as our Saviour's, and therefore admit the fame explanation with more ease.

IV. Oaths are nugatory, that is, carry with them no proper force or obligation, unless we believe, that God will punish falfe fwearing with more severity than a fimple lie, or breach of promife; for which belief there are the following reasons:

1. Perjury is a fin of greater deliberation, The juror has the thought of God and of religion upon his mind at the time; at least, there are very few who can shake them off entirely. He offends, therefore, if he do offend, with a high hand, in the face, that is, and in defiance of the sanctions of religion. His offence implies a difbelief or contempt of God's knowledge, power, and justice, which cannot be said of a lie, where there is nothing to carry the mind to any reflection upon the Deity, or the divine attributes

at all.

2. Perjury violates a fuperior confidence. Mankind must trust to one another; and they have nothing better to truft to than one another's oath. Hence legal adjudications, which govern and affect every right and intereft on this fide the grave, of neceffity proceed and depend upon oaths. Perjury, therefore, in its general confe

quence, ftrikes at the fecurity of reputation, property, and even of life itself. A lie cannot do the fame mifchief, because the fame credit is not given to it*.

3. God directed the Ifraelites to fwear by his name; and was pleafed, "in order to fhow "the immutability of his own council," to confirm his covenant with that people by an oath: neither of which it is probable he would have done, had he not intended to reprefent oaths, as having fome meaning and effect, beyond the obligation of a bare promife; which effect must be owing to the feverer punishment, with which he will vindicate the authority of oaths.

V. Promiffory oaths are not binding, where the promise itself would not be fo: for the feveral cafes of which, fee the Chapter of Promises.

VI. As oaths are defigned for the fecurity of the imposer, it is manifeft they must be interpreted, and performed in the fenfe in which the impofer intends them; otherwise, they afford no fecurity to him. And this is the meaning and reason of

* Except, indeed, where a Quaker's or Moravian's affirmation is accepted in the place of an oath; in which cafe, a lie partakes, so far as this reafon extends, of the nature and guilt of perjury.

+ Deut. vi. 13. X. 20.

+ Heb. vi. 17.

the

the rule, "jurare in animum imponentis;" which rule the reader is defired to carry along with him, whilst we proceed to confider certain particular oaths, which are, either of greater importance, or more likely to fall in our way than others.

CHA P. XVII.

OATH IN EVIDENCE.

T

HE witnefs fwears, " to speak the truth, "the whole truth, and nothing but the "truth, touching the matter in question."

Upon which it may be observed, that the defigned concealment of any truth, which relates to the matter in agitation, is as much a violation of the oath, as to teftify a pofitive falsehood; and this whether the witnefs be interrogated to that particular point or not. For when the person to be examined is fworn upon a voir dire, that is, in order to inquire, whether he ought to be admitted to give evidence in the caufe at all, the form runs thus: "You shall true answer "make to all fuch queftions as fhall be asked

you;" but, when he comes to be sworn in chief, he fwears "to speak the whole truth," without reftraining it, as before, to the queftions that shall be afked: which difference fhews, that the law intends, in this latter cafe, to re

quire of the witness, that he give a complete and unreferved account of what he knows of the subject of the trial, whether the questions proposed to him reach the extent of his knowledge or not. So that if it be inquired of the witness afterwards, why he did not inform the court so and so, it is not a fufficient, though a very common anfwer to fay, "because it was never asked me."

I know but one exception to this rule; which is, when a full difcovery of the truth tends to accuse the witness himself of fome legal crime. The law of England conftrains no man to become his own accufer; confequently, impofes the oath of teftimony with this tacit refervation. But the exception must be confined to legal crimes. A point of honour, of delicacy, or of reputation, may make a witnefs backward to difclofe fome circumftance with which he is acquainted; but will in no wife justify his concealment of the truth, unless it could be fhewn, that the law which impofes the oath, intended to allow this indulgence to fuch motives. The exception is alfo withdrawn by compact between the magistrate and the witnefs, when an accomplice is admitted to give evidence against the partners of his crime.

Tender