480. Their judges for this were the chief or dato aided by some old men of his own barangay, or of another barangay if necessary. Or they themselves appointed a judge-arbiter, even if he were of a distinct barangay or village. If there were a suit with rival parties, they tried first to come to an agreement. If they would not agree, an oath was taken from each one, who declared that they would do as the judges should sentence. Having done that, witnesses were examined summarily. If the testimony was equal for each side, then the litigants were reconciled. If the evidence were in favor of one of them, the suit was sentenced in his favor, and the defeated one was notified. If he would not admit the sentence willingly, the judge and all the others proceeded against him, and by way of execution deprived him of all the gold to which he had been sentenced. The greater part of it went to the judges of the case, and to pay the witnesses on the victorious side; while the poor litigant had the least of all, being content with only the glory of victory. 481. Criminal cases were judged according to the rank of the murderer and the murdered. For if the murdered man were a chief among them all his relatives went to the house of his murderer, and the houses of his relatives, and they had continual wars one with the other until--the old men stepped in and acted as mediators, with the declaration of the amount of gold that ought to be given as a payment for that murder. The judges and the chief old men took one-half that sum, and the other was divided among the wife, children, and relatives of the deceased. The penalty of death was never adjudged except when the murderer and his victim were so poor and so destitute that they had no gold for satisfaction and expenses. In that case either his own chief or dato killed the criminal, or the other chiefs speared him after he had been fastened to a stake, and made him give up the ghost by spear-thrusts.