules and restless under restraints.“Our sturdy English ancestors,"says Blackstone,"held it beneath the condition of a freeman to appear,or to do any other act,at the precise time appointed."But for this trait of our doughty forefathers the doctrine of personal liberty and the rights of man might have waited long for assertion.

But now that these rights are tolerably well established, might we not judiciously lay somewhat more emphasis upon the importance of subordinating the individual will to the public good,and upon the majesty of law?And in these directions have we not something to learn from the Chinese?