,,the ,,true ,,story ,,of ,,my ,,parliamentary ,,struggle4 ,,by ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 ,illustration ,,london3 ,,freethought ,,publishing ,,company1 #bh1 ,,stonecutter ,,street1 ,e4,c4 #ahhb4 ,,price ,,sixpence ,,london3 ,,printed ,,by ,,annie ,,besant ,,and ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 #bh1 ,,stonecutter ,,street1 ,e4,c4 ,so much misapprehension and misrepresentation prevails as to what has really taken place in the ,house of ,commons with reference to my ,parliamentary struggle1 that ,i reprint the ,report of the ,second ,select ,committee and the ,evidence taken before such ,committee1 together with my three speeches at the bar and the resolutions of the ,house3 these together giving the actual facts4 ,ordered1--,tuesday1 #beth ,may #ahhj3--,,that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 the ,member for ,northampton1 having claimed at the ,table of this ,house to make an ,affirmation or ,declaration instead of the ,oath prescribed by ,law1 founding his claim upon the terms of the ,act #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts of #ahfi and #ahgj1 and stating that he had been permitted to affirm in ,courts of ,justice by virtue of the said ,evidence ,amendment ,acts3 ,and it having been referred to a ,select ,committee to consider and report their opinion whether persons entitled1 under the provisions of the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahgj1 to make a solemn ,declaration instead of an ,oath in ,courts of ,justice1 may be admitted to make an ,affirmation or ,declaration instead of an ,oath in this ,house1 in pursuance of the ,acts #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and #ca #cb ,vict4 c4 #gb2 ,and the said ,committee having reported that in their opinion such persons cannot be admitted to make an ,affirmation or ,declaration1 instead of an ,oath in pursuance of the said ,acts3 ,and ,mr4 ,bradlaugh having since come to the ,table of the ,house for the purpose of taking the ,oath prescribed by the #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and the #ca #cb ,vict4 c4 #gb1 and objection having been made to his taking the said ,oath1 it be referred to a ,select ,committee to inquire into and consider the facts and circumstances under which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claims to have the ,oath prescribed by the #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and #ca #cb ,vict4 c4 #gb1 administered to him in this ,house1 and also as to the ,law applicable to such claim under such circumstances1 and as to the right and jurisdiction of this ,house to refuse to allow the said form of the ,oath to be administered to him1 and to report thereon to the ,house1 together with their opinion thereon4 ,ordered1--,friday1 #bhth ,may #ahhj3--,,that the ,committee do consist of twenty-three ,members4 ,committee nominated of-- ,mr4 ,whitbread4 ,sir ,john ,holker4 ,mr4 ,john ,bright4 ,lord ,henry ,lennox4 ,mr4 ,massey4 ,mr4 ,staveley ,hill4 ,sir ,henry ,jackson4 ,mr4 ,attorney ,general4 ,mr4 ,solicitor ,general4 ,sir ,gabriel ,goldney4 ,mr4 ,grantham4 ,mr4 ,pemberton4 ,mr4 ,watkin ,williams4 ,mr4 ,walpole4 ,mr4 ,hopwood4 ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope4 ,major ,nolan4 ,mr4 ,chaplin4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,simon4 ,mr4 ,secretary ,childers4 ,mr4 ,trevelyan4 ,sir ,richard ,cross4 ,mr4 ,gibson4 ,,that the ,committee have power to send for ,persons1 ,papers1 and ,records4 ,,that ,five be the ,quorum of the ,committee4 ,,report4 ,,the ,,select ,,committee appointed to inquire into and consider the facts and circumstances under which ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh claims to have the ,,oath prescribed by the #bi #cj ,vict41 c4 #ai1 and #ca and #cb ,vict41 c4 #gb1 administered to him in this ,house2 and also as to the ,,law applicable to such claim under such circumstances2 and as to the right and jurisdiction of this ,house to refuse to allow the said form of the ,,oath to be administered to him2 and to ,report thereon to the ,house1 together with their ,opinion thereon3--,,have agreed to the following ,,report3-- ,in pursuance of the terms of the reference to your ,committee1 they have inquired into and considered 7#a7 the facts and circumstances under which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claims to have the oath prescribed by the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act1 #ahff1 and the ,promissory ,oaths ,act1 #ahfh1 administered to him in the ,house1 7#b7 the ,law applicable to such claim under such circumstances1 and 7#c7 the right and jurisdiction of the ,house to refuse to allow the form of the said ,oath to be administered to him4 ,in order to carry out such inquiry and consideration1 your ,committee thought it right to examine ,sir ,t4 ,erskine ,may as a witness before them4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh applied to be permitted to make a statement to your ,committee1 and the application was granted4 ,after such statement had been made by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 he submitted himself for examination1 and was examined by any ,members of your ,committee who desired to put questions to him4 ,under the circumstances appearing in the ,evidence and in the ,appendix to this ,report1 your ,committee admitted in evidence a letter written by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to certain newspapers1 dated #bjth ,may1 #ahhj4 ,all the evidence taken by your ,committee appears in the ,appendix to this ,report4 ,facts of the ,case4 ,the facts and circumstances under which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claimed to take and subscribe the ,oath are as follow3 ,on ,monday1 the #crd of ,may1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh came to the ,table of the ,house and claimed to be allowed to affirm1 as a person for the time being by law permitted to make a solemn affirmation instead of taking an oath2 and on being asked by the ,clerk upon what grounds he claimed to make an affirmation1 he said that he did so by virtue of the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj4 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,speaker informed ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 that if he desired to address the ,house in explanation of his claim1 he might be permitted to do so4 ,in accordance with ,mr4 ,speaker's intimation1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh stated shortly that he relied on the ,evidence ,further ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahgj1 adding1 ,i have repeatedly1 for nine years past1 made an affirmation in the highest courts of jurisdiction in this realm2 ,i am ready to make such a declaration or affirmation4 ,thereupon ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted the ,house that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh having made such claim1 he did not consider himself justified in determining it2 and having grave doubts on the construction of the ,acts above stated1 he desired to refer the matter to the judgment of the ,house4 ,thereupon a ,select ,committee was appointed to consider and report their opinion whether persons entitled1 under the provisions of the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj1 to make a solemn declaration instead of an oath in courts of justice1 might be admitted to make an affirmation or declaration instead of an oath1 in pursuance of the ,acts #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and #ca #cb ,vict4 c4 #gb2 and on the #bjth of ,may the ,committee reported that1 in their opinion1 persons so entitled could not be admitted to make such affirmation or declaration instead of an oath in the ,house of ,commons4 ,on the day after the receipt of this ,report1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh presented himself at the table of the ,house to take and subscribe the ,oath2 and was proceeding to do so1 when ,sir ,henry ,drummond ,wolff1 one of the ,members for ,portsmouth1 objected thereto1 and ,mr4 ,bradlaugh having been ordered to withdraw1 ,sir ,h4 ,d4 ,wolff moved1 ,that1 in the opinion of the ,house1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 the ,member for ,northampton1 ought not to be allowed to take the ,oath which he then required to be administered to him1 in consequence of his having previously claimed to make an affirmation or declaration instead of the ,oath prescribed by law1 founding his claim upon the terms of the ,act #bi #cj ,vict4 c4 #ai1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts of #ahfi and #ahgj2 and on the ground that under the provisions of those ,acts the presiding judge at a trial has been satisfied that the taking of an oath would have no binding effects on his conscience4 ,this ,motion was superseded by an ,amendment appointing your ,committee4 ,the ,law ,applicable to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's ,claim4 ,your ,committee have been furnished by ,sir ,t4 ,erskine ,may with a list of precedents which illustrate the jurisdiction and proceedings of the ,house in regard to the taking of ,oaths4 ,these precedents1 and others which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh placed before your ,committee as bearing on the case1 will be found in the ,appendix to this ,report4 ,they may generally be divided into three classes3 first1 cases of refusal to take the ,oath2 secondly1 claims to make an ,affirmation1 instead of taking the ,oath2 and1 thirdly1 claims to omit a portion of the ,oath of ,abjuration4 ,among them there is no precedent of any ,member coming to the table to take and subscribe the ,oath1 who has not been allowed to do so1 nor of any ,member coming to the table and intimating expressly1 or by necessary implication1 that an oath would not1 as an oath1 be binding on his conscience4 ,the present case is1 therefore1 one of first impression4 ,now there is not only a prima facie right1 but it is the duty of every ,member who has been duly elected to take and subscribe the ,oath1 or to affirm according to the ,statute4 ,no instance has been brought to the attention of your ,committee in which any inquiry has been made into the moral1 religious1 or political opinion of the person who was desirous to take any ,promissory ,oath1 or of any objection being made to his taking such ,oath4 ,it would be impossible to foresee the evils which might arise if a contrary practice were sanctioned4 ,but the question remains whether1 if a ,member when about to take the ,oath should voluntarily make statements as to the binding effect of the ,oath on his conscience1 it is not within the power of the ,house to take such statements into consideration1 and determine whether such member would1 if he went through the form of taking the ,oath1 be duly taking it within the provisions of the ,statute4 ,in the present instance1 when ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claimed under the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,acts his right to affirm1 and also stated that he had on several occasions been permitted in a ,court of ,justice to affirm1 and had affirmed under the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj1 he thereby in effect informed the ,house that on such occasions a judge of such court had been satisfied that an oath would have no binding effect upon his conscience4 ,your ,committee did not think it right to accept this implication as conclusive without permitting ,mr4 ,bradlaugh an opportunity of making a statement to1 and giving evidence before1 them4 ,nothing that has come before your ,committee has affected or altered their views as to the effect of that which occurred when ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claimed to affirm1 as above stated4 ,as to the ,right and ,jurisdiction of the ,house4 ,as to the right and jurisdiction of the ,house to refuse to allow the form of the ,oath prescribed to be taken by duly elected ,members to be taken by them1 your ,committee are of opinion that there is and must be an inherent power in the ,house to require that the law by which the proceedings of the ,house and of its ,members in reference to the taking of the ,parliamentary ,oath is regulated1 be duly observed4 ,but this does not imply that there is any power in the ,house to interrogate any ,member desirous to take the ,oath of ,allegiance upon any subject in connection with his religious belief1 or as to the extent the ,oath will bind his conscience2 or that there is any power in the ,house to hear any evidence in relation to such matters4 ,and your ,committee are of opinion that by and in making the claim to affirm1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh voluntarily brought to the notice of the ,house that on several occasions he had been permitted in a ,court of ,justice to affirm1 under the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj1 in order to enable him to do which a ,judge of the ,court must have been satisfied that an ,oath was not binding upon ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's conscience2 and1 as he stated he had acted upon such decisions by repeatedly making the ,affirmation in ,courts of ,justice2 and1 as above stated1 nothing has appeared before your ,committee to cause them to think ,mr4 ,bradlaugh dissented from the correctness of such decisions1 your ,committee are of opinion that1 under the circumstances1 the compliance by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh with the form used when an oath is taken would not be the taking of an ,oath within the true meaning of the ,statutes #bi ,vict4 c4 #ai4 and #ca #cb ,vict4 c4 #gb2 and1 therefore1 that the ,house can1 and in the opinion of your ,committee ought1 to prevent ,mr4 ,bradlaugh going through this form4 ,but your ,committee desire to point out to your ,honorable ,house the position in which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh will be placed if he is not allowed either to take the ,oath or to affirm4 ,if the ,house of ,commons prevent a duly elected ,member from taking the ,oath or ,affirming1 there is no power of reviewing or reversing that decision1 however erroneous it may be in point of law4 ,but it appears to your ,committee that if a ,member should make and subscribe the ,affirmation in place of taking and subscribing the ,oath1 it would be possible1 by means of an action brought in the ,high ,court of ,justice1 to test his legal right to make such ,affirmation4 ,the ,committee appointed to inquire into the law relating to the right of certain persons to affirm in effect recorded that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was not entitled by law to make the ,affirmation4 ,but1 from the fact that this ,report was carried by the vote of the ,chairman1 thus showing a great division of opinion amongst the members of that ,committee1 the state of the law upon the subject cannot be regarded as satisfactorily determined4 ,under these circumstances it appears to your ,committee that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh should have an opportunity of having his statutory rights determined beyond doubt by being allowed to take the only step by which the legality of his making an ,affirmation can be brought for decision before the ,high ,court of ,justice4 ,the ,house1 by an exercise of its powers1 can1 doubtless1 prevent ,mr4 ,bradlaugh from obtaining such judicial decision2 but your ,committee deprecate that course4 ,your ,committee accordingly recommend that should ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again seek to make and subscribe the ,affirmation he be not prevented from so doing4 #af ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,list ,,of ,,witnesses4 ,wednesday1 #bnd ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,sir ,,thomas ,,erskine ,,may1 ,k4,c4,b4 ,,mr4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 ,m4,p4 ,monday1 #gth ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,mr4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 ,m4,p4 ,,minutes ,,of ,,evidence4 ,wednesday1 #bnd ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,members ,,present3 ,mr4 ,attorney ,general4 ,mr4 ,john ,bright4 ,mr4 ,childers4 ,sir ,richard ,cross4 ,mr4 ,gibson4 ,sir ,gabriel ,goldney4 ,mr4 ,grantham4 ,mr4 ,staveley ,hill4 ,sir ,john ,holker4 ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope4 ,mr4 ,hopwood4 ,sir ,henry ,jackson4 ,lord ,henry ,lennox4 ,mr4 ,massey4 ,major ,nolan4 ,mr4 ,pemberton4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,simon4 ,mr4 ,solicitor ,general4 ,mr4 ,trevelyan4 ,mr4 ,walpole4 ,mr4 ,whitbread4 ,mr4 ,watkin ,williams4 ,the ,right ,honorable ,,spencer ,,horatio ,,walpole in the ,chair4 ,sir ,,thomas ,,erskine ,,may1 ,k4,c4,b42 ,examined4 #a4 ,,chairman3 ,you are the ,clerk of the ,house of ,commons8--,i am4 #b4 ,you1 ,i believe1 are perfectly acquainted with what took place when ,mr4 ,bradlaugh came to the table of the ,house1 and proposed to make his affirmation instead of taking the oath8--,yes1 ,i was personally present on that day4 #c4 ,will you have the kindness to state to the ,committee exactly what took place on that occasion1 in order that we may have the facts upon our proceedings8--,i will read what occurred1 mainly from the ,votes and ,proceedings of the ,house1 in which an accurate and authentic record of the proceedings of that day will be found4 ,it appears that on ,monday the #crd of ,may1 #ahhj1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 returned as one of the ,members for the borough of ,northampton1 came to the table and delivered the following statement in writing to the ,clerk3 ',to the ,right ,honorable the ,speaker of the ,house of ,commons4 ,i1 the undersigned ,charles ,bradlaugh1 beg respectfully to claim to be allowed to affirm1 as a person for the time being by law permitted to make a solemn affirmation or declaration1 instead of taking an oath4 7,signed7 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4' ,and being asked by the ,clerk upon what grounds he claimed to make an affirmation1 he answered3 ,by virtue of the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj4 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported to ,mr4 ,speaker1 that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 ,member for the borough of ,northampton1 claimed to make an affirmation or declaration instead of taking the ,oath prescribed by law1 in virtue of the provisions of the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj4 ,mr4 ,speaker thereupon informed ,mr4 ,bradlaugh that if he desired to address the ,house in explanation of his claim he might be permitted to do so4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh addressed the ,house in accordance with ,mr4 ,speaker's intimation1 and then he was directed to withdraw4 ,the ,committee will observe that there is no entry in the ,votes of the words used by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh2 it is not customary on such occasions to make an entry of the observations made1 which are considered to be part of the debates of the ,house1 which are not recorded in the ,votes and ,proceedings2 and there was no shorthand writer authorised by the ,house to take notes1 and therefore there could have been no authentic record upon which one could rely4 #d4 ,have you any reason to believe that something was said upon that occasion by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh other than what appeared upon the ,votes8--,mr4 ,bradlaugh's observations were very short4 ,he repeated that he relied upon the ,evidence ,further ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahgj1 adding1 ,i have repeatedly1 for nine years past1 made an affirmation in the highest courts of jurisdiction in this realm2 ,i am ready to make such a declaration or affirmation4 ,substantially those were the words which he addressed to the ,speaker4 #e4 ,what took place after that8--,whereupon ,mr4 ,speaker addressed the ,house as follows3 ,i have now formally to acquaint the ,house that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 ,member for the borough of ,northampton1 claims to make an affirmation or declaration instead of the oath prescribed by law4 ,he founds this claim upon the terms of the #dth clause of the ,act #bi and #cj ,vict41 c4 #ai1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj4 ,i have not considered myself justified in determining this claim myself1 having grave doubts on the construction of the ,acts above stated1 but desire to refer the matter to the judgment of the ,house4 #f4 ,that is substantially all that took place upon that occasion8--,i presume the ,committee will scarcely desire that ,i should proceed through all the subsequent ,votes of the ,house in regard to the appointment of the ,committees4 #g4 ,there is nothing beyond what you have stated which is material for the ,committee to consider8--,no1 nothing besides what happened on that day in reference to this matter4 #h4 ,you are1 of course1 acquainted with the terms of the reference to this ,committee4--,yes4 #i4 ,what were the proceedings which took place after the ,report of the former ,committee8--,the ,report of the ,committee was ordered to lie upon the table1 and no further proceedings were taken upon it2 it lies upon the table at present4 #aj4 ,mr4 ,,gibson3 ,on what day was it laid upon the table8--,on the #bjth of ,may1 the day on which the ,house assembled for business4 #aa4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,i think some of the members of the ,committee would like to have some account of what took place in the interval between the time when ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claimed to make the affirmation1 and the time when he appeared at the table to take the ,oath8--,mr4 ,bradlaugh presented himself at the table to be sworn on the #bast of ,may1 the day after the receipt of the ,report from the ,committee2 and if the ,committee would desire it1 ,i can read from the ,minutes what took place upon that occasion4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 returned as one of the ,members for the borough of ,northampton1 came to the table to take and subscribe the ,oath1 and the ,clerk was proceeding to administer the same to him1 when ,sir ,henry ,drummond ,wolff1 ,member for ,portsmouth1 rose to take objection thereto1 and submit a motion to the ,house2 whereupon ,mr4 ,speaker directed ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to withdraw4 ,and then1 as the ,committee are aware1 several proceedings occurred1 which extended over some days3 the ,committee will scarcely desire them to be read4 #ab4 ,,chairman3 ,those proceedings are really stated in the ,order of ,reference to this ,committee8--,yes4 #ac4 ,mr4 ,,gibson3 ,at what date did this ,parliament meet for the first time8--,on ,thursday1 the #bith of ,april4 #ad4 ,and on what day did ,mr4 ,bradlaugh claim to make the affirmation8--,on ,monday1 the #crd of ,may4 #ae4 ,the swearing of ,members had been going on in the meantime1 had it not8--,the swearing of ,members began on ,friday1 the #cjth of ,april4 #af4 ,you are acquainted with ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's appearance2 are you yourself aware whether he had been in the ,house during the swearing of ,members on any of the intervening days8--,he had been about the ,house1 unquestionably4 #ag4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,,simon3 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was present1 ,i believe1 and voted when the ,speaker was elected8--,yes2 none of the members had then been sworn4 #ah4 ,,chairman3 ,since this ,committee has been appointed have you made a search into the ,journals of the ,house for any precedents which bear upon the question before the ,committee8--,yes1 ,i directed the ,clerk of the ,journals to make a search for every precedent which would tend to illustrate the jurisdiction and proceedings of the ,house in regard to the taking of oaths4 #ai4 ,what is the result of the search8--,the result of that search is the paper which is upon the table to-day1 and in the hands of all the ,members of the ,committee4 #bj4 ,i see that one of those is a precedent of a ,member disabled for having sat in the ,house without taking the ,oath2 then there is a precedent of a ,member being admitted to sit without taking the ,oath of ,allegiance and ,supremacy2 then there are precedents of ,members being discharged for declining to take the ,oath2 then there is a precedent of a ,member1 being a ,quaker1 refusing to take the ,oath2 then there is a precedent of a ,member expelled for absconding1 and not taking the ,oath2 then there is a precedent of a ,member refusing to take the ,oath of ,supremacy2 then there is a precedent of a ,member1 being a ,quaker1 claiming to make an affirmation2 then there are precedents of ,members omitting the words in the ,oath of ,abjuration1 on the true faith of a ,christian2 and lastly1 the precedent of a ,member stating that he had a conscientious objection to take the ,oath4 ,i should like to ask whether there is any precedent amongst those of a member coming to the table and stating that he was ready to take the ,oath1 and any objection being taken to him in consequence of that statement8--,no1 there is no precedent to that effect1 unless it might be argued that the case of ,mr4 ,o',connell1 in #ahbi1 was1 to a certain extent1 analogous4 ,he claimed1 as the ,committee are aware1 to take the ,oath recently provided by the ,catholic ,relief ,act1 and which1 he contended1 was the oath that he was entitled to take2 it was a question of law whether that was the oath which he could take4 #ba4 ,in that case he refused to take the old oath1 and he offered to take the new oath under the ,catholic ,relief ,act8--,that is so4 #bb4 ,and the ,house refused1 ,i believe1 to allow him to take that oath8--,that was the case4 ,i may state briefly that these precedents may generally be divided into three classes3 first1 cases of refusal to take the oath2 secondly1 claims to make an affirmation instead of taking the oath2 and thirdly1 claims to omit a portion of the ,oath of ,abjuration4 ,with one or two exceptional cases1 those three classes comprehend all the cases which have been laid before the ,committee4 #bc4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,i should like to ask upon that whether the case of ,daniel ,o',connell was not a case of absolute refusal by the ,member to take the oath required by law8--,i think the best way will be1 perhaps1 to read the precedent from this paper1 and then any inference can be drawn from it4 ,it is at page #e4 ,precedent of ,member refusing to take the ,oath of ,supremacy2 ,daniel ,o',connell1 ,esq41 professing the ,roman ,catholic religion1 returned knight of the shire for the county of ,clare1 being introduced in the usual manner1 for the purpose of taking his seat1 produced at the table a certificate of his having been sworn before two of the deputies appointed by the ,lord ,stewart1 whereupon the ,clerk tendered to him the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration2 upon which ,mr4 ,o',connell stated that he was ready to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,abjuration1 but that he could not take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 and claimed the privilege of being allowed to take the oath set forth in the ,act passed in the present ,session of ,parliament 'for the relief of ,his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic subjects'2 whereupon the ,clerk having stated the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 ,mr4 ,speaker informed ,mr4 ,o',connell that1 