oath

An outward pledge given by the person taking it that his attestation or promise is made under an immediate sense of his responsibility to God. Tyler, Oaths, 15. ■ The term has been variously defined: As, "a solemn invocation of the vengeance of the Deity upon the witness if he do not declare the whole truth, so far as he knows it." 1 Starkie, Ev. 22.. Or, "a religious asseveration by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of Heaven if he do not speak the truth." 2 Leach, C. C. 482. Or, as "a religious act by vyhich the party invokes God not only to witness the truth and sincerity of his promise, but also to avenge his imposture or violated faith, or, in other words, to punish his perjury if he shall be guilty of it." 10 Toulliei;, Dr. Civ. notes 343-348; Puffendorff, bk. 4, c. 2, § 4. The essential idea of an oath would seem to be, however, that of a recognition of God's authority by the party taking it,- and an undertaking to accomplish the transaction to which it refers as required by His laws.

In its broadest sense, the term is used to include all forms of attestation by which a party signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform the act faithfully and truly.

In a more restricted sense, it excludes all those forms of attestation or promise which are not accompanied by an imprecation. Assertory Oaths. Those required by law other than in judicial proceedings, and upon induction to office, such, for example, as custom-house oaths. Promissory Oaths. Oaths taken by authority of law, by which the party declares that he will fulfill certain duties o he will support the constitution of the United States; the oath which a judge takes that he will perform the duties of his office. The breach of this does not involve the party in the legal crime or punishment of perjury. 3 Zab. (N. J.) 49. Extrajudicial Oaths. Those taken without authority of l&vt. Though binding in foro conscientiae, they do not, when false, render the party liable to punishment for perjury. Judicial Oaths. Those administered in judicial proceedings.

An outward pledge given by the person taking it that his attestation or promise is made under an immediate sense of his responsibility to God. Tyler, Oaths 15. The term lias been variously defined: as, “a solemn invocation of the vengeance of the Deity upon the witness if he do not declare the whole truth, so far as he knows it;” 1 Stark. Ev. 22; or, “a religious asseveration by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of Heaven if he do not speak the truth;” 2 Leach 482; or, as “a religious act by which the party invokes God not only to witness the truth and sincerity of his promise, but also to avenge his imposture or violated faith, or, in other words, to punish his perjury if he shall be guilty of it;” 10 Toullicr, n. 343; Puffendorff, b. 4, c. 2, § 4. The essential idea of an oath would seem to be, however, that of a recognition of God’s authority by the party taking it, and an undertaking to accomplish the transaction to which it refers as required by his laws.

In its broadest sense, the form is used to include all forms of attestation by which a party signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform the act faithfully and truly.

