If no witnesses are forthcoming the king must endeavour to find out the truth by the oaths of the accuser or the accused, which in cases of special importance he may test and confirm by the "divine declaration." Even the Brahmans could not refuse the oath; for Vasishtha had sworn to the son of Pijavana (Sudas). The Brahman swore by his truthfulness; the Kshatriya by his weapons, his horses, and elephants; the Vaiçya by his cows, his corn, his grass; the Çudra, when taking an oath, must invoke all sins on his own head.[243] If the king desires the "divine revelation" on the truth of the oath, the person taking it must lay his hand, while swearing, on the head of his wife, or the heads of his children; or after taking it, he must undergo the test of fire and water or fire; i.e. he is thrown into water and he must touch fire with his hand. If in the second case no immediate harm follows, if in the first the witness sinks like any other person, if in the third he is not injured by the fire, the oath is correct. Fire, so the book proceeds, is to be the test of guilt or innocence for all men; the holy Vatsa once demonstrated his innocence by walking through fire without a hair of his head being consumed.[244] When we consider the inclination of the Indians to the marvellous, and their belief in the perpetual interference of the gods, it cannot surprise us that these regulations about the divine declaration--which are all that are found in the book of the law--became at a later time much more extended and complicated; it is also possible that the book has omitted certain hereditary forms of the divine sentence, such as the carrying of hot iron, though they continue to exist.[245] When the king had thus come to a conclusion about the matter and its position by means of indications, evidence, oaths, and "divine declaration," when he had considered the extenuating or aggravating circumstances, _e.g._ special qualities in the criminal, or repeated convictions, and reflected on the prescriptions given by the law, he is to cause punishment to be inflicted on the guilty. The book acknowledges that the king alone is not sufficient for the burden of pronouncing justice; it is open to him to name a representative, and the necessary judges from the number of the twice-born; no exclusive right in this respect is reserved for the Brahmans, but they are especially recommended. "A court of law, assembled by the king, and consisting of a very learned Brahman and three Brahmans acquainted with writing, is called by the sages the court of Brahman with four faces." A Çudra can never be named by the king as his representative in a court of law. If such a thing were to happen, the kingdom would be in the unfortunate position of a cow which had fallen into a morass.[246]