nently respectable portion of the community should be entitled to great weight. In some parts of Pennsylvania largely inhabited by members of the Society of Friends and their descendants, the affirmation is much more frequent than the oath, and one who swears is looked upon as of almost doubtful character. But the oath is not administered in a solemn and reverent manner-on the contrary it is administered on practically all occasions in a very light and irreverent manner. Even if one subscribes to the doctrine of the English church that swearing before magistrates is not forbidden by the Scriptures, and, therefore, has no scruples against it, yet such continual reference to the most sacred name surely can be thought of as little better than "vain and false swearing."

There is a final objection against the use of oaths which does not depend upon purely ethical considerations. There is a large class of persons who not only have conscientious scruples against swearing but also against administering oaths. This is particularly true of the Society of Friends. As a matter of fact Friends who maintain their standing in their society are to-day excluded from holding the offices of judge, magistrate, or any other office as a part of the duties of which they may be called upon to administer oaths. This is not true religious liberty. This is not consistent with the spirit of the constitution. If persons having conscientious scruples against administering oaths are capable of filling such offices creditably (and there can be no doubt of this) they and the community are both injured by a rule or custom which prevents them from becoming candidates. If William Penn the great founder of Pennsylvania were alive to-day he would be debarred from the office of judge or magistrate. The time surely has come when affairs secular and affairs religious should be separated finally, when the duties of civil office should be definitely severed from all questions which can affect the religious belief of a possible incumbent.

Legislation having for its purpose the abolition or modification of oaths has already been enacted in some States and countries. In Mexico the law is "The simple promise to tell the truth * * shall be substituted for the re

ligious oath in its effects and penalties." (Hall's Mex. Law, p. 1201.) In Maryland the oath has practically been abolished, as the present form omits all imprecatory words. (Pub. Stats. Art. I, Sec. 8.) In California all reference to the deity was abolished in their form of oath by a very recent act (Code Sec. 2094), although the code revision was declared unconstitutional for reasons which had nothing to do with the subject matter (134 Cal., 291).

The ideas of the great founder of Pennsylvania have been tested by time. Most of them although in his day deemed chimerical, have become a part of our every day experience. It was largely due to the beneficent influence of his wise and far-seeing statesmanship that Pennsylvania became the freest and most prosperous of the colonies-it laid the foundation of her power to take the lead in the momentous affairs of the nation as she has done. But the almost complete religious liberty which William Penn brought her, Pennsylvania lost through the interference of the churchmen of England and she has never fully regained it. If she will abolish the religious tests entirely, substituting in all cases the solemn affirmation for the oath, she will but restore the law as William Penn made it, and again prove her title to be, as to her measure of religious freedom, preeminent among the states.

ON THE JUDICIAL RECORDING OF TITLES

By CHARLES WETHERILL, Esq.

A perfect system of law would undoubtedly provide that, so far as possible, all estates in, rights to, and claims against land should be a matter of public record. In Pennsylvania this has only been partly done. Under the recording acts only deeds are recorded, while estates passing by will to devisees, by intestacy to heirs, dowagers and tenants by the curtesy; and also upon adverse possession or re-entry remain entirely in pais. Even as to deeds the recording acts are only a partial security to the purchaser: there being nothing to prevent a land owner from granting the same premises by various deeds leaving the several grantees to the recording act, which rewards the winner in the race to the office of the recorder; and it would be easy for any forger to record his forged deed or mortgage, and then destroy it and bring suit on a certified copy of the record, thus completely hiding the evidence of his forgery: and the dangers of defective acknowledgment, and of incomplete description add to the perils of the purchaser.

While the population was sparse and the value of land comparatively small, the inconveniences caused by this state of the law were not burdensome. In recent years the rapid increase in population, the fact that many of the people are foreigners, who are themselves unknown, and whose heirs often live in the various countries from which they emigrated, have been serious sources of danger to purchasers, and at the same time the increased activity of the market and the development of the landed resources has enormously increased the value of real estate in Pennsylvania, and added to the importance of the accurate identification of each

AL RECORDING OF TITLES

THERILL, Esq.

... v would un Joubtedly pro

all estates in, rights to, and d be a matter of public record. Sonly been partly done. Under ·eds are recorded, while estates intestacy to heirs, dowLe curtesy; and also upon y remain entirely in pa's. ading acts are only a partial there being nothing to pregranting the same premises by everal grantees to the record

the winer in the race to t'e ; and it would be easy for m forged ceed or mortgage, and then ing suit ca a certified copy of the mplete v loding the evidence of his f defective acl...owledgment. tion add to the perils of the

1

(:་