In a more restricted sense, it excludes all those forms of attestation or promise which are not accompanied by an imprecation. Assertory oaths are those required by law other than in judicial proceedings and upon induction to office: such, for example, as O out authority of law. Though binding in foro conscientice, they do not, when false, render the party liable to punishment for perjury. Judicial oaths are those administered in judicial proceedings. Promissory or official oaths are oaths taken, by authority of law, by which the party declares that he will fulfil certain duties therein mentioned: as, the oath which an alien takes, on becoming naturalized, that he will support the constitution of the United States: the oatli which a judge takes that he will perform the duties of his office. The breach of this does not involve the party in the legal crime or punishment of perjury; State v. Dayton, 23 N. J. L. 49, 53 Am. Dec. 270. Where an appointee neglects to take an oath of of lice when required by statute to do so, he cannot be considered qualified, nor justify Ills doings as an officer; Johnston v. Wilson, 2 N. II. 202, 9 Am. Dec. 50. Qualified oaths are circumstantial oaths. Rap. & L. Diet. The form of administering the oath may be varied to conform to the religious belief of the individual, so as to make it binding upon his conscience; 4 Bla. Com. 43; 1 Whart. Ev. §§ 380-8; Com. v. I.uzzell, 1G Pick. (Mass.) 154; Mc Kinney v. People, 2 Gilman (111.) 510, 43 Am. Dec. 65; 7 111. Uy. & M. 77. The most common form is upon the gospel, by taking the book in the hand: the words commonly used are, ‘‘You do swear that,” etc., ‘‘so "help you God,” and then kissing the hook; 9 C. & P. 137. The oath was in common use long prior to the Christian era; Willcs 515, 1744; the oath and Christianity became associated during the reign of Henry VIII. in England; 3 Bobertson's Charles V. 257. The origin of this oath may he traced to the Roman law; Nov. 8, tit. 3; Nov. 74, cap. 5; Nov. 124, cap. 1. In ancient times a Bible containing the Gospels was placed upon a stand in view of the prisoner. The jurors placed their hands upon the book, and then the accused had a full view of ‘‘the peer” who was to try him. This was called the ‘‘corporal oath” because the hand of the person sworn touched the book. Probably, out of reverence, the book may have boon kissed sometimes, as a Catholic priest now kisses it in a mass; but it is doubtful if kissing the book was ever essential to the validity of the “corporal oath”; 22 Law Mag. & Rev. 59. The terms “corporal oath” and “solemn oath” are synonymous, and an oath taken with the uplifted hand is properly described by either term in an indictment for perjury; are not generally used, but? the party taking the oath holds up his right hand and repeats the words here given; 1 Leach 412, 408. Kissing the book has been abolished by statute (1895) in Pennsylvania. Where a justice asks affiant if he swears to the affidavit, and he replies that he does, the oath is sufficient though he does not hold up his hands and swear; Dunlap v. Clay, 05 Miss. 454, 4 South. 118. Another form is by the witness or party promising holding up his right hand while the officer repeats to him, ‘‘You do swear by Almighty God, the searcher of hearts, that,” etc., “and this as you shall answer to God at the great* day.” In another form of attestation, commonly called an affirmation ( q. r.), the officer repeats, “You do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm that;” which is the form prescribed in England by 8 Geo. 1. ch. 6. A general oath that the evidence “shall he the truth, the whole truth, and nothing hut the truth,” etc., is all that is necessary for a witness who testifies to the signing of an instrument in his presence, and translates the language of such instrument for the benefit of the jury; Krewson v. Purdoui, Iff Or. 568, 11 Pae. 281. A.lew is sworn on the Pentateuch, or Old Testament, with his head covered; Stra. 821, lllff; a Mohammedan, on the Koran; 1 Leach 51; a Gentoo, by touching with his hand the foot of a Brahmin or priest of his religion; a Brahmin, by touching the hand of another such priest; Wils. 549; 1 Atk. 21; a Chinaman, by breaking a china saucer; 1 C. & M. 248. See State v. Ohyo Chiagk, 92 Mo. 895, 4 S. W. 704. After a witness has taken the oath according to the custom and religion of his country, it is not error to require him to take the statutory oath; State v. Giu Pen, Mi Wash. 425, 47 Pac. 001. The requirement of an “oath” as used in any act or resolution of congress shall be deemed complied with by making affirmation in the judicial form; II. S. K. S. § 1. The form and time of administering oaths, as well as the person authorized to administer are usually fixed by statute. See Herman v, Herman, 4 Wash. O. C. 555, Fed. Oas. No. 0,407; U. S. v. Bailey, 9 Pet. (U. S.) 288, 9 L. Ed 118; Oaks v. Itodgors, 48 Cal. 197; Arnold v. Middletown, 41 Conn. 200. The administering of unlawful oaths is an offence against the government; AVhart. Lex. By the Promissory Oaths Act (81 & 82 Viet. c. 72) a number of unnecessary oaths have been abolished, and declarations substituted. The same act provides a new form of the oath of allegiance, and forms of a judicial oath and an official oath to he taken In Arkansas, California, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, and Wisconsin there are constitutional provisions intended to exclude any religious test for the competency of witnesses. The Bible is not an indispensable requisite in the administration of an oath; People v. Cook, 8 N. Y. 07, 59 Am. Dec. 451. See Kissing the Book.

An external pledge or asseveration, made in verification of statements made or to be made, coupled with an appeal to a sacred or venerated object, In evidence of the serious and reverent state of mind of the party or with an invocation to a supreme being to witness the words of the party and to visit him with punishment lf they be false. See O'Reilly v. People, 86 N. Y. 154, 40 Am. Rep. 525; Atwood v. Welton, 7 Conn. 70; Clinton v. State, 33 Ohio St. 32; Brock v. Milligan. 10 Ohio, 123; thicker v. Burness, 2 Ala. 354. A religious asseveration, by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of heaven, lf he do not speak the truth. 1 Leach, 430.

— Assertory oath. One relating to a past or present fact or state of facts, as distinguished from a "promissory" oath which relates to future conduct; particularly, any oath required by law other than in judicial proceedings and upon induction to office, such, for example, as an oath to be made at the custom-house relative to goods imported.

— Corporal oatb. See Corporal.

— Decisory oatb. In the civil law. An oath which one of the parties defers or refers back to the other for the decision of the cause.
—-Extrajudicial oatb. One not taken in any judicial proceeding, or without any authority or requirement of law, though taken formally bsfore a proper person.

— Judicial oath. One taken in some judicial proceeding or in relation to some matter connected with judicial proceedings.

— Oath against bribery. One which could bave'been administered to a voter at an election for members of parliament. Abolished in 1854. Wharton.-

— Oath ex officio. The oath by which a clergyman charged with a criminal offense was formerly allowed to swear himself to be innocent; also the oath by which the compurgators swore that they believed in his innocence. 3 Bl. Comm. 101, 447; Mozley & Whitley.