according to his interpretation of the law1 it was incumbent upon ,mr4 ,o',connell to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy and ,abjuration1 and that the provisions of the new act applied only to ,members returned after the commencement of the said ,act1 except in so far as regarded the repeal of the declaration against transubstantiation2 ,and that ,mr4 ,o',connell must withdraw unless he were prepared to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration4 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,o',connell withdrew4 ,motion1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell be called back and heard at the table4 ,debate arising1 a ,member stated that he was requested by ,mr4 ,o',connell to desire that he might be heard4 ,debate adjourned4 ,resolved1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell1 the ,member for ,clare1 be heard at the bar1 by himself1 his counsel or agents1 in respect of his claim to sit and vote in ,parliament without taking the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,mr4 ,o',connell was called in and heard accordingly3 and being withdrawn2 ,resolved1 ,that it is the opinion of this ,house that ,mr4 ,o',connell1 having been returned a ,member of this ,house before the commencement of the ,act passed in this ,session of ,parliament 'for the relief of ,his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic subjects1' is not entitled to sit or vote in this ,house unless he first take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,ordered1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell do attend the ,house this day1 and that ,mr4 ,speaker do then communicate to him the said resolution1 and ask him whether he will take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,and the ,house being informed that ,mr4 ,o',connell attended at the door1 he was called to the ,bar1 and ,mr4 ,speaker communicated to him the resolution of the ,house of yesterday1 and the order thereon1 as followeth4 ,then the resolution and the order are repeated4 ,and then ,mr4 ,speaker1 pursuant to the said order1 asked ,mr4 ,o',connell whether he would take the said ,oath of ,supremacy8 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,o',connell requested to see the said ,oath1 which being shown to him accordingly1 ,mr4 ,o',connell stated that the said ,oath contained one proposition which he knew to be false1 and another proposition which he believed to be untrue2 and that he therefore refused to take the said ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,and then ,mr4 ,o',connell was directed to withdraw1 and he withdrew accordingly2 and then a new writ was ordered4 #bd4 ,mr4 ,,john ,,bright3 ,were those oaths separate oaths8--,yes1 they were three separate oaths4 #be4 ,and they require three separate acts in taking them8--,yes4 #bf4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,i think the result is that the ,house first determined that the ,oath of ,supremacy which ought to be taken by ,mr4 ,o',connell was the old oath1 and not the oath under the ,catholic ,relief ,act8--,clearly4 #bg4 ,and having determined that it was the old oath that required to be taken1 ,mr4 ,o',connell refused to take it8--,certainly4 #bh4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,have you searched for any precedent affecting the taking of the oath by a ,member alleged to be disqualified or ineligible2 has your attention been called to the case of ,john ,horne ,tooke1 in ,volume #ce of ,parliamentary ,history1 in the year #ahja1 commencing at page #ief8--,not in respect of any question relating to oaths3 it is not amongst these precedents4 #bi4 ,as a fact1 was ,mr4 ,john ,horne ,tooke's capacity to sit in the ,house challenged in this case8--,yes1 as being in ,holy ,orders1 but not in relation to any question of taking the oath4 #cj4 ,the next question that ,i have to ask is whether your attention has been called to the case of the alleged ineligibility of ,francis ,bacon1 the ,king's ,attorney ,general1 in #afad1 cited in the ,commons ,journal1 ,volume ,i41 pp4 #dei and #dfj8--,no1 my attention has not been directed to any questions of incapacity3 it has been confined to questions arising out of the taking of the oaths prescribed by law4 #ca4 ,there is one other question that ,i should like to ask1 and that is whether your attention has been called to any case in which the ,house has discussed and dealt with the election of a ,member1 before that ,committee was sworn8--,with regard to the ,jews1 that would apply to ,baron ,rothschild and to ,alderman ,salomons4 #cb4 ,i do not mean a case of a ,member refusing to be sworn1 but a case in which the ,house has dealt with the election before the ,member had been sworn2 has your attention been called to that8--,no4 #cc4 ,there is one case1 the case of ,john ,wilkes2 the cases of ,o',donovan ,rossa and ,mitchell were cases of legal disability2 has your attention been called to any case in which the ,house has dealt with the election of a ,member before he was sworn except for statutory disability8--,sir ,john ,leedes sat in the ,house without having taken the ,oath1 and therefore he had clearly vacated his seat1 and a new writ was issued4 #cd4 ,i mean a case in which the ,member has not been sworn1 and in which there has been a discussion upon his eligibility outside the precedents which you have handed in2 ,i refer to the case of ,john ,wilkes1 which is to be found in #ch ,commons ,journals1 p4 #igg1 and ,cavendish's ,parliamentary ,debates1 ,volume ,i41 extending over many hundred pages1 commencing at #hbg4 ,may ,i ask ,sir ,erskine ,may whether the practice has not been that when a ,member appears to take the ,oaths within the limited time1 all other business is immediately to cease and not to be resumed until he has sworn and has subscribed the roll8--,that was the old practice1 but it has been superseded by a recent ,standing ,order under the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act of #ahff1 and the rule is now different2 ,members can be sworn until the commencement of public business and afterwards2 but no debate or business may be interrupted for that purpose4 #ce4 ,that is not quite the question that ,i wish to put2 the question that ,i wish to put is whether it is not now and has not always been the practice of the ,house that within a limited time1 whatever that time may be1 if a ,member appears to take the oaths all other business is immediately to cease and not to be resumed until he has been sworn and has subscribed the ,roll8--,that was the old practice1 when the oaths were required to be taken before four o'clock1 but it has since been altered4 ,this is the present ,standing ,order under which the oaths are administered1 and this order was made in pursuance of the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act of #ahff3 ,that ,members may take and subscribe the ,oath required by law at any time during the sitting of the ,house before the ,orders of the ,day and ,notices of ,motions have been entered upon1 or after they have been disposed of1 but no debate or business shall be interrupted for that purpose4 #cf4 ,then ,i again repeat my question1 whether the practice has not been that a ,member so appearing under the ,standing ,order just read to take the oath1 all other business is immediately to cease and not to be resumed until he has been sworn and has subscribed the ,roll8--,i have already stated that such was the old practice1 which has been distinctly and specifically superseded by the last ,standing ,order1 which is now in force4 #cg4 ,is that the ,standing ,order which you have just read8--,yes1 that is the ,standing ,order now in force4 #ch4 ,of course it will be a matter for argument whether it has altered it or not1 but is there any other ,order altering this practice except the one which you have just read8--,there is no other ,standing ,order1 and that ,standing ,order was made1 as ,i have already stated1 in pursuance of the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act of #ahff1 which authorised the ,house to make regulations with regard to the swearing of ,members4 #ci4 ,but except so far as it may have been altered by the ,standing ,order which you have just read1 was the practice that a ,member appearing to take the oath all other business was to cease1 and not to be resumed until he had sworn and subscribed the ,roll8--,yes1 certainly4 #dj4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,the present ,standing ,order is dated the #cjth ,april1 #ahff1 is it not8--,it is4 #da4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,are you aware that the ,house has refused to make any inquiry as to what is consistent1 or what is not consistent with the ,oath of ,allegiance taken by a ,member8--,i presume that the reference must be to a case which arose in debate4 ,that ,i do not consider1 in any way1 in point in the present inquiry1 but the question was this3 ,in one case an attempt was made to obtain from a ,member who was about to bring forward a motion1 a repudiation of statements made elsewhere1 which were alleged to be at variance with the oath he had taken2 but the ,speaker stated that it was no part of his duty to determine what was consistent with that oath1 and that the terms of the motion were not in violation of any rules of the ,house4 ,that was a point of ,order1 and had no reference whatever to the taking of the ,oath4 #db4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,what was the motion8--,it is in the #bajth volume of ,hansard's ,debates1 #crd ,series1 page #beb4 ,it is at page #aig of my book1 in a note4 #dc4 ,mr4 ,,john ,,bright3 ,in what year8--,on the #aith ,march1 #ahgb2 there is merely an incidental reference to it4 #dd4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,are you aware of any precedent for the dealing by the ,house with the election of any ,member not disqualified by statute or common law1 until after that ,member had sat and been sworn8--,my attention has not been directed to any precedent bearing upon that precise point1 but ,i apprehend that the fact of whether the ,member had been sworn or not would not interfere with any proceedings4 ,for example1 under an election petition1 if a ,member's seat were contested1 under the old system1 the matter would have proceeded in the usual way1 without reference to the question of whether the ,member had taken the ,oath or not4 #de4 ,but in such a case the ,member would have been sworn1 and would have sat until the question was decided8--,not necessarily2 under the terms of the question ,i assume that he had not taken his seat4 #df4 ,are there not very numerous cases in which with a petition against a ,member for alleged statutory disqualification that ,member has been sworn and has sat until the decision8--,unquestionably2 there can be no doubt about it2 it frequently happens4 #dg4 ,then ,i ask whether there is any precedent whatever for the ,house dealing with a ,member's election or his right to sit1 except in cases of absolute statutory disqualification1 until that ,member has taken his seat and the oaths8--,so far as ,i understand the question1 ,i should say that whether the ,member has been sworn1 or not1 the matter of his disqualification1 or of his right to sit would be open to the decision of the ,house4 #dh4 ,i am not arguing the point at the moment2 ,i am only trying to get at the fact4 ,if you have not looked for it1 of course ,i cannot have it2 but is there1 so far as you know1 any precedent of such a thing ever having happened8--,i know of none2 but ,i have not searched for any such precedent4 #di4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,it would not appear1 would it8--,i hardly know how it would appear2 unless one's attention were specifically drawn to any case1 there would be no means of discovering it4 #ej4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,i will ask whether that question was not raised in the case of ,wilkes1 and whether it was not in the consideration of that case fully discussed1 and whether the ,house did not resolve that any such dealing with a member was subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this kingdom8--,i do not understand how that case has any bearing upon the present question4 #ea4 ,there are three cases3 one of expulsion1 two of election annulled1 and then ultimate reversal of the whole of that and expungment by the ,house8--,yes1 but that has no bearing upon the present case4 ,of course1 ,i am familiar with the case of ,wilkes1 but not in connection with any matter arising out of the administration of oaths1 which is the special matter referred to this ,committee4 #eb4 ,have you had your attention called to the ,journal of the ,house of ,commons1 ,vol4 ,i41 page #dfj1 in which ,sir ,francis ,bacon1 the ,king's ,attorney ,general1 having sworn to his qualification1 which was challenged1 the ,house said1 ,their oath1 their own consciences to look into1 not we to examine it8--,that case is not one of the precedents that we have collected4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh3 ,they are entered extremely curiously1 and one can only take the decision4 ,it begins on page #dei1 ,eligibility of the ,attorney ,general1 and it does not show there that it is ,sir ,francis ,bacon3 but ,i have learnt that by looking up the other records2 and there being then a statutory declaration which lasted until a few years ago for all counsel1 solicitors1 and practising men of the law1 it was objected that the ,king's ,attorney ,general could not sit2 it appears that he had to swear to his qualification1 and the question of his oath and of his disqualification1 being ,attorney ,general1 were put1 and the ,house said1 ,their oath1 their own consciences to look into1 not we to examine it1 and they left him in the ,house1 resolving that no future ,attorney ,general should sit in it4 ,,chairman3 ,that was the case which was raised as to whether the law officers of the ,crown1 who had for certain purposes seats in the ,house of ,lords1 had seats in the ,house of ,commons4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh3 ,not quite that4 ,there was an obsolete statute of the #dfth ,edward ,,iii41 which was only repealed eight or nine years ago1 but which does not seem to have been attended to1 by which all practising barristers and solicitors were disqualified for sitting for counties4 #ec4 ,mr4 ,,beresford ,,hope3 ,wilkes's precedent being expunged1 is it still legible in the ,journal1 and could it be produced for historical information8--,certainly4 #ed4 ,major ,,nolan3 ,with regard to the evidence about ,o',connell1 ,i think you stated that an ,act was passed to enable ,o',connell and his co-religionists to sit in ,parliament8--,not to enable ,o',connell to sit in ,parliament1 but to enable ,roman ,catholics to sit in ,parliament4 #ee4 ,o',connell was not allowed to take advantage of that ,act until he was re-elected8--,no1 because he had been elected prior to the passing of the ,act1 and the ,act was clearly prospective4 #ef4 ,was the wording of that particular statute the reason why he was not allowed to take advantage of that ,act8--,certainly2 distinctly4 #eg4 ,would it be possible for the present or any future ,parliament to pass an ,act which would enable a man who had been elected previous to the passing of the ,act to sit in the ,house8--,it is not for me to say what ,act of ,parliament might be agreed to by ,parliament1 but that is quite a distinct case4 ,in that case ,mr4 ,o',connell had actually been elected when the ,catholic ,relief ,act was passed1 and there was a clause in the ,act which made its operation prospective1 and therefore distinctly1 and1 ,i believe1 intentionally1 excluding ,mr4 ,o',connell from the benefits of the ,act4 #eh4 ,then he was only prevented from taking advantage of that ,act owing to the particular wording of that particular clause1 and not owing to anything inherent in the ,house of ,commons8--,yes2 the decision was founded upon a literal construction of the words of the recent statute4 #ei4 ,mr4 ,,whitbread3 ,the case of ,mr4 ,o',connell was this3 that he declined to take the oath which was required of ,members of ,parliament elected at the time that he was elected1 and that he requested to be allowed to take another form of oath2 he was ordered to withdraw1 and the ,house considered his case2 is there anything that you have found in the ,journals or in the ,debates to indicate that if ,mr4 ,o',connell had been willing to take the oath required of him by the ,house1 the ,house would have objected to his so taking it8--,certainly not2 they put it to him whether he would take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 and upon the face of the ,journal1 it would seem that if he had taken that oath1 he would have been admitted4 #fj4 ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh 7through the ,committee73 ,after ,john ,archdale had claimed to affirm1 did not the ,house absolutely order him to attend in his place for the purpose of being sworn1 and tender the oaths to him8--,mr4 ,archdale was ordered to attend1 and the ,house being informed that ,mr4 ,archdale attended according to order1 his letter to ,mr4 ,speaker was read4 ,that letter is printed at full length among the precedents4 ,and the several statutes qualifying persons to come into and sit and vote in this ,house were read1 viz41 of the #cj ,car4 ,,ii41 #a ,will4 and ,mariae1 and #g #h ,will4 and ,mariae4 ,and then the said ,mr4 ,archdale was called in1 and he came into the middle of the ,house1 almost to the table2 and ,mr4 ,speaker1 by direction of the ,house1 asked him whether he had taken the oaths1 or would take the oaths1 appointed to qualify himself to be a ,member of this ,house2 to which he answered1 ,that in regard to a principle of his religion he had not taken the oaths1 nor could take them2 and then he withdrew1 and a new writ was ordered4 #fa4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,,simon3 ,with reference to what the ,honorable ,member for ,bedford has put to you just now1 ,mr4 ,o',connell refused to take the ,oath of ,supremacy on the ground that it contained matter which he knew to be untrue1 and other matter which he believed to be untrue8--,yes1 he so stated4 #fb4 ,thereupon he withdrew2 but is there any precedent among the ,journals to show that a ,member stating beforehand that what was contained in the oath was untrue1 or a matter of unbelief to him1 has been allowed to take the oath under such circumstances8--,no1 this is the only precedent1 so far as ,i know1 of that particular character4 ,the others are cases of absolute refusal to take the oath1 or a desire to make an affirmation instead of an oath1 or to leave out certain words of the ,oath4 #fc4 ,but is there any precedent where1 as in the case of ,mr4 ,o',connell1 a ,member coming to the table of the ,house1 has made a statement such as ,mr4 ,o',connell made1 that the oath contains matter which he knows to be untrue1 or believes to be untrue1 and has been allowed to take the oath afterwards8--,there is no case to be found1 so far as ,i know2 certainly there is none in any of these precedents4 #fd4 ,mr4 ,secretary ,,childers3 ,is the precedent in ,mr4 ,o',connell's case this2 that on the #aeth ,may ,mr4 ,o',connell said that he could not take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 and that1 nevertheless1 on the #aith1 he was asked whether he would take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 although he had previously informed the ,house that he was unable to take it8--,yes1 because he had been heard1 in the interval1 upon his claim to take the new oath1 under the recent ,catholic ,relief ,act4 #fe4 ,but was not that a precedent for a ,member who had already stated that he could not take a certain oath1 nevertheless being afterwards asked by the ,house whether he would take it8--,it so appears on the face of the precedents4 #ff4 ,i will put that question again more clearly2 is it not the case that1 as appears on page #e of the ,paper which you have placed before us1 ,mr4 ,o',connell on the #aeth ,may said1 that he could not take the ,oath of ,supremacy8--,yes4 #fg4 ,and that1 nevertheless1 on the #aith of ,may it was ordered that ,mr4 ,speaker do communicate to him the ,resolution passed on the same day1 and ask him whether he would take the ,oath of ,supremacy8--,it was so4 #fh4 ,although the ,house was aware that ,mr4 ,o',connell had said that he could not take it8--,yes2 but as ,i observed before1 in the interval he had been heard upon the question of his right to take the new oath2 and that1 ,i think1 accounts for the fact that the question was repeated to him as to whether1 after the decision of the ,house had been communicated1 he still persisted in refusing to take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 #fi4 ,mr4 ,,watkin ,,williams3 ,was not ,mr4 ,o',connell's objection to taking the ,oath of ,supremacy an objection to the truth of the matter sworn to8--,yes1 certainly2 and it was an oath which no ,roman ,catholic could take4 #gj4 ,it was the truth of the matter which he was asked to pledge his oath to that he objected to1 and he did not express any disbelief in the binding character of the oath itself8--,no4 ,every ,roman ,catholic objected to take the ,oath of ,supremacy2 in fact1 the ,oath of ,supremacy was expressly designed to exclude them from ,parliament4 #ga4 ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,and in consequence of the objection a new form of oath was put in the ,catholic ,relief ,bill8--,certainly1 because the ,oath of ,supremacy was intended to exclude ,roman ,catholics1 and did exclude them1 and was known to exclude them4 #gb4 ,mr4 ,,watkin ,,williams3 ,it was not his inability to take the oath1 but his inability to pledge himself to the truth of what he was asked to swear to8--,certainly4 #gc4 ,mr4 ,,staveley ,,hill3 ,i gather from you that the ,house never asked ,o',connell to take the oath after his giving the grounds of recusancy8--,yes1 that is so4 #gd4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,,simon3 ,it appears that the ,speaker first asked him whether he would take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 and then he says1 ,no1 and gives those reasons8--,yes4 #ge4 ,mr4 ,,pemberton3 ,in addition to ,mr4 ,o',connell's having been heard after he had at first declined to take the oath1 was there not some further discussion in the ,house in which other ,members took part8--,certainly2 those ,debates will all be found in ,hansard4 #gf4 ,sir ,,gabriel ,,goldney3 ,his refusal to take the oath in the first instance was accompanied by a claim at the same time to take the new oath8--,clearly4 #gg4 ,it was a refusal to take the oath accompanied by a claim for a new one2 afterwards he was allowed to be heard upon that point1 and then it was that the ,house1 having decided that he could not be admitted on the new oath1 he was asked if he chose to take the old oath1 which he refused to do8--,that is a correct statement of the case4 #gh4 ,mr4 ,,hopwood3 ,with regard to the point of the ,standing ,orders as to which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh has asked1 as ,i understand you1 under the old practice1 as pointed out in ,hatsell1 and as we know it existed1 the occasion of a ,member coming to be sworn caused all other business to cease8--,yes4 #gi4 ,and then as you say1 a ,standing ,order was passed that particular times more appropriate should be allotted for taking those oaths8--,yes4 #hj4 ,but even though that may be so at the time of taking an oath1 no other business can go on8--,clearly not2 it is the sole business that is transacted at the moment4 #ha4 ,no other business can be interposed1 and nothing else can be proceeded with but the oath of the ,member8--,certainly not2 it is the business of the moment1 and no other business can interpose4 #hb4 ,mr4 ,,gibson3 ,you have been asked by several honorable ,members about ,o',connell's case2 in your opinion1 is there the slightest analogy between the facts and circumstances in ,o',connell's case and those of the case now before the ,committee8--,i see none myself1 but ,i would rather leave such questions for the determination of the ,committee4 ,i have stated the case in print1 and of course the points of difference are matters of argument4 #hc4 ,so far as you know1 is there any precedent for permitting a ,member of the ,house of ,commons to take the ,oath after he has stated in the ,house expressly1 or by necessary implication1 that it will have no binding effect upon his conscience8--,there is no such case on record1 so far as ,i have had the means of ascertaining4 ,mr4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 a ,member of the ,house2 ,examined3 #hd4 ,,chairman3 ,you were in the room1 ,i think1 when ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may gave that part of his evidence as to a matter which was not on the ,votes and ,proceedings8--,yes1 but which took place upon the occasion of my first coming to offer to affirm4 #he4 ,is that accurately and fully stated8--,it is accurately and fully stated4 ,i shall have to ask the indulgence of the ,committee if in any of the points which ,i press there seems to be any undueness in the pressing of them1 because1 as far as ,i can see1 this is the first occasion on which such a matter has arisen4 ,in the reference which the ,committee have to deal with1 ,i claim to be sworn and take my seat by virtue of my due return1 a return untainted by illegality of any description1 and in pursuance of the ,statute of the #eth of ,richard ,,ii41 which puts upon me the duty of coming here to be sworn and do my duty under penalty of fine and imprisonment4 ,i do not know whether the ,committee wish that ,i should read the ,statute4 ,it is the second ,statute of ,richard ,,ii42 it is on page #bbh of the revised ,statutes1 ,vol4 ,i42 it is a ,statute of the year #achb4 ,i submit that although a ,member may not sit and vote until he has taken the oaths1 he is entitled to all the other privileges of a ,member1 and is otherwise regarded both by the ,house and the laws as qualified to serve1 until some other disqualification has been shown to exist2 and ,i quote in support of that ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may's book1 p4 #bjb1 that there is nothing in what ,i did in asking to affirm which in any way disqualified me from taking the ,oath4 ,the evidence that that is so is found in the case of ,archdale1 on page #c of the ,precedents handed in by ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may1 where1 after ,john ,archdale had claimed to affirm1 he was called into the ,house1 and ,mr4 ,speaker1 by direction of the ,house1 asked him if he would take the oaths2 that ,i have never at any time refused to take the ,oath of ,allegiance provided by ,statute to be taken by ,members2 that all ,i did was1 believing as ,i then did1 that ,i had the right to affirm1 to claim to affirm1 and ,i was then absolutely silent as to the oath2 that ,i did not refuse to take it1 nor have ,i then or since expressed any mental reservation1 or stated that the appointed ,oath of ,allegiance would not be binding upon me2 that1 on the contrary1 ,i say1 and have said1 that the essential part of the oath is in the fullest and most complete degree binding upon my honor and conscience1 and that the repeating of words of asseveration does not in the slightest degree weaken the binding effect of the ,oath of ,allegiance upon me4 ,i may say1 that if it would be more convenient for any ,member of the ,committee to ask me any question upon my statement as ,i go on1 it will not interrupt me at all4 #hf4 ,i think the ,committee would rather hear you through4--,i submit that according to law the ,house of ,commons has neither the right nor the jurisdiction to refuse to allow the said form of oath to be administered to me1 there being no legal disqualification on my part of which the ,house can or ought to take notice1 and there being on my part an express demand to take the ,oath1 this demand being unaccompanied by1 and free from1 any reservation or limitation4 ,i submit that there is no case in which the ,oath of ,allegiance has been refused to any ,member respectfully and unreservedly tendering himself to be sworn4 ,i submit that any ,member properly presenting himself to be sworn1 and not refusing to be sworn1 is entitled to be sworn1 and to take his seat without interruption1 and that the discussion of any disqualification or ineligibility must in such case1 according to the practice and precedent of ,parliament1 take place after the ,member has taken his seat2 and ,i quote in support of that ,john ,horne ,tooke's case1 which came before the ,house in #ahja4 ,it was alleged that ,john ,horne ,tooke was ineligible because he was an ordained clergyman of the ,church of ,england4 ,there he was allowed to take the oaths first1 and after he had taken the oaths ,earl ,temple rose and said 7,i am quoting from page #ief of the ,parliamentary ,history1 ,volume #ce71 that he observed a gentleman who had just retired from the table after having taken the ,oaths whom he conceived to be incapable of having a seat in the ,house in consequence of his having taken priest's orders1 and been inducted into a living4 ,earl ,temple agreed he would wait to see if a petition were presented against him1 and if not he should move a resolution upon the subject2 and ultimately a resolution was moved that ,john ,horne ,tooke was ineligible4 ,the ,house allowed ,john ,horne ,tooke to sit1 but declared clergymen for the future to be ineligible for sitting4 ,i rely upon that as showing that the proper course to be pursued1 supposing that any ,member should think that ,i am ineligible1 is to wait until ,i have been sworn and have taken my seat1 and then to challenge it2 and that this is clear1 because if it were not so it would be possible for the first #da ,members sworn or for a majority of that #da1 that is1 for #ba ,members to hinder the swearing of all ,members coming later to the table without any remedy on the part of the ,members aggrieved2 and ,i submit1 with great respect for the evidence of ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may1 that he has misapprehended the force of the ,standing ,order that he read to you4 ,hatsell's ,precedents1 ,volume ,,ii41 page #ij1 declares distinctly that when a ,member appears to take the oaths within a limited time1 all other business is immediately to cease1 and not to be resumed until he has been sworn and has subscribed the ,roll2 and with great submission to ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may1 there is no word in the ,standing ,order which he quoted as altering and changing that practice1 which does so alter and change it4 ,all that the ,standing ,order does is to specify the time and the manner in which the ,members might come to the table to be sworn1 which had not been hitherto specified2 but it does not in any way deal with what was to happen when they did come to the table to be sworn4 ,and if the ,committee would permit me respectfully to submit1 it would be most dangerous to the ,house if it were not so4 ,the first batch of ,members called over by the ,clerk of the ,house are sworn1 and they may then1 if the contention raised upon the ,standing ,order quoted by ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may be correct1 prevent every other ,member being sworn1 if there be more than #dj4 ,they may fulfil all the duties of a ,house of ,commons1 and do what they please1 without any remedy1 as the matter stands2 every election might be declared null and void1 and every one sent back to their constituencies one after another4 ,i submit also that the case of the ,attorney ,general1 ,sir ,francis ,bacon1 ,volume ,i4 of the ,commons ,journal1 page #dei1 is also a precedent in the same direction4 ,i am obliged to tell the ,committee that ,i cannot quote it with the same reliance that ,i can put upon ,horne ,tooke's case1 for the notes seem to have been taken1 ,i will not say irregularly1 but they do not seem to convey the whole of what took place1 and therefore ,i can only deal with the result4 ,sir ,h4 ,hobart is quoted as being the only attorney that hath been in this ,house2 and then there arises a discussion1 some of which does not seem to me to be material1 as to whether the then ,attorney ,general could sit or not1 and ,i find in the returns that the ,attorney ,general at that date was ,sir ,francis ,bacon1 who1 three days after this discussion1 elected to sit for the ,university of ,cambridge1 and although ,i have not the legal evidence1 because the returns are incomplete for that year1 as he elected to sit for the ,university of ,cambridge1 the probability is that he had also been returned for a county4 ,there was then a ,statute of the #dfth ,edward ,,iii41 which has only recently been repealed1 which made a practising man of the law absolutely ineligible2 and it also appears that there was some oath of qualification1 of which ,i have not been able to find the words1 which was then taken by a ,member coming to the table2 and it appears here that the ,oath was alleged in the course of the discussion1 and two things were said which ,i press upon the attention of the ,committee2 one1 that the precedents to disable a ,member ought to be shown on the side of those who seek to disable 7it is not written so lengthily as that2 the words are1 ,the precedents to disable him ought to be showed on the other side71 and the other is1 ,their oath1 their own consciences to look unto1 not we to examine it1 which meant1 as ,i submit1 that the ,house did not constitute itself into an ,inquisition to look behind a man coming to take the ,oath1 but that1 subject to his being dealt with by law if he had taken it improperly1 or subject to a legal disqualification being made clear to the ,house1 they assumed his oath to be properly taken4 ,i submit that even ,members absolutely petitioned against and alleged to be disqualified or ineligible by law1 are always allowed to be sworn when they come to the table to be sworn and to sit pending the decision of the petition4 ,the only cases which ,i have found of absolute legal disqualification in which the ,member's election was annulled before he had entered the ,house1 are the cases of ,mitchell and ,o',donovan ,rossa 7both of whom were away71 and the case of ,john ,wilkes1 who was physically incapacitated from taking the oath from the act that he was in the custody of the law at the time1 and those who held him would not have permitted him to come to the table to be sworn4 ,those are the only cases even with an allegation of an absolute disqualification in the case of ,o',donovan ,rossa and ,mitchell1 and of a disqualification alleged1 but not admitted1 and not legal1 not statutory1 in the case of ,wilkes1 that ,i have been able to find2 and in ,wilkes's case the ,house has solemnly decided that it did wrong there1 and ,i submit that it ought not to do it again4 ,but here the return is not questioned4 ,it is not pretended that there has been a single circumstance of illegality connected with the election1 the sole point being1 ,am ,i qualified to sit8 ,if ,i am qualified to sit1 ,i have the duty to take the ,oath1 and the ,house has neither the right nor the jurisdiction to refuse the ,oath to me1 nor to interrupt me in the taking of it4 ,if my qualification or eligibility to sit is to be discussed1 the precedent for the proper mode of discussing that qualification is in ,horne ,tooke's case1 and rightly so1 because then ,i have the opportunity from my place in the ,house of defending myself1 and of correcting any misstatements that may possibly be urged by ,members who may be too anxious that ,i should not sit1 supposing in any other ,house of ,commons it should happen1 and it then gives the ,member attacked fair play4 ,while ,i admit entirely that the ,house has a full and most complete right to expel any sitting ,member1 and this in its own discretion1 and for any reasons in its wisdom sufficient1 ,i submit that it has never done this without first calling upon the ,member to be heard in his own defence1 and that that cannot possibly happen until the ,member is sworn and is sitting4 ,i submit that while the ,house has the right to annul the election of a person absolutely disqualified by law1 it has never1 except in one case1 that of ,john ,wilkes1 claimed the right to interfere1 and in that case it ultimately expunged from its proceedings the whole of its hostile resolutions1 as being subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this kingdom4 ,i quote on that the ,commons ,journal1 ,vol4 #ch1 #crd of ,may #aghb4 ,i do not think that ,i should be right in troubling the ,committee with the very strong arguments used time after time by ,edmund ,burke1 ,thomas ,pitt1 and others2 but ,i want to point out this1 that in addition to the charge on which ,john ,wilkes was expelled from the ,house 7and ,i am not questioning his original expulsion71 there were also charges introduced against ,john ,wilkes for his publications outside the ,house4 ,that will be found in #ast ,cavendish1 page #gc and page #abi1 and they are charges far exceeding anything 7if ,i may judge from the reports which have even been put in7 in relation to any supposed publications of my own4 ,none of those charges were ultimately considered by the ,house to justify the interference of the ,house with the choice of the constituency4 ,to use the words of ,mr4 ,thomas ,pitt1 on page #cej of ,cavendish1 words endorsed by the ,house itself1 ,nothing but a positive law can enable you to circumscribe the electors in their choice of a representative1 however1 indiscreet they may be in their choice4 ,i consider now on what grounds is it claimed that the ,house of ,commons has the right and jurisdiction1 following the words of reference1 to refuse to allow me to take and subscribe the ,oath8 ,is it for a disqualification or ineligibility existing prior to my election and continuing down to the time of my election--,i mean a disqualification or ineligibility created by ,statute or existing at common law8 ,no such disqualification is even pretended4 ,is it for a disqualification or ineligibility of like legal character arising since my election8 ,no such disqualification is pretended4 ,is it for conduct not amounting to absolute disqualification legally1 but conduct for which the ,house has in its discretion exercised its rights and jurisdictions by expelling a ,member8 ,it must be this1 or it is nothing4 ,if there is neither legal disqualification prior to my election1 nor legal disqualification subsequent to my election1 then there must be such conduct not amounting to absolute legal disqualification as would1 were ,i a sitting ,member1 justify the ,house in using its discretion to expel a ,member4 ,but if that conduct be prior to the election1 then ,i submit that the constituency is the sole and sovereign judge of the fitness of the candidate1 such candidate not being legally disqualified1 and that where the chosen and duly returned candidate is ready to perform his duties1 this ,house has neither the right nor the jurisdiction to revoke the decision of the constituency2 and that in the only case in which the ,house did so interfere it afterwards solemnly recorded that its conduct was illegal1 as being subversive of the rights of the whole body of the electors of this kingdom4 ,if the complaint against me is for conduct arising since my election1 then ,i submit that even if such matters justify my expulsion as a ,member1 the point could only be raised after ,i had been heard in my place against the ,resolution1 and that the matter could not arise until ,i have taken the ,oath and become entitled to speak1 sit1 and vote4 ,manifestly this must be so1 as otherwise it would always be in the power of a majority to exclude from coming to take his seat any ,member to whom they might have an objection2 and although such a thing is1 luckily1 not probable now1 there have been times1 even in the history of the ,house of ,commons1 when a majority1 even of election committees1 as ,i read in the ,records of the ,house1 have sought by mere prejudice to exclude ,members4 ,it is1 therefore1 the more necessary that at any rate a ,member should have the right to be heard in his own defence4 ,i submit that there is no precedent whatever for preventing a ,member from taking his seat and the ,oath1 on the ground of conduct not amounting to absolute legal disqualification4 ,there is no such precedent to be found at all1 and ,i have searched very carefully indeed4 ,i put the question to ,sir ,erskine ,may lest anything should have escaped me1 and ,i say absolutely there is no precedent4 ,then ,i submit that it would not be consistent with the dignity of the ,house to examine any statement made by any ,member outside the ,house1 as to any of its procedure1 and that in fact the ,house has firmly refused to allow a ,member to be challenged as to whether or not some of his extra-,parliamentary utterances were inconsistent with his ,oath of ,allegiance2 and here ,i should like the ,committee to come to a decision1 because it would alter and abridge my argument4 ,if the ,committee thought 7,i will put a suppositious case7 that1 say there were some document that they thought they had the right to take into consideration here1 then while ,i should object to that1 ,i should like to have the opportunity of addressing the ,committee as to that4 ,so far as the evidence has gone1 ,i have not heard of any1 except the mere statement in the ,house1 only ,i judged from a question put by an honorable and learned ,member that something was passing in his mind 7which1 by the way1 did not seem to me to be the fact7 justifying a question put to ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may as to whether the ,oath could be administered to a man who had done something either actually or by implication repudiating the effect of that ,oath4 ,i have heard nothing in the evidence1 so far as it has gone1 giving the slightest color or warranty for such a question4 ,if there are any facts to be dealt with by this ,committee other than that1 then ,i should like to know the facts1 and to argue upon them2 but it would be only wasting the time of the ,committee to address argument to any point which the ,committee would not think it right to consider2 and ,i should be glad if1 before going further into my statement1 the ,committee thought it right to intimate to me their view upon that4 ,the ,committee deliberated4 #hg4 ,,chairman3 ,i think the ,committee would like to understand from you the kind of objection that you are anticipating before you proceed with your argument2 as ,i understood you1 you took this kind of objection3 ,i wish to know whether the ,committee are going into any proceedings external to the proceedings which took place in the ,house1 or will entertain the consideration of those questions1 and that if they did so you would wish to be heard upon that point2 ,i understood you also to say that beyond that general question as to any proceedings which may have taken place as part of the transaction in any other place than the ,house itself1 you wish to know whether the ,committee would take such matter into their consideration2 am ,i right in supposing that to be the character of your objection8--,not quite4 ,practically my question is this3 ,will this ,committee take any facts into consideration other than those of which ,i have heard evidence given1 and those which have been stated by myself in the course of my argument8 ,if so1 ,i should like to know1 because ,i understood the permission of the ,committee to be that ,i should address them at the close of the case before their deliberations1 and ,i should submit with all respect that the ,committee would not take one matter of fact into their consideration to influence them in their deliberations which ,i had not the opportunity of addressing them upon4 ,if they have finished1 and if there are no facts except those which ,i have heard to be dealt with1 it enables me to turn out and eliminate a portion of the argument which ,i have prepared4 ,the ,committee deliberated4 #hh4 ,,chairman3 ,the ,committee have considered the matter which you have submitted to them1 and they request me to inform you that members of the ,committee do propose1 after your statement is concluded1 to ask some questions of you2 but ,i have to inform you1 at the same time1 that you will be invited1 and are invited1 to state any objections that you may entertain to any such questions when put1 and that you shall have a full opportunity of addressing the ,committee after they have heard your answers to the questions so put8--,that will enable me to eliminate a portion of my argument4 ,i wish to submit to the ,committee one observation on the precedent of ,daniel ,o',connell1 and that is that1 as a matter of fact1 the evidence of ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may shows that he misapprehended that precedent4 ,it was a refusal by ,daniel ,o',connell to take the ,oaths by law required of a member at the date of his election4 ,between the date of his election and the date of his refusal the law had changed1 but it had not changed 7so the ,house interpreted the ,statute1 or so the ,statute ran1 ,i do not know which7 at the date of his election4 ,so that ,i submit that ,daniel ,o',connell's case is a case of a ,member refusing to take the ,oath by law required2 and ,i further submit that the ,parliamentary ,debates will show that the words which appear as being used by ,mr4 ,o',connell on the #aith of ,may1 sufficiently expressed his reason for refusing to take the ,oath of ,supremacy some days at least before the ,house asked him again to take it4 ,then ,i have only two other matters which ,i should wish to submit to the ,committee4 ,one is that ,i have1 neither directly nor indirectly1 obtruded upon the ,house1 since ,i have been a ,member1 any of my utterances or publications upon any subject whatever2 that there is no precedent1 except in the case of ,john ,wilkes1 for any reference on the part of any opposing ,member to such publications by any ,member prior to the taking of his seat2 and that the ultimate decision of the ,house in ,john ,wilkes's case is directly against the introduction by any ,member hostile to me of any such matter as a reason for my not being allowed to take my seat4 ,finally1 ,i most respectfully submit that ,i have grave matter of complaint that my privileges as a ,member of the ,house of ,commons have been seriously infringed1 and that the rights of the electors1 my constituents1 have been ignored in the attacks made upon me without previous notice to me2 attacks to which ,i had no opportunity of making a dignified reply2 attacks which1 if the newspaper reports be accurate1 were in many instances based upon absolute misapprehension or misquotation of my publications1 and in one instance at any rate1 based upon the most extreme misrepresentation of my conduct4 ,i thank the ,committee for listening to me1 and ,i regret if my want of knowledge of the forms of the ,house has involved my saying anything in a manner in which the ,committee would prefer that ,i should not have said it4 #hi4 ,that is all you wish to state at present8--,that is all ,i wish to state at present upon the evidence as taken by the ,committee4 ,if fresh evidence should be taken1 ,i should ask the permission of the ,committee to have the right of addressing them upon that4 #ij4 ,the ,committee will now proceed to examine you4--,before any question is put to me1 will you1 ,sir1 tell me when is the proper time to object to any question which ,i may think ,i have the right to object to8 #ia4 ,when the question is put1 before answering it8-- ,mr4 ,,attorney ,,general3 ,you will understand that ,i am not in any sense cross-examining you1 but merely to clear up what took place in the ,house4 ,i am entirely in the hands of the ,committee4 #ib4 ,we know from the ,proceedings of the ,house that you did at the table of the ,house make a claim1 in the first instance1 to make affirmation instead of taking the oath8--,yes4 #ic4 ,and we understand that you did so on the ground that you were a person entitled to make affirmation within the terms of the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts of #ahfi and #ahgj8--,that was then my impression of the law1 and that was the claim which ,i made4 #id4 ,and ,i presume1 of course1 that at the time when you made that claim you founded it upon the belief that you were entitled to make affirmation in the ,house of ,commons8--,i made that claim solely upon my belief that the law entitled me to make it4 #ie4 ,then as regards your power to give evidence under the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts in courts both civil and criminal1 you of course put it before the ,house of ,commons1 as a fact1 that you were a person entitled in those courts to make affirmation8--,yes4 #if4 ,and ,i presume that you were acquainted with the terms of those ,acts1 the subject interesting you8--,quite4 #ig4 ,were you aware that if you yourself were called as a witness1 it would be necessary before you were allowed to make affirmation in a court1 either civil or criminal1 under the ,acts of #ahfi and #ahgj1 that two things should be established2 first1 that you yourself objected to take the oath1 or that your right to take it was objected to by some one else2 and then1 secondly1 that the judge would be required to satisfy himself that the taking of an oath by you would have no binding effect upon your conscience8--,no1 that is not my interpretation of the ,statute1 nor do ,i think it has always been 7although ,i think it has sometimes been7 the interpretation of the judge or other presiding officer dealing with it4 #ih4 ,would you kindly explain your own view as to the sense in which you read the statute of #ahfi1 which says that the judge must satisfy himself that the oath is not binding upon the conscience of the person wishing to affirm1 the words being1 ,if any person called to give evidence in any court of justice1 whether in a civil or criminal proceeding1 shall object to take an oath1 or shall be objected to as incompetent to take an oath1 such person shall1 if the presiding judge is satisfied that an oath would have no binding effect on his conscience1 make the following promise and declaration8--,my interpretation is that upon certain answers being given by the witness1 the judge is bound to take his affirmation1 even supposing that the judge himself should not be of opinion that the oath is not binding upon him2 and it has been decided so by the ,court of ,queen's ,bench4 ,in the case of ex parte ,lennard v4 ,woolrych1 a man tendered his affirmation at the ,westminster ,police ,court1 and the magistrate asked him 7,i am repeating from memory1 but repeating perfectly accurately the substance of what appears in the affidavits filed in the ,court of ,queen's ,bench71 ,why do you object8 ,he said1 ,i am an ,atheist4 ,the magistrate refused to allow him to give evidence upon affirmation1 and the court held that upon hearing that answer there was enough under the ,act1 and that the magistrate was bound to take the man's evidence1 and issued a mandamus to compel him4 #ii4 ,you will not suppose that ,i am arguing with you1 but as ,i understand that case the witness who tendered himself having said he was an ,atheist1 the court held that the magistrate was bound to draw the inference from that assertion that the oath was not binding1 and therefore to let him make the affirmation8--,that is so4 ,whether the presiding officer did draw the inference or not1 the court held that he was bound to4 #ajj4 ,then ,i do not think that there is much difference between us2 but ,i assume that when you come to the table of the ,house of ,commons1 and asked leave to make affirmation instead of taking the ,oath1 you were a person1 as ,i understand it1 who1 if you had gone into a court of justice and made the same request1 would have been held by the presiding judge to be one upon whom the oath would have no binding effect8--,i did think so when ,i applied to affirm4 ,i do not think so since the ,report of your ,committee1 for your ,committee has reported that the two oaths are entirely different4 #aja4 ,it is a question for you3 do you draw any distinction between the binding effect upon your conscience of the ,assertory ,oath1 as it is called1 and the ,promissory ,oath8--,most certainly ,i do4 ,the ,testimony ,oath is not binding upon my conscience1 because there is another form which the law has provided which ,i may take1 which is more consonant with my feelings4 ,the ,promissory ,oath is and will be binding upon my conscience if ,i take it1 because the law1 as interpreted by your ,committee1 says that it is the form which ,i am to take1 and the ,statute requires me to take it4 #ajb4 ,pray do not answer this question unless you like3 am ,i to understand you that the binding effect upon your conscience of the ,oath depends upon whether there is an alternative method of taking that which is to you equivalent to the oath8--,no1 most certainly not4 ,any form that ,i went through1 any oath that ,i took1 ,i should regard as binding upon my conscience in the fullest degree4 ,i would go through no form1 ,i would take no oath1 unless ,i meant it to be so binding4 #ajc4 ,pray object if you do not wish to answer this question3 ,by virtue of what do you regard that assertion which you make within the ,oath as binding8--,i have not caught your question1 if you will pardon me for saying so4 #ajd4 ,by virtue of what portion of what is contained in the ,oath do you feel that your conscience is bound2 is it by the mere fact that you repeat the words therein contained1 or is it by that which is contained in the form of the ,oath8--,those words1 ,i do swear that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law1 are to me1 binding in the most full and complete and thorough degree on my conscience4 #aje4 ,if you read a promise out of any book or paper1 and said1 ,i promise so to do1 is there more binding effect in those words that you have read than in the mere ordinary assertion of a promise8--,yes1 because this reading is by law1 and by the decision of your ,committee intended to be the form in which ,i pledge my allegiance as a ,member4 #ajf4 ,then if it were a form sanctioned by law1 as in the case of an affirmation1 is there any more effect upon your mind if you take it in the form of what we call an oath than if you took it simply by words of affirmation or promise8--,if the form sanctioned by law ran ,i affirm1 or ,i declare and affirm1 or ,i solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law1 that would be equally binding upon my conscience4 #ajg4 ,do you attach any express or particular meaning to the words ,i swear8--,the meaning that ,i attach to them is that they are a pledge upon my conscience to the truth of the declaration which ,i am making4 #ajh4 ,but a pledge given1 may ,i ask1 to whom8--,a pledge given to the properly constituted authorities1 whomsoever they may be1 who are entitled to receive it from me4 #aji4 ,do you attribute any more meaning to those words than a pledge to human beings around you8--,i attach no more meaning to those words than ,i do to a pledge to human beings authorised by