The Cheerake use another expression, which bears a strong analogy to the former method of adjuration; though it is not so sacred in their opinion, because of one letter prefixed, and another subjoined. The judge, in small controversies, asks the witness, _To e u (sko?)_ To which he answers, _To e u_, or _To e u hah_, “It is very true,” or “a most certain truth.” Such an addition of any letter, or letters, to the vowels of the supposed divine, four-lettered name, seems to proceed from a strict religious custom of proportioning them to the circumstances of persons and things, lest, otherwise, they should blaspheme, or prophane the emblems of the great divine name. And the vowel _U_ seems to allude to אחד, _i. e._ ONE—a name of God, figuratively—for, in their dialect, when it is a period, it makes a superlative, according to their usage in applying the rest of the divine appellatives, symbols, or names. They esteem _To e u hah_ so strong an assent to any thing spoken, that _Cheesto Kaiēhre_, “the old rabbet,” (the name of the interpreter) who formerly accompanied seven of their head warriors to London,[24] assured me, they held there a very hot debate, in their subterranean lodgings, in the dead hours of the night of September the 7th, 1730, whether they should not kill him, and one of the war-chieftains, because, by his mouth, the other answered _To e u hah_ to his Majesty’s speech, wherein he claimed, not only their land, but all the other unconquered countries of the neighbouring nations, as his right and property. When they returned home, they were tried again, by the national sanhedrim, for having betrayed the public faith, and sold their country, for acknowledged value, by firm compact, as representatives of their country; they having received a certain quantity of goods, and a decoying belt of white wampum: but, upon serious deliberation, they were honourably acquitted, because it was judged, the interpreter was bound, by the like oath, to explain their speeches; and that surprise, inadvertence, self-love, and the unusual glittering show of the courtiers, extorted the sacred assent, _To e u hah_, out of the other’s mouth, which spoiled the force of it; being much afraid, lest they should say something amiss, on account of the different idiom of the English, and Indian American dialects[XII]. As there is no alternative between a falsehood, and a lie, they {50} usually tell any person, in plain language, “You lie,” as a friendly negative to his reputed untruth. The cheerful, inoffensive _old rabbet_ told me, he had urged to them, with a great deal of earnestness, that it was certain death by our laws, to give his Majesty the lie to his face; and cautioned them to guard their mouths very strongly from uttering such dangerous language: otherwise, their hearts would become very heavy, and even sorrowful to death; as he would be bound as firmly by our holy books, to relate the bare naked truth, as they were by repeating _To e u ah_, or even