may arise from the contemplated change in the Law of oaths. Yet still the change is not of so decided a kind as to prevent those who are ill-affected to the cause of God, from promoting much the old system, and from even biassing natives (if they choose) still to swear by their idolatrous abominations. The new Law will enable the truly good to do much good; but it cannot prevent the evil from doing much evil. We need therefore that every servant of God should still be at his post, and should still contend for the glory of his God. We shall here give the old Law and the new, that they may be compared with each other.

Regulation 50 of 1803.

SECTION V. The civil courts are directed by Section 6, of Regulation IV. 1793, to administer to parties and witnesses such oaths as may be considered most binding on their consciences according to their respective religious persuasions. The same rule is to be observed by the criminal courts; but in both, should a Hindu party or witness state objections to the usual form of swearing by water of the Ganges, copper, and toolsey: and offer to take any other form of oath, which on inquiry may be found legal and binding on the conscience of such party or witness, and which it may be practicable and convenient to administer to him, he shall be sworn accordingly. Provided that nothing herein shall be construed to authorize the administering of such oaths, described in the Hindu laws, as are of the nature of ordeals, and rest the proof of facts or the credibility of evidence on the immediate or future contingency of evil to the person sworn, his family, or property.

SECTION VI. Under the provision contained in the preceding section, and the exposition of the Mahommedan and Hindu laws, cited in the preamble to this regulation, the courts of justice, civil and criminal, are required to be circumspect in dispensing with the oaths of witnesses and not to admit, on his subscription to a declaration, the evidence of any person, whose rank and condition are not really such, as under the existing prejudice, would render it improper to compel him to take an oath.

"October 21, 1839.-The following Draft of a proposed Act was read in Council for the first time on the 21st October, 1839.

"ACT NO. OF 1839.

"An Act for the Examination of Native Witnesses.

"I. Whereas obstruction to justice has arisen, owing to the unwillingness of native witnesses to give testimony in consequence of their being compelled to be sworn upon the Koran, or by the water of the Ganges, or according to other forms which are repugnant to their consciences or feelings,

"It is hereby enacted, that no native witness shall be compellable in any Court of Justice to make oath or declaration otherwise than according to the following effect:

"I solemnly affirm and declare, in the presence of Almighty God, that I will faithfully and without partiality, answer make to all such questions as shall be demanded of me touching the matter now before the Court, which shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

"II. And it is hereby provided, that if any person making such affirmation or declaration shall be convicted of having wilfully and falsely affirmed or declared any matter or thing which if it had been sworn to previously to the passing of this Act, would have amounted to wilful perjury, every such offender shall be subject to the same pains, penalties and forfeitures to which persons convicted of wilful perjury were subject before the passing of this Act.

" III. And it is hereby provided, that this Act shall not extend to any proceeding in any of Her Majesty's Courts of Justice.

"Ordered, that the Draft now read be published for general infor

mation.

"Ordered, that the said Draft he reconsidered at the first Meeting of the Legislative Council after the 21st day of January, 1840.

"J. P. GRANT,

"Offy. Secy. to the Govt. of India." Now it will at once be perceived that the avowed difference between these two acts is this. (1.) That there is now proposed a general Form of pure oath to be used in Courts of Justice, in which appeal is to be made to ALMIGHTY GOD alone :-and (2.) That whilst formerly a native witness was compellable" to swear by Ganges, or Toolshi, he shall now be compellable to swear by no oath but the preceding. From this then it follows,

1. That a witness may still prefer an idolatrous oath; and that a Judge may still, if he please, yield to that preference, and cause the witness to be sworn by some idolatrous symbol as formerly.

2. That a witness may express a desire to have his oath administered by such idolatrous symbols as formerly ;-and that the Judge may refuse it, and compel him to swear by the new form of solemn affirmation.

3. That a witness may declare his preference for the new form; and the Judge, for some reason or other, may bias or confuse that witness as to his grounds of preference, and so induce him to claim or to receive the old or idolatrous form.

4. That both witness and Judge may agree in choosing the new and pure form :-as we hope, in most cases will be found to happen.

If these inferences be just, it is evident how much of the fruit of this improved measure will depend on the character of the presiding Judge or Magistrate-and therefore how im

portant it is that all right-minded men should be ready to perform their duty in this matter. They will have much in their power that they had not before; though their task will often be invidious, and may sometimes be painful, inasmuch as the Government shifts on them the onus of receiving or rejecting an idolatrous oath. How much better were it that our Legislative Body should at once require, what they cannot but admit to be best in principle, that no other oath shall be proposed or received than that which is proposed in the Act. This would simplify all procedure, and prevent much dissension and difference of practice among the servants of Government. Such a measure also could aggrieve no conscience, even on the principle of those who profess to contend for the "conscientious" idolatry, and "conscientious" superstition of India. For every man is of course left to think of God as he pleases-and if he connect with the pure name of the only God, false associations, he does so on his responsibility and with full liberty, in so far as the proposed oath is concerned. In fact there is no common ground of swearing, on which all parties can meet without the aggrievance of some conscience, but this. Councils and Judges may hunt about as much as they please, and contrive as long as they list, but they never will be able to discover any other method of securing judicial harmony, or magistratual efficiency, in oathadministration, than that which has been published for more than 2000 years in these words, "He that sweareth in the earth, let him swear by the God of Truth." This is the ordinance of the Almighty Governor; and no human device, no conventional prejudice, shall ever be able to overturn or supplant it. Let our rulers then at once place their act on the basis of eternal and inoffensive truth, and make the superstructure universal in its requirement. Let them give no choice but between either a pure oath or a solemn promise, without symbols or ceremonies;-and they will soon have to rejoice in their decision. God will be with them, and prosper their work, for it is written, "Them that honour me, I will honour." We formerly wrote concerning the preamble of the proposed Act; let what we have now said suffice concerning the enactment itself. Let those who have better and more direct influence than the pages of a magazine, contend for the further improvement of a measure whose present capacities for good or for evil are left but too dependent on the caprice of individuals;-which ought not to be permitted in any thing judicial.

