2/0 OATHS — RETHIBTTTtON — TRIEfiTnOOD. 



jury lifts not been devised, or rendered practical, that 

 oaths are at nil required. Let the records of British 

 jurisprudence in the East declare how much more 

 potent, on the whole, is the fear of a teittpojttl punish- 

 ment, than that of one in a future state, 



Bad as the moral feeling of the native too commonly 

 is, regarding the nature of truth, tin n: ran he lillle 

 donht that even now the fear of dotec-iion and tempo- 

 ral pmiif?hm'Mit limits die instances of wilful perjury. 

 Besides, it is quite clear that where, as amongst most 

 Asiatic people, religion embodies in its ordinances, 

 and announces the severest panislunenisin a future 

 state, to those guilty of lying only, the person who 

 bctteven in that religion has little occasion to take an 

 oath. The punishment, in his apprehen^i'm. is to Main 

 whether he swears or not. If he does not l>elieve in 

 the faith he professes, then an oath is still less neces- 

 sary and his assertion on it amounts to no more than 

 phiaple affirmation. 



A little investigation into the religions and civil 

 codes of India and Indo-Chinese countries would shew 

 that throughout these regions, the imposition of ait 

 oath was originally a religious not a civ il act, and that 

 the priests with whom the practice of administering 

 paths and of investing them with supernatural ter- 

 rors, originated, felt their own consequence greatly 

 enhanced hy it. So much is this the case that they still 

 retain the privilege, in many of these countries, of 

 In nig the adjurers. Hell is the portion assigned both 

 to lying Mahometans and Hindoos of all denomina- 

 tions, as well as to Christians. The Indo-Chinese 

 liative creed and dogmas assign to the liar a very hot 

 mansion in Roroowa in .V«/v>A, or hell j where lie 

 is tormented in manifold ways during a period of 

 four thousand Yogas. Four thousand years on this 

 ( arth are considered, in these creeds, as eqmil to orje. 



