This, I am induced to believe, would scarcely be the case, were the population taught, as I am persuaded the Legislature might, by salutary regulations, gradually teach them,-to regard an oath as a solemn appeal to God, to be allowed only in cases of necessity, and to be made, if at all, only in causes requiring the solemnity of judicial investigation; and then to be taken with a solemnity corresponding to the awfulness of the majesty of HIM who is invoked to witness the truth.

2. The second mischief we mentioned arising from our present unhappy practice in the administration of oaths, was a proportionate undervaluing of the truth, when a bare affirmation is made without the additional sanction of such an immediate appeal to Heaven. This undervaluing of a simple declaration is seen in a twofold point of view,—in the person whose words purport to convey the truth, and in the person to whom they are addressed,—a sort of general disparagement of that "yea" and "nay" of Christians, beyond which the great Legislator and Judge, from whom lieth no appeal, has pronounced every thing to originate in a poisoned well-spring. If the legislature of England, by its solemn enactments, pronounces and declares, that no credit is to be given to a man's word, however seriously pledged, unless it be confirmed by an oath, though the most trivial question of everyday life be the subject; if Justice, even when en

gaged in settling a point of less value than can be estimated by the lowest coin that is named among us, will not move her hand or tongue without first witnessing an appeal to heaven, what is the natural result? Can it be Can it be any other (especially among the least educated part of mankind), than on the one hand, a comparative carelessness, a heedlessness of his own words, when a man speaks unrestrained, uninfluenced by the religious bond of an oath; and on the other hand, a proportionate distrust of another man's bare, naked word,-an incredulity, when he merely affirms or denies under the general obliga tion to speak the truth. Thus does the multiplication of oaths throw simple truth into the background, and pave the way for the third evil we specified,―the prevalence of rash and common swearing.

3. This evil, lamentably prevalent among us, I trace in part as one result of the multiplication of oaths administered by magistrates and in Courts of Justice, with somewhat of increased certainty, from the fact of the exact terms of our authorized form of oath being employed very generally among common swearers. Too often are our ears assailed in the streets by the very expressions used as well by a juror when swearing in his own person, as by the magistrate when administering an oath, accompanied (like the more solemn oaths in the corrupt ages of Christianity) by a volley of horrible im

precations. It is very common when one party is incredulous, to hear the exclamation, half imprecatory half questioning, "So help you, God?" though the voluntary imprecation is far more frequent, "So help me, God!" Whilst I am induced to ascribe much of this habit of rash and common swearing, to the discredit thrown upon simple assertion or denial by the frequency of oaths sworn before official persons in public, I cannot forget nor withhold the clear and nervous language of St. Augustin, which speaks directly to our point: "No one knows, except by experience, how difficult it is to extirpate the habit of swearing, and how difficult it is to do that at no time rashly and without cause, which necessity sometimes obliges us to do." Compelled as I am to express my strong disapprobation of the levity with which Michaëlis speaks of useless and thoughtless oaths, as idle words, doing no harm to the individual who utters them, or to those who hear them, I am, at the same time, ashamed as an Englishman, to find myself compelled, in the name of my country, to plead guilty to the charge which he brings against us. Having held up to contempt and ridicule the attempts of the legislature to put down, by prosecutions and penalties, the habit of common swearing, denouncing it as a sign of holy zeal without any knowledge, and a proof that those who enacted the law, though no doubt pious men, were yet quite

66

miserable legislators, he adds, " Perhaps there is no country in the world, in which one hears so much cursing as in England. Were I in London,” he continues, "under such a law (a law compelling any one who heard an idle oath, to inform against the utterer), I should never leave home, because I should be sure to hear more curses than I could possibly denounce*.”

66

* But whilst we cannot plead 'Not Guilty' to this charge of our German censor, we feel gratitude in being able to recognise a most material improvement within these late years among all classes of the community in England. I cannot refrain from making an extract on this subject, from the letter of a most valued friend. Among these desultory remarks, I must not omit one, which perhaps, you have often heard from me-that I do not think the present age so immoral; so given to lying, swearing, or drunkenness, as the last, or any preceding age in our history. Common swearing is beyond a doubt diminished, I believe, in the proportion of 100 to 1. A French writer, author of a satirical book written fifteen years ago, entitled, Three Months in London, the object of which is to run down England and Englishmen, observes, that he hardly ever heard an oath either in society or in the street. This is one of the few praises he bestows upon us. Certainly my experience corresponds with his; and I am old enough to remember very different manners, both in society and in the streets." At the same time, also, there is undoubtedly, much rash and common swearing in other countries through the whole Continent of Europe, as well as in our own. are told, that in "Upper Languedoc, at Toulouse especially, you hear scarcely a sentence without an oath in the jargon of their patois."—(Annual Register, 1761.) In Italy too, especially in its southern parts, I am told, the multiplicity of oaths is astonishing, volumes of which, of the coarsest kind,

We

Agreeing with him that our land is still disgraced by cursing and swearing, and also that prosecutions and convictions are in no way the proper means for checking the custom, I differ from him entirely as to the character and effects of common swearing He would laugh at it as a matter of no moment, and would, in derision, make us a by-word on account of it. In my mind, it is always associated with rashness, reckless impiety, and a callous and abandoned mind. Experience forbids us to look for the effects of the divine influences of true religion in any one, from whose heart the evil spirit of common swearing has not been dislodged. In its origin, the habit is evil; during its existence, it is an indication of a depraved, or at least of a careless character; and, in its effect it is pernicious, shocking the decent and religious, confirming the wicked and impious, and betraying into sin the thoughtless and unguarded.

My anxiety in this treatise is not to make out a strong case against our own times, but to lay before my readers the real state of things at pre

are poured forth with a velocity for which an Englishman is not prepared. And a gentleman, well conversant with the subject, assures me, that he believes common oaths are as prevalent at least in Germany, as in our own country, and much more frequent in France. But in proportion to the advanced state of religious education among us, ought we not to be far more free than we are, from such corrupt and barbarous practices?