Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 17.djvu/759

Rh OATH 701 Deus,&quot; closely corresponding to above-mentioned formulas of pre-Christian Rome. This became widely spread in Europe, appearing in Old French &quot; Si m ait Dex,&quot; German &quot; So mir Gott helfe,&quot; English &quot; So help me God.&quot; A re markable point in its history is its occurrence in the &quot; So help me Frey,&quot; &c., of the old Scandinavian ring -oath already described. Among the curiosities of the subject are quaint oaths of kings and other great personages : William Rufus swore &quot; by that and that &quot; (per hoc et per hoc), William the Conqueror &quot;by the splendour of God,&quot; John &quot; by God s teeth&quot; ; other phrases are given in Ducange (/.c.), as &quot;per omnes gentes,&quot; &quot;per coronam,&quot; &quot;par la sainte figure de Dieu,&quot; &quot;par la mort Dieu,&quot; &c. Profane swearing, the trifling or colloquial use of sacred oaths, is not without historical interest, formulas used being apt to keep up traces of old manners and extinct religions. Thus the early Christians were reproved for continuing to say &quot;meherdef&quot; some of them not knowing that they were swearing by Hercules (Tertull., De Idol., 20). Oaths by deities of pre-Christian Europe lasted into the modern world, as when a few generations ago Swedish peasants might be heard to swear, &quot; Odin take me if it is not true!&quot; (Hylten-Cavallius, War end och Wirdarne, vol. i. p. 228). The thunder-god hold s his place still in vulgar German exclamations, such as &quot;Donner!&quot; (Grimm, Deiitsche Mythologie, pp. 10, 166). The affected revival of classical deities in Italy in the Middle Ages still lingers in such forms as &quot; per Bacco ! &quot; &quot; cospetto di Bacco! &quot; (by Bacchus ! face of Bacchus ! ). In France the concluding oath of the last paragraph has dwindled into &quot;mordieu!&quot; or &quot;morbleu!&quot; much as in England the old oaths by God s body and wounds became converted into &quot; oddsbodikins ! &quot; and &quot;zounds!&quot; The oaths now administered among civilized nations are chiefly intended for maintaining governments and securing the perform ance of public business. They fall under the headings of political, ecclesiastical, and legal. In England the coronation oath is to be administered by one of the archbishops or bishops in the presence of all the people, who, on their parts, reciprocally take the oath of allegiance to the crown. The archbishop or bishop shall say : &quot;Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this kingdom of England and the dominions thereto be longing according to the statutes in parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs of the same ?&quot; The king or queen shall say : &quot; I solemnly promise so to do.&quot; ArcJibp. or bp. &quot;Will you to your power cause law and justice, in mercy, to be executed in all your judgements ?&quot; K. or Q. &quot;I will.&quot; Arehbp. or bp. &quot; Will you, to the utmost of your power, maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant reformed religion established this I promise to do.&quot; After this the king or queen, laying his or her hand upon Hie holy Gospels, shall say: &quot;The things which I have here before promised I vill perform and keep ; so help me God,&quot; and then shall kiss the book. The chief officers of state take an &quot;official&quot; oath well and truly to serve his (or her) majesty. Special oaths are taken by privy councillors, archbishops and bishops, peers, baronets and knights, recruits, and others. The old oath of allegiance, as administered (says Blackstone) upwards of 600 years, contained a promise &quot;to be true and faithful to the king and his heirs, and truth and faith to bear of life and limb and terrene honour, and not to know or hear of any ill or damage intended him without defending him there from &quot; (Blackstone, Commentaries, book i. chap. x. ). In the reign of William III. it was replaced by a shorter form, and in the present reign stands : &quot; I do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, her heirs and successors, according to law.&quot; Statutes of Charles II. and George I. enacted that no member should vote or sit in either house of parliament Avithout having taken the several oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration. The oath of supremacy in the reign of William III. was : &quot;I A B doe swear that I doe from my heart abhorr detest and abjure as impious and hereticall this damnable doctrine and position that princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope or any authority of the see of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever. And I doe declare that no forreigne prince person prelate state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction power superiority preeminence or authoritie ecclesiasticall or spirituall within this realme. Soe,&quot; &c. The oath of abjuration introduced in the time of William III. recognizes the king s rights, engages the juror to support him and disclose all traitorous conspiracies against him, promises to maintain the Hanoverian Protestant succession, and expressly renounces any claim of the descendants of the late Pretender. This oath was not only taken by persons in office, but might be tendered by two justices to any person suspected of disaffection. In modern times a single parliamentary oath was substituted for the three, and this was altered to enable Roman Catholics to take it, and Jews were enabled to sit in parliament by being allowed to omit the words &quot;on the true faith of a Christian.