m
wi
■
l i i i r
j j g
fi
jilp l
I F i
t|j
C L A I M S . B o o k XXIV .
been emancipated, and his mafter deny this, in that cafe (as the l aw
does not admit of a Mujfulman becoming a Have after having been once
free) the oath tendered to the mafter muft relate to the caufe-,— in
other words, he muft be required pofitively to fwear “ whether he
“ has ever emancipated this Have, or not?”— It is otherwife, however,
with refpedt to a female Mujfulman flave, or an in f del male (lave;
becaufe both of thefe may be again fubjedted to flavery after having
been rendered free;— the female flave, by being firft emancipated,
and then apoftatizing and being united to a hoftile country;— and the
male flave, by being firft emancipated, and then breaking hiscontradt
of fealty, and being united to a hoftile country.
If a perfon acquire a right to a flave by inheritance, and another
prefer a claim of right to the faid flave, in that cafe the bath of the defendant
muft relate to his knowledgef—that is, he muft be required to
fwear that he does not khow the flave in queftion to be the property of
the plaintiff;—becaufe not being acquainted with the adtsfof the perfon
from whom the inheritance defcends, he cannot abfolutely fwear
that the flave is not the property of the plaintiff;—whereas, if he had
acquired the flave by a g ift or purchaje, he could fwear pofitively as
to his right of property, fince pur chafe and gift are both caufes of a
right of property.
In a cafe o f
inheritance,
the path o f
the defendant
muft relate
to his
knontdledve.
when a de- I f a perfon prefer a claim againft another, and the defendant deny
tersdLntoT it, but fhould afterwards give the plaintiff ten dirms, either as an ex-
compoiition piation for his oath, or as a compofition for it, fuch expiation or com-
plaintiff, an pofition is, valid; becaufe it has been fo related by Omar; and the plain-
afth rwaX b e tiff cannot afterwards demand an oath from the defendant, as having
■ M jiM h im f e lf deftroyed this right.
exacted from
him.
C H A P
C H A P . III.
Tahdlif; or the fwearing of both the "Plaintiff and
the Defejidant.
I f a feller and purchafer fhould difagree, the pUrchafer afferting that
the price of the goods was an hundred dirms, and the feller, that it was
more,— or, if the feller fhould acknowledge the article fold to be fo
much, and the purchafer aflert that it was more,— in this cafe, if either
of them adduce evidence in fupport of his aflertion, the Kazee muft
pafs a decree in his favour; becaufe.atteftation is ftronger than Ample
aflertion.— If, on the other hand, both of them fhould adduce evidence
in fupport of their refpedtive aflertions, then the evidence of the
patty’that attefts m.oft muft be admitted; becaufe. the,object of evidence
is proof; and with refpedt to the excefs, there is no oppofition of
evidence.— I f the feller and purchafer fhould difagree with refpedt
both to the price and the goods, then the evidence of the feller with
refpedt to the price is preferable; and the evidence o f the purchafer
is preferable with refpedt to the goods. If, however, both parties be
deftitute of evidence, then the Kazee muft fay to the purchafer “ i f
“ you acquiefce in the price claimed by the feller, it is well; if not,
“ I will diflolve the c o n t r a d t a n d to the feller, “ i f you are qon-
“ tented to yield the quantity of goods claimed by the purchafer,, it is
“ Well; if not, I will diflolve the contradt;”— becaufe the objedt is
to terminate the contention; and it is probable that his thus addreffin^
them may terminate the contention, fince the parties may poflibly be
averfe to breaking off the contradt ; when, therefore, they perceiv^
that if they do not agree, the contradt will be broken, they may. be
M 2 content
A feller and
purchafer arc
mutually to
fwear where
they both d if.
agree, and
are deftitute
of-evidence.