not to your recommendation to omit that part of the oath which is directly imprecatory, turning entirely, in the English oath, upon the word "so"

-an objectionable, almost an insidious form of inducing an illiterate man to invoke the vengeance of the Almighty. I hold it no sufficient reason to retain the words, "So help me God," that there will still be a virtual imprecation without them. If actual imprecation shocks the conscience, even of the weaker brethren, and adds little or nothing to the sense of obligation, it is a reason for recommending an altered form.”

I

But whatever difference of opinion may exist, as to the importance or propriety of changing the expression of the oath, I shall proceed to the next branch of our inquiry, with an assumption that on two points at least, all Christians will agree. shall take it for granted, that every one who professes to regard the Gospel as the rule of life, will feel, First, that all unnecessary oaths should be abolished, in whatever department of Church or State they may be found; and, Secondly, that whatever oaths, after a calm and dispassionate examination of the subject in all its bearings, may still be deemed indispensable, they should always be administered with such marks of reverence and solemnity, as at once are due to the hallowed name of HIM who is invoked, and may be calculated to inspire a religious feeling of respect and a reveren

tial awe, as well in the person sworn, as in all who witness the ceremony. At the same time, while I assume these to be sentiments generally felt, I am fully aware, that when the expediency of adopting any alteration in the present system shall be discussed, we must expect a great diversity of opinion among men of practical knowledge and sound understanding.

I am also fully sensible, that such a treatise as the present will best perform its own office by keeping within its own province; and instead of offering suggestions of specific alterations as to judicial or other oaths, my purpose is only to state the evils felt, and the principles upon which such alterations should proceed, leaving it to those who are best acquainted with the subject, to apply those principles in detail. And I may be allowed to hope, that should any recommendations appear to come from me, which ought to be left rather to those who are conversant with the details of practice in courts of law, they may not operate to prejudice the question as to the two general principles of abolishing all unnecessary oaths, and of administering with solemnity and reverence such as may yet be retained. Still I may be expected, perhaps, to enter somewhat into detail, in a few cases which have either come under my own personal experience, or have been communicated to me by men of practical knowledge: I would be understood, however,

merely as giving specimens of the kind of alterations which had suggested themselves to my own mind previously, or have been brought to my observation in the progress of the present inquiry.

In the spirit then of these principles, I would first endeavour to ascertain WHETHER ANY KINDS OF OATHS NOW TAKEN IN OUR ECCLESIASTICAL AND CIVIL AFFAIRS, MAY BE ABOLISHED WITH

SAFETY. I conceive there are many classes of oaths, and myriads in number, which may be so abolished.

F

CHAPTER IX.

OATHS OF OFFICE AND VOLUNTARY AFFIDAVITS.

1. In the first place, the usual oaths of office, in almost every department, with some exceptions perhaps, I would gladly see abandoned, and without any apprehension of the slightest neglect of duty in consequence. When the sovereign*, for the first time, formally takes upon himself the duties of his high station, on the due execution of which the constitution in church and state, the maintenance of the laws, the welfare, and even, in some cases, the existence of his people may be involved, the occasion may seem to require him to bind himself (as

*Mr. Greene, M. P. for Lancaster, was understood last session, to give notice that he should move in the course of the next session, for the abolition of all oaths of office, except those of the King, the Judges, Privy Councillors, and great officers of state.

I would here observe, that the evil tendency of promissory oaths, as well as their inutility, is forced upon us by the number of exceptions to their obligation, which casuists used to discuss and sanction. Take for example, the oath by which a person, when admitted to his freedom, swears not to divulge the secrets of the trade or mystery to which he belongs. This oath has been pronounced to be not binding "in case it hinders any greater moral good, or prevents us from discharging any duty of morality, or if the divulging of the secret cannot injure the party who required the oath, or if those already acquainted with the mystery cannot sufficiently supply the wants of men in this particular, &c." -See Puffendorf, B. iv., c. 2.

may

all our kings have ever bound themselves,) by the most solemn religious sanctions to be faithful to his high trust*; and, as the correlative obligation, it be very fit that certain of his more eminent officers and subjects should, upon the same sanctions, bind themselves to be faithful to their sovereign. There may probably be also some offices of extraordinary trust in the church or state†, which might, in the opinion of wise and good men, require an oath from those who are appointed to them; but allowing such exceptions, I would,

* That our Kings of the Anglo-Saxon race solemnly bound themselves at their coronation, by an oath, faithfully to discharge the duties of their high trust; and that it is a mistake to suppose (with Carte), that they only promised on their royal word to keep the three articles, which the Norman princes swore to observe, is shown by Lyttelton. Hist: Hen: II. The old office used at King Ethelred's coronation (he maintains) was used by the Conqueror. The words of that oath are preserved: it commences thus, "I promise in the name of Christ;" and ends, "As may the gracious and merciful God grant his mercy to me and to you." The three articles were,-to protect the Church and all Christian people in peace; to put down all rapine and injustice; and to observe equity. and mercy in all judgments.

I am fully aware of the difficulty, if the principle is admitted, of limiting its application. But I have a good hope that men of practical wisdom and discretion may be found, who would be able to draw the line, with much satisfaction to the country at large, between those oaths of office which might be safely abolished, and such as relating to the more important and solemn offices of state, it might be generally considered expedient to retain.