Wax Table Case (1370)
The Wax Tablet Case (蠟書案, rap-st′ja-′anh) of 1370 was a landmark case in Themiclesian jurisprudence relating to the plenipotentiary powers of diplomatic envoys.
Case
In the autumn of 1368, a Themiclesian diplomatic mission to Maracaibo exchanged letters with the Vitric people and prepared to leave the Maracaiboan shore. As Themiclesia had, through the Battle of Portcullia in 1325 lost control of Portcullia, diplomatic fleets were now protected by full-time soldiers for their protection. This had not been necessary prior to that time, as the Themiclesian fleet was then able to dominate the waters. The Vitric people, for their diplomatic correspondence to the Themiclesian court, wrote in tablets of tree wax. The tablet was kept under the deck to shield it from the heat of the sun and corrosion from contact with seawater. The fleet's soldiers were also kept under the deck to keep it clear for the crew's convenience. Soon after the fleet's disembarkment, one of the soldiers reported to the ship's doctor that he felt profoundly unwell; upon investigation, it was discovered he had eaten the wax tablets that contained the Vitric people's diplomatic letter. The envoy flew into a rage and threw him into the sea. Upon landing in Themiclesia, the drowned soldier's family prosecuted the envoy for murder and Lèse-majesté. The envoy was acquitted before court on confirmation that his diplomatic powers were plenipotentiary, resembling that of the sovereign, as long as he was beyond the seas and on a legitimate path from his mission.
Argument and judgment
The soldier's family alleged that the envoy had acted ultra vires when he cast the soldier into the sea. They cite the edict leading to his mission and contend that the phrase "to have power of life and death over all men under his charge" did not include killing his charge without a legitimate cause, reasoning that not even the emperor had such a power to kill subjects arbitrarily. Since the envoy was at most a representative of the emperor, he could not enjoy a power the emperor did not possess. This was a very serious allegation in Themiclesia at the time, as not only it implied administrative overreach, but a direct attack on the legal hierarchy. If the plaintiffs were successful, the envoy could face capital punishment for surpassing the emperor's powers and thus placing himself on a higher rank than the emperor.
The envoy appeared before the court in 1370 and presented his counterarguments. First, he stated that "power of life and death" was to be interpreted literally, as "life and death" could not have, at law, a figurative definition. Thus, he enjoyed an arbitrary power to put to death any person for any cause he liked. The judges were not persuaded by this argument, however, noting that there was indeed no power at law to execute persons arbitrarily, so "life and death" could not imply such a power. The envoy then argued that the grant of plenipotentiary power on behalf of the state to make treaties with the Vitric peoples implied sovereign-like powers within the limits the diplomatic mission.
The plaintiffs argued that still the defendant had committed lèse-majesté by pretending to a power the emperor did not enjoy; however, the envoy responded that the emperor did enjoy an arbitrary power of life and death, to the surprise of the judges. The envoy reasoned that since all state powers stemmed from the emperor, the judicial power to convict and punish both were properly the emperor's prerogative, though exercised by different officers, as required by statute, to prevent collusion. However, his mission itself was founded by a statute, meaning that all the emperor's powers, domestically distributed to different officers, were concentrated in himself by reason of his mission, as long as he remained within its operation.
The judges ultimately acquitted the envoy, instead convicting the plaintiffs of raising a false capital case. They were sentenced to life imprisonment for this crime, their lands and movables confiscated to the state (收孥, l′ju-na′).
Legal impact
This case established Themiclesian envoy's absolute power over their subordinates while in their mission, but later jurists had questioned this judgment on a number of grounds.
First, the judgment implied that the emperor had the power to convict arbitrarily, even against statute, precedent, fact, and reason, and then to punish based on that conviction. Jurists were uncomfortable with such a notion. While some suggested that the emperor, as an institution, was held by morality or some other kind of restraint that was inherent in the emperor's body politic, this would contradict the emperor's sovereign power and run into the same problem as the plaintiff's argument. In the 1400s, a satisfactory answer to this problem was provided by jurist Mrjanh, who reasoned that the judicial power was exercised domestically always by an officer of the law, who was bound to follow laws while exercising the emperor's power; that is, while the power to convict arbitrarily was properly that of the emperor, by reason of its (irretrievable) delegation in domestic cases, it could still be legally restrained, as the conduct of a subject ought to be.
Food history
In 1976, food historian James Presser discussed this case extensively and concluded that the case was probably a hoax, asserting that Maracaiboan tree wax was bitter to taste and could not possibly be confused for food. In 1979, another food historian, Margaret Stills, noted that Presser's views were based on a single type of tree wax, failing to note that Vitric people used several types of them for purposes such as longevity and legibility; she notes that examples have surfaced where incense or honey was added to improve its aroma, which otherwise was pungent. She concluded that it was possible for a wax tablet so treated, as may be expected for a diplomatic document, to be confused for food. In 1990, naval historian Kiw wrote that Themiclesian fleets often stored pemmican in tablet shapes, and such tablets may have been confused for the wax tablet in the dim light of the cabin, with all gun ports closed, such as expected on a diplomatic sojourn. Kiw cites excavated moulds that have been recovered in recent archaeological digs in the western shores of the Halu'an Sea and in Themiclesia, which agreed in dimensions with typical Vitric wax tablets "quite well". Experimental historian Kagwh took up this case in 1999, conducting a blind taste-test of wax cubes and pemmican cubes; results showed that 0% of the 100 subjects confused the two substances; he thus rejected Kiw's argument that "no-one could have such a bad sense of taste."
Just as the case appeared to approach an impassé, legal historian N′ubh in 2001 published a cache of previously uncatalogued cases, one of which dealt with pemmican supplies for the navy: a supplier was convicted of adulterating the navy's pemmican with as much as 90% wax. Kiw, in light of this case, asserted that the particular store of pemmican used on the journey could have been adulterated; thus the letter, for its dimensions and under insufficient lighting, must have resembled the pemmican tablets and tasted like the adulterated tablets. The soldier would have been entirely accustomed to eating such pemmican so as not to notice the letter's consistency that only slightly differed from the adulterated pemmican. This conclusion briefly stirred media attention, with a 1,000-signature petition to the government to overturn the soldier's conviction of treason and restore honours to him. Particularly, since the Portcullia Merchant Militia that the soldier belonged to would later become the Themiclesian Marine Corps, modern marines have signed this petition enthusiastically, gathering 500 signatures within four days. Yet the Home Secretary replied in June 2002 that "while the case is indeed tragic by all accounts, and the envoy in question had taken an unpopular decision, there is no cause to doubt the legal soundness of his actions." The Home Secretary went on to receive a honourary doctorate in law two years later.