A Treatise Clearing Away the Wrong Done to Chao Cuo (鼂錯)爲鼂錯雪冤論
古之人論漢之英明之君。則首稱文景。然以誅錯事觀之。景帝不足謂之明矣。且國政。非臣之所能專斷而行之者也。陳其利害而取斷於君上者。臣之職也。受下之謀議。商酌可否。而後行之者。君之明也。錯旣爲漢臣。患諸侯之彊大難制。欲因過削地。以尊京師。此可謂忠於國者也。遂以此奏於上。上亦不能獨裁。與公卿列侯宗室雜議而後行之。則咎不獨在錯矣。脫七國實爲錯而發兵者。業已用其計而致此。則是亦朝廷之恥也。宜徐觀其變。然後誅之未晚也。錯之削諸侯。亦非不慮其反逆而策之者也。宜委以制禦之任。有不可而後誅之亦可矣。況吳王卽山鑄錢。煮海爲鹽。爲反計數十年。而後與六國發之。則名雖誅錯。其意不在錯也。苟其勢可以抗京師。則雖急斬錯以謝。祗自示中國之輕耳。終不爲罷兵明矣。苟不能以區區七國能抗京師。則雖不誅錯。其若予何耶。其誅之也。雖斷自上心。猶爲不可。況聽其讎者之讒。以戮忠臣。內爲袁盎復讎。外爲諸侯報仇。其不明孰大焉。又使中尉紿載行市。是欺臣也。以天子而斬一鼂錯。何必誑耶。是亦非人君之政也。過孰甚焉。惜也銳於爲國遠慮。而反受誅戮。鼂錯之冤。不亦甚乎。以文帝之疏斥賈誼。較諸此則彼特過之小小者耳。況誼之斥也。未幾復徵。傅上之愛子。而其策雖未盡見用。其所採而施於世者亦多矣。則不可謂大失其志者也。然後世猶以不大用爲之冤也。況如錯者乎。予是以譏景帝之不明。以此雪錯之深冤也。嗚呼。有努力扶我身者。誤而少失其手。則未及踣地。而敢怒斥耶。
When the men of old discuss the enlightened sovereigns of Han, they put Emperor Wen and Emperor Jing first of all. Yet looking at the beheading of Chao Cuo, Emperor Jing is not enough to be called clear-sighted.
Moreover, the government of a state is not a thing a minister can decide and carry out on his own. To set out its gains and its losses and receive the decision from the sovereign is a minister's office; and to receive the plans and counsels of those below and weigh their right and wrong before acting is a sovereign's clear-sightedness. Chao Cuo, being already a minister of Han, was anxious that the feudal lords were strong and great and hard to hold in check, and wished, on the pretext of their faults, to pare away their land and so exalt the capital; and this may be called loyalty to the state. At last he reported it to the sovereign, and the sovereign too could not decide alone, but took counsel widely with the great ministers and the enfeoffed marquises and the royal kin before he acted. The fault, then, does not lie with Chao Cuo alone.
Even granting that the seven states did indeed raise their troops because of Chao Cuo, since his plan had already been used and matters had come to this pass, this too was the shame of the court. They should have watched slowly how things turned, and then beheaded him; it would not have been too late. Nor did Chao Cuo pare away the lands of the feudal lords without reckoning their rebellion into his plan. They should have charged him with the task of blocking and putting it down, and beheaded him once it had proved beyond him; that would have done.
And more: the King of Wu went up into the hills and cast coin, and boiled sea water into salt, and plotted rebellion for several tens of years, and only then rose together with the six states. So, though the name of it was the beheading of Chao Cuo, their purpose did not lie in Chao Cuo. If their strength was such as could stand against the capital, then even had Chao Cuo been hastily beheaded by way of apology, it would only have shown of itself the lightness of the Middle Kingdom, and it is clear that in the end they would not have disbanded their troops. And if the seven petty states could not stand against the capital, then even without beheading Chao Cuo, what could they have done to us?
Even had the beheading of him been decided in the sovereign's own heart it would still not have been right; how much more when he listened to the slander of the man who was his enemy and put a loyal minister to death, and so within avenged Yuan Ang (袁盎) and without avenged the feudal lords. What want of clear-sightedness could be greater than this? And further he had the Commandant of the Capital (中尉) deceive him and set him in a carriage and take him to the marketplace: this was the deceiving of a minister. For a Son of Heaven to behead one Chao Cuo, why must he deceive him? This too is not the government of a sovereign. What fault could be graver than this?
What a pity. He was keen to plan far ahead for the state, and was beheaded for it instead; is not the wrong done to Chao Cuo grave indeed? Set beside this Emperor Wen's thrusting Jia Yi far away, and that is only a small thing among faults. And besides, Jia Yi, not long after he was thrust away, was called back and became tutor to the sovereign's beloved son, and though his plans were not all put to use, much was drawn from him and bestowed upon the world, so that he cannot be said to have greatly lost his purpose. And yet later ages still count it a wrong that he was not greatly used. How much more one like Chao Cuo?
For this reason I blame Emperor Jing's want of clear-sightedness, and with it I clear away the deep wrong done to Chao Cuo. Ah, when a man is holding my body up with all his strength and by mischance lets his hand slip a little, shall I dare, before I have even fallen to the ground, to grow angry and thrust him away?