| Discussion about the People:...: |
If the order of the country depends on the judgments of the family, it attains supremacy; if it depends on the judgments of the officials, it becomes only strong; if it depends on the judgments of the prince, it becomes weak. If light offences are heavily punished, punishments will disappear; if officials are permanent, there is orderly administration. The necessary guarantee for restricting the use of punishments is that promises of rewards are kept. If they make it their habit to denounce all crimes, then the people make the judgments in their own minds; and if, when the ruler gives his orders, the people know how to respond, so that the means for enforcing the law are really manufactured in the families and merely applied by the officials, then the judgments over affairs rest with the family. Therefore, in the case of one who attains supremacy, judgments with regard to punishments and rewards rest with the people's own minds, and those with regard to the application of the means for enforcing the law rest with the family. If there is a clear law, people will agree with one another; if there is an obscure law, people will differ from one another. If they agree, things run smoothly, but if they differ, things are hampered; in the former case, there is order, in the latter, disorder. If there is order, it is the families that make judgments; if there is disorder, it is the prince who makes judgments. |
