KISSING THE BOOK.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 440, 24 February 1909, Page 6

KISSING THE BOOK.

Although, the. practice of "kissing the Book'! in tho Law Courts has been the subject of innumerable attacks from various quarters,- the practice still flourishes so well- that a person who, for hygienic reasons, adopts the alternative, of "making an affirmation'' is considered worthy of a paragraph in the -papers. The durability of this unwholesome custom is accounted for by the' fact' 'that' the .denunciations of it 'are single shots, fired at long intervals;, and something more' than that is required to uproot a'ny longestablished i habit, especially a habit planted in the -conservative atmosphere of law. In England, however, they have grown v tired of these merely: occasional protests on behalf of decency - and dignity,, and the London - Times- has led a campaign against the practice of "smacking . calfskin," as vulgar persons • designated the process in the. eighteenth cen - tury; Colonel Mapleson informed tho Tinm that a very eminent prima donna, who was ; subprenaed as a witness in a recent law case, "kissed the Book" with the result that she shortly afterwards contracted a rash on her mouth and chinthat.affected her thrpat. For two months she was unable to fulfil her professional engagements, and her doctor declared his conviction that the : complaint was caught from the filthy, Testament she had kissed in Court. - There is no obligation, of course, upon any witness to "take the oath" ill amanner; which; as the Times says, "has noither antiquity, solemnity, nor deconcy ,to. recommend it." Any witness who chooses may claim the privilege of being sworn in the Scottish fashion, and nobody can havo any doubt as to which is the more solemn and decent: the 'general practice of giving a perfunctory smack to a dirty Testament at the bidding 'of a policeman who gabbles a formula that has grown meaningless to him by long habit, or the Scottish' fashion in which tho ,witness holds up his' right hand uncovered and says, on hi? own behalf: "I swear by Almighty God, as I shall answor to God at the great Day of Judgment, that I will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Most witnesses in a Law Court are too deeply impressed by the unfamiliar surroundings, and too agitated by the' sternness orthe Court's air, to think, ftt oil of the possibility o£ departing; irom the

usual practicc. Moreover, 1 , most • witnesses are too shy, .and too undesirous of attracting attention, by claiming the privilego of making affirmation. , The Times makes the shrewd 'observation that the average witness even feels that if he l ejected the Book, the Court would in some way be prejudiced agaihst him. The current practice is quito indefensible, on almost every ground, and it is not even necessary. In one London Court every witness is offered the option of being sworn in the Scottish; fashion. Following upon the attention given to the Sir Gorell Barnes, presiding over tho Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division of the High Court, made a statement from the Bench respecting the manner of taking .the oath. Some years ago, he said,, ho caused a notice to be conspicuously. exhibited in his Court to direct witnesses that they might make affirmation if they ; chose. But it is remarkable, he went on, that practically nobody takes advantage of the. information conveyed. He has since then had a number of Testaments provided which are bound in covers that permit of repeated,cleansing. In view, however, of the inveteracy of -witnesses adherence to the-usual practice, he has instructed that the officer administering the oath should ask each witness if he desires to be sworn in the Scottish form. That is a practice that might with advantage be adopted in our own Courts, even if the more drastic remedy suggested by tho Times, is not adopted, namely, that an Act of Parliament should bo passed to make' the Scottish fashion obligatory instead .'of''.optional/: