"The juror kisses the book; the kiss, however, seems rather an act of reverence to the contents of the book, as in the Popish ritual the priest kisses the gospel before he reads it, than any part of the oath."—Mor. and Pol. Ph., p. 193., thirteenth edition.
In none of the instances given by C. S. G. does kissing the book appear to be essential. Does not this rather favour Dr. Paley's explanation? which, if it be correct, would, I think, afford grounds for concluding that the practice of kissing the book accompanied the taking of ancient oaths, and is not, as C. S. G. suggests, an addition of later times.
Again, may I bring forward the same authority in opposition to that quoted by your correspondent with reference to the origin of the term corporal oath:
"It is commonly thought that oaths are denominated corporal oaths from the bodily action which accompanies them, of laying the right hand upon a book containing the four gospels. This opinion, however, appears to be a mistake, for the term is borrowed from the ancient usage of touching upon these occasions the corporale, or cloth, which covered the consecrated elements."—P. 191.
R. V. T.
Mincing Lane.
The old custom of taking the judicial oath by merely laying the right hand upon the book, is undoubtedly, thinks Erica, of Pagan origin. In my humble opinion it is far too common with us to ascribe things to Pagan origin. I would venture to assert that the origin of this form of judicial oath may be traced to Deuteronomy xxi. 1-8., where at the sacrifice offered up in expiation of secret murder, the rulers of the city nearest the spot where the corpse was found were in presence of the corpse to wash their hands over the victim, and say, "Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it."
Ceyrep.
Mayors and Sheriffs (Vol. viii., p. 126.).—In answer to a Subscriber, there can be little or no doubt, I consider, but that the mayor of a town or borough is the principal and most important officer, and ought to have precedence of a sheriff of a town or borough. By stat. 5 & 6 Wm. IV. cap. 76. sec. 57., it is enacted, "That the mayor for the time being of every borough shall, during the time of his mayoralty, have precedence in all places within the borough." As sheriffs of towns, and counties of towns, do not derive their appointments from the Crown, but from the councils of their respective towns, &c. (see sec. 61. of the
above Act), I do not imagine that they can legally claim precedence of mayors, on the alleged ground of any "representation of Majesty," in the face of the particular enactment above quoted; which, indeed, seems to me to give to the mayor within his own borough precedence of a high sheriff of a county, if present on any public occasion. I am not aware that the sheriff of borough, as such, can "claim to have a grant of arms, if he has not any previous;" although I have no doubt he may readily obtain one, upon payment of the usual fees.