Tabernacles, led to riot and bloody reprisals on the only occasion on which it seems to

have been carried into practice.84 85 Similarly, the Sadducees objected to the beating off

the willow-branches after the procession round the altar on the last day of the Feast of

Tabernacles, if it were a Sabbath.  86 Again, the Sadducees would have had the High-

Priest, on the Day of Atonement, kindle the incense before entering the Most Holy Place;

the Pharisees after he had entered the Sanctuary.  87 Lastly, the Pharisees contended that

the cost of the daily Sacrifices should be discharged from the general Temple treasury,

while the Sadducees would have paid it from free-will offerings. Other differences, which

seem not so well established, need not here be discussed.

Among the divergences on juridical questions, reference has already been made to that in

regard to marriage with the 'betrothed,' or else actually espoused widow of a decea sed,

childless brother. Josephus, indeed, charges the Sadducees with extreme severity in

criminal matters;88 but this must refer to the fact that the ingenuity or punctiliousness of

the Pharisees would afford to most offenders a loophole of escape. On the other hand,

such of the diverging juridical principles of the Sadducees, as are attested on trustworthy

authority,89 seem more in accordance with justice than those of the Pharisees. They

concerned (besides the Levirate marriage) chiefly three points. According to the

Sadducees, the punishment90 against false witnesses was only to be executed if the

innocent person, condemned on their testimony, had actually suffered punishment, while

the Pharisees held that this was to be done if the sentence had been actually pronounced,

although not carried out.91 Again, according to Jewish law, only a son, but not a daughter,

inherited the father's property. From this the Pharisees argued, that if, at the time of his

father's decease, that son were dead, leaving only a d aughter, this granddaughter would

(as representative of the son) be the heir, while the daughter would be excluded. On the

other hand, the Sadducees held that, in such a case, daughter and granddaughter should

share alike.92 Lastly, the Sadducees argued that if, according to Exodus xxi. 28,29, a man

was responsible for damage done by his cattle, he was equally, if not more, responsible

for damage done by his slave, while the Pharisees refused to recognise any responsibility

on the latter score.93 94