Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
OATH (0. Eng. ddh)
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: NUM-ORC
del.icio.us it!
|
See also:OATH (0. Eng. ddh) , a See also:term which may be defined as an asseveration or promise made under non-human See also:penalty or See also:sanction. The word is found throughout the See also:Teutonic See also:languages (Goth. ailhs, Mod. Ger. Eid), but without ascertainable See also:etymology. The verb to swear is also Old Teutonic (Goth. svaran, Mod. Ger. schworen); this word, too, is not clear in See also:original meaning, but is in some way connected with the notion of answering—indeed it still forms See also:part of the word See also:answer, O. Eng. and-swarian; it has been suggested that the swearer answered by word or gesture to a See also:solemn See also:formula or See also:act. Among other terms in this connexion, the See also:Lat. jurare, whence See also:English See also:law has such derivatives as See also:jury, seems grounded on the metaphorical See also:idea of binding (See also:root ju, as in jungo) ; the similar idea of a See also:bond or See also:restraint may perhaps be traced in Gr. opKoc. It may be See also:worth See also:notice that Lat. sacramentum (whence Mod. Fr. serment) does not really imply the sacredness of an oath, but had its origin in the See also:money paid into See also:court in a See also:Roman lawsuit, the loser forfeiting his See also:pledge, which went to pay for the public See also:rites (sacra); thence the word passed to signify other solemn pledges, such as military and judicial oaths. Writers viewing the subject among civilized nations only have sometimes defined the oath as an See also:appeal to a deity. It will be seen, however, by some following examples, that the harm or penalty consequent on See also:perjury may be considered to result directly, without any spirit or deity being mentioned; indeed it is not unlikely that these See also:mere See also:direct curses invokedon'himself by the swearer may be more See also:primitive than the invocation of divinities to punish. Examples of the simplest See also:kind of curse-oath may he seen among the Nagas of See also:Assam, where two men will See also:lay hold of a See also:dog or a See also:fowl by See also:head and feet, which is then chopped in two with a single See also:blow of the dao, this being emblematic of the See also:fate expected to befall the perjurer. Or a See also:man will stand within a circle of rope, with the implication that if he breaks his See also:vow he may rot as a rope does; or he will take hold of the See also:barrel of a See also:gun, a See also:spear-head or a See also:tiger's tooth, and solemnly declare, " If I do not faithfully perform this my promise, may I fall by this!" (See also: To See also:modern views, a bear or a tiger seems at any See also:rate a more rational being to appeal to than a See also:river or the See also:sun, but in the earlier stage of nature-See also:religion these and other See also:great See also:objects of nature are regarded as animate and See also:personal. The prevalence of river-See also:worship is seen in the extent to which in the old and modern See also:world oaths by See also:rivers are most sacred. In earlier ages men swore inviolably by See also:Styx or See also:Tiber, and to this See also:day an oath on See also:water of the See also:Ganges is to the See also:Hindu the most binding of pledges, for the goddess will take awful vengeanceon the See also:children of the perjurer. The Tungus brandishes a See also:knife before the sun, saying, " If I See also:lie may the sun plunge sickness into my entrails like this knife." The natural transition from See also:swearing by these great objects of nature to invoking gods conceived in human See also:form is well shown in the treaty-oath between the Macedonians and the Carthaginians recorded by See also:Polybius (vii. 9); here the sun and See also:moon and See also:earth, the rivers and meadows and See also:waters, are invoked See also:side by side with See also:Zeus and See also:Hera and See also:Apollo, and the gods of the Carthaginians. The See also:heaven-See also:god, able to smite the perjurer with his See also:lightning, was invoked by the See also:Romans, when a hog was slain with the sacred See also:flint representing the thunderbolt, with the invocation to Jove so to smite the Roman See also:people if they See also:broke the oath (Liv. i. 24; Polyb. iii. 25). Another form of this See also:Aryan rite was preserved by the old See also:Slavonic nation of See also:Prussia, where a man would lay his right See also:hand on his own See also:neck and his See also:left on the See also:holy See also:oak, saying, " May Perkun (the See also:thunder-god) destroy me!" The oaths of the See also:lower culture show a remarkable difference from those of later stages. In the apparently primitive forms the curse on the perjurer is to take effect in this world. But as nations became more observant, experience must have shown that bears and tigers were as See also:apt to kill truth-tellers as perjurers, and that even the lightning-flash falls without moral discrimination. In the Clouds of See also:Aristophanes, indeed, men have come openly to ridicule such beliefs, the See also:Socrates of the See