When any person is put to the torture the inquisitors and the ordinary should be present--or, at least, some of them. But when this is for any reason impossible, then the person entrusted to question should be a learned and faithful man (_hombre entendido y fiel_). ARTICLE XIX The absent accused shall be cited by public edict affixed to the door of the church of the district to which he belongs, and after thirty days’ grace the inquisitors may proceed to try him as contumaciously absent. If there is sufficient evidence of his guilt, sentence may be passed upon him. Or, if evidence is insufficient, he may be branded a suspect and commanded--as is due of suspects--to present himself for canonical purgation. Should he fail to do so within the time appointed, his guilt must be presumed. Proceedings against the absent may be taken in any of the following three ways: (1) In accordance with the chapter “Cum contumatia de hereticis,” citing the accused to appear and defend himself upon certain matters concerning the Faith and certain sins of heresy, under pain of excommunication; if he does not respond, he shall be denounced as a rebel, and if he persists in this rebellion for one year he shall be declared a formal heretic. This is the safest and least rigorous course to adopt. (2) Should it seem to the inquisitors that a crime against any absent can be established, let him be cited by edict to come and prove his innocence within thirty days--or a longer period may be conceded if such is necessary to permit him to return from wherever he may be known to be. And he shall be cited at every stage of the proceedings until the passing of sentence, when, should he still be absent, let him be accused of rebellion, and should the crime be proved he may be condemned in his absence without further delay. (3) If in the course of inquisitorial proceedings there is presumption of heresy against an absent person (although the crime is not clearly proved) the inquisitors may summon him by edict commanding him to appear within a given time to clear himself canonically of the said error, on the understanding that should he fail to appear, or, appearing, should fail to clear himself, he shall be deemed convicted and the inquisitors shall proceed to act as by law prescribed. The inquisitors, being learned and discriminating, will select the course that seems most certain and is most practical under the particular circumstances of the case. Any person condemned as contumacious became an outlaw, whom it was lawful for any man to kill. CANONICAL PURGATION, which is mentioned in this article, differs considerably from ABJURATION, and the difference must be indicated.