3 20 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



in decent families learn to answer plain questions some years before 

 they learn to swear, and material evidence is often lost by the child 

 not having been taught beforehand the proper answers to make when 

 questioned as to the nature of an oath. I heard of a case only lately, 

 which was expected to lead to a committal on a charge of murder, and 

 where an important point rested on the evidence of a young lad who 

 was, to all appearance, truthful, but who did not satisfy the bench 

 that he understood the nature of an oath. Those in whom the cere- 

 mony of swearing a child arouses the feeling of physical repugnance 

 that it does in myself, may learn with interest a fact as yet little 

 known in England, and which sufficiently justifies my bringing for- 

 ward the subject. Hearing that there was something to be learned 

 from Germany, I applied to the eminent jurist, Dr. Gneist, of Berlin, 

 and hear from him that under the new German rules of procedure, 

 which are expected shortly to come into force, the evidence of children 

 under sixteen may be received without oath, at the discretion of the 

 judge. In these days there is a simple rule which an Englishman will 

 do well to act up to, and that is, " Don't be beaten by a German ! " 

 Let us live in the heartiest fellowship with the Germans, and never 

 let them get ahead of us if we can help it. In this matter of children's 

 legal evidence, they are fairly leaving us behind, by introducing a 

 plan which is at once more humane and more effective than ours. 



If, now, looking at the subject as one of practical sociology, we 

 consider what place the legal oath has filled in savage, barbaric, and 

 civilized life, we must adjudge to it altogether higher value than to 

 the ordeal. At certain stages of culture it has been one of the great 

 forces of society. There was a time when Lycurgus could tell the 

 men of Athens that the oath was the very bond that held the democ- 

 racy together. There was a time when, as Montesquieu insists, an 

 oath was so binding on the minds of the Romans, that for its observ- 

 ance they would do more than even patriotism or love of glory could 

 draw them to. In our own day, its practical binding power is unmis- 

 takable over the consciences of a numerous intermediate class of 

 witnesses, those who are neither truthful nor quite reckless, who are 

 without the honesty which makes a good man's oath superfluous, who 

 will indeed lie solemnly and circumstantially, but are somewhat re- 

 strained from perjury by the fear of being, as the old English saying 

 has it, " once forsworn, ever forlorn." Though the hold thus given is 

 far weaker than is popularly fancied, it has from time to time led 



falsely, and answered in due form, " Please, sir, I should go to burning hell ! " Unluck- 

 ily, however, the unusual question was then put, how she knew that ? which brought the 

 reply, " Oh, please, another girl outside told me I was to say so ! " It is bar tradition, 

 though there may be no record in print, that years ago the most sarcastic of English 

 judges put the whole matter in a nutshell. The question having been asked of a child 

 witness, if she knew what would become of her when she died, she answered simply, 

 " Don't know, sir ! " whereupon the judge said, " Well, gentlemen, no more do I know- 

 but the child's evidence cannot be taken." 



