MB GOD

2 definitions found across Law Mind sources

MB GODAuthored
The Law Mind • 443 words
Definition
"MB GOD" does not appear to be a recognized legal term, doctrine, rule, or term of art in any common law, civil law, or statutory tradition. The fragment appearing in the source material under this heading is not a self-contained legal definition but rather a partial passage from Bouvier's Law Dictionary relating to the form of oath administered upon admission to the bar — specifically, a recommendation that a particular oath form be adopted across the states and territories, followed by a list of jurisdictions and a partial sentence regarding the moral content of bar admission oaths in remaining states. No legal definition, no legal concept, and no recognized usage of "MB GOD" as a legal term has been identified in any Law Mind source dictionary, treatise, encyclopedia, or corpus resource. ---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering "MB GOD" as a retrieval result, index entry, or search hit in the Law Mind corpus should treat it as a probable indexing artifact, OCR error, digitization anomaly, or misattributed heading rather than a substantive legal term. Historical legal dictionaries — Bouvier's included — were subject to printing errors, damaged source copies, imperfect OCR during digitization, and inconsistent editorial headings. Fragment entries of this kind can appear when page headers, running titles, section markers, or marginalia are mistakenly parsed as entry headwords. The substantive content associated with this fragment in Bouvier's concerns bar admission oaths, moral fitness requirements, and the jurisdictional variation in oath language across states and territories. Researchers interested in that subject matter should search directly under: OATH, ADMISSION TO THE BAR, ATTORNEY, or MORAL CHARACTER. ---
Historical Dictionary Support
The only source material available — Bouvier's Law Dictionary — contains no entry for "MB GOD" as a legal term. The text associated with this heading is a mid-sentence fragment addressing bar admission oaths and is almost certainly a misread header or digitization error. Bouvier's is otherwise a reliable and comprehensive source for 19th-century American legal terminology; this entry reflects a structural anomaly in source processing, not a gap in Bouvier's coverage. No other historical legal dictionary in the Law Mind corpus — Black's, Rapalje & Lawrence, Stroud's, or Wharton's — contains an entry under this designation. ---
Related Terms
OATH — the substantive subject of the associated fragment text ADMISSION TO THE BAR — the procedural context of the fragment MORAL CHARACTER — the fitness standard referenced in the partial passage ATTORNEY — the class of persons subject to bar admission oaths AFFIRMATION — the secular alternative to an oath; closely related in legal doctrine
MB GODmain
Bouvier's Law Dictionary • 1928
We commend this form of oath for adoption by the proper authorities in all the States and Territories. • Alabama, California, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. The oaths administered on admission to the Bar in all the other States require the observance of the highest moral principle in the practice of the profession, but the duties of the lawyer are not as specifically defined by law in the States named. [The foregoing foot-note was appended to the above form of Oath as published at the time of the adoption of the Canons of Professional Ethics in 1908. It does not indicate any subsequent changes of form or requirement of Oath by later State legislation.] Canons of Judicial Ethics: (Adopted by the American Bar Association at its Forty-Seventh Annual Meeting at Phila- delphia, Pennsylvania, on July 9, 1924.) [The committee of the American Bar Association, which prepared the Canons, was appointed in 1922, and composed of the following: William H. Taft, District of Columbia, Chairman; Leslie C. Cornish, Maine; Robert von Moschzisker, Pennsylvania; Charles A. Boston, New York, and Garret W. Me- Enerney, California. George Sutherland, of Utah, originally a member of the Committee, retired and was succeeded by Mr. McEnerney. In 1923, Frank M. Angellotti, of California, took the place of Mr. McEnerney.] Ancient Precedents. "And I charged your judges at that time, saying Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. "Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's; ard the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it."-Deuteronomy, I, 16-17. "Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift; for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous." -Deuteronomy, XVI, 19. "We will not make any justiciaries, constables, sheriffs or bailiffs, but from those who understand the law of the realm and are well disposed to observe it."-Magna Charta, XLV. "Judges ought to remember that their office is jus dicere not jus dare; to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law." "Judges ought to be more learned than witty; more reverend than plausible; pl and more advised than confident. Above all things, integrity is their portion and proper virtue." "Patience and gravity of hearing is an essential part of justice; and an over speaking judge is no well- tuned cymbal. It is no grace to a Judge first to find that which he might have heard in due time from the Bar, or to show quickness of conceit in cutting off evidence or counsel too short; or to prevent informa- tion by questions though pertinent." "The place of justice is a hallowed place; and therefore not only the Bench, but the foot pace and precincts and purprise thereof ought to be preserved without scandal and corruption." -Bacon'a Esay "of Judicature." Preamble. In addition to the Canons for Professional Conduct of Lawyers which it has formulated and adopted, the American Bar Association, mindful that the character and conduct of a judge should never be objects of indifference, and that declared ethical standards tend to become habits of life, deems it desirable to set forth ita views respecting those principles which should govern the personal practice of members of the Judiciary in the administration of their office. The Association accordingly adopts the following Canons, the spirit of which it suggests as a proper guide and reminder for judges, and as indicating what the people have a right to expect from them. 1. Relations of the Judiciary. The assumption of the office of judge casts upon the incumbent duties in respect to his personal cont which concern his relation to the state and its inhabi- tants, the litigants before him, the principles of law, the practitioners of law in his court, and the witnesses, Jurors and attendants who aid him in the administra- tion of its functions. 2. The Public Interest. Courts exist to promote justice, and thus to serve the public interest. Their administration should be speedy and careful. Every judge should at all times be alert in his rulings and in the conduct of the business of the court, so far as he can, to make it useful to litigants and to the community. He should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts instead of the courts for the litigants. 3. Constitutional Obligations. It is the duty of all judges in the United States to support the federal Constitution and that of the state whose laws they administer; in so doing, they should fearlessly observe and apply fundamental limitations and guarantees. 4. Avoidance of Impropriety. A judge's official conduct should be free from impr

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

SubscribeEncyclopediaSign In