also:play pointing out that notorious perjurers go unharmed, while Zeus hurls his bolts at his own See also:temple, and the tall oaks, as if an oak-See also:tree could perjure itself. The See also:doctrine of miraculous earthly retribution on the perjurer lasted on in See also:legend, as where See also:Eusebius relates how three villains conspired to bring a false See also:accusation against See also:Narcissus, See also:bishop of See also:Jerusalem, which accusation they confirmed by solemn oath before the See also: See also:Ant. i. 16). Even the covenant among many See also:ancient and modern nations by the parties mixing their See also:blood or drinking one another's is in itself only a solemn rite of See also:union, not an oath proper, unless some such ceremony is introduced as dipping weapons into the blood, as in the form among the ancient Scythians (See also:Herod. iv. 70); this, by bringing in the idea of death befalling the covenant-breaker, converts the proceeding into an oath of the strongest kind. The See also:custom of swearing by weapons, though frequent in the world, is far from consistent in meaning. It may signify, in cases such as those just mentioned, that the swearer if forsworn is to die by such a weapon; or the See also:warrior , may appeal to his weapon as a powerful or divine See also:object, as Parthenopaeus swears by his spear that he will level to the ground the walls of See also:Thebes (Aeschyl. See also:Sept. contra Theb. 530; see the custom of the Quadi in Ammian. Marcellin. xvii.); or the weapon may be a divine See also:emblem, as when the Scythians swore by the See also:wind and the See also:sword as denoting life and death (See also:Lucian, Toxaris, 38). Oaths by weapons lasted into the See also:Christian See also:period; for instance, the See also:Lombards swore lesser oaths by consecrated weapons and greater on the Gospels (see Du Cange, s:v. " Juramenta super arma "; See also:Grimm, Deutsche Rechtsalterth. p. 896). Stretching forth the hand towards the object or deity sworn by is a natural gesture, well shown in the oath of See also:Agamemnon, who with uplifted hands (Lit xeipas avao- v) takes Heaven to See also:witness with Sun and Earth and the See also:Erinyes who below the earth wreak vengeance on the perjurer (See also:Homer Il. xix. 254; see also See also:Pindar, Olymp. vii. 120). The gesture of lifting the hand towards heaven was also an Israelite form of oath: See also:Abraham says, " I have lifted up my hand to See also:Jehovah," while Jehovah Himself is represented as so swearing, " For I lift up My hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever " (Gen. xiv. 22; Dent. xxxii. 40; see See also:Dan. )ii. 7; Rev. x. 5). This gesture established itself in Christendom, and has continued to modern times. In See also:England, for example, in the See also:parliament at Shrews-See also:bury in 1398, when the Lords took an oath on the See also:cross of See also:Canterbury never to suffer the transactions of that parliament to be changed, the members of the See also:Commons held up their hands to signify their taking upon themselves the same oath (J. E. See also:Tyler, Oaths, p. 99). In See also:France a juror takes oath by raising his hand, saying, "Je jure!" The Scottish judicial oath is taken by the witness holding up his right hand uncovered, and repeating after the See also:usher, " I swear by Almighty God, and as I shall answer to God at the great day of See also:judgment, that I will," &c. In the ancient world See also:sacrifice often formed part of the ceremony of the oath; typical examples may be found in the Homeric poems, as in Agamemnon's oath already mentioned, or the compact between the Greeks and Trojans (Il. iii. 276), where See also:wine is poured out in See also:libation, with See also:prayer to Zeus and the immortal gods that the perjurer's brains shall, like the wine, be poured on the ground; the rite thus passes into a symbolic curse-oath of the See also:ordinary barbaric type. Connected with such sacrificial oaths is the practice of laying the hand on the victim or the See also:altar, or touching the See also:image of the god. A classic instance is in a See also:comedy of See also:Plautus (Rudens, v. 2, 45), where Gripus says, " Tange See also:aram hanc Veneris," and Labrax answers " Tango " (See also:Greek instance, Thucyd. v. 47; see See also:Justin xxiv. 2). Thus See also:Livy (xxi. r) introduces the phrase "touching the sacred objects " (tactis sacris) into the picturesque See also:story of See also:Hannibal's oath. Details of the old Scandinavian oath have been preserved in See also:Iceland in the Landn'amab6k (Islendinga Sogur, See also:Copenhagen, 1843); a See also:bracelet (baugr) of two rings or more was to be kept on the altar in every head court, which the godi or See also:priest should See also:wear at all law-things held by him, and should redden in the blood of the See also:bullock sacrificed, the witness pronouncing the remarkable formula: " Name I to witness that I take oath by the See also:ring, law-oath, so help me See also:Frey, and Niord, and almighty See also:Thor " (hialpi mer sva Freyr, ok Niordr, ok hinn almattki See also:Ass), &c. This was doubtless the great oath on the holy ring or bracelet which the Danes swore to See also: 35, and elsewhere).
