Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1910-12-30

be sworn on a copy or the Pentateuch
Since, as intimated above, almost al
the laws and customs in any manner
connected with religious worship anC
ordinances in use among Christian ma
tions have come, with various modi-
fications. by regular inheritance, so tc
speak, from the ancient Jews, 1t Is
but reasonable that we should expect
to find the law and the customs con.
cerning the oath deduced from the
same source. so that, in tracing the
history of the ordinance of the oath
as ii now exists in this country, In
England, and, indeed, in almost al
o-called Christian nations we are led
back inevitably to the ancient Jews
as the fountain head whence the
stream has flowed down through the
ages to our times.
1t Is not strange that we find that
In the early dawn Of Christianity lax
ideas In regard to the oath prevailed
to a greater or lesser extent; for we
must remember that Christianity sue
ceeded Judaism when the latter had
greatly declined and had been cor
rupted by contact with the Romans
and other heather nations, who had
conquered and oVerrun their land,
This must, and to our mind, does, ac-
count for the fact that we find in the
early days Of the Christian era cor
ruption and false ideas Of the nature
of this ordinance. both as to its OBJ
ject and binding force and the mode
Of its administration.
For instance, we are told that un-
der the early Christian emperors oaths
were taken by a simple religious as
severation. The Emperor Justinian is
said to have Instituted the custom of
laying the hand on the Gospels, or
kissing the Gospels, or kissing the
book" which absurd custom has come
down 20 us, and Is now crystallized
into statute, and to this date stands
as the law in many states Of the I'm
ion, prescribed as the usual mode of
administering oaths," to be observed
in all cases, though by the clemency
60 Of the law the person who desires
1t shall be permitted to swear with
uplifted hands," &c.
While it Is said that Justinian in
stituted the custom Of laying the hand
on the Gospels or kissing the book,
We are inclined TO think that, while
he may have possibly instituted kiss
ing the Gospels, the custom of laying
the hand on the Gospels in taking the
oath Is only a continuation and in imi-
tation of the Jewish custom Of lay
ing the hand on a copy of the law of
Moses, and this we believe is the origin
of the term so much in use, "the
corporal oath" 1t Is generally be-
lieved, and Webster gives this as the
definition, that this term is derived
from the custom Of laying the hand
on the corporate" or cloth that COW
cred the consecrated emblems Of the
Eucharist; for 1t became the custom
not only to lay the hand on the Cos
pels, but also on affairs and the con-
secrated emblems, and on the cloth
covering them, or on anything almost
that was, in those twilight ages, con-
sidered holy. But we strongly in
cline to the opinion, and are support
ed by very learned and respectable
authority that this term corporal"
Is derived from bri' .ging the hand in
actual contact bodily, corporal
touch, with the book or altar, or
whatever it rested upon in taking the
oath.
1t may be interesting to note that
this term corporal oath" has received
a judicial Interpretation by the su-
preme court of Indiana as recently as
the year 1S4S. One Jackson was in
dicted for perjury, and the indict-
ment charged that, having taken ''his
corporal OATH" he swore falsely, &c.
The proof showed that he swore by
raising his hand, etc. 1t was object
ed to by the defense, on the trial, that
this was not corporal OATH" The
supreme court decided that this was
a hypertechnical distinction, and that
a corporal" oath and solemn"
oath were synonymous, at least sufti-
ciently so to convict Mr.. Jackson Of
perjury.
We have characterized the custom
of kissing the book, the Gospel, as
absurd. We should perhaps better
style it as superstitious, and as tend
ing to convey an erroneous impression
of the meaning and force Of the OATH
We are, in general, no stickler for
forms; but at the same time, where
it is necessary that some form must
be used, we believe that 1t should at
least not be nonsensical, not to say er-
roneous, in it's tendency. What, let us
ask, is conveyed to the mind Of the
average juror by this ceremony Of
kissing the book? If anything at
all, it is some vague, superstitious no
ton of some inherent virtue In the
book-the paper, or the leaves, or the
leather of the binding. Certainly
there is nothing In the act to call the
attention to the fact that an appeal
is being made to the God Of heaven
to take notice Of what Is affirmed or
denied, and that His vengeance is i'm
precated If the truth be not uttered.
In Rees' Cyclopedia we are told that
the custom is in imitation Of the priest
kissing the ritual before reading 1t to
the people. We are forced to the
from our investigation Of
the history Of the custom, that it is
a relic of the darker and more igno-
rant ages, and that the idea first sug-
gesting it was that of revering and
worshiping the book. and not its au-
thor; for 1t is we'll known, and may
be abundantly proved, that to kiss In
most Oriental nations, where this Gus
tom first obtained, amongst other
things implies the idea Of, and is
synonym for, homage, subsection and
worship. How much more impressive
and appropriate Is the custom Of the
ancient Jew (Which Is almost the only
one mentioned in Holy Writ, and al
ways with approbation) Of simply lift
ing the right hand toward heaven.
thereby intuitively raising the
thoughts and directing the mind to
the Omniscient Ruler and Judge OF
heaven and earth!
To render the ordinance Of the oath
as useful and impressive as possible.
we are Of the opinion (and we find the
made by some law writer.
whom we have had occasion recently
to consult) that a return to the old
custom of the juror repeating the oath
after the formula recited by the
person administering 1t. instead OF
simply asserting to it at the close,
would tend much to make 1t impress
sive and effective.-The Docket.