Notes and Queries, Number 207, October 15, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.Various
History
Notes and Queries, Number 207, October 15, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
dated 1492, speaks of her as "Joan, my wife, late the wife of John Hawys,
one of the Justices of the Common Pleas." Now this John Hawys was living in
1487, and Lovett's son and heir, Thomas, was seventeen years old in 1492.
The abstract of Lovett's will in the _Test. Vetust._, calling Thomas Lovett
the Younger "my son and heir by the said Joan my wife," must therefore be
manifestly incorrect. I will not apologise for the minuteness of this
account, as I believe the correction of detail in published pedigrees to be
one of the most valuable features of "N. & Q.;" but I am almost ashamed of
the length of my communication, which I hope some of your readers may throw
light upon.
TEWARS.
* * * * *
OATHS.
The very remarkable distinction between the manner in which English and
Welsh witnesses take the book at the time when they are sworn, has often
struck me. An English witness always takes the book with his fingers under,
and his thumb at the top of the book. A Welsh witness, on the contrary,
takes it with his fingers at the top, and his thumb under the book. How has
this singular difference arisen? I am inclined to suggest that originally
the oath was taken by merely laying the hand on the top of the book,
without kissing it. Lord Coke (3 _Inst._ 165.) says, "It is called a
corporal oath, because he toucheth with his hand some part of the Holy
Scripture." And Jacob (_L. D._, "Oath"), says it is so called "because the
witness, when he swears, _lays his right hand upon_, and toucheth the Holy
Evangelists." And Lord Hale (2 _H. P. C._ 279.) says, "The regular oath, as
is allowed by the laws of England, is 'Tactis sacrosanctis Dei
Evangeliis'," and in case of a Jew, "Tacto libro legis Mosaicae:" and, if I
rightly remember, the oath as administered in the Latin form at Oxford
concludes: "Ita te Deus adjuvet, tactis sacrosanctis Christi Evangeliis."
In none of these instances does kissing the book appear to be essential.
Whereas the present form used in the Courts is, "So help you God, kiss the
book;" but still the witness is always required to touch the book with his
hand, and he is never permitted to hold the book with his hand in a glove.
When then did the practice of kissing the book originate? And how happens
it that the Welsh and English take the book in the hand in the different
manners I have described?
C. S. G.
* * * * *
THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account