The history of oaths in the See also:early Christian ages opens a controversy which can hardly be said even yet to have closed. Under See also:Christ's See also:injunction, " Swear not at all " (Matt. v. 34; also See also: The See also:line mostly taken by influential teachers, however, was that swearing should indeed be avoided as much as possible from its leading to perjury, but that the passages forbidding it only applied to superfluous or trifling oaths, or those sworn by created objects, such as heaven or earth or one's own head. On the other hand, they argued that judicial and other serious swearing could not have been forbidden, seeing that See also:Paul in his epistles repeatedly introduces oaths (2 See also:Cor. i. 23; Phil. i. 8; Gal. i. 20). Thus See also:Athanasius writes: " I stretch out my hand, and as I have learned of the apostle, I call God to witness on my soul " (Apol. ad See also:Imp. Const. ; see See also:Augustine, De Mend. 28; Epist. cl. iii. 9; el. iv. 250; Enarr. in See also:Psalm. lxxxviii. (4); Serm. 307, 319). This See also:argument is the more forcible from Paul's expressions being actually oaths in accepted forms, and it has also been fairly adduced that Christ, by answering to the adjuration of the high priest, took the judicial oath in solemn form (Matt. See also:xxvi. 63). The passages here referred to will give an idea of the theological grounds on which in more modern times See also:Anabaptists, See also:Mennonites and See also:Quakers have refused to take even judicial oaths, while, on the other hand, the See also:laws of Christendom from early ages have been only directed against such swearing as was considered profane or otherwise improper, and against perjury. Thus from the 3rd or 4th See also:century we find oaths taking much the same See also:place in Christian as in non-Christian society. In the 4th century the Christian military oath by God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the See also:majesty of the See also:emperor is recorded by See also:Vegetius (Rei Milit. Inst. ii. 5). See also:Constantine's laws required every witness in a cause to take oath; this is confirmed in Justinian's See also:code, which even in some cases requires also the parties and See also:advocates to be sworn (See also:Cod. Theod. xi. 39; Justin. Cod. iv. 20, 59). Bishops and See also:clergy were called upon to take oath in ordination, monastic vows, and other ecclesiastical matters (see details in See also:Bingham, Antiq. of Chr. Church, xvi. 7). By the See also:middle ages oaths had increased and multiplied in Christendom far beyond the practice of any other See also:age or religion. The See also:Reformation made no See also:change in principle, as is seen, for instance, in See also:Art. xxxix. of the church of England: " As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James His apostle, so we judge, that Christian Religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the See also:Magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the See also:Prophet's teaching, in See also:justice, judgement and truth." The history of swearing in early Christendom would See also:lead us to expect that the forms used would be adopted with more or less modification from Hebrew or Roman See also:sources, as indeedproves to be the See also:case. The oath introduced in the body of one of Constantine's laws---" As the Most High Divinity may ever be propitious to me " (Ita mihi summa Divinitas See also:semper propitia sit)—follows an old Roman form. The Roman oath by the See also:genius of the emperor being objected to by Christians as recognizing a demon, they swore by his safety (Tertull. Apol. 32). The gesture of holding up the hand in swearing has been already, spoken of. The Christian oath on a copy of the Gospels seems derived from the See also:late Jewish oath taken holding in the hand the See also:scroll of the law (or the phylacteries), a ceremony itself possibly adapted from Roman custom (see See also:treatise " Shebuoth in Gemara). Among the various mentions of the oath on the Gospels in early Christian writers is that characteristic passage of Chrysostom in a See also:sermon to the people of See also:Antioch: " But do See also:thou, if nothing else, at least reverence the very See also:book thou holdest forth to be sworn by, open the See also:Gospel thou takest in thy hands to administer the oath, and, See also:hearing what Christ therein saith of oaths, tremble and desist " (Serm. ad pop. Antioch. Homil. xv.). The usual mode was to lay the hand on the Gospel, as is often stated in the records, and was kept up to a modern date in the oath in the university of See also:Oxford, " tactis sacrosanctis Evangeliis "; the practice of kissing the book, which became so well established in England, appears in the middle ages (J. E. Tyler, Oaths, pp. 119, 151). The book was often laid on the altar, or (after the manner of ancient See also:Rome) the swearer laid his hand on the altar itself, or looked towards it; above all, it became customary to See also:touch See also:relics of See also:saints on the altar, a ceremony of which the typical instance is seen in the See also:representation of Harold's oath in the See also:Bayeux See also:tapestry. Other objects, as the cross, the bishop's crosier, &c., were sworn by (see Du Cange, s.v. " Jurare "). An oath ratified by contact or inspection of a sacred object was called a " See also:corporal " or bodily oath, as distinguished from a merely spoken or written oath; this is well seen in an old English See also:coronation oath, " so helpe me God, and these holy euangelists by me bodily touched vppon this hooly awter." The English word signifying the " sacred object " on which oath is taken is halidome (A.S. hdligdom; Ger. Heiligthum); the halidome on which oaths are now sworn in England is a copy of the New Testament. See also:Jews are sworn on the Old Testament; the sacred books of other religions are used in like manner, a Mohammedan swearing on the See also:Koran, a Hindu on the Vedas.
