lious children, and the accounts of fearful
punishments which were inflicted upon them in Jewish history. They
began their statement by formally acknowledging that Peter himself had
absolute power to dispose of the case of his son according to his own
sovereign will and pleasure; that they had no jurisdiction in the case,
and could not presume to pronounce judgment, or say any thing which
could in any way restrain or limit the Czar in doing what he judged
best. But nevertheless, as the Czar had graciously asked them for
their counsel as a means of instructing his own mind previously to
coming to a decision, they would proceed to quote from the Holy
Scriptures such passages as might be considered to bear upon the
subject, and to indicate the will of God in respect to the action of a
sovereign and father in such a case.

They then proceeded to quote the texts and passages of Scripture. Some
of these texts were denunciations of rebellious and disobedient
children, such as, "The eye that mocketh his father and that despiseth
to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pluck it out," and
the Jewish law providing that, "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious
son, who will not obey the voice of his father nor the voice of his
mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto
them, then shall his father and mother lay hold of him, and bring him
out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place, and
shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is rebellious: he
will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the
men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die."

There were other passages quoted relating to actual cases which
occurred in the Jewish history of sons being punished with death for
crimes committed against their parents, such as that of Absalom, and
others.

The bearing and tendency of all these extracts from the Scriptures was
to justify the severest possible treatment of the unhappy criminal.
The bishops added, however, at the close of their communication, that
they had made these extracts in obedience to the command of their
sovereign, not by way of pronouncing sentence, or making a decree, or
in any other way giving any authoritative decision on the question at
issue, but only to furnish to the Czar himself such spiritual guidance
and instruction in the case as the word of God afforded. It would be
very far from their duty, they said