To this part, I have annexed an historical dissertation on Perjury, with reference both to its moral guilt, and to its punishment as a crime against the State.

For the third portion, I have reserved such discussions, and such insulated facts and anecdotes connected with our subject, as might have been thought to impede the progress of our inquiry, had they been introduced into the body of the work.

No one, by reading this treatise, will be made more sensible of its imperfections than I am already and most sincerely do I acknowledge my regret, that the task has not fallen on one able to conduct the inquiry in all its bearings in a manner more worthy of its great importance and true character. I trust, however, that my mind has been influenced throughout, by the single desire of finding the truth; and in the practical application of the result of my inquiries, of following only as the truth might seem to lead me by the hand. I may be allowed to add, that in the remarks and suggestions which I have ventured to offer on the present state of Oaths among us in England, the principle by which I have been guided is this:that whilst change, generally speaking, is in itself an evil, and is therefore never to be adopted lightly,

or for its own sake; nevertheless it is the office not of hatred but of love,-not of unkindness, but of friendship,-not of rashness, but of judgment,first, to inquire with diligence for the safest and least painful remedy of any evil under which the objects of our care and regard may be labouring, and then to recommend the cure with tenderness, but with honesty.

CHAPTER II.

ORIGIN OF OATHS.

It is well observed by an ancient writer*, that would men allow Christianity to carry its own designs into full effect; were all the world Christians, and were every Christian habitually under the influence of his Religion in principle and in conduct, no place on earth would be found for OATHS; -every person would, on all occasions, speak the very truth, and would be believed merely for his word's sake every promise would be made in good faith, and no additional obligation would be required to ensure its performance.

When entire reliance on any individual's credit is intended to be expressed, we often hear a phrase employed asserting that his word is equally good with his bond;' and in a Christian's mind, the love of truth, for its own sake, is tantamount to every other consideration. The highest Authority, too, that ever spake on earth, has pronounced that whatever is more than this,-whatever goes beyond the simple statement of the truth,-cometh of evilt. Our Lord does not say (as some have

* Hilarius, Comment. Matt. v. 33. This is also the sentiment of many other early Christian writers.

Matt. v. 37. Some, however, regard our Lord's words in this passage, as referring solely to the ordinary com

misunderstood him to say), that whatever goes

further than the mere itself sinful, but that its in what is in itself bad. in which oaths take their rise is the prevalence of falsehood and wrong, and the consequent prevalence of suspicion and distrust*. It is because we do not place confidence in the veracity of men in general, when they profess to speak the truth; it is because we cannot rely upon their good faith, when they make a bare promise, that we are driven to seek for something more satisfactory to ourselves, by imposing upon them a more binding responsibility than that of their mere word.

passing of one's word is source is evil; it originates And undoubtedly the evil

Such an obligation has been supposed in every age and country of the world to be afforded by the interposition of an ОATH. Through all the diversified stages of society, from the lowest barbarism to

munication between man and man. The earliest and most celebrated writers of the Christian church, seem to me to have considered them as applicable to all Oaths. Whichever of these two views we adopt, His words equally refer us to the origin of the evil. Augustin (De Verb. Apost. Jac. v.) takes the view adopted in this chapter.

* Hesiod represents "Strife," the Malignant Deity, to have been the parent of a thousand evils, enumerating a long and black catalogue; and, as though he would put that end to the climax, beyond which nothing further could be conceived, he adds, "And that which most of all is the bane of mortal men, should any voluntarily incur the guilt of perjury,-AN OATH."-Theogon. 230, 231.

the highest cultivation of civilized life,-where the true religion has been professed, no less than where paganism has retained its hold, recourse has been had to Oaths as affording the nearest approximation to certainty in evidence, and the surest pledge of the performance of a promise*. Even in the present state of society, among professed Christians, however it may be lamented as a proof of the deficiency of sound religious principle, an oath seems to be considered necessary, as impressing the mind of almost every one, with a more awful sense of the guilt and danger of falsehood, and of the religious obligation to speak the very truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth+. Whoever offends by falsehood, after binding himself by an oath to speak the truth, offends (as Archdeacon

* " 'Horcus," or the God of Oaths, is said to be the son of Eris, or Contention; and fables tell us, that in the golden age, when men were strict observers of the laws of truth and justice, there was no occasion for oaths, nor any use made of them. But when they began to degenerate from their primitive simplicity, when truth and justice were banished out of the earth, when every one began to take advantage of his neighbour by cozenage and deceit, and there was no trust to be placed in any man's word, it was high time to think of some expedient, whereby they might secure themselves from the fraud and falsehood of one another: hence had oaths their origin.-Potter's Antiq., b. ii., c. 6.

The Solicitor-General, Murray, in the celebrated case of "Omychund and Barker;" to which we shall have occasion frequently to refer, says, "No country can subsist a twelvemonth, where an oath is not thought binding; for the want of it must necessarily dissolve society."