Among the oath-formulas used in Christendom, that taken by provincial See also:governors under Justinian is typical of one class: " I swear by God Almighty, and His only begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy See also:Ghost, and the Most Holy Glorious See also:Mother of God and ever Virgin See also:Mary, and by the Four Gospels which I hold in my hand, and by the Holy Archangels See also:Michael and See also:Gabriel," &c. The famous oath of the See also:kings See also: Oaths by deities of pre-Christian Europe lasted into the modern world, as when a few generations ago See also:Swedish peasants might be heard to swear, " See also:Odin take me if it is not true!" (Hylten-Cavallius, Warend och Wirdarne, i. 228). The thunder-god holds his place still in vulgar German exclamations, such as "Donner!" (Grimm. Deutsche Mythologie, pp. 1o, 166). The affected revival of classical deities in See also:Italy in the middle ages still lingers in such forms as " per Bacco 1" " cospetto di Bacco I" (by Bacchus ! See also:face of Bacchus!). In France the concluding oath of the last See also:paragraph dwindled into " mordieu 1" or " morbleu I" much as in England the old oaths by God's body and wounds became converted into " oddsbodikins ! " and " zounds ! " (E. B. T.) Law.—Politicians and moralists have placed much reliance on oaths as a See also:practical See also:security. It has been held, as See also:Lycurgus the orator said to the Athenians, that " an oath is the bond that keeps the See also:state together " (Lycurg Leocr. 8o; see See also:Montesquieu, Spirit of Laws). Thus modern law-books quote from the leading case of See also:Omichund v. See also:Barker: " No See also:country can subsist a twelve-See also:month where an oath is thought not binding; for the want of it must necessarily dissolve society." On the other hand, wherever the belief in supernatural interference becomes weakened, and oaths are taken with solemn form but See also:secret contempt or open ridicu'e, they become a serious moral See also:scandal, as had already begun to happen in classical times. The yet more disastrous effect of the practice of swearing is the public inference that, if a man has to swear in See also:order to be believed, he need not speak the truth when not under oath. The early Christian fathers were alive to this depreciation of ordinary truthfulness by the practice of swearing, and opposed, though unavailingly, the See also:system of oaths which more and more pervaded public business. How in the course of the middle ages oaths were multiplied is best seen by examining a collection of formulas such as the Book of Oaths (London, 1649), which range from the coronation oath to the oaths sworn by such as valuers of cloths and the See also:city scavengers.' Oaths of See also:allegiance and other See also:official oaths are still taken throughout Europe, but experience shows that in times of revolution they are violated with little See also:scruple, and in the case of the See also:United Kingdom it is doubtful whether they have any more practical value than, if so much as, See also:simple declarations. The question of legal oaths is more difficult. On the one hand, it is admitted that they do induce witnesses, especially the ignorant and superstitious, to give See also:evidence more truthfully than they would do on even solemn See also:declaration. On the other hand, all who practise in courts of justice declare that a large proportion of the evidence given under oath is knowingly false, and that such perjury is perceptibly detrimental to public morals. The oaths now administered among civilized nations are chiefly intended for maintaining governments and securing the performance of public business. 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 See also:crown. The See also:archbishop or bishop shall say : " Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this United Kingdom of Great See also:Britain and See also:Ireland and the dominions thereto belonging according to the statutes in parliament agreed on, and the respective laws and customs of the same?" The king shall say: " I solemnly promise so to do." Archbishop or bishop: " Will you to the utmost of your power cause law and justice, in See also:mercy, to he executed in all your judgements?" King: " I will." Archbishop or bishop: " Will you, to the utmost of your power, maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, and the See also:Protestant re-formed religion established by law? And will you maintain and preserve inviolably the See also:settlement, of the Church of England and the doctrine, worship, discipline and See also:government thereof, as by law established in England. And will you preserve unto the bishops and clergy of England, and to the churches therein all such rights and privileges as by law do or shall appertain to them, or any of them ?z" King: " All this I promise to do." As to reform of the excessive multiplication of oaths, see See also:Paley, Moral See