law to take such a pledge from me under similar solemn circumstances4 #aaj4 ,but the solemn circumstances1 ,i suppose1 are the mere mundane circumstances8--,the statutory circumstances4 ,i meant solemn simply in the sense of being the statutory circumstances2 ,i meant to distinguish between that and mere conversation4 #aaa4 ,i think we understand from your answers that you do not attribute any more weight to the use of the words ,i swear1 and to the words ,so help me ,god1 than you would to an ordinary promise if it were given under the same circumstances as those under which you gave that promise in the ,house of ,commons8--,i conceive myself entitled by law to distinguish1 and ,i beg therefore to object to so much of the question as deals with the words ,so help me ,god1 my objection being founded on the case of ,miller v4 ,salomons1 in the #agth ,jurist1 and the case of the ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton in the #dth ,jurist1 new series4 #aab4 ,i presume by that answer you mean that ,so help me1 ,god is no part of the oath or promise1 but merely the form in which it is taken8--,that is so2 it is merely a form of asseveration4 #aac4 ,will you confine yourself1 then1 to the words ,i swear8--,i will4 #aad4 ,do you attribute any greater weight or any meaning to the words ,i swear1 and to the fact of kissing the book1 beyond the words of ordinary promise8--,not beyond the words of ordinary promise made under statutory obligation4 #aae4 ,then what greater weight do you attach to a promise made under statutory obligation than to an ordinary promise8--,i would prefer not making any promise that ,i did not intend to keep2 but the law has attached a weight to statutory promises1 and a penalty and disgrace on the breaking of them4 #aaf4 ,that is a consequence resulting from human action2 you do not attribute any other weight to such a promise beyond what results from such penalties8--,i object to that question4 #aag4 ,i will now go to another point4 ,how lately is it that you have claimed a right to affirm in a court of law8--,in a superior court or in an inferior court8 #aah4 ,in any court where you have taken an oath8--,recently in an inferior court1 within a few days4 #aai4 ,how lately prior to your claim in the ,house of ,commons8--,prior to my claim in the ,house of ,commons1 about #ab months4 #abj4 ,you had made a claim on several occasions1 ,i suppose1 prior to the period which you have just mentioned8--,yes4 #aba4 ,what steps1 if any1 were taken by the judge on such occasions to arrive at the conclusion that the oath would have no binding effect3--,on the last occasion1 by ,mr4 ,justice ,lindley1 none4 ,i presume he thought my claim to affirm well founded1 and he simply bowed his head1 and the clerk administered the affirmation after looking to him4 #abb4 ,i suppose you made a claim to affirm8--,when the clerk brought the ,testament to the witness-box ,i said1 ,i desire to affirm1 and the clerk looked at ,mr4 ,justice ,lindley1 who just bowed his head 7he happened to be the presiding judge71 and ,i did affirm4 #abc4 ,had you reason to think that ,mr4 ,justice ,lindley was acquainted with any previous applications by you to affirm8--,i should think it possible1 because the claim to affirm has been the subject of considerable litigation by myself in the courts4 #abd4 ,upon any occasion upon which the judge did make inquiry1 what was the nature of the inquiry8--,the present ,lord ,justice ,brett1 whom ,i remember distinctly challenging me upon it when he was ,mr4 ,justice ,brett1 said3 ,why do you claim1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh8 and ,i perfectly remember my answer1 but ,i am just thinking whether ,i am not entitled to say this3 that happened seven years ago2 ,i do not intend to imply that there is any change or anything since1 but ,i think ,i am entitled to say to this ,committee that it is hardly within the limits of their reference to inquire into something that happened in a law court between myself and a judge seven years ago4 #abe4 ,i should not have asked the question1 but you have stated in the ,house of ,commons yourself1 in order to support your claim to make affirmation1 that you have frequently been permitted to affirm8--,that is so4 #abf4 ,and ,i think you gave the last nine or ten years8--,yes1 and ,mr4 ,justice ,brett's question came within that time4 ,i hope you will not consider that ,i am putting the objection unfairly4 ,what ,i want to put is this3 that the conversation which took place on the occasion of my having affirmed 7and ,i repeat that ,i have affirmed before different judges7 being more or less informal1 ought not to be the subject of inquiry by this ,committee4 ,the fact is of record4 ,those were all at ,nisi ,prius4 #abg4 ,it was before a judge who would have to administer an oath8--,quite so4 #abh4 ,if you state that you really entertain an objection to the question1 ,i do not wish to press it myself personally8--,i have no objection to answering1 except that ,i have purposely tried to keep out of this discussion any question of my views2 otherwise ,i am quite in the hands of the ,committee1 and if the ,committee are disposed to press the question ,i will give the answer1 having made my objection4 #abi4 ,i do not wish to go into the views generally entertained by you1 except so far as expressed by you that the ,testimony ,oath had no binding effect upon your conscience8--,my answer applied to the ,assertory or ,testimony ,oath4 #acj4 ,i am asking you what you stated when a ,testimony ,oath was being administered to you2 but if you desire not to answer the question1 so far as ,i1 an individual member of the ,committee1 am concerned1 ,i do not wish to put it to you8--,i take the objection4 #aca4 ,mr4 ,,gibson3 ,can you recall whether within any time since your right to affirm was first recognised in courts of justice1 you have taken the ,oath8--,never2 that is to say1 the oath as a witness4 #acb4 ,have you ever taken any oath since your right to affirm was first admitted in courts of justice8--,it only has been my right to affirm as a witness that has been admitted in a court of justice2 ,i have under cover of that ,act1 but ,i think illegally1 affirmed as foreman of a special jury1 but ,i have considerable doubt whether the ,act covered my affirmation as a juryman4 #acc4 ,with that knowledge now present to your mind1 is it the fact that the oath which you seek to take at the table of the ,house is1 if you are permitted to take it1 the first oath that you will have taken since you were permitted to affirm in courts of justice8--,it is the first occasion upon which there has been any reason for my taking or not taking the ,oath of ,allegiance since ,i have been permitted to affirm4 #acd4 ,or any other form of oath8--,my memory is not quite clear upon that2 ,i am not sure4 ,there was a case in which ,i took evidence as a ,commissioner from ,america1 and ,i am not at all sure whether the completion of that ,commission was before or after the passing of the ,affirmation ,act4 #ace4 ,but since the passing of the ,act8--,i cannot quite pledge my mind as to that2 but except in that case in which ,i was a ,commissioner for taking some evidence in relation to an ,american process1 in which ,i may have done so1 ,i certainly have not4 #acf4 ,then am ,i to understand that you seek now to take this oath with exactly the same meaning in your mind as you would take the affirmation8--,which affirmation8 #acg4 ,the affirmation which you originally sought to take at the table of the ,house1 the ,promissory ,affirmation8--,i seek to take the ,oath of ,allegiance just as ,i should seek to take the ,affirmation of ,allegiance4 #ach4 ,and do you attach in your mind no different meaning to the word swear than you would to the word affirm8--,the law does not4 #aci4 ,do you1 in your own mind1 attach any difference to the sanction8--,i object that the question put to me asks me to make a distinguishment which the law does not make4 #adj4 ,i do not wish to press anything to which you object2 do you desire to tell the ,committee that1 in your own mind1 there is no distinction drawn when you use the word affirm and when you use the word swear8--,to me1 on the ,statute they have the same meaning2 that is1 they are a pledge that what ,i put after those words is binding upon me in the most complete degree4 #ada4 ,i suppose you are aware of all the ordinary definitions of an oath contained in the law books8--,i am afraid that would be saying more than ,i have any right to say4 ,i am fairly well read1 but not sufficiently to say that ,i know them all4 #adb4 ,you know a great many of them1 ,i suppose8--,i have learnt a few4 #adc4 ,you said to my honorable and learned friend1 the ,attorney ,general1 that you regarded the word swear as a pledge given to a properly constituted authority1 and that that was the meaning you attached to the word swear2 what do you mean by the properly constituted authority that you referred to in that answer8--,whatever may be the authority established by ,statute for the purpose of taking such an oath4 #add4 ,a human authority8--,all authorities established by ,statute for the taking of oaths are human authorities ,any authority outside a ,statute is illegal1 and any person administering such an oath is indictable4 #ade4 ,you are aware of the meaning of the expression sanction of an oath2 what do you consider would be the sanction of the ,oath if you took it8--,i am not sure that ,i apprehend the meaning that is in your mind when you use the words sanction of an oath4 #adf4 ,i will read the definition which is contained in ,mr4 ,baron ,martin's judgment in the case of ,miller v4 ,salomon's1 where it refers to the case of ,omichund v4 ,barker1 as reported in the ,law ,journal3 ,the doctrine laid down by the ,lord ,chancellor 7,hardwicke7 7,omichund v4 ,barker71 and all the other judges1 was that the essence of an oath was an appeal to a ,supreme ,being in whose existence the person taking the oath believed1 and whom he also believed to be a rewarder of truth and an avenger of falsehood1 and that the form of taking an oath was a mere outward act1 and not essential to the oath which might be administered to all persons according to their own peculiar religious opinions1 and in such manner as most affected their consciences4 ,you have listened to that statement8--,yes2 and ,i have also read the judgment of the ,court of ,error in the following year1 in which they say that the essential words of the oath are those without the appeal1 and that the words ,so help me1 ,god are words of asseveration1 the manner of taking the oath2 but the words preceding them are1 it appears to me1 an essential part of the oath2 and in the case of the ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton1 it was held that the oath was completely taken without the addition of that appeal4 #adg4 ,i am not at all upon the words ,so help me1 ,god1 which are the words referred to in the last case to which you referred4 ,i am now upon what contains a promise that an oath is being taken when a man uses the word swear2 do you object to the definition which ,i have read8--,i object to that definition as overruled by the ,court of ,error in its final decision in error1 confirmed by a subsequent decision of ,lord ,campbell in the ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton1 when it was held that the appeal was not a part of the oath4 #adh4 ,,chairman3 ,in both those cases ,i think the judges in holding that view had reference simply to the words ,so help me1 ,god8--,simply to the words ,so help me1 ,god4 #adi4 ,i think we are a little misunderstanding each other8--,i hope not2 ,i want to be candid with the ,committee4 #aej4 ,mr4 ,,gibson3 ,i am not at all on the words which that case went on of ,so help me1 ,god1 but ,i am on what must be the essential distinction between an oath and an affirmation2 what1 ,i ask you now1 do you conceive to be the essential distinction between an oath and an affirmation8--,following the judgment of the ,court of ,error1 repeated in the other judgment which ,i quoted1 ,i regard the essential words of the oath as beginning with ,i swear1 and ending with according to law4 ,i submit that it is no part of my duty to draw any distinction1 if distinction exists1 between the value of that and the value of an affirmation1 because the ,statute has declared that they both have the same value4 #aea4 ,do you consider that the taking of an oath implies in the person taking it the existence of a belief in ,god1 and that he will reward and punish us according to our deserts8--,that depends upon the form of the oath2 and since the decision you quoted very many forms of oath have been entirely changed by the ,legislature4 #aeb4 ,do you consider that if you use the word swear1 you appeal to a ,god8--,i consider that ,i take an oath which is binding upon my honor and conscience4 #aec4 ,without any reference to ,god8--,i consider that ,i take an oath which is binding upon my honor and conscience4 #aed4 ,and supposing that you break that oath1 what what would be the consequences which you consider would result to you8--,i am not aware that the ,statute has provided that ,i shall declare my opinion upon those consequences4 #aee4 ,am ,i to understand that you decline to answer8--,i am objecting that the question is one which would not be put in a court of law1 and therefore1 much more1 should not be put here4 #aef4 ,in answer to the ,attorney ,general1 and in your statement also1 you used the words essential part of the ,oath1 and the words of the ,oath are1 ,i do swear that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to ,her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law2 do you consider that all the words there present to your mind are equally definite and clear meaning8--,i consider that the whole of those words are essential2 ,i hold them to be essential1 and ,i submit myself to the construction which the ,court has put upon them4 #aeg4 ,is there any word in the ,oath in the ,statute which does not convey to your mind any clear and definite meaning8--,there is no word in that which does not convey to me a clear and definite meaning4 #aeh4 ,and do you regard the words at the end of it1 ,so help me1 ,god1 as conveying any definite meaning1 or merely as a useless addendum to the promise8--,i object that this ,committee will not ask me my opinion upon those words1 because they have been held by the highest court of law in this realm1 subject to appeal1 to be no necessary part of the ,oath4 #aei4 ,sir ,,henry ,,jackson3 ,if your counsel were here ,i should put to him this question1 which do not answer if you object2 ,i will treat you as if you were your own counsel2 ,i understand your view to be that the ,act of #ahff or the ,act of #ahfh1 gives you two alternative methods of taking your seat1 the one of affirmation and the other of oath1 and that it is open to you to take whichever of the two you prefer2 you prefer the affirmation1 but it having been decided not to be competent for you to make the affirmation1 you now propose to take the ,oath8--,that is exactly my construction4 #afj4 ,now ,i will tell you my doubt1 and perhaps you will be good enough to tell me what you say upon it4 ,it occurs to me that these two alternatives are what lawyers call true alternatives2 that is to say1 that each excludes the other1 and that the ,committee having decided 7perhaps you will say erroneously7 that you cannot affirm1 you have by your claim to affirm excluded yourself from the alternative claim to take the ,oath2 are not the two mutually exclusive8--,no2 the ,house of ,commons decided that1 fortunately for me1 and that saves me the trouble of thinking on it for myself4 ,when ,john ,archdale applied to affirm1 the ,house held that he could not affirm1 and they ordered him to take the ,oath4 #afa4 ,was that under the ,statute which regulates the present procedure8--,no1 but it was under the claim of a man who thought that he had alternative courses1 and who refused to take the ,oath4 #afb4 ,that is the answer which you give to my doubt8--,i am not sure whether ,i have answered fully4 #afc4 ,you do not condescend to any argument upon the ,statute1 but you think that the one alternative is not exclusive of the other8--,i thought then1 and subject to the ,report of the ,committee against me1 which ,i presume binds me1 ,i should still think that ,i have the right to affirm1 and if there were any way in which ,i thought ,i could legally raise the question1 ,i should try to do so4 #afd4 ,but on the hypothesis that the decision of the ,committee was right1 have you anything except the ,archdale precedent1 from which you would argue that these two ,acts of ,parliament do not create two mutually exclusive alternatives8--,i should simply reply that if that be so1 and you told me that ,i did not come within the one1 ,i must come within the other4 #afe4 ,mr4 ,,staveley ,,hill3 ,i wish to ask you one question with reference to what took place before ,lord ,justice ,brett 7then ,mr4 ,justice ,brett71 and1 of course1 if you think proper1 you will take the objection as you did to what the ,attorney ,general asked you3 when ,mr4 ,justice ,brett admitted you to affirm1 what steps did he take with a view to satisfy himself that an oath would not be binding upon your conscience8--,he put to me the question1 ,why8 and ,i gave to him three words as an answer1 and these three words apparently satisfied him1 and he directed the clerk to allow me to affirm4 ,he put no question to me as to whether the oath was binding upon me or not4 #aff4 ,have you any objection to tell the ,committee what those three words were8--,the question put by ,mr4 ,justice ,brett was1 ,why8 ,i object to tell the answer1 because it would be an inquiry into a man's religious opinions1 and ,sir ,george ,grey1 in introducing the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act in #ahff1 under which ,i claim1 said1 ,we will make no inquiry into any man's religious opinions2 let the constituencies be the judges of that4 #afg4 ,but those three words1 whatever they were1 satisfied ,mr4 ,justice ,brett that an oath would not be binding upon your conscience8--,i cannot say that1 but they satisfied him sufficiently that he gave the clerk directions to allow me to affirm4 #afh4 ,when did that take place8--,about eight years ago1 speaking roughly2 it may be six or seven years1 but ,i am not certain about the time4 #afi4 ,was it reported in the newspapers1 and is it generally known8--,i am not sure2 there have been cases reported4 #agj4 ,mr4 ,,pemberton3 ,i wish to ask whether1 since you were returned as a ,member of this ,house1 and since the ,report of the last ,committee1 you authorised the publication of a letter which appeared in the newspapers of the #bast of ,may in reference to the proceedings which have taken place on this matter8--,i ask that the question may not be put to me1 because ,i say that the ,house has already decided that they will not put any inquiry to a member as to what happens outside the ,house to determine what was consistent with the ,oath1 or not4 #aga4 ,of course ,i do not press the question more than to remind you that it had reference to proceedings which have taken place in this ,house1 and in a ,committee of this ,house8--,many things ,i have read 7,i do not know whether they are accurate or inaccurate71 speeches made by ,members referring to proceedings in this ,house1 and to that ,committee in relation to this matter4 ,to put it roughly1 ,i should submit that this ,committee should not examine me as to extra-,parliamentary utterances in reply to extra-,parliamentary utterances4 ,for example1 one honorable ,member1 ,sir ,henry ,drummond ,wolff1 made a speech at ,chichester---- #agb4 ,lord ,,henry ,,lennox3 ,not at ,chichester8--,the papers said so2 they may be very likely wrong1 only it shows still more1 ,i submit1 the force of the objection that extra-,parliamentary publications in reply to extra-,parliamentary utterances should not be the subject of questions before this ,committee4 #agc4 ,mr4 ,,pemberton3 ,i will only again point out that it was not in reply to an extra-,parliamentary utterance1 but had reference to proceedings in this ,house8--,that assumes what would be passing in the mind of the writer and what he had in view in assuming it1 and ,i decline to discuss any subject of that kind4 #agd4 ,i am to take it that you decline to answer the question8--,no1 ,i object to answer it4 ,if the ,committee think that ,i ought to answer it ,i will answer it4 ,i do not take a legal objection4 ,you quite understand that if the ,committee think ,i ought to answer it1 ,i will answer it at once4 ,the ,committee deliberated4 ,,chairman3 ,the ,committee have come unanimously to the conclusion that the question put by the honorable ,member for ,east ,kent ought to be answered2 but1 in arriving at that conclusion1 ,i am requested to inform you what ,i will now read3 ,that the ,committee think ,mr4 ,bradlaugh should answer the question put to him by ,mr4 ,pemberton1 on the ground that it refers to matters written by him directly in relation to the question involved in the order of reference to the ,committee1 and for the purpose of expressing his views on such questions since the claim was made by him to make the affirmation1 and before the appointment of the ,committee4 #age4 ,mr4 ,,pemberton3 ,i wish to ask whether1 since you were returned as a ,member of this ,house1 and since the ,report of the last ,committee1 you authorised the publication of a letter which appeared in the newspapers of the #bast ,may1 in reference to the proceedings which have taken place on this matter1 such letter being signed in your name8--,i think one of the members of the ,committee has a copy1 which ,i handed to him2 ,i have not seen the print2 and as ,i sent to all the newspapers a lithographed copy1 ,i prefer1 for greater accuracy1 to ask him to return it to me4 ,i hold in my hand a copy which ,i have no doubt is the same4 #agf4 ,,chairman3 ,do you object to that letter being put in8--,the moment the ,committee decided that ,i ought to answer that question1 ,i had no reserve in saying that ,i left myself in the hands of the ,committee on it4 ,i shall take the liberty of wishing to address a word or two to the ,committee presently upon it4 7,the letter was handed in47 #agg4 ,mr4 ,,watkin ,,williams3 ,do you propose to take the ,oath in the form given in the ,statute of #ahfh1 which ,i will read to you3 ,i41 ,a4 ,b41 do swear that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law4 ,so help me1 ,god8--,i do1 that being the form in the ,statute4 #agh4 ,if you are permitted to take that oath1 do you intend the ,committee to understand and believe that it will be binding upon your conscience as an oath8--,yes4 #agi4 ,in taking such oath1 do you consider yourself as appealing to some ,supreme ,being as a witness that you are speaking the truth8--,i submit that having said that ,i regard the oath as binding upon my conscience1 this ,committee has neither the right nor the duty to further interrogate my conscience4 #ahj4 ,sir ,,richard ,,cross3 ,you know of course that in taking the oath in the form prescribed by the ,statute1 and according to the custom of taking oaths1 you will have to kiss the ,testament3 do you attach the smallest weight to the kissing of that book8--,i attach the weight attached by the law to the whole of the formula4 #aha4 ,do you attach the smallest weight to the kissing of the book2 do you think that the kissing of that book adds in the slightest degree to the weight upon your conscience of the words which you have already spoken without kissing the book8--,the law has said that the whole of that is to be complete2 ,i have not the right1 therefore1 to form an opinion1 or to formulate an opinion as to how much of that ,i would leave out had ,i any choice in the matter4 #ahb4 ,then do you attach any further importance to the word swear in the oath itself1 and to the fact of the kissing of the book than if the word swear were written affirm1 and no kissing of the book were required8--,i have already said that ,i attach to the complete affirmation the most complete binding effect on my conscience4 ,if ,i were allowed a preference1 ,i would and still prefer the affirmation4 ,the law says that the oath is the form1 and ,i shall regard that form as in all its respects binding upon my conscience4 #ahc4 ,do you look upon the kissing of that particular book as adding any more sanction than the kissing of any other book8--,i decline to do that which the law has not done2 the law has not split up the formula into parts1 and expressed an opinion upon each part separately1 and ,i deny the right of the ,committee to ask me to do that which the law has not done4 #ahd4 ,i will ask you one other question2 do not answer it unless you like8--,i will not4 #ahe4 ,do you think that the fact of the kissing of that book has any relation to an appeal to a ,supreme ,being1 that you will1 before ,him1 perform the oath which you have taken8--,the law has not required me1 in any case1 to express an opinion as to that by itself4 ,as to the whole ,oath ,i have expressed an opinion4 #ahf4 ,as regards the kissing of that book1 would you look upon that1 so far as your conscience is concerned1 as an idle form8--,the law has not required me to look upon it by itself1 and ,i dispute the right of the ,committee to divide the ,oath into parts1 and to take one part by itself without the other4 ,i have already answered that the whole of the ,oath when taken by me1 and if taken by me1 will be binding upon my conscience4 #ahg4 ,but still you consider that a certain part of that ,oath1 which the ,statute imposes upon you the necessity to take1 is an idle1 and empty1 and meaningless form8--,i have never said so at any time4 #ahh4 ,but do you consider it so8--,most certainly ,i do not consider the most considerable portion of it an idle and empty form4 #ahi4 ,some portion of it1 ,i said8--,i consider no portion of the essential ,oath an idle and empty form4 #aij4 ,that is to say1 that you would take the ,oath because the ,statute says you must do so in order to take your seat8--,that is not so4 ,i take the ,oath because the ,statute says that ,i must do so1 intending to be bound in my honor and conscience by the oath ,i take4 ,every ,member takes the ,oath because he must do so in order to take his seat1 and he could not take it without it4 #aia4 ,but you do not think that the forms of the ,oath1 as settled by law1 adds anything to the binding of your conscience further than saying ,i solemnly affirm8--,your question presumes a form of thought which ,i have not enunciated4 #aib4 ,mr4 ,,john ,,bright3 ,do ,i understand you aright that you have never said that the oath1 as you propose to take it1 is less binding upon your conscience than it is supposed to be on the consciences of other men8--,i have never said so2 and in #ahfh1 when ,i stood for election1 there being then no form of affirmation possible for me1 ,i had gravely considered the question4 #aic4 ,it is within your knowledge that some men1 and not a few men1 who do not absolutely refuse to take an oath1 still greatly prefer to make an affirmation8--,if it would not be impertinent to say it1 many ,members of the ,house have told me so since this question has been pending4 #aid4 ,,chairman3 ,i think you said1 when ,i informed you that the ,committee thought that the letter should be put in1 that it was a subject upon which you wished to make an observation8--,i wish just to make the slightest observation upon that1 and upon one or two points that arose in questions that have been put to me4 ,if the ,committee would allow me to