2. The courts of justice in Sparta have already been spoken of in several places.(1025) The Gerusia decided all criminal causes, together with most others which affected the conduct of the citizens; the other jurisdiction was divided among the magistrates according to the branches of their administration.(1026) The ephors decided all disputes concerning money and property, as well as in accusations against responsible officers, provided they were not of a criminal nature; the kings decided in causes of heiresses and adoptions, and the bidiæi in disputes arising at the gymnasia. Public offences, particularly of the kings and other authorities, were decided by a supreme court of judicature.(1027) The popular assembly had probably no judicial functions; disputes concerning the succession to the throne were referred to it only after ineffectual attempts to settle them, and it then passed a decree.(1028) The assembly took the case of those who fled from their ranks at the battle of Leuctra out of the hands of the regular court, by nominating an extraordinary nomothetes for the occasion, and afterwards confirming his proposal.(1029) It does not appear that the practice of ostracism was known in the Doric states before the destruction of the early constitution.(1030) Arbitrators were also employed at Sparta for the decision of private cases, as in the Homeric time;(1031) but whether they were publicly appointed, as in Athens, is not known. At Sparta, as well as at Athens, the parties interested were, of course, entitled to accuse in private causes; and in criminal cases the next of kin; it cannot however be supposed that in Sparta, as in Athens, every citizen of the state was empowered to institute a public action; as a regulation of this kind appears too inseparably connected with democracy. Private individuals were therefore only permitted to lay an information before a magistrate, which was also allowed to the Helots;(1032) the action being conducted, as we find to have been so frequently the case with the ephors, by some public officer. In the judicial procedure of Sparta, it is probable that much of the ancient Grecian simplicity remained, which Aristotle for example remarks in the criminal proceedings of the Æolic Cume, where in trials for murder witnesses from the family of the murdered person were sufficient to prove the offence.(1033) In the ancient laws of Rhadamanthus, disputes were generally decided in a very summary manner by oath,(1034) and the legislation of Charondas for the Chalcidean colonies was the first that instituted inquiries concerning false testimony.(1035)