He visited various great cities and courts of emperors, and everywhere was received with honor. Confucius was saddened by the sight of so much disorder. Soon after writing the “Book of Odes” and the “Book of History,” he became magistrate of the town of Chung-Too. He now had an opportunity of putting his principles of government to the test, and the result partly justified his expectations. He framed rules for the support of the living, and for the observance of rites for the dead; he arranged appropriate food for the old and the young; and he provided for the proper separation of men and women. And the results were, we are told, that anything dropped on the road was not picked up; there was no fraudulent carving of vessels; coffins were made of the ordained thickness; graves were unmarked by mounds raised over them; and no two prices were charged in the markets. The duke, surprised at what he saw, asked the sage whether his rule of government could be applied to the whole State. “Certainly,” replied Confucius, “and not only to the State of Loo, but to the whole empire.” Forthwith, therefore, the duke made him Assistant Superintendent of Works, and shortly afterwards appointed him Minister of Crime. Here, again, his success was complete. As soon as he was appointed he began to carry the laws into effect by punishing high-handed criminals and ere long good government resumed its sway. [Illustration: TEMPLE OF CONFUCIUS, THE CHINESE SAGE, IN PEKING.] Though eminently successful, the results obtained under his system were not quite such as his followers have represented them to have been. No doubt crime diminished under his rule, but it was by no means abolished. In fact, his biographers mention a case which must have been peculiarly shocking to him. A father brought an accusation against his son, in the expectation, probably, of gaining his suit with ease before a judge who laid such stress on the virtues of filial piety. But to his surprise, and that of the on-lookers, Confucius cast both father and son into prison, and to the remonstrance of the head of the Ke-clan answered: “Am I to punish for a breach of filial piety one who has never been taught to be filially minded? Is not he who neglects to teach his son filial duties, equally guilty with his son who fails in them? Crime is not inherent in human nature, and therefore the father in the family, and the government in the State are responsible for the crimes committed against filial piety and the public laws. If a king is careless about publishing laws, and then peremptorily punishes in accordance with the strict letter of them, he acts the part of a swindler; if he collect the taxes arbitrarily without giving warning, he is guilty of oppression; and if he puts the people to death without having instructed them, he commits a cruelty.”