The Code And Punishment Of Imperial Commissioners' Conduct In The Early Song Dynasty

The background of dispatching imperial commissioners was special in the early Song Dynasty.On the one hand,it was closely related to practices about dispatching commissioners in former generation.Before the Tang Dynasty,these practices had formed a trend that could be summarized as “imperial commissioners-(temporary positions for these commissioners)-official positions”.But this trend had abnormally changed in the late Tang Dynasty and the Five Dynasties.The mass of temporary positions had led to the confusion of official system and the expansion of local power.In the early Song Dynasty,these temporary positions were added into the official rank and lost authority,which made the official system regular and eliminated the hidden problem from the local area.However,because the system of Chai Qian that replaced these temporary positions could not meet emperors' needs about candidates,duties and procedures,emperors chose the origin of fore mentioned trend and extensively dispatched imperial commissioners.On the other hand,the background was closely related to the hierarchy's political policy about strengthening the control of the central government.Emperors divided this policy into political aims in practice,such as supervising local officials,controlling local economy and obtaining local information,and needed imperial commissioners to achieve these aims.Political aims became aims of dispatching imperial commissioners.As the result of these,the dispatching imperialcommissioners in the early Song Dynasty was as usual as in former generation and even became more various.The inheritance and development of dispatching imperial commissioners depended on the legal system of the early Song Dynasty.The law was useful to regulate imperial commissioners' conduct and achieve aims of dispatching imperial commissioners.Most of imperial commissioners were officials,but compared with ordinary officials,they did missions and kept the special identity.According to these differences,legislators made the code of imperial commissioners' conduct.Accomplishing missions was the main duty of imperial commissioners.The law required that they should execute the order from emperors carefully,report timely and not act dictionally.At the same time,they should indicate their identities and the authority of the emperor when they did missions.Holding seals named as Feng Shi and scepters and returning them timely were duties of imperial commissioners.Also,using national postal system was another difference between doing mission by imperial commissioners and executing functions by ordinary officials.The law required that they should hold certificates,use horses by operation of law and obey the time limit of national postal system.When officials became imperial commissioners,their personal conduct would be more strictly restricted.They should obey the etiquette which could be divided into two parts.At the level of central government,they should farewell and report to the emperor.If they broke rules,they might be impeached by censors.At the level of local government,they should cooperate with local officials to complete the etiquette and not “overstep standards of reception”.In terms of crime of corruption,the criminal code called them “powerful persons” or “officials who do missions”,and the code usually set the measurement of penalty as same as that of senor officials.In addition,for achieving special aims,emperors might grant imperial commissioners the discretionary power and permit them to change or break the law.The jurisdiction and procedure of this power were not set in the law.According to the origin of the power,the standards of whether it was executed properly belonged to the emperor.The punishment of imperial commissioners' conduct which had special judicial procedure was an important method of ensuring the achievement of aims of dispatching them.The prosecution of these cases included claims of citizens and impeachments of officials.Because of the specification of these cases,people could sue imperial commissioners for illegality through ordinary legal action,overstepping indictment or direct appealing system.The supervisory system of the early Song Dynasty was complete,but the local supervisory system played the most important role in supervising imperial commissioners.Local officials not only had the duty of reporting the illegal action of imperial commissioners but also had the convenience of doing so.In addition,emperors might dispatch imperial commissioners once again to get information of these cases.The settlement of these cases was dominated by the emperor.The emperor could determine whether to hear the case and what the trial institution was.The emperor who was not restricted by the proposed decision from trial institutions usually entered a judgement by promulgating special orders.In practice,emperors prioritized preventing illegal act,concentrated on choosing good candidates and peached to them,which became institutionalized.Judgments were influenced by extra-legal factors that might lead to judgements beyond the law,such as the identity of imperial commissioners,the background and effect of cases.Many“diligent imperial commissioners” and the local support reflected that the punishment was effective in the early Song Dynasty.Until the late Song Dynasty,edicts and the criminal code were both valid.Part of code of imperial commissioners' conduct in the early Song Dynasty continued to be used.With revising edicts and codifying,the content and system of part of norms were changed.Some special law about imperial commissioners' conduct was enacted according to special missions.Though the Lv Ling System had vanished in Ming and Qing Dynasty,modern people can find previous system in the Dian Li System.In practice,the emperor's control of punishment was inherited and strengthened by later generations.According to the history,the traditional conclusion about “Ren Fa” of the Song Dynasty should be re-examined.Dispatching and managing imperialcommissioners in the early Song Dynasty had the feature of “giving priority to Ren Ren” dominated by the emperor and led to a great social effect,but that caused crises of relevant practices in later ages,because of lacking “Ren Fa”.If we put it under the background of the social change between Tang and Song Dynasty,we will find that the fundamental political and legal practice about state governance showed “the rule by man” occupied the main position and political policies took precedence of legal institutions,which reflected the tendency of political legalization had declined in the early Song Dynasty.Nowadays,the central government often dispatches officials to the local area.When modern people manage these officials,they can draw on the experience of the early Song Dynasty,uphold the rule of law.They should not only enact administrative legal norms according to the particularity of these officials but also make full use of local supervision in censorial practice.