— Oath in litem. In the civil law. An oath permitted to be taken by the plnintiff, for the purpose of proving the value of the subject-matter in controversy, when there was no other evidence on that point, or when the defendant fraudulently suppressed evidence which might have been available.

— Oath of allegiance. An oath by which a person promises and binds himself to bear true allegiance to a particular sovereign or government, e. g., the United States; administered generally to high public officers and to soldiers and sailors, also to aliens applying for naturalization, and, occasionally, to citizens generally as a prerequisite to their suing in the courts or prosecuting claims before government bureaus. See Rev. St. U. S. §§ 1756, 2165, 3478 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, pp. 1202, 1329, 2321), and section 5018.

— Oath of calumny. In the civil law. An oath which a plaintiff was obliged to take that he was not prompted by malice or trickery in commencing his action, but that he had bona fide a good cause of action. Poth. Pand. lib. 5, tt. 16, 17, s. 124.

— Oath-rite. The form used at the taking of an oath.

— Official oath. One taken by an officer when he assumes charge of his office, whereby he declares that he will faithfully discharge the duties of the same, or whatever else may be required by statute in the particular case.

— Poor debtor's oath. See that title.

— Promissory oaths. Oaths which bind the party to observe a certain course of conduct, or to fulfill certain duties, in the future, or to demean himself thereafter in a stated manner with reference to specified objects or obligations; such, for example, as the oath taken by a high executive officer, a legislator, a judge, a person seeking naturalization, an attorney at law. Case v. People, 6 Abb. N. C. (N. Y.) 151

— Purgatory oath. An oath by which a person purges or clears himself from presumptions, charges, or suspicions standing against him, or from a contempt.

— Qualified oath. One the force of which as an affirmation or denial may be qualified or modified by the circumstances under which it is taken or which necessarily enter into it and constitute a part of it; especially thus used in Scotch law.

— Solemn oath. A corporal oath. Jackson v. State, 1 Ind. 184.

— Suppletory oath. In the civil and ecclesiastical law. The testimony of a single witness to a fact is called "half-proof," on which no sentence can be founded; in order to supply the other half of proof, the party himself (plaintiff or defendant) is admitted to be examined in his own behalf, and the oath administered to him for that purpose is called the "suppletory oath," because it supplies the necessary quantum of proof on which to found the sentence. 3 Bl. Comm. 370. This term, although without application in American law in its original sense, is sometimes used as a designation of a party's oath required to be taken in authentication or support of some piece of documentary evidence which he offers, for example, his books of account.

— Voluntary oath. Such as a person may lake in extrajudicial matters, and not regularly in a court of justice, or before an officer invested with authority to administer the same. Brown

A declaration or promise before some authorized ofl Bcer corroborated by an appeal to God, and accompanied by some outward manual act or foi*m, as touching or kissing the Gospels, or holding up the right hand. Oath of ol Hce: an oath taken by an officer that he will faithfully perform the duties of his office, v. Corporal oath.

In the civil law. Oath decisory: the oath of the opposite party to which a party unable to prove his case offered to refer the decision of the cause. Oath in litem: an oath by the complainant as to the value of the thing in dispute, taken on failure of other proof, to prevent a failure of justice. Ob, I For; about; on account of. Ob causam aliqnam a re maritime ortam: for some cause arising out of a maritime matter. Ob continentlam delicti: on account of the contaminating character of the offense. Ob contingentiam: in case of contingency. Ob favorem niercatornm: in favor of merchants. Ob tnrpem cansam: for an immoral consideration.

An external pledge or asseveration, made in verification of statements made or to be made, coupled with an appeal to a sacred or venerated object, in evidence of the serious and reverent state of mind of the party, or with an invocation to a supreme being to witness the words of the party and to visit him with punishment if they be false. A religious asseveration, by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of heaven, if he do not speak the truth. 1 Leach, 430. The calling upon God to witness that what is said by the person sworn is true, and invoking the divine vengeance upon his head, if what he says is false. 10 Ohio, 123. Oaths are either judicial or extrajudicial; the former, when taken in some judicial proceeding or in relation to some matter connected with judicial proceedings; the latter, when not taken in any judicial proceeding, or without any authority of law, though taken formally before a proper person. An official oath is one taken by an officer when he assumes charge of his office, whereby he declares that he will faithfully discharge the duties of the same, or whatever else may be required by statute in the particular case. An assertory oath is one required by law other than in judicial proceedings and upon induction to office. A corporal oath is one taken by the form of laying the hand on or kissing a copy of the gospels. The terms "corporal oath" and "solemn oath" are synonymous; and an oath taken with the uplifted hand is properly described by either term in an indictment for perjury. 1 Ind. 184.

