Sir William Menzies and Alexander Clerk, v. William Morison of Prestongrange
Date: 17 January 1712 Case No. No. 144.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Upon report of the Lord Bowhill, the Lords allowed Marini a Jew to be received a witness, because his religion doth not hinder him to swear our formula by God himself, &c. unless he were a Sadducee, who denies the Resurrection, and so could not depone “as he shall answer to God at the Great Day.”
Forbes, p. 570.*** Fountainhall reports this case:
A Jew being adduced as a witness in a certain cause, it was objected by the other party that he was inhabile in law, considering the rooted hatred they bear to all Christians. The Lords thought, if a Jew were led a witness in a cause betwixt a Christian and a Jew, there might be reason in that case to suspect him, but it being betwixt two Christians, his disowning Jesus Christ for the Messias could no more incapacitate him, than it would do a Socinian; our formula jurandi mentioning only God in the general; and though he will not swear on the New Testament, yet he will swear by Jehovah, on his Torah or the law of Moses. Yea, which is more, a Turk or a Pagan are capable; for in Captain Green's case for piracy, two Heathen boys were admitted; and if in criminals, why not in civil causes? It was also remembered, that the Queen had knighted Sir Solomon de Medina a Jew trading at London; and if capable of honours, why not of bearing testimony? And we allow Quakers to declare in their own way.