think for a moment ,i believe ,i can compress it within very slight limits4 #aie4 ,sir ,,gabriel ,,goldney3 ,your statement to ,mr4 ,justice ,brett1 ,i understood1 you would think over8--,no1 that my answer did not apply to4 ,if the ,committee think that ,i ought to answer that question in the same way1 the question as to the three words1 or rather four words1 that ,i answered to ,mr4 ,justice ,brett1 ,i am quite in the hands of the ,committee1 and ,i should not decline to answer them4 #aif4 ,mr4 ,,staveley ,,hill3 ,the reason why ,i asked you what they were1 and where they were to be found if you did not answer the question1 was on purpose that one might look for them1 because it must be a matter of public notoriety what the words were8--,i should think it very possible4 ,i have taken my objection1 and if there is even a thought in the ,committee that ,i had better answer the question1 ,i should not object to do so4 #aig4 ,,chairman3 ,what are the observations which you wish to offer in consequence of your examination8--,as the ,house will now have before it the statement1 ,i ask the ,committee in examining it to take it complete1 not to separate one or two words in it and to take those without the countervailing words1 and to remember that in this letter ,i declare that the oath1 if ,i take it1 would bind me1 and ,i now repeat that in the most distinct and formal manner2 that the ,oath of ,allegiance1 viz43 ,i do swear that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law1 will1 when ,i take it1 be most fully1 completely1 and unreservedly binding upon my honor and conscience2 and ,i crave leave to refer to the unanimous judgment of the full ,court of the ,exchequer ,chamber1 in the case of ,miller v4 ,salomons1 #agth ,jurist1 page #dfc1 and to the case of the ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton1 #dth ,jurist1 new series1 page #gjh1 for the distinguishment between the words of asseveration and the essential words of an oath4 ,but ,i also desire to add1 and ,i do this most solemnly and unreservedly1 that the taking and subscribing1 or repeating of those words of asseveration1 will in no degree weaken the binding effect of the oath on my conscience4 ,i should like1 finally1 simply to submit to the ,committee1 and especially to the honorable and learned gentleman on the left of the ,chairman1 that there has not been from the beginning to the end of this matter1 any declaration1 either distinct or implied1 that the ,oath if taken by me would be less binding upon me than upon him2 and ,i do submit to this ,committee that this ,house has never sought to inquire or to distinguish in any fashion as to the religious views of its ,members1 except so far as any of them have found themselves obliged by their conscience to refuse to comply with some form that the ,house has put before them4 ,on the contrary1 in the ,lords' protest on the discussion of the ,promissory ,oaths ,municipal ,bill1 ,lord ,holland and other ,lords put it in the most distinct fashion that no sort of inquisition and no sort of inquiry ought to be tolerated involving any examination of a man's theological views4 ,lord ,holland added1 in words better than ,i can command3 ,that there is no tribunal which he knows competent to make that examination1 and that the purely secular and political duties called upon to be performed were not such as to entitle that examination to be made4 ,i thank the ,committee for having listened to me1 and ,i submit myself to their decision4 #aih4 ,,chairman3 ,you mentioned some precedents which you thought might usefully be added to the list of precedents which we have already had3 could you conveniently add those cases8--,yes1 ,i will do so4 ,monday1 #gth ,june #ahhj4 ,,members ,,present3 ,mr4 ,attorney ,general4 ,mr4 ,john ,bright4 ,mr4 ,secretary ,childers4 ,mr4 ,chaplin4 ,sir ,richard ,cross4 ,mr4 ,gibson4 ,mr4 ,grantham4 ,mr4 ,staveley ,hill4 ,sir ,john ,holker4 ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope4 ,mr4 ,hopwood4 ,lord ,henry ,lennox4 ,sir ,henry ,jackson4 ,mr4 ,massey4 ,major ,nolan4 ,mr4 ,pemberton4 ,mr4 ,serjeant ,simon4 ,mr4 ,solicitor ,general4 ,mr4 ,trevelyan4 ,mr4 ,walpole4 ,the ,right ,honorable ,,spencer ,,horatio ,,walpole1 in the ,chair4 ,mr4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 a member of the ,house2 further ,examined4 #aii4 ,,chairman3 ,there was some reference1 ,i think1 made to you by ,mr4 ,whitbread1 with regard to which you desire to make some observations8--,there was a point urged by ,mr4 ,whitbread upon the first ,committee4 ,i do not know whether ,i should be in order in referring to it4 ,i thought it had been sufficiently covered by what ,i had said1 until ,i reflected upon it1 and then ,i thought it had not4 ,i wish to submit to this ,committee that it ought not to consider that ,i claimed to affirm because ,i regarded the oath as not binding upon my conscience1 under the spirit of the ,evidence ,further ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1 for that ,statute runs3 ,if any one shall object to take an oath1 or be objected to as incompetent to take an oath2 and that it is quite possible 7perhaps wrongly1 and undoubtedly wrongly1 as the ,committee have so decided7 that ,i might claim to affirm1 objecting to take the oath1 and that the ,committee have not on the evidence here either the right or the duty to assume anything more as against me in dealing with it now4 ,that is all ,i wish to put before the ,committee4 ,,appendix4 ,appendix ,no4 #a4 ,,precedents ,,relative ,,to ,,parliamentary ,,oaths4 ,,precedent of a ,,member disabled for having sat in the ,house without taking the ,oath4 ,sir ,,john ,,leedes hath been in the ,house and not taken the ,oath4 ,sir ,john ,leedes not to come into the ,house till further ,order4 ,sir ,e4 ,,coke3 ,that by the law ,sir ,j4 ,leedes is disabled to serve this ,parliament1 and therefore ought to be discharged1 and a new ,writ4 ,mr4 ,,pawlett1 accordant4 ,sir ,j4 ,,strangways3 ,can pretend no ignorance1 for a ,member of the ,house last ,parliament4 ,mr4 ,,crew1 for ,sir ,j4 ,leedes3 ,no question but he is incapable4 #b4 ,he is to be punished4 ,resolved1 ,sir ,j4 ,leedes incapable of being a ,member of this ,house1 as if never returned4 ,mr4 ,,hackwyll3 ,to have him removed2 a ,writ for a new choice2 and to punish him1 by sending him to the ,tower4 ,sir ,g4 ,,moore3 ,to have no question made1 but where it is questioned4 ,mr4 ,,secretary3 ,the fault great1 especially because of last ,parliament4 ,to order1 he shall be discharged now1 and to serve no more this ,parliament4 ,sir ,j4 ,leedes1 brought to the ,bar1 confesseth he was of the ,house last meeting in ,parliament2 and that he hath sit this ,parliament in the ,house1 and hath not taken his ,oath4 ,mr4 ,t4 ,,fanshaw3 ,that he must be punished as one that hath come into the ,house1 not being chosen4 ,sir ,e4 ,,sandes3 ,to pay the ,serjeant his fees1 and no further punishment2 because1 but negligence1 no presumption1 and is willing to take the ,oath4 ,mr4 ,,chidley3 ,to have an order to disable him for this ,parliament4 ,a ,warrant for a new ,writ in his room4 ,,precedent of a ,,member ,admitted to sit without taking the ,,oaths of ,,allegiance and ,,supremacy4 ,ordered1 ,that ,,william ,,ayres1 ,esquire1 being legally elected and returned a ,member of this ,house1 his election being returned and remitted of ,record1 shall be admitted to sit in this ,house1 without taking the ,oaths of ,supremacy and ,allegiance4 ,ordered1 ,that an ,ordinance be brought in by ,mr4 ,lisle1 to-morrow morning1 for repealing that clause in the ,act of 99 99 ,that no person be admitted to sit as a ,member of this ,house1 before he hath taken the ,oath of ,allegiance and ,supremacy4 ,ordered1 ,that all and every the ,sheriffs of the respective counties in ,england and ,wales do henceforth execute their several places and offices of ,sheriffs of their several and respective counties1 according to the duty of their said office1 without taking the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,supremacy4 ,,precedent of a ,,member ,discharged for declining to take the ,,oaths4 ,the ,house being informed1 that ,sir ,,henry ,,mounson attended1 according to the ,order on ,saturday last2 ,resolved1 ,that he be called in1 and tendered the ,oaths and ,declaration directed to be taken1 made1 repeated1 and subscribed by the ,members of the ,house4 ,he was called in accordingly2 and came up to the table3 ,and ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted him1 ,that the ,house had taken notice that he had been about the town a considerable time2 but yet did not attend the service of the ,house3 ,and that he had directions to tender him the ,oaths and the ,declarations4 ,whereupon1 ,sir ,henry ,mounson said3 ,that he was sorry that for some reasons he could not comply to qualify himself to sit in the ,house3 ,but that those reasons would no way incline him to disturb the ,government2 and that he submitted himself to the ,house4 ,and then withdrew4 ,resolved1 ,that ,sir ,henry ,mounson be discharged from being a ,member of the ,house4 ,new ,writ ,ordered4 ,,precedent of a ,,member ,discharged for declining to take the ,,oaths4 ,the ,house being informed1 ,that the ,lord ,,fanshaw attended at the door1 according to the order of ,saturday last4 ,resolved1 ,that he be called in1 and tendered the ,oaths and ,declaration1 directed to be taken1 made1 repeated1 and subscribed by the ,members of the ,house4 ,he was called in accordingly2 and came up to the table3 ,and ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted him1 ,that the ,house had taken notice that he had been about the town a considerable time2 but yet did not attend the ,service of the ,house2 and that he had direction to tender him the ,oaths and ,declaration4 ,whereupon the ,lord ,fanshaw said1 that it was true1 he had been about town a great while indeed2 but had been in the country1 if his health would have permitted him2 but that he had been in a strict course of physick1 and was in the same condition still of physick and diet2 but1 however1 that since he was absent there was an ,act of ,parliament passed for taking the ,oaths2 and he was not qualified to sit in the ,house1 in regard he was not satisfied to take the ,oaths2 and therefore he could not appear4 ,and then withdrew4 ,resolved1 ,that the ,lord ,fanshaw be discharged from being a ,member of the ,house4 ,and there being a ,petition in1 touching the ,election1 the granting a new ,writ was respited4 ,,precedent of a ,,member ,committed to the ,,tower for declining to take the ,,oaths4 ,the ,house being acquainted1 that ,mr4 ,,cholmly attended according to their order of ,tuesday last2 ,he was called in1 and came up to the table3 ,and ,mr ,speaker1 by the direction of the ,house1 acquainted him to this effect1 viz41 ,that the ,house had taken notice of his being absent from their service a considerable time1 and that now he was come he was to tender him1 and accordingly did tender him1 the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,supremacy appointed to be taken by the ,members of the ,house1 according to an ,act of this present ,parliament4 ,to which ,mr4 ,cholmly replied1 ,that as to his absence1 both when he was in the country and since he came to town1 he had been infirm and lame1 and had been under the doctor's hands1 and could not as yet recover himself4 ,and that he had endeavored to qualify himself to be a sitting ,member of the ,house1 by taking the ,oaths1 as the ,house expects1 but that he could not as yet do it3 ,and therefore humbly submitted himself to the ,house2 and that he did it not out of any wilful humor4 ,upon which he was commanded to withdraw4 ,and being withdrawn accordingly2 ,resolved1 ,that ,francis ,cholmly1 ,esquire1 a ,member of this ,house1 for his contempt in refusing to take the ,oaths1 99 991 be committed ,prisoner to the ,tower of ,london4 ,ordered1 ,that the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house do take into his custody the said ,mr4 ,cholmly1 and convey him to the ,tower3 ,and that ,mr4 ,speaker do issue his ,warrant for that purpose4 ,,precedent of a ,,member1 being a ,,quaker1 refusing to take the ,,oath4 ,house called over1 ,and the name of ,john ,archdale1 ,esquire1 a burgess for the borough of ,chipping ,wicomb1 in the county of ,bucks1 being called over a second time3 ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted the ,house that ,mr4 ,archdale had been with him this morning1 and delivered him a letter sealed1 which ,mr4 ,speaker presented to the ,house4 ,and the same was opened and read1 and is as followeth1 viz43-- ,london1 the #crd of the #aath month1 called ,january #afih-i4 ,sir4 ,upon the call of the ,house it will appear that ,i am duly chosen and returned to serve in ,parliament for the borough of ,chipping ,wycomb1 in the county of ,bucks2 and1 therefore1 ,i request of thee to acquaint the honorable ,house of ,commons the reason ,i have not as yet appeared1 which is1 that the burgesses being voluntarily inclined to elect me1 ,i did not oppose their inclinations1 believing that my declarations of fidelity1 etc41 might1 in this case1 as in others1 where the law requires an oath1 be accepted1 ,i am1 therefore1 ready to execute my trust if the ,house think fit to admit of me thereupon2 which ,i do humbly submit to their wisdom and justice2 and shall acquiesce with what they will be pleased to determine therein3 ,this being all at present1 ,i remain1 ,thy real and obliged friend1 ,,john ,,archdale4 ,day appointed for considering the contents of the said letter4 ,mr4 ,archdale ordered to attend4 ,the ,house being informed1 that ,mr4 ,archdale attended according to order2 ,his letter to ,mr4 ,speaker was again read2 ,and the several statutes qualifying persons to come into and sit and vote in this ,house were read1 viz41 of the #cj ,car4 ,,ii41 #a ,will4 and ,mariae1 and #g and #h ,will4 and ,mariae4 ,and then the said ,mr4 ,archdale was called in1 ,and he came into the middle of the ,house1 almost to the table2 ,and ,mr4 ,speaker1 by direction of the ,house1 asked him whether he had taken the ,oaths or would take the ,oaths1 appointed to qualify himself to be a member of this ,house2 ,to which he answered1 ,that in regard to a principle of his religion he had not taken the ,oaths1 nor could take them4 ,and then he withdrew4 ,a new ,writ ordered4 ,,precedent of a ,,member expelled for absconding1 and not taking the ,,oaths4 ,the ,house was called over according to order4 ,and the names of such as made default to appear were taken down4 ,ordered1 ,that the names of such as made default be now called over4 ,and they were called over accordingly4 ,and several of them appeared1 and others were excused upon account of their being ill1 some in the country1 some in town2 and others upon account of their being in the country upon extraordinary occasions2 and some as being upon the road4 ,upon calling over the names of 99 99 ,,lewis ,,price1 ,esquire1 99 99 they were not excused4 ,several ,members sent for4 ,ordered1 ,that ,lewis ,price1 ,esquire1 be sent for1 in custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house4 ,the ,serjeant-at-,arms being called upon to give the ,house an account of what he had done in relation to ,lewis ,pryse1 ,esquire1 who was1 the #hth of ,august last1 ordered to be sent for in custody1 for not attending the ,service of the ,house2 he acquainted the ,house1 ,that the messenger he sent to bring up ,mr4 ,pryse1 had been at his house at ,gargathen1 but that he was not there2 nor could the messenger have any intelligence where he was4 ,ordered1 ,that ,lewis ,pryse1 ,esquire1 do surrender himself into the custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house1 by this day month at the farthest1 upon pain of occurring the farther displeasure of this ,house1 and of being proceeded against with the utmost severity4 ,the order of the #bnd of ,february last being read requiring ,lewis ,pryse1 ,esquire1 to surrender himself into the custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house by that day month at farthest2 ,the ,serjeant was called upon to know whether he had heard from the said ,mr4 ,pryse1 and he acquainted the ,house1 ,that he had not heard from him4 ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted the ,house1 that he had received a letter from the said ,mr4 ,pryse1 and he delivered the same to the ,clerk to be read2 and the same was read accordingly1 and is as follows1 viz43 ,sir1 ',tis with pleasure that ,i embrace every opportunity of returning you my acknowledgments for the good offices you have done me1 as often as the case of my unavoidable absence has come under debate in the ,house4 ,the repeated experience ,i have had of your friendship in this point1 encourages me to hope for the continuance of them1 which ,i shall not offer to desire longer than the reasonableness of my case shall appear to deserve them4 ,i beg leave once more to represent it to you2 and through your assistance to the honorable ,house2 whose displeasure as it is a very sensible affliction to me1 ,i should be glad by any means in my power to remove4 ,that as it is impracticable for me to attend by the time appointed1 because of a very severe fit of the gout which ,i am now afflicted with1 and thereby give satisfaction to the ,house in the method they have insisted on2 ,i hope they will accept of such as is in my power1 and give me a favorable hearing when ,i represent to them1 that ,i was chose knight of the shire of ,cardigan when ,i was at #ajj miles distant from it1 and had been absent thence for ten months before the time of my election2 which ,i was so far from seeking1 that ,i never asked a vote for it1 and was chose even against my inclinations4 ,i know not how far a man is obliged to stand to the choice a county makes of him4 ,sure ,i am that ,i have reason to complain of a force that has administered the occasion of my disobliging the honorable ,house1 by an absence caused by infirmities1 under which ,i labored at the time of my choice1 and which have continued upon me ever since with the greatest severity1 and with little or no intermission4 ,in these circumstances ,i would fain hope that the honorable ,house will rather blame the country's choice than him who has been unwillingly forced into a post1 and lies under the misfortune 7for ,i flatter myself 'twill not be thought a crime7 of not being able to attend the business of it2 and will therefore lay aside their displeasure1 and remit the sentence ordered against me4 ,and ,i am the rather encouraged to hope this1 because ,mr4 ,prynne1 in his comment on the fourth book of ,sir ,edward ,coke's ,institutes1 shows1 from various records1 that incurable distempers have been constantly allowed by the ,house for a just excuse of non-attendance2 and upon debates in such cases1 no other punishment has been inflicted than excusing the service of the ,member1 and ordering a new writ for electing a person duly qualified1 and capable of attending the business of the ,house4 ,this being the course of ,parliamentary proceedings in such cases as mine1 which ,i have now truly represented to you1 and can produce hundreds of witnesses to confirm1 ,i hope that the unhappy incapacity ,i am under of attending the service of the ,house1 will be thought to deserve no severer treatment than has been usual in the like cases2 and that my ready submission to the honorable ,house's pleasure in this point1 will be a means to restore me to their favorable opinion1 and engage you to promote the request of ,your most obliged and obedient humble servant1 ,,le ,,pryse4 ,aberllefenny1 #ahth ,february1 #agae4 ,i know not how far the ,house in their last order about me1 might be influenced by any report of the messenger who came down to my house2 but to prevent misrepresentation ,i think it proper to assure you1 that within three days after a very dangerous fit of the gout suffered me to come downstairs1 ,i came from thence hither to my father-in-law's1 eighteen miles in my way to ,london4 ,but the motion of even so small a journey brought another fit upon me immediately1 with which ,i have been laid up here ever since1 and not having been yet so much as able to return to my own house4 ,then the journal of the 99 day of ,may1 #afhi1 in the case of ,mr4 ,cholmondley was read4 7,house interrupted--,conference47 ,the ,house resumed the consideration of the matter relating to ,mr4 ,pryse4 ,resolved1 ,that ,lewis ,pryse1 ,esquire1 a ,member of this ,house1 having been sent for in custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house1 the #hth day of ,august last1 for not attending the service of this ,house1 and having never qualified himself as a ,member of this ,house1 by taking the oaths at the table1 be forthwith brought up in custody4 ,the ,messenger gives the ,house an account of what he had done pursuant to the order of the ,house4 ,resolved1 ,that ,lewis ,pryse1 ,esquire1 a ,member of this ,house1 having been sent for in custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms attending this ,house1 the #hth day of ,august last1 for not attending the service of this ,house1 and having never qualified himself as a ,member of this ,house by taking the ,oaths at the table2 and having been on the #bnd of ,february last summoned to surrender himself into custody of the ,serjeant-at-,arms1 upon pain of being proceeded against with the utmost severity1 and he having absconded1 and peremptorily refused to surrender himself into custody1 be1 for the same contempt1 expelled this ,house4 ,,precedent of a ,,member refusing to take the ,,oath of ,,supremacy4 ,,daniel ,o',,connell1 ,esq41 professing the ,roman ,catholic religion1 returned ,knight of the ,shire for the ,county of ,clare1 being introduced in the usual manner1 for the purpose of taking his seat1 produced at the table a certificate of his having been sworn before two of the deputies appointed by the ,lord ,steward1 whereupon the clerk tendered to him the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration2 upon which ,mr4 ,o',connell stated1 that he was ready to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,abjuration1 but that he could not take the ,oath of ,supremacy1 and claimed the privilege of being allowed to take the ,oath set forth in the ,act passed in the present ,session of ,parliament for the ,relief of his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic ,subjects2 whereupon the ,clerk having stated the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 ,mr4 ,speaker informed ,mr4 ,o',connell that1 according to his interpretation of the law1 it was incumbent on ,mr4 ,o',connell to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration1 and that the provisions of the new ,act applied only to ,members returned after the commencement of the said ,act1 except in so far as regarded the repeal of the ,declaration against transubstantiation2 and that ,mr4 ,o',connell must withdraw unless he were prepared to take the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration4 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,o',connell withdrew4 ,motion1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell be called back and heard at the table4 ,debate arising4 ,a ,member stated that he was requested by ,mr4 ,o',connell to desire that he might be heard4 ,debate adjourned4 ,resolved1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell1 the ,member for ,clare1 be heard at the ,bar1 by himself1 his counsel or agents1 in respect of his claim to sit and vote in ,parliament without taking the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,mr4 ,o',connell was called in1 and heard accordingly3 ,and being withdrawn2 ,resolved1 ,that it is the opinion of this ,house1 that ,mr4 ,o',connell having been returned a ,member of this ,house before the commencement of the ,act passed in this ,session of ,parliament for the ,relief of his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic ,subjects1 is not entitled to sit or vote in this ,house unless he first take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,ordered1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell do attend the ,house this day1 and that ,mr4 ,speaker do then communicate to him the said resolution1 and ask him whether he will take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,and the ,house being informed that ,mr4 ,o',connell attended at the door1 he was called to the ,bar1 and ,mr4 ,speaker communicated to him the resolution of the ,house of yesterday1 and the order thereupon1 as followeth3-- ,resolved1 ,that it is the opinion of this ,house1 that ,mr4 ,o',connell having been returned a ,member of this ,house before the commencement of the ,act passed in this ,session of ,parliament1 for the ,relief of his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic ,subjects1 is not entitled to sit or vote in this ,house unless he first take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,ordered1 ,that ,mr4 ,o',connell do attend the ,house this day1 and that ,mr4 ,speaker do then communicate to him the said resolution1 and ask him whether he will take the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,and then ,mr4 ,speaker1 pursuant to the said order1 asked ,mr4 ,o',connell whether he would take the said ,oath of ,supremacy8 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,o',connell requested to see the said ,oath1 which being shown to him accordingly1 ,mr4 ,o',connell stated that the said ,oath contained one proposition which he knew to be false1 and another proposition which he believed to be untrue2 and that he therefore refused to take the said ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,and then ,mr4 ,o',connell was directed to withdraw2 and he withdrew accordingly4 ,ordered1 ,that ,mr4 ,speaker do issue his warrant to the ,clerk of the ,crown in ,ireland to make out 7subject to the provisions of an ,act passed in this ,session of ,parliament1 intituled1 ,an ,act to amend certain ,acts of the ,parliament of ,ireland relative to the election of ,members to serve in ,parliament1 and to regulate the qualification of persons to vote at the election of ,knights of the ,shire of ,ireland7 a new writ for the electing of a ,knight of the ,shire to serve in this present ,parliament for the ,county of ,clare1 in the room of ,daniel ,o',connell1 ,esq41 who1 having been returned a ,member of this ,house before the commencement of an ,act passed in this ,session of ,parliament for the ,relief of his ,majesty's ,roman ,catholic ,subjects1 has refused to qualify himself to sit and vote as a ,member of this ,house1 by taking the ,oath of ,supremacy4 ,,precedent of a ,,member being a ,,quaker1 claiming to make an ,,affirmation4 ,several ,members attended at the table to take the ,oaths2 and ,joseph ,pease1 ,esquire1 returned for the ,southern ,division of the ,county of ,durham1 having stated that1 being one of the people called ,quakers1 he claimed the privilege of making an ,affirmation1 instead of taking the ,oaths2 whereupon he was desired by ,mr4 ,speaker to retire until the sense of the ,house could be taken upon his claim2 and he retired accordingly4 ,ordered1 ,that a ,select ,committee be appointed to search the ,journals of the ,house1 and to report to the ,house such precedents1 and such ,acts or parts of ,acts of ,parliament as relate to the right of the people called ,quakers to take their seats in ,parliament1 and to the privilege conferred upon them to make their solemn ,affirmation in ,courts of ,justice1 and other places where by law an ,oath is allowed1 authorised1 or required to be taken4 ,report3-- ,resolved1 ,that it appears to this ,house1 