{"newspaper_name": "Mobile register and journal.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 862, "word_count": 153, "ccnet_language_score": [0.960099995136261], "ccnet_perplexity": [1289.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
OArHs.--la lately before the Supreme Court of New Jersey, the Chief Justice decided that indrcIHent could ie against man for perjury, provided ihe oath had been taken wIh upliied hand. IL was understood that the decision was made in conformity with satute if so of conrse, all right: But we perceive that writer in the Newark Ad- sertiser cricises ihe decison denies the existence of the statute, and declares that 'hcre are prececnts in hr practice ofothr Judges of lhe Supreme Court for the of the uplied hand in the oath We suppose il does not make much difference in Penn sy,ania, where forms perish, and with them muc, that hey served to sustain. Here, the ''corpora oath," and Ihe uphed hand are equal. We never saw the "Bhle used' m Court m Massachusetts and suppose lhe essence of an oath is the soemr promise before competent authoril. = Phil. U. S Gaz.