also:Philosophy, bk. iii. pt. i. ch. 16; and J. E. Tyler, Oaths. After this the king, laying his hand upon the holy Gospels, shall say : " The things which I have here before promised I will perform and keep; so help me God," and then shall See also:kiss the book. The See also:chief See also:officers of state take an " official " oath well and truly to serve his majesty. See also: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 See also:Blackstone) upwards of 600 years, contained a promise " to be true and faithful to the king and his heirs, and truth and faith to bear of life and See also:limb and terrene See also:honour, and not to know or hear of any See also:ill or damage intended him without defending him therefrom " (Blackstone, Commentaries, book i. See also:chap. x.). In the reign of William III. it was replaced by a shorter form; and it now runs: " I . . . do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty . . . , his heirs and successors, according to law." Statutes of Charles II. and See also:George I. enacted that no member should See also:vote or sit in either house of parliament without having taken the several oaths of allegiance, supremacy and See also:abjuration. The oath of supremacy in the reign of William III. was: " I A B doe swear that I doe from my See also:heart abhorr detest and abjure as impious and hereticall this damnable doctrine and position that princes excommunicated or deprived by the See also: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 See also:prince See also:person See also:prelate state or potentate hath or ought to have any See also:jurisdiction power superiority preeminence or authoritie ecclesiasticall or spirituall within this realme. Soe," &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 See also:succession, and expressly renounces any claim of the descendants of the late Pretender. This oath was not only taken by persons in See also:office, but might be tendered by two justices to any person suspected of disaffection. In modern times a single See also: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 "on the true faith.of a Christian." 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 " judicial " oath taken by See also:judges of the court of appeal or of the High Court of Justice, and by justices of the See also:peace, is " to do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this See also:realm, without fear or favour, See also:affection or ill-will." Jurors are sworn, whence indeed their name (juratores); in felonies the oath administered is: " You shall well and truly try and true deliverance make between our See also:sovereign lord the king and the prisoner at the See also:bar whom you shall have in See also:charge, and a true See also:verdict give according to the evidence." In misdemeanours the form is: "Well and truly try the issue joined between our sovereign lord the king and the See also:defendant, and a true verdict," &c. The oath of the jurors in the Scottish criminal courts is: " 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 See also:assize." The See also:oldest trace of this form of oath in See also:Scotland is in Reg. maj. i. cap. 11, copied from See also:Glanvill, which points to an origin in the See also:Norman See also:inquest or " recognition." In the ancient custom of See also: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. Witnesses in English law courts must give their evidence under the sanction of an oath, or of what is See also:equivalent to an oath, and the ordinary form of oath adapted to Christians is: " The evidence you shall give . . . shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God." Many alterations of the English law as to oaths have been made in See also:relief of (1) those Christians who object on conscientious grounds .to the taking of an oath, and (2) of those persons who refuse to admit the binding force of an oath. Special See also:provision was first made for Quakers, Moravians and Separatists; then followed general enactments See also:relating to See also:civil and criminal proceedings respectively, till finally the law was embodied in the Oaths Act 1888, which enacted that " every person upon objecting to being sworn, and stating, as the ground of such objection, either that he has no religious belief, or that the taking of an oath is contrary to his religious belief, shall be permitted to make his solemn See also:affirmation instead of taking an oath in all places and for all purposes where an oath is or shall be required by law, which affirmation shall be of the same force and effect as if he had taken the oath; and if any person making such affirmation shall wilfully, falsely and corruptly affirm any See also:matter or thing which, if deposed on oath, would have amounted to wilful and corrupt perjury, he shall be liable to See also:prosecution, See also:indictment, See also:sentence and See also:punishment in all respects as if he had committed wilful and corrupt perjury." The form of