Daily Los Angeles herald., 1881-05-19
OFFICIAL 0ATHS.
The Various Forms Of Signifying Allssare
to the Government.
New York TimeF.1

A comparison Of the official oaths
of several countries, apropos OF the
Bradlsugh affair, is not uninterest.
ing. France demands no oath, nor
even any equivalent formality, be.
fore her Legislators enter upon their
duties. Even under the Empire
the Deity was not called upon, the
simple formul being: II swear
fidelity to the Emperor and the
Constitution In Austria, also,
there is no oath, but. in reply to a
question from the President Of the
Reichsrath, whether ths new men,
Der "promises loyalty and obedi-
ence to the Emperor, inviolable
observance to the Constitution, as
we'll as of all other laws, and con-
scientious fulfillment of his duty"
the member simply replies, II
promiee.n The reason that mem.
bers of the German Parliament
take no oath is that maby OF them
are under an oath Of allegiance to
their respective States in the Ger.
man Feuetr on, and so q conflict
of duty might arise ii two Oaths
were insisted II, IN. The Pfusslau
member Of Parliament takes an
oath beginning, II swear by God,
the omnipotent and omniscient,"
aud ending $50 may God help me !"
AS II this were not enough, those
who choose, it is provided, may
add "through Jesus Christ to eIer-
nal bliss, amen" The Spanish
Deputies are put through sort of
catechism. lhe Secretary asks
them: "Do you swear to observe,
and make others observe, the
Constitution of the Spanish mon.
archy? Do you swear fidelity and
obedience to the legitimate King
of Spain, Alfonso XII? Do you
swear we'll and truly to behave in
the mission contided to you by the
nation, always aud In everything
seeking the welfare of the nation?"
The answer expected is, eyes, l do
swear" and the replication is,
"If you do so may God reward you,
and if you do not, may He call you
to account.n In 1879, 1t may be
said, Sefor CASTELAR, and Il teen
others were the Bradlaughs of
Spain, but their objections were
not based on religious or irreligious
grounds. In Italy the President of
The Chamber of Deputies says with
elaborate politeness, II invite the
honorable gentleman to take the
oath in the form following: Il
swear to be faithful to the king and
to observe Loyalty the fundamental
statute and the other laws of the
State, with a single view to the in.
separable welfare of the king and
the country" The new deputy
responds with the single word "Gi-
urgo," U swear). The oath to
which Mr.. Bradlaugh objects seems
harmless enough. 1t reads: 81 do
swear that l will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to her
N msjesty, Queen Victoria, her heirs
and successors, according to law;
so help me God" Obviously, any
man who believes in any God,
whether Jew or Moham m edan or
Christian, might honorably assent
to every letter of this oath. And
go, too. Of course, might any man
who believes in no god at all. For
him the oath lacks its usual sane.
tion, and scrupulous honor might
lead him to point this out at the
time of complying with the custom
of oath taking; but there can be no
doubt that dozens, perhaps scores,
of other members OF Parliament do
not agree with Mr.. Bradlaugh in
this view Of the subject. He, hav-
ing explained his position once for
all, cannot be expected to be for.
ever explaining and objecting, aud
so cannot be blamed for swearing
The United States, it is generally
known, have two oaths, but their
precise forms are familiar.