LEGISLATIONS OF ISRAEL AND BABYLONIA. 



155 



of protection against the demands of the moneylender (§ 48), 

 and again the wife and child of a debtor recover their liberty 

 after only three years' service to the creditor (§ 117). 



Thirdly, it may fairly be said that Hammurabi expects every 

 man to do his duty, and holds that he ought to be properly 

 remunerated for his work. With this object, we find numerous 

 provisions dealing with the remuneration of various craftsmen 

 and inflicting punishment for unsatisfactory work. A similar 

 idea appears in the provisions that are ins))ired by the Babylo- 

 nian theory of wifely duty. And this brings us to a fourth 

 characteristic of the code, its treatment of various trades and 

 crafts. Hammurabi believed that he could best regulate by 

 legislation matters that might have been left to contract or 

 judicial discretion. Probably he knew the circumstances of his 

 own age and country best, and was right in taking this course. 

 At any rate we have no materials which would justify us in 

 blaming the grandmotherliness of his legislation. 



Fifthly, the Babylonian conception of justice — like that of the 

 Indian law-books — is fundamentally warped by the caste 

 system. Throughout there is one law for the rich, another for 

 the poor. The dignity of man was unknown in Babylonia. 



It is probable, too, that the provision for drowning a wine 

 merchant who makes the price of wine less than that of corn 

 {§ 108), though it sounds a little strange to our ears, is really a 

 temperance enactment which should be noted with approval. 



The highest ideals of the code may be summed up very 

 briefly. Hammurabi held that it was the duty of " the shepherd 

 of the people " to make them dwell safely and prosperously. 

 His ethics, his morality, his theory of legislation, in so far as 

 they are not merely inherited from past ages, are alike 

 economic. 



On the other hand it would appear that he did give his 

 people strong and certain rule with its attendant benefits, and 

 it must be remembered that even inferior laws, if enforced 

 rigorously and impartially, are greatly preferable in their 

 practical consequences to a legislation that is not applied 

 strongly and uniformly, even if the latter be superior on paper. 



It is a misfortune for the posthumous reputation of the 

 Babylonian king, that in our days circumstances necessitate 

 the comparison of his famous statute with the noblest monument 

 of legislative idealism that history has produced. The interest 

 that is felt in Hammurabi's code by the general public is largely 

 due to the supposed possibility that it may have exercised some 

 considerable influence on the law of Israel. The Babylonian 



