192

THE RELATIVE DUTIES OF MANKIND. [Part III.

probably have been derived from the form of the oath seen inGenesis xxiv. 2, 3, as the variation is not very considerable.* * * §

In Scotland, and in some of the United States, the juror,when sworn, holds up his right hand. Dr. Paley thinks thisceremony was derived from the Jews, and that it explainsPsalm cxliv. 8, which says, “ whose mouth speaketh vanity,and their right hand is a right hand of falsehood.”! This, how-ever, more probably refers to the pledge accustomed to beentered into by the parties to an engagement, and evidencedby the joining of their hands. In England, and in several,probably in most of the United States, the juror, while repeat-ing, or more generally listening to the oath, takes a copy of theBible, or of the Four Gospels, in his right hand, or lays the samehand upon either of them, and the ceremony concludes withhis kissing the sacred volume. In England, too, an oath admin-istered to a Jew upon the Old Testament or upon the Penta-teuch, to a Mahometan upon the Koran, and to a Gentoo ac-cording to the form prescribed by bis religion, has been recog-nised as valid, j: The reasonable principle, and the one intended,I presume, to be established, is, that every man, when admittedto an oath, shall be bound by the highest sanctions of his ownreligion. This principle has been expressly sanctioned in theRevised Statutes (ch. 94, sec. 11.) of Massachusetts, and Idoubt not, either has been, or would be, if occasion shouldarise, admitted and acted upon by every court of justice in theUnited States.

3. The signification of oaths. An oath may well be called areligious act,§ since by it the existence of God is acknowledged,and an appeal is made to his omniscience, his omnipresence,and his retributive justice. The ancient forms and imposingceremonies were addressed to the senses and the imagination,and were well suited, we may presume, to the state of the timesin which they were devised and used, when, amidst general vio-

* See Hawkins’ Picture of Quebec, p. 130.

t Moral and Political Philosophy, p.110.

$ 1 Atkyns, 21; Phillips’ Law of Evidence, 19.

§ This view of an oath is as ancient as the time of Cicero, who says, u Jus-jurandum affirmatio religiosaest.” De Officiis, Lib, III. 29.