A reverent appeal to God, in corroboration of what one says, invoking, according as his declaration is sincere or deceptive, the divine blessing or punishment in another life. In the vernacular, oaths may be reverent or profane: the word standing alone means either kind. In jurisprudence, ■when oath is used without some 'qualifying word, the meaning generally i^ a reverent oath, — a lawful, formal oath. In the Scotch law, according to Bell, an oath is an affirmation, or denial, or promise, attested by the name of God. The judicial oath of a witness is in the terms: I swear by Almighty God, and as I shall answer to God at the great day of judgment, that I will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, in so far as I know, or as the same shall be asked of me. This is somewhat more solemn in form (though not different in purport) than the usual American form, as administered by the clerk of court to the witness, who either kisses a copy of the gospels, or raises the right hand towards heaven: You solemnly swear that in this issue joined between, &c., you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Oaths are called judicial, when administered under direction of law in some judicial proceeding; axii extra-judicial, when there is no authority of law for taking them. The penalties of perjury do not attach to false oaths of the latter class. Official oath generally signifies an oath prescribed to be taken by an officer, before entering on his duties, that he wiU faithfully discharge them, or pursuing other form of declaration according to the directions of the law applicable. It is more accurately called oath of office. Being promissory in their nature, oaths of this class do not subject the affiant to a prosecution for perjury, in case of a subsequent breach of official duty. As to form of oath, the general prin- 0. nizes as binding upon his conscience; as exposing him, in case of a violation, to divine retribution. Accordingly, persons who repudiate all belief in a God and a system of rewards and punishments in a world to come, have, except under enabling statutes of recent times, been considered incompetent to take an oath. A corporal oath is one taken by the form of laying the hand on or kissing a copy of the gospels. The word oath, in many of the statute-books, includes affirmation; that is, a person who declares conscientious scruples against taking any form of oath, may satisfy any statute requiring an oath by making a solemn affii-mation; and one who has made an affirmation instead of an oath is (under such statutes) liable to the punishment of perjury, if his ai Brmation is false, to the same extent as if it had been an oath. An oath is an affirmation or denial of any thing, before one or more persons who have authority to administer the same, for the discovery and advancement of truth and right, calling God to witness that the testimony is true: therefore, it is termed sacramentum, a holy hand, or tie. Jacob. An affirmation, negation, or promise, corroborated by the attestation of the Divine Being; an appeal to God. Wharton. A religious asseveration, by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of Heaven, if he do not speak the truth. Ejng v. White, 1 Leach Cr. Cos. 430. An oath is a solemn adjuration to God to punish the affiant, if he swears falsely. The sanction of the oath is a belief that the Supreme Being will punish falsehood; and, whether that punishment is administered by remorse of conscience or in any other mode in this world, or is reserved for the future state of being, cannot affect the question, as the sum of the matter is a belief that God is the avenger of falsehood. Blocker v. Burness, 2 Ala. 354. The calling upon God to witness that what is said by the person sworn is true, and invoking the divine vengeance upon his head, if what he says is false. Brock o. Milligan, 10 Ohio, 123. A statute which requires an oath to be administered " by the court or judge " is complied with, if the oath is administered by the clerk in court, under the direc- Where tax-payer was asked by assessor, " You take your oath that that Is all, do you 1 " and answered, " Certainly I do," this was held not to be a lawful oath. Arnold v. Middletown, 41 Conn. 206. The terms corporal oath and solemn oath are synonymous; and an oath taken with the uplifted hand is properly described by either term in an indictment for perjury. Jackson v. State, 1 Ind. 184. OB. On account of; for. Several Latin phrases and maxims, commencing with this word, are more commonly introduced by in, q. v. Others are here defined: Ob continentiam delicti. On account of the contaminating character of the offence. This use of the word continentia is probably without classical authority. The phrase expresses a ground for extending a sentence of condemnation, in maritime law, to property not confiscated on other grounds; as in the case of a vessel condemned for carrying despatches for the enemy in time of war, the sentence may be extended to the cargo oft continentiam delicti. The Atalanta, 6 Rob. Adm. 440. Ob contingentiam. On account of connection; by reason of similarity. In Scotch law, this phrase expresses a ground for the consolidation of actions. Ob turpem causam. For a base cause; for an immoral consideration. See the maxim, Ex turpi causa non oritur actio.

JUDICIAL. A judicial oath is a solemn declaration made in some form warranted by law, before a court of justice or sume officer authorised to administer it, by which the person who takes it promises to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, in relation to his knowledge of the matter then under examination, and appeals to God for his sincerity. In the civiljo law, a judicial oath is that which is given in judgment by one party to another. Dig. 12, 2, 25.