that ,joseph ,pease is entitled to take his seat upon making his solemn ,affirmation and ,declaration to the effect of the ,oaths directed to be taken at the table of this ,house4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the ,counsel and ,agents in the case of the ,coleraine ,election1 being returned to the bar1 the ,clerk appointed to attend the said ,committee delivered into the ,house a reduced ,list2 and the same was called over1 and is as follows3-- 99 99 99 99 99 ,and the ,members of the ,committee being as usual1 come to the ,table to be sworn1 and ,joseph ,pease1 ,esquire1 a ,quaker1 being one of the said ,members1 ,mr4 ,speaker submitted to the ,house whether ,mr4 ,pease was capable of serving on the said ,election ,committee without having been sworn4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and the ,house being unanimously of opinion1 ,that ,mr4 ,pease was capable of serving on the said ,committee2 ,the rest of the ,committee were sworn1 and ,mr4 ,pease made his solemn ,affirmation1 as follows3 99 99 99 99 99 ,,precedent of a ,,member omitting the words in the ,,oath of ,,abjuration ,on the true ,faith of a ,christian4 ,the ,baron ,,lionel ,,nathan ,,de ,,rothschild1 returned as one of the members for the ,city of ,london1 came to the table to be sworn2 and being asked by the ,clerk what ,oath he wished to take1 the ,protestant or the ,roman ,catholic ,oath1 he replied1 ,i desire to be sworn upon the ,old ,testament4 ,whereupon the ,clerk having stated the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 ,mr4 ,speaker directed ,baron ,rothschild to withdraw4 ,debate on ,question relative to the matter adjourned4 ,ordered1 ,that ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 one of the ,members for the ,city of ,london1 having demanded to be sworn on the ,old ,testament1 be called to the table1 and that ,mr4 ,speaker do ask him why he has demanded to be sworn in that form4 ,whereupon ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 having come to the ,table1 was asked by ,mr4 ,speaker-- ,baron de ,rothschild1 you have demanded to be sworn on the ,old ,testament1 and ,i am directed by the ,house to ask you why you have demanded to be sworn in that form8 ,to which ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild replied3 ,because that is the form of swearing that ,i declare to be most binding on my conscience4 ,and then ,mr4 ,speaker directed him to withdraw4 ,ordered1 ,that ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 one of the ,members for the ,city of ,london1 having presented himself at the table of the ,house1 and having previously to taking the ,oaths1 requested to be sworn on the ,old ,testament 7being the form which he has declared at the table to be most binding on his conscience71 the ,clerk be directed to swear him on the ,old ,testament accordingly4 ,the ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 having come to the table1 ,mr4 ,speaker acquainted him that the ,house had made the following ,order3 ,that ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 one of the ,members for the ,city of ,london1 having presented himself at the table of the ,house1 and having previously to taking the ,oaths1 requested to be sworn on the ,old ,testament 7being the form which he has declared at the table to be most binding on his conscience71 the ,clerk be directed to swear him on the ,old ,testament accordingly4 ,whereupon the ,clerk handed to him the ,old ,testament1 and tendered him the ,oaths2 and he accordingly took the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,supremacy1 repeating the same after the ,clerk2 the ,clerk then proceeded to administer the ,oath of ,abjuration1 which the ,baron de ,rothschild repeated after the ,clerk so far as the words upon the true faith of a ,christian1 but upon the ,clerk reading those words1 the ,baron de ,rothschild said1 ,i omit those words as not binding on my conscience2 he then concluded with the words ,so help me1 ,god 7the ,clerk not having read those words to him71 and kissed the said ,testament3--,whereupon he was directed to withdraw4 ,question for a new writ negatived4 ,resolved1 ,that the ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild is not entitled to vote in this ,house1 or to sit in this ,house during any debate1 until he shall take the ,oath of ,abjuration in the form appointed by law4 ,resolved1 ,that this ,house will1 at the earliest opportunity in the next ,session of ,parliament1 take into its serious consideration the form of the ,oath of ,abjuration1 with a view to relieve her ,majesty's subjects professing the ,jewish religion4 ,the ,house refuses to hear ,petitioners by ,counsel in favour of a resolution admitting ,baron ,lionel de ,rothschild4 ,see case of ,david ,salomons1 ,esq41 ,july1 #ahea1 infra4 ,bill to provide for the relief of her ,majesty's subjects professing the ,jewish ,religion4 ,brought from the ,lords1 #acth ,july4 ,royal assent1 #bcrd ,july1 #aheh4 ,oaths ,bill ,passed3 ,by the ,lords with ,amendments2 ,lords' ,amendments disagreed to2 ,lords insist1 and assign reasons4 ,resolved1 ,that this ,house does not consider it necessary to examine the reasons offered by the ,lords for insisting upon the exclusion of ,jews from ,parliament1 as by a ,bill of the present ,session1 intituled1 ,an ,act to provide for the relief of her ,majesty's subjects professing the ,jewish ,religion1 their ,lordships have provided means for the admission of persons professing the ,jewish ,religion to seats in the ,legislature4 ,resolved1 ,that this ,house doth not insist upon its disagreement with the ,lords in their ,amendments to the said ,bill4 ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 returned as one of the ,members for the ,city of ,london1 came to the table to be sworn2 and stated that1 being a person professing the ,jewish religion1 he entertained a conscientious objection to take the ,oath which1 by an ,act passed in the present ,session1 has been substituted for the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration1 in the form therein required4 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 who desired ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild to withdraw1 and he withdrew accordingly4 ,resolved1 ,that it appears to this ,house that ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 a person professing the ,jewish religion1 being otherwise entitled to sit and vote in this ,house1 is prevented from so sitting and voting by his conscientious objection to take the oath which1 by an ,act passed in the present ,session of ,parliament1 has been substituted for the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration1 in the form therein required4 ,resolved1 ,that any person professing the ,jewish religion may henceforth1 in taking the oath prescribed in an ,act of the present ,session of ,parliament to entitle him to sit and vote in this ,house1 omit the words and ,i make this declaration upon the true faith of a ,christian4 ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild having again come to the table1 desired to be sworn on the ,old ,testament1 as being binding on his conscience4 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 who then desired the ,clerk to swear him upon the ,old ,testament4 ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild was sworn accordingly1 and subscribed the ,oath at the table4 ,see case of ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild1 #aeth ,feb41 #ahei1 infra4 ,parliament dissolved1 #bcrd ,april1 #ahei2 met1 #cast ,may1 #ahei4 ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 ,member for the ,city of ,london1 came to the table to be sworn1 and stated that being a person professing the ,jewish religion1 he had a conscientious objection to take the oath in the form required by the ,act #bb ,vict4 c4 #dh4 ,the ,clerk having reported the circumstance to ,mr4 ,speaker1 ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild was directed to withdraw1 and he withdrew accordingly4 ,resolved1 ,that it appears to this ,house that ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 a person professing the ,jewish religion1 being otherwise entitled to sit and vote in this ,house1 is prevented from so sitting and voting by his conscientious objection to take the oath1 which by an ,act passed in the #bbnd year of her ,majesty has been substituted for the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration in the form therein required4 ,resolved1 ,that any person professing the ,jewish religion may henceforth in taking the oath prescribed in an ,act passed in the twenty-second year of her ,majesty to entitle him to sit and vote in this ,house1 omit the words and ,i make this declaration upon the true faith of a ,christian4 ,whereupon ,baron ,lionel ,nathan de ,rothschild1 ,alderman ,david ,salomons1 and ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild1 being ,members professing the ,jewish religion1 having come to the table1 were sworn upon the ,old ,testament1 and took the oath1 omitting the words and ,i make this declaration upon the true faith of a ,christian1 and subscribed the same4 ,,precedent of a ,,member omitting the words in the ,,oath ,,of ,,abjuration1 on the true faith of a ,christian4 ,,david ,,salomons1 ,esq41 returned as one of the ,members for the borough of ,greenwich1 came to the table to be sworn2 and being tendered the ,new ,testament by the ,clerk1 stated that he desired to be sworn on the ,old ,testament3 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 and ,mr4 ,speaker asked him why he desired to be sworn on the ,old ,testament2 he answered1 because he considered it binding on his conscience2 ,mr4 ,speaker then desired the ,clerk to swear him upon the ,old ,testament2 the ,clerk handed to him the ,old ,testament1 and tendered him the oaths2 and he took the ,oaths of ,allegiance and ,supremacy1 repeating the same after the ,clerk4 ,the ,clerk then proceeded to administer the ,oath of ,abjuration1 which ,mr4 ,salomons read as far as the words upon the true faith of a ,christian1 which he omitted1 concluding with the words ,so help me1 ,god4 ,and the ,clerk having reported to ,mr4 ,speaker that ,mr4 ,salomons had omitted to repeat the words upon the true faith of a ,christian1 ,mr4 ,speaker desired ,mr4 ,salomons to withdraw4 ,he thereupon retired from the table and sat down upon one of the lower benches1 upon which ,mr4 ,speaker informed him that1 not having taken the ,oath of ,abjuration in the form prescribed by the ,act of ,parliament1 and in the form in which the ,house had upon a former occasion expressed its opinion that it ought to be taken1 he could not be allowed to remain in the ,house1 but must withdraw4 ,and he withdrew accordingly4 ,motion for new writ withdrawn4 ,the ,house resumed the further proceedings4 ,mr4 ,alderman ,salomons entered the ,house1 and took his seat within the ,bar3 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,speaker said that he saw that a ,member had taken his seat without having taken the ,oaths required by law2 and that he must therefore desire that the honorable ,member do withdraw4 ,mr4 ,alderman ,salomons continued in the seat within the ,bar4 ,ordered 7after ,debate71 ,that ,mr4 ,alderman ,salomons do now withdraw4 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,speaker stated that the honorable ,member for ,greenwich had heard the decision of the ,house1 and hoped that the honorable ,member was prepared to obey it4 ,mr4 ,alderman ,salomons continuing to sit in his seat1 ,mr4 ,speaker directed the ,serjeant-at-,arms to remove him below the ,bar4 ,whereupon ,mr4 ,serjeant-at-,arms having placed his hand on ,mr4 ,alderman ,salomons1 he was conducted below the ,bar4 ,the ,house refuses to hear ,petitioners by ,counsel at the ,bar of the ,house in defence of their right to elect their own ,representative4 ,resolved 7after ,debate71 ,that ,david ,salomons1 ,esq41 is not entitled to vote in this ,house1 or to sit in this ,house1 during any debate1 until he shall take the ,oath of ,abjuration in the form appointed by law4 ,,precedent of a ,,member stating that he had a conscientious objection to take the ,,oath4 ,baron ,,mayer ,,amschel ,,de ,,rothschild1 returned for the town and port of ,hythe1 came to the table to be sworn1 and stated that1 being a person professing the ,jewish religion1 he entertained a conscientious objection to take the oath1 which by an ,act passed in the last ,session has been substituted for the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration1 in the form therein required4 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 who desired ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild to withdraw2 and he withdrew accordingly4 ,resolved1 ,that it appears to this ,house that ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild1 a person professing the ,jewish religion1 being otherwise entitled to sit and vote in this ,house1 is prevented from so sitting and voting by his conscientious objection to take the oath1 which by an ,act passed in the last ,session of ,parliament has been substituted for the ,oaths of ,allegiance1 ,supremacy1 and ,abjuration in the form therein required4 ,resolved1 ,that any person professing the ,jewish religion may henceforth1 in taking the oath prescribed in an ,act of the last ,session of ,parliament to entitle him to sit and vote in this ,house1 omit the words and ,i make this declaration upon the true faith of a ,christian4 ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild1 being again come to the table1 desired to be sworn on the ,old ,testament as binding on his conscience4 ,whereupon the ,clerk reported the matter to ,mr4 ,speaker1 who then desired the ,clerk to swear him upon the ,old ,testament4 ,baron ,mayer ,amschel de ,rothschild was sworn accordingly1 and subscribed the oath at the table4 ,appendix ,no4 #b4 ,,paper handed in by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 #bnd ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,precedents ,,relating ,,to ,,parliamentary ,,oaths4 ,,case of ,attorney ,general ,sir ,,francis ,,bacon1 ,commons ,journals1 ,vol4 #a1 page #dei1 #aath ,april1 #afad1 continued from page #def1 #hth ,april4 ,,eligibility of the ,attorney ,general to sit in ,parliament4 ,by #df ,edward ,,iii41 #acgb1 no practising barrister could be ,knight of the ,shire4 ,page #dei4--,the precedents to disable him ought to be showed on the other side4 ,page #dfj4--,their ,oath their own consciences to look unto1 not we to examine it4 ,at that date each ,member had to make ,oath that he was duly qualified4 #a4 ,question whether he shall for this ,parliament remain of the ,house or not3--,resolved1 ,he shall4 #b4 ,question4--,whether any ,attorney ,general shall after this ,parliament serve as a ,member of this ,house3--,resolved1 ,no4 ,,case of ,,john ,,wilkes1 ,esquire1 ,commons ,journal1 #ch1 page #igg1 #crd ,may1 #aghb4 ,,the ,house was moved1 that the entry in the ,journal of the ,house1 of the #agth day of ,february1 #agfi1 of the ,resolution1 ,that ,john ,wilkes1 ,esquire1 having been in this ,session of ,parliament expelled this ,house1 was and is incapable of being elected a ,member to serve in this present ,parliament1 might be read1 and the same being read accordingly2 ,a motion was made1 and the question being put1 ,that the said resolution be expunged from the ,journals of this ,house1 as being subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this ,kingdom4 ,the ,house divided4 ,the ,yeas went forth4 ,tellers for the ,yeas1 ,sir ,philip ,jennings ,clarke and ,mr4 ,byng1 #aae4 ,tellers for the ,noes1 ,mr4 ,john ,st4 ,john and ,sir ,william ,augustus ,cunynghame1 #dg1 ,so it was resolved in the affirmative4 ,and the same was expunged by the ,clerk at the table1 accordingly4 ,ordered1 ,that all ,declarations1 ,orders1 and ,resolutions of this ,house1 respecting the election of ,john ,wilkes1 ,esquire1 for the county of ,middlesex1 as a void election1 the true and legal election of ,henry ,lawes ,luttrell1 ,esquire1 into ,parliament for the said county1 and the incapacity of ,john ,wilkes1 ,esquire1 to be elected a ,member to serve in the said ,parliament1 be expunged from the ,journals of this ,house as being subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this ,kingdom4 ,by ,cavendish's ,parliamentary ,debates1 ,vol4 ,i41 page #gc1 #bdth ,november1 #agfh1 it appears that inter alia were used to justify the original and subsequently expunged ,resolutions--first1 the copy of the record of the proceedings1 on an information in the ,court of ,king's ,bench1 against ,john ,wilkes1 ,esquire1 for blasphemy--page #abc2 three obscene and impious libels2 an impious libel with intent to blaspheme the ,almighty ,god4 ,,case of ,mr4 ,,john ,,horne ,,tooke1 ,parliamentary ,history1 ,vol4 #ce1 page #ief1 #afth ,february1 #ahja4 ,mr4 ,john ,horne ,tooke took the ,oaths and his seat for ,old ,sarum4 ,he was introduced by ,sir ,francis ,burdett and ,mr4 ,wilson4 ,this being done1 ,earl ,temple rose and said1 he had observed a gentleman who had just retired from the table1 after having taken the ,oaths1 whom he conceived to be incapable of a seat in that ,house1 in consequence of his having taken priest's orders and been inducted into a living4 ,he would wait the allotted time of fourteen days to see whether there was any petition presented against his return2 if not he should then move that the return for ,old ,sarum be taken into consideration4 ,page #acbc1 #ajth ,march1 #ahja4--;,earl ,temple moved that ,mr4 ,boucher1 ,deputy ,registrar of ,salisbury1 be called in to prove that ,mr4 ,horne ,tooke1 being a priest in orders1 was not eligible to a seat in that ,house4 ,after debate1 in which ,mr4 ,john ,horne ,tooke spoke--,amendment and ,division--,motion agreed to 7page #acdb71--,select ,committee appointed 7page #acdc74 ,two reports given1 pages #acdc to #acdi1 were made1 giving all the cases of any of the clergy returned to ,parliament4 #dth ,may1 #ahja4--;,earl ,temple moved 7pages #acdi to #acgd71 ,that ,mr4 ,speaker do issue his warrant to the clerk of the ,crown in ,great ,britain1 to make out a new writ for the election of a burgess to serve in this present ,parliament for the ,borough of ,old ,sarum1 in the county of ,wilts1 in the room of the ,rev4 ,john ,horne ,tooke1 who being at the time of his election in priest's orders1 was and is incapable of sitting in this ,house4 ,a debate took place in which ,mr4 ,john ,horne ,tooke spoke 7pp4 #acej to #adjb71 division1 and the motion negatived4 ,jurist1 ,vol4 #ag1 ,page #dfc4--;,exchequer ,chamber2 ,error from the ,court of ,exchequer3 ,coram1 ,lord ,campbell1 ,chief ,justice1 and ,coleridge1 ,cresswell1 ,wightman1 ,williams1 and ,crompton1 ,j4 ,one judgment by ,lord ,chief ,justice ,campbell for the whole ,court4 ,lord ,campbell 7page #dfd74--,the words so help me1 ,god1 are words of asseveration1 and of the manner of taking the oath2 but the words preceding them are1 it appears to me1 an essential part of the oath4 ,fisher's ,digest1 ,vol4 #c1 page #fagi4--;,by a private ,act1 no person appointed to act as tithe valuer shall be capable of acting until he shall have taken and subscribed an oath in the words following3 ,i1 ,a4 ,b41 do swear that ,i will faithfully1 etc41 execute1 etc42 so help me1 ,god4 ,held1 that the oath had nevertheless been properly administered according to the ,statute1 for the words omitted were no part of the oath1 but only an indication of the manner of administering it4 ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton1 #h ,el4 ,bl41 #ieb2 #d ,jur41 ,n4 ,s41 #gjg2 #bg ,l4 ,j41 ,q4 ,b41 #aie4 ,appendix ,no4 #c4 ,,paper handed in by ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh1 #bnd ,june1 #ahhj4 ,,statement on the ,,oath ,,question by ,mr4 ,,bradlaugh4 #bj1 ,circus ,road1 ,st4 ,john's ,wood1 ,london1 ,n4,w41 #bjth ,may1 #ahhj4 ,,when elected as one of the ,burgesses to represent ,northampton in the ,house of ,commons1 ,i believed that ,i had the legal right to make affirmation of allegiance in lieu of taking the oath1 as provided by section #d of the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act1 #ahff4 ,while ,i considered that ,i had this legal right1 it was then clearly my moral duty to make the affirmation4 ,the oath1 although to me including words of idle and meaningless character1 was1 and is1 regarded by a large number of my fellow countrymen as an appeal to ,deity to take cognizance of their swearing4 ,it would have been an act of hypocrisy to voluntarily take this form if any other had been open to me1 or to take it without protest1 as though it meant in my mouth any such appeal4 ,i1 therefore1 quietly and privately notified the ,clerk of the ,house of my desire to affirm4 ,his view of the law and practice differing from my own1 and no similar case having theretofore arisen1 it became necessary that ,i should tender myself to affirm in a more formal manner1 and this ,i did at a season deemed convenient by those in charge of the business of the ,house4 ,in tendering my affirmation1 ,i was careful when called on by the ,speaker to state my objection1 to do nothing more than put in the fewest possible words my contention that the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act1 #ahff1 gave the right to affirm in ,parliament to every person for the time being by law permitted to make an affirmation in lieu of taking an oath1 and that ,i was such a person1 and therefore claimed to affirm4 ,the ,speaker neither refusing1 nor accepting my affirmation1 referred the matter to the ,house1 which appointed a ,select ,committee to report whether persons entitled to affirm under the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts1 #ahfi and #ahgj1 were1 under ,section #d of the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act1 #ahff1 also entitled to affirm as ,members of ,parliament4 ,this ,committee1 by the casting-vote of its ,chairman1 has decided that ,i am not entitled to affirm4 ,two courses are open to me1 one of appeal to the ,house against the decision of the ,committee2 the other1 of present compliance with the ceremony1 while doing my best to prevent the further maintenance of a form which many other ,members of the ,house think as objectionable as ,i do1 but which habit1 and the fear of exciting prejudice1 has induced them to submit to4 ,to appeal to the ,house against the decision of the ,committee would be ungracious1 and would certainly involve great delay of public business4 ,i was present at the deliberations of the ,committee1 and while naturally ,i cannot be expected to bow submissively to the statements and arguments of my opponents1 ,i am bound to say that they were calmly and fairly urged4 ,i think them unreasonable2 but the fact that they included a legal argument from an earnest ,liberal deprives them even of a purely party character4 ,if ,i appealed to the ,house against the ,committee1 ,i1 of course1 might rely on the fact that the ,attorney ,general1 the ,solicitor ,general1 ,sir ,henry ,jackson1 ,q4,c41 ,watkin ,williams1 ,q4,c41 and ,mr4 ,serjeant ,simon are reported in the ,times to have interpreted the law as ,i do2 and ,i might add that the ,right ,honorable ,john ,bright and ,mr4 ,whitbread are in the same journal arrayed in favor of allowing me to affirm4 ,but even then the decision of the ,house may endorse that of the ,committee1 and should it be in my favor it could only1 judging from what has already taken place1 be after a bitter party debate1 in which the ,government specially and the ,liberals generally would be sought to be burdened with my anti-theological views1 and with promoting my return to ,parliament4 ,as a matter of fact1 the ,liberals of ,england have never in any way promoted my return to ,parliament4 ,the much-attacked action of ,mr4 ,adam had relation only to the second seat1 and in no way related to the one for which ,i was fighting4 ,in #ahfh1 the only action of ,mr4 ,gladstone and of ,mr4 ,bright was to write letters in favor of my competitors2 and since #ahfh ,i do not believe that either of these gentlemen has directly or indirectly interfered in any way in connection with my ,parliamentary candidature4 ,the majority of the electors of ,northampton had determined to return me before the recent union in that borough1 and while pleased to aid their fellow ,liberals in winning the two seats1 my constituents would have at any rate returned me had no union taken place4 ,my duty to my constituents is to fulfil the mandate they have given me1 and if to do this ,i have to submit to a form less solemn to me than the affirmation ,i would have reverently made1 so much the worse for those who force me to repeat words which ,i have scores of times declared are to me sounds conveying no clear and definite meaning4 ,i am sorry for the earnest believers who see words sacred to them used as a meaningless addendum to a promise1 but ,i cannot permit their less sincere co-religionists to use an idle form in order to prevent me from doing my duty to those who have chosen me to speak for them in ,parliament4 ,i shall1 taking the oath1 regard myself as bound1 not by the letter of its words1 but by the spirit which the affirmation would have conveyed had ,i been permitted to use it4 ,so soon as ,i am able1 ,i shall take such steps as may be consistent with ,parliamentary business to put an end to the present doubtful and unfortunate state of the law and practice on oaths and affirmations4 ,only four cases have arisen of refusal to take the oath except1 of course1 those cases purely political in their character2 two of those cases are those of the ,quakers ,john ,archdale and ,joseph ,pease4 ,the religion of these men forbade them to swear at all1 and they nobly refused4 ,the sect to which they belonged was outlawed1 insulted and imprisoned2 they were firm1 and one of that sect sat on the very committee1 a member of her ,majesty's ,privy ,council1 and a member of the actual ,cabinet4 ,i thank him gratefully that1 valuing right so highly1 he cast his vote so nobly for one for whom ,i am afraid he has but scant sympathy4 ,no such religious scruple prevents me from taking the oath as prevented ,john ,archdale and ,joseph ,pease4 ,in the case of ,baron ,rothschild and ,alderman ,salomons the words upon the true faith of a ,christian were the obstacle4 ,to-day the oath contains no such words4 ,the ,committee report that ,i may not affirm1 and protesting against a decision which seems to me alike against the letter of the law and the spirit of modern legislation1 ,i comply with the forms of the ,house4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 ,,mr4 ,,bradlaugh',s ,,speeches4 ,,mr4 ,,bradlaugh',s ,first ,speech at the ,bar of the ,house of ,commons1 delivered ,june #bcrd1 #ahhj4 ,,sir1--,i have to ask the indulgence of every member of this ,house while1 in a position unexampled in the history of this ,house1 ,i try to give one or two reasons why the resolution which you have read to me should not be enforced4 ,if it were not unbecoming ,i should appeal to the traditions of the ,house against the ,house itself1 and ,i should point out that in none of its records1 so far as my poor reading goes1 is there any case in which this ,house has judged one of its members in his absence1 and taken away from that member the constitutional right he has 7hear1 hear74 ,there have been members against whom absolute legal disqualification has been urged4 ,no such legal disqualification is ventured to be urged by any member of this ,house against myself4 ,but even those members have been heard in their places2 those members have been listened to before the decision