&quot; In its present form the parliamentary oath consists of an oath of allegiance and a promise to maintain the succession to the crown as limited and settled in the reign of William III. The &quot;judicial&quot; oath taken by judges of the Court of Appeal or of the High Court of Justice, and by justices of the peace, is &quot;to do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.&quot; Jurors are sworn, whence indeed their name (juratorcs) ; in felonies the oath administered is : &quot; You shall well and truly try and true deliverance make between our sovereign lady the Queen and the prisoner at the bar whom you shall have in charge, and a true verdict give according to the evidence. &quot; In misdemeanours the form is: &quot;Well and truly try the issue joined between our sovereign lady the Queen and the defendant, and a true verdict,&quot; &c. The oath of the jurors in the Scottish criminal courts is : &quot; You [the jury collectively] swear in the name of Almighty God and as you shall answer to God at the great day of judgment that you will truth say and no truth conceal in so far as you are to pass upon this assize. &quot; The oldest trace of this form of oath in Scotland is in Reg. inaj. , i. cap. 11, copied from Glenville, which points to an origin in the Norman inquest or &quot;recognition.&quot; In the ancient custom of compurgation, once prevalent in Europe, the accused s oath was supported by the oaths of a number of helpers or compurgators who swore to their belief in its validity. A remnant of it lasted on till the 17th century in the &quot; ex offickT&quot; oath of a clergyman cited before the ecclesiastical court for misconduct, who might be required to call his neighbours as compurgators to swear to their belief in his inno cence. Thcjusjuratidum or decisory oath of Roman law, which was of greater authority than rcsjudicata (Digest xii. 2, 2), is still repre sented in modern law by the serment decisoire of the Code Civil, and the &quot;reference to the oath of the party&quot; of Scotch law (see the case of Longworth v. Yelverton, in Law Exports, 1 Scotch Appeals, 218). Such an oath is final and conclusive. It has something in common with the old &quot;wager of law&quot; in England, abolished by 3 and 4 William IV. c. 42, s. 13, in so far as it makes an oath the finis litium. The decisory oath was formerly used in the ecclesiastical courts (Burn, Eccl. Laiv, s.v. &quot;Oaths&quot;). It seems to be still used in admiralty cases in Massachusetts (Dunlop, Adm. Pr., 290). Witnesses are sworn : &quot;The evidence you shall give. . . shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So,&quot; &c. Where a witness is sworn on the voir dire, the oath is : &quot; You shall true answer make to all such questions as the court shall demand of you. So help you God. &quot; As to wit nesses of religions other than Christian, an oath is to be adminis tered to them in such form and with such ceremonies as they may declare to be binding. The great number of oaths formerly required have been much reduced by modern legislation, in many cases a voluntary declaration before a justice, notary, &c. , being substituted. Many alterations of the English law as to oaths have been made of late years in relief of those conscientiously objecting. Quakers, Moravians, and Separatists are allowed to make affirmation, whether as witnesses or on other occasions, where an oath was formerly required. Thus a Quaker in the witness-box affirms by answering &quot;Yea!&quot; and when taking his seat in parliament substitutes for &quot;swear&quot; the words &quot;solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm,&quot; and omits &quot;So help me God.&quot; The Evidence Further Amendment Act, 1869 (32 and 33 Viet. c. 68, s. 4), allowing affirma tions in place of oaths in certain cases in judicial proceedings, is by the Evidence Amendment Act, 1870 (33 and 34 Viet. c. 49), extended to proceedings before all persons having authority to administer oaths. It was specially intended to meet the case of an arbitrator. But the right to affirm in lieu of taking the parlia mentary oath has been held not to apply to the case of avowed atheists, as appears from the case of Mr Charles Bradlaugh, elected member for Northampton, but not permitted to take the affirmation and sit (1883 ; see Clarke v. Bradlaugh, 7 Q. B. D. 38). False witness given under affirmation is punishable as perjury. Profane swearing and cursing is punishable by law, any labourer, sailor, or soldier being liable to forfeit Is., every other person under the de gree of a gentleman 2s. , and every gentleman or person of superior rank 5s., to the poor of the parish. The administering or taking of certain oaths is criminal in English and Scotch law. It is a felony punishable by penal servi tude for life (a) to administer or cause to be administered or aid or assist at the administering of any oath or engagement purporting or intending to bind the person taking the same to commit treason or murder or any felony which on the 12th of July 1812 was punishable with death ; (b) to take any such oath or engagement, not being compelled thereto (52 George III. c. 104, s. 1). It is a felony punishable with penal servitude for seven years (a) to administer or cause to be administered or aid or assist at or be present and consenting to the administering or taking of any oath