CHAPTER XIII.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

EVIDENCE.

Oaths.-Among the various classes of men there will always be differences and misunderstandings concerning persons and property. In a state of nature these disputes are settled by a resort to arms, when the stronger and more cunning subdues the weaker, without any reference to principles of right. In enlightened countries, courts are established and judges are appointed to determine, by lawful means, all disputes between citizens. Law-loving and lawabiding people never attempt to enforce their rights except in the way prescribed by law. When an appeal is made to the courts to right the wrongs or settle the controversies of citizens, witnesses are called in to give evidence concerning the facts. As it is written in the moral law, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor," every one is under obligation to speak the truth.

Since the giving of testimony in court may concern a neighbor's life or liberty, reputation or property, it is well to impress upon the conscience of the witness the solemn obligation he is under to tell the truth. For this purpose he is expected to take an oath, which is an appeal to Almighty God to witness the truth about to be uttered. Every man is under as much obligation to tell the truth without taking the oath as with it, and every truly good

How are disputes settled What do the courts require? Repeat the text. What is

What is the subject of chapter XIII? What is the text? in a state of nature? How in enlightened countries? Why is every one under obligation to speak the truth? an oath? Is it our duty to tell the truth at all times?

man's word is as good as his oath, yet there are those who are rendered more careful by this solemn ceremony.

Anecdote.-The virtue of the ancient Athenians is very remarkable, as was exhibited in the case of Euripides. This great poet, though famous for the morality of his plays, had introduced a person, who, being reminded of an oath he had taken, replied, "I swore with my mouth but not with my heart." The impiety of this sentiment set the audience in an uproar; made Socrates (though an intimate friend of the poet) leave the theater with indignation, and gave so great offense that he was publicly accused and brought upon his trial, as one who had suggested an evasion of what they thought the most holy and indissoluble bond of human society. So jealous were these virtuous heathen of the slightest hint that might open the way to the violation of an oath.

The legal oath.-There are two forms in which an oath is administered in our courts, and for the benefit of those who have conscientious scruples against taking an oath, there is provided what is termed "the affirmation." Either of these forms may be used at the request of the witness.

1st. Oath by the uplifted hand.-The witness holds up his right hand to heaven, as if to ask God to hear and help him speak the truth. The officer of the court, who is legally authorized to administer the oath, repeats the following solemn words: "You do swear, in presence of Almighty God, that the evidence you shall give in this case shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, as you shall answer to God in the great day." The witness bows to the officer, and answers, "I do."

What is the object of the oath? Give the anecdote. gry at the poet? What is meant by the legal oath? the oath by the uplifted hand. Repeat the oath,

Why were the heathen anDescribe the form of taking

2d. Oath on the Bible.-As a peculiar sacredness is attached to the Bible as the word of God, an oath is prepared in which it is used. The witness lays his hand upon it, and the officer administering the oath says: "You do solemnly swear, upon the Holy Evangels, that the evidence you shall give in this case shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God." The witness then kisses the Book, to show his willingness to tell the truth as God shall help him.

3d. The affirmation.-The solemn affirmation is used by the Friends, or Quakers, and others who prefer it in preference to the forms of the oath. The officer says to the witness: "You do solemnly, sincerely, and truly affirm that the evidence you shall give in this case shall be the truth to the best of your knowledge and belief, and this you affirm." The witness says, "I do.”

Perjury.—The violation of the oath, or affirmation, is not a breach of the moral law only, but also of the civil law, and the crime is denominated perjury. If no dependence could be placed upon the sacred obligation of the oath, there would be an end to human confidence; men would fail to recognize their relation to the moral law whose Author is the very essence of truth, and human society would lose its strongest bond. He who is guilty of perjury is esteemed an enemy of God and the state, and, if convicted by the court, is subject to very severe punishment.

As the best of men are liable, from a great variety of circumstances, to be mistaken, it is quite possible that, even with the best intentions, they may not always speak the truth. All that the laws of God or man require is that the witness shall exercise great care in making his statements,

Why do some prefer to take the oath upon the Bible? Describe this method. Is there any difference in sanctity between these methods? Does a good man require the aid of an oath to enable him to tell the truth? Why is the form of affirmation preferred by some? Give that form. Is it less binding than the oath? What is perjury? What is done with a perjurer? Why? What do the laws require?

and that he shall speak the truth "according to the best of his knowledge and belief," and to declare it "without fear, favor, or affection" for the parties concerned.

Involuntary evidence.-The moral law requires that men shall live peaceably with each other, as was discussed in Chapter VIII; but such is the weakness of human nature, that it is not always possible to obey the law. The civil courts must adjust the difficulties that neighbors can not or will not settle. The safety of the individual, and the welfare of the community, depend upon the legal arrangement of all strifes, and all good citizens are bound to afford whatever aid is necessary to effect the object. The moral as well as the civil law requires that we shall give evidence when called upon by the legal authorities.

No man is obliged to be a witness against himself in the courts, but he may be compelled to testify concerning others, even when his feelings and interests would prompt him to keep silent. In case he should refuse to tell what he knows, the court would send him to prison till he should be willing to divulge it. However mortifying to the pride, or distressing to the mind, the evidence may be, it should be given fully and honestly, without any mental reservation or concealment. We are morally bound to tell the truth, and should not yield to any temptation to deviate from this duty.

Voluntary evidence. The state is composed of individuals who are united to promote their highest welfare in the protection of the rights of life, liberty, and property. Every individual is interested, for every one has some rights that need protection. Any infraction of the law is an injury to the whole community, which every member should,

Is it possible to live peaceably with all men? Why? How must differences be settled? What depend upon the prompt settlement of disputes? Should pupils refer their differences to teachers, or continue to quarrel? Is a man obliged to testify against himself? Is he obliged to testify concerning others? What will be done if he refuses to testify? Why should the court compel a man to testify? Is every citizen interested in the enforcement of the law? Why?

M. M.-6

if possible, avert. If the incendiary burns a house, it is a loss not only to the owner, but a serious damage to the public; if a horse is stolen, the whole community is disturbed, since every man's horse is liable to be taken; if a man is knocked down and robbed, every man's person and property are insecure if the robber is not detected and punished. The feeling of safety which every good community enjoys is disturbed when outrages of this kind occur.

It is the duty, then, of every good citizen to make his best efforts to discover such perpetrators of crime and bring them to justice. It would be a cowardly wrong for any one to conceal his knowledge of such offenders, and thereby screen them from punishment. While it is an unpleasant duty to become a voluntary informer, yet the welfare of society as a whole, and of every individual, demands that such information be given. A public informer may be a public benefactor.

Opinions in Evidence.-Witnesses are often called to give opinions with reference to things about which they can not speak with certainty. Thus, a physician may be summoned to testify whether, in his opinion, a certain man came to his death by a blow on the head or a stab in the side; a farmer, to give his estimate of the value of a certain horse; a mechanic, to determine the strength and durability of a piece of machinery. These conclusions are matters of judgment, and one man is not to be blamed if his opinion does not agree with that of another.

Opinions are valuable according to the age, experience, intelligence, and general character of the witness. Young people are apt to form judgments too hastily. They often jump at conclusions without carefully weighing all the facts and circumstances, and thus do injury to themselves and

Is it the duty of every one to assist in bringing offenders to justice? Why? Why may a voluntary informer be a public benefactor? May a person swear to that which he does not certainly know? Illustrate how one may give an opinion on oath. What is an opinion worth as evidence?