In concluding these observations, we cannot refrain from expressing our gladness that the year 1839 has witnessed even

the proposal that the name of the Living and True God should be authoritatively proclaimed in the Courts of British India. This is a new day here, where Idols have so long sat in our judgment-seats. The very mention of that venerable and blessed Name in a "Draught Act" gives joy to our hearts, as God knoweth. Such a thing (we believe) is unexampled in our Indian history. May this streak of dawn redden and spread, until the "Sun of Righteousness" shall arise in our political horizon-Let the servants of God use that unseen, unknown and uncredited influence which they have before the Throne of Heaven, and their prayers will affect those to whom their persons are unknown, and by whom their sentiments when expressed would perchance be rejected. Christian brethren, let us constantly and earnestly pray that our Rulers and Councillors may be taught of God, and that they may serve Him who is "King of Kings and Lord of Lords !"

And let not our Missionary brethren think that what has been expended, in this Organ of their body, on the subject of the "Christian administration of Idolatrous oaths," has been without its bearing on their peculiar work. Whatever tends to take away causes of controversy between a Righteous God and a sinful world-between the King of Kings and the nations of the earth, helps on the mighty work of the conversion of men;-it takes away obstacles to the Spirit's effusion and the Redeemer's presence. The greatest hindrances to our Master's work, are his servants' sins; and has not a mistaken prudence, or a blind negligence, been one of those intercepting barriers before the Throne of the Eternal? Much cause have we for deep, deep, deep humiliation, that whilst for half a century our Judges, our Magistrates and our Rulers, our own countrymen, and our fellow-Christians in name, administered solemn oaths by the abominations of Baal and Ashtaroth, we cried not out, at any or every risk, "Shame! shame! eternal shame!" Let us now help on the cause of reformation with our whole might;-whatever concerns God, or India, concerns us ;-what pleases the former, what blesses the latter, is our privilege and happiness. We are the Lord's witnesses-let us bear the Lord's Testimony. Then the land, even this land, shall yield her increase; and God, even our own God, shall bless us !-TO HIM BE GLORY!

III.-Family Conversation and Domestic Education.

To the Editors of the Calcutta Christian Observer.

GENTLEMEN,

The enclosed Essay on Family Conversation and Education in England, is from the pen of a deceased young minister of considerable promise. It has already been circulated among the friends of the author; but its intrinsic value and clear exposition of a class of "evils of the Family," from which the kingdom of Christ is now suffering, and by which its onward progress is immensely retarded, is a strong reason why it should be more widely known. It is indeed distressing to reflect that a very large majority of the children of pious parents, walk not in the way of their fathers, but grow up into life as the servants of sin, and not as the people of God. We are perhaps scarcely aware how much of this may be the result of the parent's misconduct and mismanagement in the education of his offspring. On a subject therefore of so much importance, the following essay may be acceptable to many of your readers.

Z.

"The inhabitants of this country are, perhaps, beyond those of any other, remarkable for domestic habits. The spirit, therefore, that prevails in the assemblage of our family circles, must have a powerful influence on the formation of our national character. Among the different classes that make up the amount of English_population, the religious part of society is by far the most domestic. From their seclusion from the fashionable gaieties of the world, as well as from the direct operation of their principles, their families are more united, more frequently assembled together, aud more accustomed to free and intelligent conversation than any others. As the younger branches of such families are not schooled in the ball-room or the theatre, nor furnished with instruction from them, (and it is taken for granted that they are not,) then their first and strongest impressions must be derived from what they hear at home, and the spirit they imbibe there; and as the highest interests of our youth, the spirit of the next generation, and of our future churches, depend much on domestic conversation, it may be deemed a subject worthy of attention. Its importance will be easily recognized, and the evils arising from a want of attention to it, and improvements which may be made, should not be passed without regard. Conversation has been well denominated, "The feast of reason, and the flow of soul." The viands then of this feast should be wholesome and well selected, and while the soul flows, the channel should be good, since it must be wide; and the waters should be pure, because many will drink of the streams, and imbibe their qualities.

Every man who has been accustomed to watch the operations of his own mind, and who can retrace but a few of the causes which have combined to form his character, will attribute a very prominent share of influence to the conversations he was accustomed to hear in early life. There is no man, whose hours of childhood were spent in the domestic circle, but recollects some particular seasons of fire-side assemblage, some evenings in which he sat in the family group, listened