464 L E V ' Y I N G .B o o k LI.
Fourprimary
examples,
which give
rules for determining
concerning
the impofi-
tion of fine
upon A k ila s .
manner, but perforce, in purfuance of a judicial decree. In the fame
manner, alio, if a man inftigate a boy to flay any perfon, and he flay
the perfon accordingly, and his Akilas pay the fine ,. they are afterr
wards entitled to recover the fame from the Akilas of the inftigator,
.upon the inftigation being eftablifhed by proof; or, i f the inftigation be
eftablifhed, not by proof , but by the acknowledgment of the inftigator,
they recover it from his property. It is to be obferved, however,
that the boy’s Akilas, in this inftance, take their reimburfement
.from the inftigator, or his Akilas, in three years from the time of the
Kdzeg's palling a decree in their favour, this. indulgen.ce in point of
time being allowed, in the payment of fines, in order that diftrefs may
be avoided.
T h e compiler of the Hecidya remarks that here .follow a great variety
o f cafes and examples, ftated by Mohammed, the primary of which are
four.— I. Where the ftate of the flayer is changed, and .his Willa tranf-
ferred to others by fome fupervenient Occurrence, (fuch as manu-
miffion;) in which cafe his offence is not transferred from his former
Akilas, whether the Kdzee iflue a decree, or not.-“ Fori in-fiance :—
the male flave of fome perfon marries the female flave :of fome other
perfon ; and her mafter emancipates her .; and withimfix months thereafter
fhe brings forth a child ; and this child committing manflaughter,
the fine falls upon the A kila soï the mother;— and the.OTuZjflave’s maftef
afterwards emancipates him, in confequence of which, the Willa of the
child.appertains. to him;— in which cafe the fine incurred by the child’s
offence ftill refis upon the mother’ s Akilas, and does not dev.olve upon
the father's Akilas, whether the Kâzee .have iflued his. decree of fine
for the offence or not.— II. Where fome unlooked for circumflance
occurs (fuch as a claim laid to a child born of a woman divorced by
Laan ;) in which cafe the matter is transferred from the Akilas on
the one fide to the Akilas on the other;—as has been explained in the
example before Hated., (The cafe of the Mokdtib, there mentioned,
alfo proceeds on this ground ; becaufe upon the payment of the ranfom
, he
he appears to have been free from the inflant of his demife ; and
hence it does not reft upon the former ground ; for here the caufe is
altogether unexpected, and is therefore not merely a fupervenient occur-
rence.)— III. Where the ftate of the offender is not altered, but his
Akilas changed, in this way, .that his regiftry was at Koofa, and was,
after his offence, transferred to Bafra ;—in which cafe regard muftbe
paid to the decree of the Kdzee ; in other words, i f he have decreed
the fine againft the former Akilas, and the Akilas be then changed,
the matter does not devolve .upon the latter Akilas ; but i f the Akilas
be changed previous to the Kdzee's decree of fine againft the fir Us: Akilas,
he mull in that cafe decree it againft the latter Akilas.— IV. Where
the Akilas ftill continue the fame, but obtain an increafe, (by there
having been among them an infant, who in the interim attains to majority,
or by fome of them dying, and others of the neareft tribe being
conjoined in the fine;)— in which cafe the additional Akilas are affo-
ciated with the original Akilas in the payment of the fine, whether the
Kdzee have decreed a fine againft the Akilas, or not,— excepting only
with refpect to fuch part as may already have been paid by the former
Akilas.— Whoever pays due attention to thefe four primary examples,
as grounds o f proceeding in this particular, will be enabled to form a
judgment, and determine upon almoft every cafe which can occur. ~
H i
Wm ■
H i l i i
V o l . IV. H E D A T A .