RULES OF INTERPRETATION 163

An Code, 1924, sec 10 1912, sec 9 1904, sec 9 1896, ch 113 1898, ch 75

10 The form of Judicial and all other oaths to be taken or administered
in this State, and not prescribed by the Constitution, shall be as follows:
"In the presence of Almighty God I do solemnly promise or declare, " etc.
And it shall not be lawful to add to any oath the words "So help me God, "
or any imprecatory words whatever

A mortgage sale will not be set aside because the tax affidavits to the assignments of
mortgage state that the affiant "made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God
and in due form of law", surplusage Tolson v Williams, 136 Md 616

An Code, 1924, sec 11 1912, sec 10 1904, sec 10 1896, ch 113 1898, ch 75

11. The manner of administering oaths shall be by requiring the per-
son making the same to hold up his hand in token of his recognition of the
solemnity of the act, except in those cases wherein this form is not prac-
ticable, or when it shall appear that some other mode is more binding upon
the conscience of the swearer.
See notes to sec 10

An Code, 1924, sec 12 1912, sec 11 1904, sec 11 1888, sec 9

12 The boundaries and limits of each of the counties of this State
and of the city of Baltimore shall remain as now established.
See art 75, sec 160, et seq

An Code, 1924, sec 13 1912, sec 12 1904, sec 12 1888, sec 10

13 Where the public general law and the public local law of any
county, city, town or district are in conflict, the public local law shall

prevail.

The general law as to assessment for taxation held to prevail over the general terms
of the charter of Hyattsville covering assessments Hyattsville held to have no power
to assess personal property of the C & P Telephone Company See notes to art 81,
secs 6 and 175 Hyattsville v C & P Tel Co, 131 Md 599

This section does not remove a public local law from ordinary rules of construction,
it applies to general and local laws adopted by the Code, but as to subsequent legis-
lation, it does not alter the common law rules of construction Alexander v Baltimore,
53 Md 100 See also State v Falkenham, 73 Md 466

This section applied McCracken v State, 71 Md 150, Ex Parte Tax Sale, 42 Md 200,
Albert v White, 33 Md 304, Hammond v Haines, 25 Md 558

For cases in which there was held to be no conflict, see Cooper v Holmes, 71 Md 20,
Snowden v State, 69 Md 208, Baltimore County v Baker, 44 Md 9

Cited but not construed in Weber v State, 116 Md 410 State v Baltimore County,
29 Md 520

An Code, 1924, sec 14 1912, sec 13 1904, sec 13 1888, sec 11.

14. The word county shall be construed to include the city of Baltimore,
unless such construction would be unreasonable.

This section applied Frederick County v Frederick City, 88 Md 659, Chappell v
Lacy, 77, Md 173

See art 75, sec 181

This section referred to in construing art 27, sec 560 Callan v State, 156 Md 459

An Code, 1924, sec 15 1912, sec 14 1904, sec 14 1888, sec 12 1888, ch 36

15. The word person shall include corporation, unless such a construc-
tion would be unreasonable

In the light of this section, the mayor and city council of Baltimore is included in
the word "persons, " as used in sec 237 of the city charter in conferring the right of
jury trial Patterson v Baltimore, 127 Md 237

Art 23, sec 219, Code 1912, relating to licenses of insurance brokers, held not to
apply to corporations, the rule of construction announced in this section cannot over-
ride the legislative intent Shehan v. Tanenbaum, Son & Co, 121 Md 286, State Tax
Commission v Harrington, 126 Md 168, Keller v State, 122 Md 682