If they understood the
case, they settled the matter; but if not, they applied to the court of
the next city. If the neighboring justices could not decide, they went
together and laid the case in debate before the court which held its
session at the entrance of the Temple-Mount. If these courts, in turn,
failed to solve the problem, they appealed to the court that sat in the
entrance of the ante-court, where a discussion was entered into upon the
moot points of the case; if no decision could be arrived at, they all
referred to the (supreme) court of seventy-one, where the matter was
finally decided by the majority of votes."
As the disciples of Shammai and Hillel multiplied who had not studied
the law thoroughly, contentions increased in Israel to such an extent
that the law lost its unity and became as two.
_Sanhedrin_, fol. 88, col. 2.
The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle, in order that they might see one
another; and two notaries stood before them, the one on the right and
the other on the left, to record the pros and cons in the various
processes. Rabbi Yehudah says there were three such notaries, one for
the pros, one for the cons, and one to record both the pros and the
cons.
_Sanhedrin_, fol. 36, col. 2.
The witnesses (in capital cases) were questioned on seven points, as
follows:--In what Shemitah (or septennial cycle) did it occur? In which
year (of the cycle)? In what month? Upon what day? At what hour? In what
place? .
Pages:
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300