affirmation prescribed by the Oaths Act was as follows: " I, A. B., do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm," &c. Under S. 5 of the same act a person might swear in the Scottish form, with uplifted hand (no book of any kind being used) and if he desired to do so " the oath shall be administered to him in such form and manner without question." With the See also:desire of making universal this method of administering the oath the Oaths Act 1909 was passed. It enacted that any oath might be administered and taken in the following form: " The person taking the oath shall hold the New Testament, or in the case of a See also:Jew, the Old Testament, in his uplifted hand, and shall say or repeat after the officer administering the oath the words ` I swear by Almighty God that . . . ,' followed by the words of the oath prescribed by law." The officer also is directed by the act to administer it in this See also:fashion, unless the person about to take it voluntarily objects or is physically incapable of taking it so. To a person who is neither a Christian nor a Jew the oath may be administered in any way in which it was previously lawful. The form of affirmation given above is that used for Quakers, Moravians and Separatists in the witness-See also:box: " I, A. B., being one of the people called Quakers (one of the United Brethren called Moravians), do, &c." A Christian swears on the Gospels, holding a copy of the New Testament in his right hand (the hand being uncovered), and his head being also uncovered. A witness may elect to be sworn on any version of the See also:Bible which he considers most binding on him, as a Roman See also:Catholic on the See also:Douai Testament or Bible. A Jew is sworn on the See also:Pentateuch, holding a copy thereof in his right hand, the head being covered. A See also:Mahommedan is sworn upon the Koran. He places his right hand See also:flat upon the book and puts the other hand upon his fore-head, bringing his head down to the book and in contact with it. He then looks at the book for some moments. Buddhists are sworn on the Buddhist doctrines, Sikhs upon the See also:Granth, See also:Parsees upon the Zend Avesta, See also:Hindus upon the Vedas, or by touching the Brahmin's foot, and, according to See also:caste custom, See also:Indian witnesses sometimes insist upon the oath being ad-ministered by a Brahmin; but in India witnesses now generally affirm. Kaffir witnesses swear by their own chief, and a Kaffir chief by the king of England. When a See also:Chinese witness is to be sworn, a saucer is handed to him, which he takes in his hand and kneeling down breaks into fragments. The colonial legislatures generally make provision for receiving unsworn evidence of barbarous and uncivilized people who have no religious belief. The great number of oaths formerly required was much reduced by the Promissory Oaths Act r868, which prescribed the forms of oath of allegiance, the official oath and the judicial oath. The right to affirm in lieu of taking the parliamentary oath in the case of atheists was first raised in the case of Charles See also:Bradlaugh (q.v.). Profane swearing and cursing is punishable by the Profane Oaths Act 1745, any labourer, sailor or soldier being liable to forfeit Is., every other person under the degree of a See also:gentleman 2s., and every gentleman or person of See also:superior See also:rank 5s., to the poor of the See also:parish. The administering or taking of unlawful oaths is criminal in English and Scots law. Statutes relating to the offence were passed in 1797, 1749, 18Io and 1812, and it is evident from the See also:preamble of the latter act (Unlawful Oaths Act 1812) that they were aimed at those See also:societies in the United Kingdom at the time of the French Revolution which required or permitted their members to take an unlawful oath. Supplementary statutes were passed in 1817 and 1837. Children of See also:tender years, who, in the See also:opinion of the court, have not sufficient intelligence to understand the nature of an oath, may give evidence without being sworn. In the United States an oath is required in practically every case in which it is required in the United Kingdom, and with the same See also:latitude as to affirmation. The formula or details may vary in different states of the Union. The same may be said generally of every civilized country, with the See also:reservation that an affirmation is not so usually accepted as in English-speaking countries. In See also:Germany an oath is compulsory on a witness in criminal cases, except in the case of certain sects, whose tenets forbid the taking of an oath. AuTxoRTrIES.—See also:Coke's Institutes; Book of Oaths (1689); See also:Stephen's Commentaries; Stringer's Oaths and Affirmations; Tyler, Oaths; Origin, Nature, History (18J5) ; See also:Ford, On Oaths. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] OATES, TITUS (1649-1705) |
[next] OAXACA, OAJACA (from Aztec Huaxyacac), or OAXACA DE... |