The teftimony
■requifite to
authenticate
it.
'The contents
muft be pre-
vioufly explained
to the
.authenticating
witneiTes.
D U T I E S O F B ook XX.
blilh their admiffibility, which will be explained in their proper place.
■— It is related as an opinion of Mohammed, that the letters of a Kdzee
are admiffible with refpeft to every fpecies of moveable property; and
this opinion has been adopted by our modern doctors.
T h e letters of Kdzees are not admiffible, unlefs authenticated by
the teftimony of two men, or of one man and two women; becaufe
there is a limilarity between all letters, and it is therefore neceflary to
eftablilh their authenticity by complete proof,— that is, by evidence.
— The grounds of this is, that thefe letters are binding in their nature,
and therefore require to be completely proved.— It is otherwife with
refpedt to the letters of Hirbees [Infidel aliens] to the Imdm, foliciting
proteftion; for thefe require not to be proved by evidence, fince they
not binding in their nature, inafmuch as it refts with the Imdm to
grant the protection or not at his pleafure.— It is alfo otherwife with
-refpefit to the meflage of a Kdzee to a Moozkee [purgator of witnefles,]
or with refpedt to the meflage of a purgator to the Kdzee
for fuch a meflage has no force, confidered as the meflage of a purgator,
but merely as being a corroboration of the teftimony of witnefles.
I t is incumbent on the Kdzee to read his letter in the prefence o f
the witnefles who are to authenticate it, or to explain the contents of
it to them, that they may have a knowledge thereof; becaufe evidence
cannot be given without knowledge. Afterwards he muft dole the
letter, and affix his feal to it in their prefence, and then confion it
over to them, that they may have a fecurity againft any poffibility of
alteration in fit.— This is according to Haneefa and Mohammed-, and
the reafon is, that a knowledge of the fubjedt of the letter, and an evidence
of the affixture of the feal, are indilpenfible requifites; and in
the fame manner a remembrance of the contents is alfo requifite;
whence it is that the Kdzee muft furniffi them with an open copy of
the letter, with which they may refrelh their memory__It is however
related, as the laft opinion of Aboo I'oofaJ', tint no one of thefe
8 particulars
C h a p. II. T H E K A Z E E,
particulars is requifite, it being fufficient to atteftthat this is the letter
and this the leal of the Kdzee*, and it is alio reported, from, him, that
the affixture of the feal, is not neceflary.— Hence it appears that, after
his attaining the dignity of Kdzee, he confidered tflis matter as of little
confequence; and his opinion is of great weight, fince thole that only
hear are not fo competent to determine as thole- that fee.-Shim fal-
Avma has adopted the opinion of Aboo Yoofaf.
W hen a letter from a. Kdzee arrives, the Kdzee tp whom it is ad-
drefled ought not to receive it unlefs in the prefence of the defendant;
becaufe, as fuch, letter is equivalent to an exhibition of evidence, the
prefence of the defendant is therefore indilpenfible.It is otherwife
with refpedt to the Other Kdzee's hearing the evidence, becaufe that:
is. done merely with a view to. tranfmit it, and not. to ‘po-Js JenteHce
upon it.
W hen the witnefles bring the letter to the Kdzee to whom it is
add'reffed, let him firft look at the feal of it, and after hearing their
teftimony, (that “ this is-the letter of a particular Kdzee,”— that “ he
“ delivered it to them in his court of judgment,”— that “ he read
“ it in their prefence,”— and, that “ he affixed his feal to it before-
“ them,” ) let him then open and read it in the prefence of the. defendant,
and pafs a decree agreeably to the contents.— This is according
to Haneefa and Mohammed.— Aboo Koofaf has-faid it is. fufficient for.
the witnefles to atteft that “ this is the letter and feal of fuch a-
“ Kdzee."— In the Kadooree, the proof of the integrity of the witnefles.
prior to the opening of the letter is not made a condition.— The
better opinion, however, is that it >is a neceflary condition ;«and the
fame has been declared by Khafdf-, for this reafon, that there may:
eventually be a neceflity to recur to other evidence, in cafe of a want ,
of proof of the integrity of thofe that brought i t ; and it would be im-
poffible for any others to give their teftimony unlefs the feal ftill
remained upon it; it is therefore abfolutely neceflary that the Kdzee
defer
It muft not ber-
received but
in prefence of:
the defend?
ant.
Forms to be-
obferved in
the reception
of it.