The record-union., 1892-01-13
Tryphena's Opinion of Legal oaths.

Tryphena's Opinion of Legal Oaths.
/ EDS. RECoRD-UNIoN: I had been read
! ing, and had just laid down the paper,
| when Tryphena looked up at me, and
asked: ''OId Crank! do you believe that
Christs injunction should be needed,
/ when he says: Swear not at all, neither
! by Heaven, for 1t is Gods throne, nor by
the earth, for it is His footstool; neither
! by Jerusalem, for it is the city Of the
great king; neither shalt thou swear by
/ thy head, for thou canst not make one
! hair white or black. Let your commune
! cation be yea, yea, nay, nay, for whatSO-
/ ever Is more than these cometh of evil -
Yes" | answered, Il believe that all
/ of Christs injunctions should be needed:
and believe that if they were, univer-
i sally or generally, human intercourse
would be as genial as the Almighty in
/ tended it should eventually become"
If you believe that" said she, ''why
| do you go into courts and swear to do
! this or that? And why do you GO before
! NOtaries, and other officials, and sub
! scribe to oaths in numerous and various
/ TRANSACTIONS"
well, Tryphena," l answered, 81
/ have subscribed to many oaths, because
! the law imposes them. Generally have
/ felt a little qualm of conscience, which [
| have tried to quiet with the mental asser-
! ton that If it was not right the law was
! responsible for the wrong, and not 1; but
lately have about decided in my own
mind never to subscribe to another oath,
unless ! am forced to do 500
! Il commend you for that" said she.
! and II | had the making of your laws
an oath should never be imposed, re-
! CURED, administered or subscribed, upon,
OF, or TO, any person, under any circum-
! stances whatsoever.
| ITO me it seems another of the MANY
inconsistencies Of men,
/ III an oath means anything is not its
| imposition foolish attempt TO make a
! person assume liability to a penalty
which human power cannot enforce?
If our Lawmakers are Christians. how
dare they disregard the plain command
OF the Mas er. on whom their faith is
! founded, to swear not at all?
III our lawmakers are skeptics, in
1ldeIs or pagans, what possible truth
extracting or justice-compelling power
can they ascribe to an oath?
wv hat susceptibility in man is in
! tended or supposed to be acted upon?
lis 1t his religious belief, or supersti-
| tiOuS fear, or does the oath contain an
Inherent truth and justice-extorting
power?
eff either, or all of these, what need is
there for human penalty for the viola
! ton Of an oath? Is the human penalty
relied upon TO enforce the oath ? If SO.
| why not apply the human penalty direct
to the violation of truth, justice, or law.
without the oath?
AS the penalties in a future existence
! are said to be just the same for living and
other crimes as for perjury, what pos
sible crime-deterring influence can an
oath have on any person because Of re-
! liglOuS faith, or superstitious fear, or anv
other susceptibility in man?
ITO accord with my perception ofcom-
mon sense, mandate of law, with a pre-
! scrIDed human penalty, should take the
place OF an oath in all cases. Instead of
the oath OF office the mandate of law
might be administered in this way:
GU have been elected COR appointed
to serve the people of the commonwealth
las President, Judge, Governor or any
OF the minor offices down to the lowest
/ The law requires you to perform the
duties of such Office faithfully. Ifyou
fail to do SO because of ignorance. or in
competency, you are liable to impeach-
| ment and deposition. If you fail from
! willtul neglect, or dishonesty, YOU are
liable to impeachment and the penalty
which the law prescribeS fine or inn
prlsonment, or whatever the penalty may
be-
''No bonds should ever be required
from public officer, because, if not for
t4.
| they always work injustice to the inno-
cent and never punishment to the guilty.
TO witness, instead of oath or aflir-
nation: You are summoned here as q
witness IN the case of Doe VS.. Roe The
| law requires you to tell the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
If you evade. or preyaricate. and il can
be proved against you at any time in the
future, you are liable to the penalty which
the law prescribes, which will surely be
enforced against YOU
TO jurors, in place of oath or affirma-
ton: You are summoned here to act as
jurors in the case Of Doe VS.. Roe. The
law requires you to carefully consider the
evidence which is adduced here, and de-
eide ithe merits OF the case) in accord
ance with the inherent sense of right and
wrong within you; Tor, if preferable, the
law as propounded toiyou by the Judge.
The law prescribeS penalty Whatever il
may be- for deviation from this mandate,
which will surely be enforced against
each, and all of you, if necessary
mo injunction to decide according to
law should be given to juror, until the
laws have been condensed and published
in such manner that every Juror is
familiar with them.
ION contracts, deeds and documents
for record the proper officials certificate
OF acknowledgment should, and would,
be just as efficient without the worse
than absurd addition of SlU0TR to.
Il cannot think of any transaction in
life where an oath can possibly be bene-
fetal.
Truly, believe that whatsoever is
more than affirmation, or denial, cOmeth
of evil.
1.-The substitution of mandate of law.
| in place of an oath, could be accom-
plished more easily than most others of
our needed reforms, as the penalty for
perjury could be transferred as the pen
atty for disregard of the legal mandate
1--WE look back upon the efforts Of the
past to eXtort truth and Justice by means
of torture, with Just condemnation.
The not distant future will look back
upon our efforts to eXtOrt truth and ius-
itce by means Of oaths with lust ridicule.
'Thank God, the future cannot impute
to US the cruelty which eXcites our hor-
ror of the methods of the past: but
civilization has not yet attained perfec-
ton, and until it does, no precedent
should be considered governing force.
The goal we seek is probably beyond
the reach of many future generations, but
let us endeavor to have the pages of his
tory on which our course toward it may
be traced show plainly successive inn
provement."
got up and reached for my hat, re-
marking: "Tryphenia. 1 am perfectly
convinced that your opinion of legal oaths
is correct, and 1 will go right out and
have arrangements made to substitute
the mandate of law in place of the oath as
soon as possible
But she said quietly, with a far-awav
look in her eyes:
''Sit down, Old Crank; you can do moth
ing; unless these ideas contain inherent
truth and power, which is acknowledged
by the wise and thoughtful, their ex-
preston is useless"
L hung up my hat and sat down meekly.
OLD CRANK.