was taken against them2 and ,i ask that this ,house to myself shall not be less just than it has always been to every one of its members 7hear1 hear74 ,do you tell me ,i am unfit to sit amongst you8 7hear1 hear1 and ,order1 order47 ,the more reason1 then1 that this ,house should show the generosity which judges show to a criminal1 and allow every word he has to say to be heard4 ,but ,i stand here1 ,sir1 as no criminal4 ,i stand here as the chosen of a constituency of this country1 with my duty to that constituency to do4 ,i stand here1 ,sir--if it will not be considered impertinent to put it so--with the most profound respect for this ,house1 of which ,i yet hope and mean to form a part1 and on whose traditions ,i should not wish to cast one shadow of reproach4 ,i stand here returned duly2 no petition against my return2 no impeachment of that return4 ,i stand here returned duly1 ready to fulfil every form that this ,house requires1 ready to fulfil every form that the law permits this ,house to require1 ready to do every duty that the law makes incumbent upon me4 ,i will not in this presence argue whether this ,house has or has not the right to set its decision against the law1 because ,i should imagine that even the rashest of those who spoke against me would hardly be prepared to put in the mouth of one whom they consider too advanced in politics an arguments so dangerous as that might become4 ,i speak within the limits of the law1 asking for no favor from this ,house for myself or for my constituents1 but asking the merest justice which has always been accorded to a member of the ,house 7hear1 hear1 and ,order47 ,i have to ask indulgence lest the memory of some hard words which have been spoken in my absence should seem to give to what ,i say a tone of defiance1 which it is far from my wish should be there at all2 and ,i am the more eased because although there were words spoken which ,i had always been taught ,english gentlemen never said in the absence of an antagonist without notice to him1 yet there were also generous and brave words said for one who is at present1 ,i am afraid1 a source of trouble and discomfort and hindrance to business4 ,i measure the generous words against the others1 and ,i will only make one appeal through you1 ,sir1 which is1 that if the reports be correct that the introduction of other names came with mine in the heat of passion and the warmth of debate1 the gentleman who used those words1 if such there were1 will remember that he was wanting in chivalry1 because1 while ,i can answer for myself1 and am able to answer for myself1 nothing justified the introduction of any other name beside my own to make a prejudice against me 7cheers and cries of ,question and ,order47 ,i fear lest the strength of this ,house1 judicially exercised as ,i understand it to be--with infrequency of judicial exercise--that the strength of this ,house makes it forget our relative positions4 ,at present ,i am pleading at its bar for justice4 ,by right it is there ,i should plead4 ,the hon4 member pointed to the seats4 ,it is that right ,i claim in the name of those who sent me here4 ,no legal disqualification before my election1 or it might have been made the ground of petition4 ,no legal disqualification since my election--not even pretended4 ,it is said3 ,you might have taken the oath as other members did4 ,i could not help when ,i read that1 ,sir1 trying to put myself in the place of each member who said it4 ,i imagined a member of some form of faith who found in the oath words which seemed to him to clash with his faith1 but still words which he thought he might utter1 but which he would prefer not to utter if there were any other form which the law provided him1 and ,i asked myself whether each of those members would not then have taken the form which was most consonant with his honor and his conscience4 ,if ,i have not misread1 some hon4 members seem to think that ,i have neither honor nor conscience4 ,is there not some proof to the contrary in the fact that ,i did not go through the form1 believing that there was another right open to me8 7hear1 hear1 and ,order47 ,is that not some proof that ,i have honor and conscience8 ,of the gentlemen who are now about to measure themselves against the rights of the constituencies of ,england ,i ask what justification had they for that measurement8 ,they have said that ,i thrust my opinions on the ,house4 ,i hold here1 ,sir1 the evidence of ,sir ,thomas ,erskine ,may1 and ,i can find no word of any opinion of mine thrust upon the ,house at all4 ,i have read--it may be that the reports misrepresent--that the cry of ,atheist has been raised from that side4 ,the hon4 member pointed to the ,opposition side4 ,no word of all mine before the committee put in any terms those theological or anti-theological opinions in evidence before the ,house4 ,i am no more ashamed of my own opinions1 which ,i did not choose1 opinions into which ,i have grown1 than any member of this ,house is ashamed of his2 and much as ,i value the right to sit here1 and much as ,i believe that the justice of this ,house will accord it to me before the struggle is finished1 ,i would rather relinquish it for ever than it should be thought that by any shadow of hypocrisy ,i had tried to gain a feigned entrance here by pretending to be what ,i am not 7cheers1 and cries of ,order47 ,on the report of the committee as it stands1 on the evidence before the ,house1 what is the objection to either my affirming or taking the oath8 ,it is said ,i have no legal right to affirm4 ,i will suppose that to be so4 ,it is the first time that the ,house has made itself a court of law from which there may be no appeal1 and deprived a citizen of his constitutional right of appeal to a court of law to make out what the statute means in dealing with him4 ,there is no case in which this ,house has overridden everything1 and put one of its members where he had no chance of battling for his right at all4 ,take the oath4 ,it is possible that some of the lawyers1 who have disagreed among themselves even upon that 7the ,opposition7 side of the ,house1 may be right1 and that ,i may be wrong in the construction ,i have put upon the oath1 but no such objection can come4 ,there is no precedent--there is1 ,i submit respectfully1 no right--in this ,house to stand between me and the oath which the law provides for me to take1 which the statute1 under penalty even upon members of this ,house themselves if they put me out from my just return1 gives me the right to take4 ,what kind of a conflict is provoked here if this resolution be enforced8 ,not a grave conflict in a court of law1 where the judges exclude passion1 where they only deal with facts and evidence4 ,i do not mean that these gentlemen do not deal with facts2 but1 if ,i am any judge of my own life's story1 there have been many things which ,i can hardly reckon in the category of facts put against myself4 ,i don't mean that they are not right1 for hon4 members may know more of myself than ,i do myself2 but1 judging myself as ,i know myself1 some of the members who have attacked me so glibly during the last few days must have been extraordinarily misinformed1 or must have exceedingly misapprehended the matters they alleged4 ,it has been said that ,i have paraded and flaunted some obnoxious opinions4 ,i appeal to your justice1 sir1 and to that of the members of this ,house1 to say whether my manner has not been as respectful as that of man could be--whether in each case ,i have not withdrawn when you told me4 ,if ,i now come here with even the appearance of self-assertion1 it is because ,i would not be a recreant and a coward to the constituency that sent me to represent them2 and ,i mean to be as members have been in the best history of this assembly4 ,i ask the ,house1 in dealing with my rights1 to remember how they are acting4 ,it is perfectly true that by a majority they may decide against me now4 ,what are you to do then8 ,are you going to declare the seat vacant8 ,first1 ,i tell you that you have not the right4 ,the moment ,i am there--the hon4 member pointed inside the ,house--,i admit the right of the ,house1 of its own good will and pleasure1 to expel me4 ,as yet ,i am not under your jurisdiction4 ,as yet ,i am under the protection of the law4 ,a return sent me to this ,house1 and ,i ask you1 sir1 as the guardian of the liberties of this ,house1 to give effect to that return4 ,the law says you should1 and that this ,house should4 ,and naturally so2 because1 if it were not so1 any time a majority of members might exclude anyone they pleased4 ,what has been alleged against me8 ,politics8 ,are views on politics urged as a reason why a member should not sit here8 ,pamphlets have been read--,i won't say with accuracy1 because ,i will not libel any of the hon4 members who read them2 but1 surely1 if they are grounds for disqualification they are grounds for indictment to be proved against me in a proper fashion4 ,there is no case in all the records of this ,house in which you have ransacked what a man has written and said in his past life and then challenged him with it here4 ,my theology8 ,it would be impertinent in me1 after the utterances of men so widely disagreeing from me that have been made on the side of religious liberty during the past two nights--it would be impertinent in me to add one word save this4 ,it is said that you may deal with me because ,i am isolated4 ,i could not help hearing the ring of that word in the lobby as ,i sat outside last night4 ,but is that a reason1 that1 because ,i stand alone the ,house are to do against me what they would not do if ,i had #ajj1jjj men at my back8 7cries of ,oh74 ,that is a bad argument which provokes a reply inconsistent with the dignity of this ,house and which ,i should be sorry to give4 ,i have not yet used--,i hope no passion may tempt me to be using--any words that would seem to savor of even a desire to enter into conflict with this ,house4 ,i have always taught1 preached1 and believed the supremacy of ,parliament1 and it is not because for a moment the judgment of one ,chamber of ,parliament should be hostile to me that ,i am going to deny the ideas ,i have always held2 but ,i submit that one ,chamber of ,parliament--even its grandest ,chamber1 as ,i have always held this to be--had no right to override the law4 ,the law gives me the right to sign that roll1 to take and subscribe the oath1 and to take my seat there pointing to the benches4 ,i admit that the moment ,i am in the ,house1 without any reason but your own good will1 you can send me away4 ,that is your right4 ,you have full control over your members1 but you cannot send me away until ,i have been heard in my place1 not a suppliant as ,i am now1 but with the rightful audience that each member has always had4 ,there is one phase of my appeal which ,i am loth indeed to make4 ,i presume you will declare the seat vacant4 ,what do you send me back to ,northampton to say8 ,i said before1 and ,i trust ,i may say again1 that this assembly was one in which any man might well be proud to sit--prouder ,i that ,i have not some of your traditions and am not of your families1 but am of the people1 the people that sent me here to speak for them4 ,do you mean that ,i am to go back to ,northampton as to a court1 to appeal against you8 that ,i am to ask the constituency to array themselves against this ,house8 ,i hope not4 ,if it is to be1 it must be4 ,if this ,house arrays itself against an isolated man--its huge power against one citizen--if it must be1 then the battle must be too4 ,but it is not with the constituency of ,northampton alone--hon4 members need not mistake--that you will come into conflict if this appeal is to go forward1 if the ,house of ,commons is to override the statute law to get rid of even the vilest of members4 ,had you alleged against me even more than against one man whose name was mentioned in this ,house last night1 ,i should still have held that the ,house cannot supersede the rights of the people4 ,but not as much is alleged against me as was alleged against that man1 in whose case the ,house itself said that its conduct had been subversive of the rights of the people4 ,i beg you1 for your own sakes1 don't put yourselves in that position4 ,i have no desire to wrestle with you for justice4 ,i admit that ,i have used hard words in my short life1 giving men the right in return to say hard things of me2 but is it not better that ,i should have the right to say them to your faces8 ,if they are within the law1 let the law deal with me fairly and properly2 but if they are without the law1 not unfairly1 as ,i submit you are doing now4 ,you have the power to send me back1 but in appealing to ,northampton ,i must appeal to a tribunal higher than yours--not to courts of law1 for ,i hope the days of conflict between the assembly which makes the law and the tribunals which administer it are passed4 ,it must be a bad day for ,england and for ,great ,britain1 if we are to be brought again to the time when the judges and those who make the law for the judges are in rash strife as to what they mean4 ,but there is a court to which ,i shall appeal--the court of public opinion1 which will have to express itself4 ,you say it is against me4 ,possibly2 but if it be so1 is it against me rightly or wrongly8 ,i am ready to admit1 if you please1 for the sake of argument1 that every opinion ,i hold is wrong and deserves punishment4 ,let the law punish it4 ,if you say the law cannot1 then you admit that you have no right1 and ,i appeal to public opinion against the iniquity of a decision which overrides the law and denies me justice4 ,i beg your pardon1 ,sir1 and that of the ,house too1 if in this warmth there seems to lack respect for its dignity2 and as ,i shall have1 if your decision be against me1 to come to that table when your decision is given1 ,i beg you1 before the step is taken in which we may both lose our dignity--mine is not much1 but yours is that of the ,commons of ,england--,i beg you1 before the gauntlet is fatally thrown--,i beg you1 not in any sort of menace1 not in any sort of boast1 but as one man against six hundred1 to give me that justice which on the other side of this hall the judges would give me were ,i pleading there before them 7loud cheers and cries of ,order1 amid which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again bowed and retired74 ,,mr4 ,,bradlaugh',s ,second ,speech at the ,bar of the ,house of ,commons1 delivered ,april #bhth1 #ahha4 ,mr4 ,,speaker1--,i have again to ask the indulgence of the ,house while ,i submit to it a few words in favor of my claim to do that which the law requires me to do4 ,perhaps the ,house will pardon me if ,i supply an omission1 ,i feel unintentionally made1 on the part of the hon4 member for ,chatham in some words which have just fallen from him4 ,i understood him to say that he would use a formal statement made by me to the ,committee against what the ,chancellor of the ,duchy had said ,i had said4 ,i am sure the hon4 and learned member for ,chatham1 who has evidently read the proceedings of the ,committee with care1 would1 if he had thought it fair1 have stated to the ,house that the statement only came from me after an objection made by me--a positive objection on the ground that it related to matters outside this ,house1 and that the ,house in the course of its history had never inquired into such matters2 but ,i can hardly understand what the member for ,chatham meant when he said that he contrasted what ,i did say with what the ,chancellor of the ,duchy said ,i said1 for it is not a matter of memory1 it is on the proceedings of this ,house1 that being examined formally before the ,committee1 ,i stated3 ,that the essential part of the oath is in the fullest and most complete degree binding upon my honor and conscience1 and that the repeating of the words of asseveration does not in the slightest degree weaken the binding of the allegiance on me4 ,i say now ,i would not go through any form--much as ,i value the right to sit in this ,house1 much as ,i desire and believe that this ,house will accord me that right--that ,i did not mean to be binding upon me without mental reservation1 without equivocation4 ,i would go through no form unless it were fully and completely and thoroughly binding upon me as to what it expressed or promised4 ,mine has been no easy position for the last twelve months4 ,i have been elected by the free votes of a free constituency4 ,my return is untainted4 ,there is no charge of bribery 7cheers71 no charge of corruption1 nor of inducing men to come drunken to the polling booth4 ,i come here with a pure untainted return--not won by accident4 ,for thirteen long years have ,i fought for this right--through five contested elections1 including this4 ,it is now proposed to prevent me from fulfilling the duty my constituents have placed upon me4 ,you have force--on my side is the law4 ,the hon4 and learned member for ,plymouth spoke the truth when he said he did not ask the ,house to treat the matter as a question of law1 but the constituencies ask me to treat it as a question of law4 ,i1 for them1 ask you to treat it as a question of law4 ,i could understand the feeling that seems to have been manifested were ,i some great and powerful personage4 ,i could understand it had ,i a huge influence behind me4 ,i am only one of the people1 and you propose to teach them that on a mere technical question you will put a barrier in the way of my doing my duty which you have never put in the way of anyone else4 ,the question is1 has my return on the #ith of ,april1 #ahha1 anything whatever to impeach it8 ,there is no legal disqualification involved4 ,if there were it could be raised by petition4 ,the hon4 member for ,plymouth says the dignity of this ,house is in question4 ,do you mean that ,i can injure the dignity of this ,house8 ,this ,house which has stood unrivalled for centuries8 ,this ,house supreme among the assemblies of the world8 ,this ,house1 which represents the traditions of liberty8 ,i should not have so libelled you4 ,how is the dignity of this ,house to be hurt8 ,if what happened before the #ith of ,april is less than a legal disqualification1 it is a matter for the judgment of the constituency and not for you4 ,the constituency has judged me2 it has elected me4 ,i stand here with no legal disqualification upon me4 ,the right of the constituency to return me is an unimpeachable right4 ,i know some gentlemen make light of constituencies2 yet without the constituencies you are nothing4 ,it is from them you derive your whole and sole authority4 ,the hon4 and learned member for ,plymouth treats lightly the legal question4 ,it is dangerous to make light of the law--dangerous because if you are only going to rely on your strength of force to override the law1 you give a bad lesson to men whose morality you impeach as to what should be their duty if emergence ever came 7hear1 hear74 ,always outside the ,house ,i have advocated strenuous obedience to the law1 and it is under that law that ,i claim my right4 ,it is said by the right hon4 baronet who interposes between me and my duty that this ,house has passed some resolution4 ,first1 ,i submit that that resolution does not affect the return of the #ith ,april4 ,the conditions are entirely different1 there is nothing since the date of that return4 ,i submit next that if it did affect it the resolution was illegal from the beginning4 ,in the words of ,george ,grenville1 spoken in this ,house in #agfi1 ,i say if your resolution goes in the teeth of the law--if against the statute--your resolution is null and void4 ,no word have ,i uttered outside these walls which has been lacking in respect to the ,house4 ,i believe the ,house will do me justice1 and ,i ask it to look at what it is ,i claim4 ,i claim to do that which the law says ,i must4 ,frankly1 ,i would rather have affirmed4 ,when ,i came to the table of the ,house ,i deemed that ,i had a legal right to do it4 ,the courts have decided against me1 and ,i am bound by their decision4 ,i have the legal right to do what ,i propose to do4 ,no resolution of yours can take away that legal right4 ,you may act illegally and hinder me1 and unfortunately ,i have no appeal against you4 ,unfortunately perhaps ,i should not say4 ,perhaps it is better that the ,chamber which makes the law should never be in conflict with the courts which administer the laws that the ,chamber makes4 ,i think the word unfortunately was not the word ,i ought to have used in this argument4 ,but the force that you invoke against the law to-day may to-morrow be used against you1 and the use will be justified by your example4 ,it is a fact that ,i have no remedy if you rely on your force4 ,i can only be driven into a contest1 wearying even to a strong man well supported1 ruinous and killing to one man standing by himself--a contest in which if ,i succeed it will be injurious to you as well as to me4 ,injurious to me because ,i can only win by lessening your repute which ,i desire to maintain4 ,the only court ,i have the power of appealing to is the court of public opinion1 which ,i have no doubt in the end will do me justice4 ,the hon4 member for ,plymouth said ,i had the manliness on a former occasion to make an avowal of opinions to this ,house4 ,i did nothing of the kind4 ,i have never1 directly or indirectly1 said one word about my opinions1 and this ,house has no right to inquire what opinions ,i may hold outside its walls1 the only right is that which the statute gives you2 my opinions there is no right to inquire into4 ,i shelter myself under the laws of my country4 ,this is a political assembly1 met to decide on the policy of the nation1 and not on the religious opinions of the citizens 7cheers74 ,while ,i had the honor of occupying a seat in the ,house when questions were raised which touched upon religious matters1 ,i abstained from uttering one word4 ,i did not desire to say one word which might hurt the feelings of even the most tender 7hear74 ,but it is said1 why not have taken the oath quietly8 ,i did not take it then because ,i thought ,i had the right to do something else1 and ,i have paid the penalty4 ,i have been plunged in litigation fostered by men who had not the courage to put themselves forward 7loud cheers below the gangway74 ,i1 a penniless man1 should have been ruined if it had not been that the men in workshop1 pit1 and factory had enabled me to fight this battle 7interruption74 ,i am sorry that hon4 members cannot have patience with one pleading as ,i plead here4 ,it is no light stake1 even if you put it on the lowest personal grounds1 to risk the ambition of a life on such an issue4 ,it is a right ambition to desire to take part in the councils of the nation1 if you bring no store of wisdom with you1 and can only learn from the great intellects that we have 7hear1 hear74 ,what will you inquire into8 ,the right hon4 baronet would inquire into my opinions4 ,will you inquire into my conduct1 or is it only my opinions you will try here8 ,the hon4 member for ,plymouth frankly puts it opinions4 ,if opinions1 why not conduct8 ,why not examine into members' conduct when they come to the table1 and see if there be no members in whose way you can put a barrier8 7,hear1 hear47 ,are members1 whose conduct may be obnoxious1 to vote my exclusion because to them my opinions are obnoxious8 ,as to any obnoxious views supposed to be held by me1 there is no duty imposed upon me to say a word4 ,the right hon4 baronet has said there has been no word of recantation4 ,you have no right to ask me for any recantation4 ,since the #ith ,april you have no right to ask me for anything4 ,if you have a legal disqualification1 petition1 lay it before the ,judges4 ,when you ask me to make a statement1 you are guilty of impertinence to me1 of treason to the traditions of this ,house1 and of impeachment of the liberties of the people4 ,my difficulty is that those who have made the most bitter attacks upon me only made them when ,i was not here to deal with them4 ,one hon4 and gallant member recently told his constituents that this would be made a party question1 but that the ,conservative members had not the courage to speak out against me4 ,i should have thought1 from reading ,hansard1 not that they wanted courage1 but that they had cultivated a reticence that was more just4 ,i wish to say a word or two on the attempt which has been made to put on the ,government of the day complicity in my views4 ,the ,liberal party has never aided me in any way to this ,house4 7,oh1 from the ,opposition47 ,never4 ,i have fought by myself4 ,i have fought by my own hand4 ,i have been hindered in every way that it was possible to hinder me1 and it is only by the help of the people1 by the pence of toilers in mine and factory1 that ,i am here to-day1 after these five struggles right through thirteen years4 ,i have won my way with them1 for ,i have won their hearts1 and now ,i come to you4 ,will you send me back from here8 ,then how8 ,you have the right1 but it is the right of force1 and not of law4 ,when ,i am once seated on these benches1 then ,i am under your jurisdiction4 ,at present ,i am under the protection of the writ from those who sent me here4 ,i do not want to quote what has happened before1 but if there be one lesson which the ,house has recorded more solemnly than another1 it is that there should be no interference with the judgment of a constituency in sending a man to this ,house against whom there is no statutory disqualification4 ,let me appeal to the generosity of the ,house as well as to its strength4 ,it has traditions of liberty on both sides4 ,i do not complain that members on that 7the ,conservative7 side try to keep me out4 ,they act according to their lights1 and think my poor services may be injurious to them4 7,cries of ,no47 ,then why not let me in8 7,cheers47 ,it must be either a political or a religious question4 ,i must apologise to the ,house for trespassing upon its patience4 ,i apologise because ,i know how generous in its listening it has been from the time of my first speech in it till now4 ,but ,i ask you now1 do not plunge with me into a struggle ,i would shun4 ,the law gives me no remedy if the ,house decides against me4 ,do not mock at the constituencies4 ,if you place yourselves above the law1 you leave me no course save lawless agitation instead of reasonable pleading4 ,it is easy to begin such a strife1 but none knows how it would end4 ,i have no court1 no tribunal to appeal to2 you have the strength of your votes at the moment4 ,you think ,i am an obnoxious man1 and that ,i have no one on my side4 ,if that be so1 then the more reason that this ,house1 grand in the strength of its centuries of liberty1 should have now that generosity in dealing with one who to-morrow may be forced into a struggle for public opinion against it 7cheers74 ,,mr4 ,,bradlaugh',s ,third ,speech at the ,bar of the ,house of ,commons1 delivered ,february #gth1 #ahhb4 ,,sir1--,in addressing the ,house for the third time from this position1 ,i feel the exceeding difficulty of dealing fairly with myself without dealing unfairly with the ,house4 ,if ,i were to follow the hon4 member who has just sat down into his errors of law1 of history1 and of memory1 into his reckless misconceptions as to what are the views ,i hold and write about1 ,i should only be giving pain to numbers of members here1 and departing from that mandate with which my constituents have trusted me4 ,it is--,i say it with all respect--not true that ,i done anything more with reference to the succession than maintain the right of ,parliament1 meaning by ,parliament both ,houses1 to control it2 and any member who pretends that ,i done anything else1 either does it1 not having read what ,i have written1 or heard what ,i have said1 or having forgotten entirely what ,i have written or said1 and being extremely careless in representing my views to the ,house4 ,i regret that the hon4 member should have imported into the discussion some fact supposed to have occurred in a police-court since ,i stood here before4 ,i can only give the ,house my positive assurance that the hon4 member is perfectly inaccurate in his representation of what took place4 ,it is exceedingly painful to bandy words in this way4 ,the hon4 member was good enough to say he did not hear--he could not well have heard1 for the magistrate did not refuse my affirmation at all4 ,i happened to have been before ,sir ,j4 ,ingham before1 and he knew me1 and knew the particular form of affirmation1 and when the clerk read it to me no discussion took place on the subject4 ,i hope the ,house will forgive me for contradicting such a small thing1 but small things are sometimes much used4 ,they have been used to work my ruin since ,i stood here before1 and ,i regret that the shame of reticence did not at least keep it from this ,house1 that the hon4 member thought it his duty1 by a common informer1 to attempt to drive me into the ,bankruptcy ,court1 and outside this ,house has boasted that the question would be solved in that way4 ,it may be a brave boast1 it may be consonant with piety from the hon4 member's point of view1 but ,i believe that every other gentleman's sense of piety would revolt against the notion of driving a single man into bankruptcy1 and then canvassing for subscriptions--7hear1 hear7--for the bold and vigorous1 and patriotic and noble conduct1 as the advertisement said1 which consisted in hurrying in a cab to find the common informer to issue a writ against me4 ,i dismiss that1 however4 ,i ask the ,house to pardon me for having wasted its time on this poor thing4 ,i do not hope1 ,i dare not think1 that any word ,i may say here will win one vote2 and ,i would have let this go silently against me1 were it not that ,i owe a duty to the constituency that has twice entrusted me with its suffrages1 a duty to every constituency right through the land in time to come--7hear1 hear7--whose representative may be challenged as ,northampton's has been4 7,hear1 hear1 and ,no47 ,some gentlemen say ,no1 but where is the challenge to stop8 7,hear47 ,it is not simply theology1 it is politics too 7hear1 hear74 ,it is not simply theology that is brought before the ,house1 but the wild imaginings of some member who1 with the nightmare of panic upon him1 and a wild imagining of the ,french ,revolution clothed in terrors of which ,i know nothing1 comes here to tell you of mighty ,russia successful1 and of the unfortunate ,united ,states with its ,presidents assassinated because of religious and political opinions4 ,panic of that kind is not evidence as to my opinions4 ,if this ,house intends to try me for my opinions1 let it do it reasonably1 and at least have the evidence before it4 ,i would show you how unfair it is to trust to memory of words4 ,the hon4 member was good enough to tell the ,house that ,i had declared to a ,committee of the ,house that certain words were meaningless4 ,i hold in my hand the report of the ,committee and the minutes of evidence1 and no such words exist in any declaration of mine4 7,hear1 hear4 ,mr4 ,newdegate shook his head47 ,the hon4 member does not believe me4 ,i cannot make more than facts4 ,i cannot make the comprehension which should distinguish when prejudice has determined that nothing shall be right that is put4 ,the only way in which it can be pretended that anything of the kind in reference to the oath can be brought in is by taking my letter of the #bjth of ,may1 written outside the ,house1 which does not contain a specific declaration the hon4 member has put into it1 which letter ,i protested ought not to be brought before the ,committee at all1 which ,i never volunteered to the ,committee--7,opposition laughter7--which ,i objected to the ,committee having before them4 7,oh1 and laughter from the ,opposition47 ,the gentlemen who laugh1 laugh because the laugh is the only answer that could be given4 ,no reason can be given in reply1 no facts can be quoted2 and ,i ask hon4 members who laugh to remember that ,i am pleading as though a quasi-criminal at this bar1 and that ,i have a right to an audience from them1 and ,i appeal to the ,house at least to give me a silent hearing4 ,judges do that4 ,if you are unfit to be judges1 then do not judge 7hear1 hear74 ,it shows1 at least1 the difficulty of dealing with a question like this1 when those who are to judge have come to a judgment already1 not upon any facts1 but upon what they think ought to be the facts4 ,i ask the ,house to deal legally and fairly with me4 ,legally you are bound to deal2 fairly1 as an assembly of ,english gentlemen1 you ought to deal with me1 even if you have differences with me1 even if you think my opinions so obnoxious1 even if you think that the politics with which you identify me in your minds are dangerous to you 7oh1 oh74 ,if ,i am not dangerous1 why not let me speak there8 7pointing to the seat he occupied last ,session47 ,if there is no danger1 why strain the law8 ,if there is no danger1 why disobey the law8 ,it is put by the hon4 gentleman who spoke last that there are certain words of the oath which the courts of law have declared essential1 ,the courts of law have declared the exact opposite4 ,so far as a decision has been given1 the very report of the ,committee shows that the highest court of judicature in this realm has decided the words are not essential to the oath at all4 ,i ask the ,house to deal with me with some semblance and show of legality and fairness1 and first ,i say that they ought not to go behind my election of the #ith of ,april1 #ahha1 and that the ,house ought to reject the resolution moved by the right hon4 gentleman1 because it deals with matters which antedate my election1 and because the ,house has nothing to do with me before the #ith of ,april1 #ahha4 ,that is the return of which the ,clerk at the table has the certificate4 ,that is my only authority for being here4 ,if ,i did aught before that rendered me unworthy to sit here1 why did the ,house let me sit here from the #bnd of ,july to the #bith of ,march8 ,if what ,i did entitles the ,house not to receive me1 why has not the ,house had the courage of its opinions and vacated the seat8 ,either the seat is mine in law1 and in law ,i claim it from you1 or ,i am unworthy to hold it1 and then why not vacate the seat and let the constituency express its opinion again8 ,but my return is unimpeached1 it is unimpeachable1 and there has been no petition against me4 ,the hon4 member who went into back alleys for common informers could not find a petitioner to present a petition against it4 ,if ,i speak with temper--7,opposition laughter7--the ,house1 ,i trust1 will pardon me4 ,i have read within the last few days words spoken1 not by members of no consequence1 but by members occupying high position in this ,house1 which make me wonder if this is the ,house of ,commons to which ,i aspired so much4 ,i have read that one right hon4 member1 the member for ,whitehaven--7laughter from the ,ministerial side7--was prompted to say to his constituents that ,i was kicked down stairs last ,session1 and that he hoped ,i should be again4 ,if it were true that ,i was kicked downstairs ,i would ask members of the ,house of ,commons on whom the shame1 on whom the disgrace1 on whom the stigma8 ,i dare not apply this1 but history will when ,i have mouldered1 and you too1 and our passions are quite gone4 ,but it is not quite true that ,i was kicked downstairs1 and it is a dangerous thing to say that ,i was1 for it means that hon4 members who should rely on law rely on force4 ,it is a dangerous provocation to conflict to throw to the people4 ,if ,i had been as wicked in my thought as some members are reported to have been in their speech1 this quarrel1 not of my provoking1 would assume a future to make us all ashamed4 ,i beg this ,house to believe1 and ,i trust1 ,sir1 that you at least will believe me1 that ,i have tried as much as man might to keep the dignity of this ,house4 ,i submitted last ,session1 and the ,session before1 to have had things said against me without one word of reply1 because having had your good counsel1 ,i felt it might provoke discussion upon matters which this ,house would willingly not have speech upon1 and that ,i had far better rest under some slight stigma than occupy the ,house with my personality4 ,i appeal to the recollection of every member of the ,house whether from the moment of my entering into it ,i did not utterly disregard everything that took place prior to my coming into it1 and direct myself to the business for which my constituents sent me here4 ,the most extraordinary statements are made as to my views1 statements as inaccurate as those which have fallen1 no doubt unconsciously1 from the hon4 member who has last addressed the ,house4 ,one noble lord in a great ,london gathering convoked against me1 a gathering which was not as successful as some that have taken place in my favor1 denounced me as a ,socialist4 ,i do not happen to be one4 ,i happen to think that ,socialists are the most unwise and illogical people you can happen to meet4 ,but the noble lord knew that ,i ought to be something 7laughter74 ,i am a red rag to a wild ,conservative bull1 and it must rush at me and call me ,socialist4 ,i ask this ,house to be more fair and just4 ,if ,i am to be tried1 at least let me be tried for the opinions ,i hold and the views ,i express4 ,why1 there are members who have soiled their tongues with words about social relations and marriage for which ,i have no proper reply in this ,house1 as unfortunately the forms of the ,house do not permit me to use the only fitting answer1 and perhaps it is as well4 ,but ,i ask the ,house1 ,do not let this be the kind of weapon with which a return is met4 ,deal with me as the law directs1 and in no other way4 ,it is said ,you have brought this upon yourself 7hear1 hear74 ,one baronet who has spoken of me with a kindness more than ,i deserve1 in the very borough which ,i represent said ,i had brought it upon myself1 because when ,i originally came to the ,house ,i flaunted and most ostentatiously put my opinion upon the ,house 7hear1 hear74 ,well1 not one word of that is true4 ,not a shadow of it is true4 ,i hold in my hand the sworn evidence of ,sir ,erskine ,may4 ,i do not ask gentlemen to take my word1 for it is clear they will not1 but that of their own officer4 ,and when the right hon4 baronet said ,i claimed under the statute1 and drew an inference from it1 he knows that my claim contained no such words until the clerk at the table of the ,house challenged me as to the law under which ,i claimed4 ,i do not quarrel with him1 but ,i submit that the ,clerk of the ,house had no right to put that question to me4 ,i submit that the ,house had nothing whatever to do with it--that it certainly is no ostentatious flaunting by me4 ,i submit1 that at any rate1 that it is prior to the #ith of ,april1 #ahha1 and the ,house had no right to revive it against me4 ,i ask the ,house to try and deal with me with some show of fairness4 ,they will find when ,i was before the ,committee1 instead of obtruding my opinions1 ,i said ,i had never directly or indirectly obtruded upon the ,house any of my utterances or publications upon any subject whatever1 and when pressed by one of the members sitting on that 7the ,opposition7 side of the ,house as to certain opinions ,i was supposed to hold1 by asking me particular words ,i was supposed to have used in a judicial proceeding1 ,i said that if the ,committee wished ,i would answer1 but that ,i objected to answer1 because ,i had carefully refrained from saying any word which would bring my opinions before the ,house4 ,i ask1 therefore1 the ,house whether it is not monstrously unfair to say that ,i have obtruded any opinions here when ,i have expressly1 carefully1 and thoroughly kept them from the ,house8 ,but it is said by the right hon4 baronet that it would be a profanation to allow me to take the oath1 and that the ,house would be no party to such a profanation 7,opposition cheers74 ,does the ,house mean that it is a party to each oath taken8 7hear47 ,there was a time when most clearly it was not so a party4 ,there was a time when the oath was not even taken in the presence of members at all4 ,but does the ,house mean it is a party now8 ,was it a party the ,session before last8 ,was it a party when ,mr4 ,hall walked up to that table1 cheered by members on the other side who knew his seat was won by deliberate bribery8 7loud ,opposition cries of ,order47 ,bribery sought to be concealed by the most corrupt perjury4 ,did the ,house join in it8 7renewed cries of ,order47 ,if the ,house did not join in it1 why did you cheer so that the words of the oath were drowned8 ,but was the ,house a party when ,john ,stuart ,mill sat in this ,house8 7hear1 no47 ,a member who is1 ,i think1 now within the walls of the ,house--the hon4 member for ,greenwich--in addressing his constituents1 said that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's opinions were hardly more objectionable than those of some other members of the ,house4 ,if the hon4 member knew that1 then he was a party to the profanation of the oath3 but perhaps they were on his own side1 and he did not feel the profanation so acutely 7hear1 hear1 and laughter74 ,but it is said1 ,our real objection is that you have declared that the oath is not binding upon you 7hear1 hear1 from ,mr4 ,alderman ,fowler74 ,that is exactly the opposite of what ,i did declare4 ,the hon4 member whose voice ,i hear now1 ,i unfortunately heard on the #crd of ,august2 and heard so that ,i shall never forget it4 7,mr4 ,bradlaugh here looked towards ,alderman ,fowler and paused47 ,the hon4 member admits that is the point--that ,i have declared the oath is not binding upon my conscience2 but1 unfortunately1 all the print goes the other way4 ,i am asked by the ,committee who sat as to whether the oath is binding1 and on page #ae ,i reply3 ,any form that ,i went through1 any oath that ,i took1 ,i shall regard as binding upon my conscience in the fullest degree1 and ,i would go through no form and take no oath unless ,i meant it to be so binding4 ,again1 ,i am asked as to the word swear4 ,i say3 ,i consider when ,i take an oath it is binding upon my honor and upon my conscience2 and with reference to the words of asseveration to which the hon4 member for ,north ,warwickshire referred1 he would at least have been more generous towards myself1 if generosity be possible with him1 if he had said3 ,i desire to add--and ,i do this most solemnly and unreservedly--that the taking1 and subscribing1 and repeating these words of asseveration will in no degree weaken the binding effect of the oath upon my conscience4 ,i say here1 ,sir1 before you1 with all the solemnity man can command1 that ,i know the words of the oath the statute requires me to take1 that ,i am ready to take that oath according to law1 and that ,i will not take an oath without intending it to be binding upon me1 and that if ,i do take the oath it will be binding upon my honor and conscience4 7,conservative cries of ,oh6 oh67 ,members of the ,house who are ignorant of what is honor and conscience----7,loud cries of ,order1 ,oh1 oh1 and ,withdraw1 from the ,opposition47 ,if members will allow me to finish my sentence----7,cries of ,withdraw47 ,members of this ,house who are ignorant of what is----7,renewed cries from the ,opposition of ,withdraw47 ,these 7,mr4 ,bradlaugh pointing to the ,opposition benches7 are my judges4 ,members of this ,house who are ignorant of what is the honor and conscience of the man who stands before them--7,oh1 and laughter from the ,opposition7--have a right to shout ,withdraw2 but they must beware lest a greater voice outside--7,oh1 oh1 and laughter from the ,opposition7--at the ballot-box1 where it has a right to express it1 may not only say withdraw1 but make withdraw all those who infringe the constitutional rights of the nation1 as they seek to infringe them now4 ,if ,i knew any kind of word which might convince members whom ,i desire to convince that ,i would take no pledge that ,i did not mean to be binding1 ,i would use that form of words4 ,but ,i have found myself so harshly judged1 so unfairly dealt with1 that one feels a difficulty in understanding whether any form of words1 however often repeated1 would convey any kind of conviction to some minds4 ,i presume that this ,house will repeat its vote of ,april #bfth4 ,what then8 ,will it have the courage of its opinions1 and vacate my seat8 7,hear1 hear47 ,if it does not1 this ,house leaves me in an unfair position before the law4 ,i am bound to come to this table1 and will come to this table1 as long as the mandate of my constituents sends me here1 unless the ,house vacates the seat4 ,if my seat be vacated1 it is my duty to bow to the ,house1 and appeal to my constituents again2 and then the verdict rests with them4 ,but to take away part of the right1 and deal with it in this fashion1 leaving me with the full legal responsibility and no kind of legal authority1 ,i submit is not generous4 ,well1 will this ,house repeat its vote of #ith ,may8 ,will it substitute force for law8 ,at present the law is on my side 7,no1 no1 and hear1 hear74 ,if not1 let me sit and sue me 7hear1 hear74 ,if not1 try by petition4 ,if not1 bring an action4 ,but shouting ,no won't decide the law1 even with the united wisdom of the members of this ,house who shout it4 ,i know that no man is a good advocate for a great principle unless he himself be worthy of the principle he advocates1 and ,i have felt acutely the judgment properly passed upon me by many members of this ,house1 who1 knowing their superiority to me1 say how unworthy ,i am that this question should be fought in my person4 ,i admit ,i am unworthy1 but it is not my fault that ,i have this fight to make4 ,i remind you of the words of one of the greatest statesmen who sat in this ,house more than a hundred years ago1 that whenever an infringement of the constitutional right was attempted1 it was always attempted in the person of some obnoxious man 7hear1 hear74 ,i ask the ,house for a moment to carry its mind to the #crd of ,august last4 ,i do that because either ,i do not understand what took place then1 or my memory has failed me1 as the memory of other hon4 members sometimes does1 or things happened without my consciousness4 ,i thought ,i had stood aside until ,parliament had dealt with the pressing business of the nation4 ,i thought that had been recognised by this ,house4 ,i thought ,i only came saying at the very door of the ,house that ,i was ready to obey its lawful orders1 and ,i thought ,i was then seized by force while saying it4 ,my memory may not serve me well on that1 but ,i think it does4 ,there were plenty of witnesses to the scene4 ,i saw one hon4 member climb on to a pedestal to see how fourteen men could struggle with one4 ,it was hardly generous1 hardly brave1 hardly worthy of the great ,house of ,commons1 that those sending out to the whole world lessons of freedom1 liberty1 and law1 should so infringe and so stamp them under foot4 ,i had no remedy in any court1 or ,i would have taken it4 ,with all respect to you1 ,sir1 and the officers of this ,house1 if there had been any possibility of trying at law against the mighty privilege of this ,house1 ,i would have appealed to that possibility4 ,let me now1 before ,i finish1 ask the ear of the ,house for one moment4 ,it is said it is the oath and not the man2 but others1 more frank1 say it is the man and not the oath4 ,is it the oath and not the man8 ,i am ready to stand aside1 say for four or five weeks1 without coming to that table1 if the ,house within that time1 or within such time as its great needs might demand1 would discuss whether an ,affirmation ,bill should pass or not4 ,i want to obey the law1 and ,i tell you how ,i might meet the ,house still further1 if the ,house will pardon me for seeming to advise it4 ,hon4 members have said that would be a ,bradlaugh ,relief ,bill 7hear1 hear74 ,bradlaugh is more proud than you are 7hear1 hear74 ,let the ,bill pass without applying to elections that have taken place previously1 and ,i will undertake not to claim my seat1 and when the ,bill has passed ,i will apply for the ,chiltern ,hundreds 7cheers47 ,i have no fear4 ,if ,i am not fit for my constituents1 they shall dismiss me1 but you never shall4 ,the grave alone shall make me yield 7hear1 hear1 and ,oh74 ,a ,,cardinal',s ,,broken ,,oath4 ,a ,letter ,,to ,,his ,,eminence ,,henry ,,edward1 ,,cardinal-,,archbishop ,,of ,,westminster4 ,,by ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 ,,eighth ,,thousand4 ,illustration ,,london3 ,,freethought ,,publishing ,,company #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street1 ,e4,c4 #ahhb4 ,,price ,,one ,,penny4 ,,london3 ,,printed ,,by ,,annie ,,besant ,,and ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street1 ,e4,c4 ,,to ,,his ,,eminence ,,henry ,,edward1 ,,cardinal-,,archbishop ,,of ,,westminster4 ,three times your ,eminence has--through the pages of the ,nineteenth ,century--personally and publicly interfered and used the weight of your ecclesiastical position against me in the ,parliamentary struggle in which ,i am engaged1 although you are neither voter in the borough for which ,i am returned to sit1 nor even co-citizen in the state to which ,i belong4 ,your personal position is that of a law-breaker1 one who has deserted his sworn allegiance and thus forfeited his citizenship1 one who is tolerated by ,english forbearance1 but is liable to indictment for misdemeanor as member of a society of the ,church of ,rome4 ,more than once1 when the question of my admission to the ,house of ,commons has been under discussion in that ,house1 have ,i seen you busy in the lobby closely attended by the devout and sober ,philip ,callan1 or some other equally appropriate ,parliamentary henchman4 ,misrepresenting what had taken place in the ,house of ,commons when ,i took my seat on affirmation in ,july1 #ahhj1 your ,eminence wrote in the ,nineteenth ,century for ,august1 #ahhj1 that which you were pleased to entitule ,an ,englishman's ,protest against my being allowed to sit in the ,commons' ,house1 to which the vote of a free constituency had duly returned me4 ,in that protest you blundered alike in your law and in your history4 ,you gave the ,tudor ,parliamentary oath ,saxon and ,norman antiquity4 ,you spoke of ,john ,horne ,tooke as having had the door of the ,house shut against him by a by-vote1 no such by-vote having been carried1 and the statute which disabled clergymen in the future not affecting ,john ,horne ,tooke's seat in that ,parliament4 ,you declared that in the ,french ,revolution the ,french voted out the ,supreme ,being2 there is no record of any such vote4 ,in ,march1 #ahhb1 when the ,house had expelled me for my disobedience of its orders in complying with the law1 and taking my seat1 you again used the ,nineteenth ,century4 ,this time for a second protest1 intended to prevent my re-election4 ,you1 in both your articles1 reminded the bigots that ,i might be indicted for blasphemy4 ,your advice has since been followed4 ,persecution is a two-edged sword1 and ,i return the warning you offer to ,lord ,sherbrooke4 ,when ,i was in ,paris some time since1 and was challenged to express an opinion as to the enforcement of the law against the religious orders in ,france1 ,i1 not to the pleasure of many of my friends1 spoke out very freely that in matters of religion ,i would use the law against none2 but your persecuting spirit may provoke intemperate men even farther than you dream4 ,in this country1 by the #ajth ,george ,,iv41 cap4 #g1 secs4 #bh and #bi1 #ca1 #cb and #cd1 you are criminally indictable1 ,cardinal-,archbishop of ,westminster4 ,you only reside here without police challenge by the merciful forbearance of the community4 ,and yet you parade in political contest your illegal position as a member of a religious order of the ,church of ,rome1 and have the audacity to invoke outlawry and legal penalty against me4 ,last month1 in solemn state1 you1 in defiance of the law1 in a personal and official visit to the borough of ,northampton itself1 sought to weaken the confidence of my constituents2 and you were not ashamed1 in order to injure me1 to pretend friendship with men who have for years constantly and repeatedly used the strongest and foulest abuse of your present ,church4 ,an amiable but ignorant ,conservative mayor1 chief magistrate of the borough1 but innocent of statutes1 was misled into parading his official robe and office while you openly broke the law in his presence4 ,in the current number of the ,nineteenth ,century you fire your last shot1 and are coarse in ,latin as well as in the vulgar tongue4 ,perhaps the frequenting ,philip ,callan has spoiled your manners4 ,it else seems impossible that one who was once a cultured scholar and a refined gentleman could confuse with legitimate argument the abuse of his opponents as cattle4 ,but who are you1 ,henry ,edward ,manning1 that you should throw stones at me1 and should so parade your desire to protect the ,house of ,commons from contamination8 ,at least1 first take out of it the drunkard and the dissolute of your own ,church4 ,you know them well enough4 ,is it the oath alone which stirs you8 ,your tenderness on swearing comes very late in life4 ,when you took orders as a deacon of the ,english ,church1 in presence of your bishop1 you swore so help me1 ,god1 that you did from your heart abhor1 detest and abjure1 and1 with your hand on the holy gospels1 you declared that no foreign prince1 person1 prelate1 state1 or potentate hath1 or ought to have1 any jurisdiction1 power1 superiority1 pre-eminence1 or authority1 ecclesiastical or spiritual1 within this realm4 ,you may now well write of men whom no oath can bind4 ,the oath you took you have broken2 and yet it was because you had1 in the very church itself1 taken this oath1 that you for many years held more than one profitable preferment in the ,established ,church of ,england4 ,you indulge in inuendoes against my character in order to do me mischief1 and viciously insinuate as though my life had in it justification for good men's abhorrence4 ,in this you are very cowardly as well as very false4 ,then1 to move the timid1 you suggest the fear of eternal punishment1 as associated with a broken oath4 ,have you any such fear8 or have you been personally conveniently absolved from the eternal consequences of your perjury8 ,have you since sworn another oath before another bishop of another church1 or made some solemn vow to ,rome1 in lieu of1 and in contradiction to1 the one you so took in presence of your bishop1 when1 in the name of the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 that bishop of the church by law established in this country accepted your oath1 and gave you authority as a deacon in the ,church you have since forsaken4 ,i do not blame you so much that you are forsworn3 there are1 as you truly say1 some men whom no oath can bind2 and it has often been the habit of the cardinals of your ,church to take an oath and break it when profit came with breach2 but your remembrance of your own perjury might at least keep you reticent in very shame4 ,instead of this1 you thrust yourself impudently into a purely political contest1 and shout as if the oath were to you the most sacred institution possible4 ,you say there are happily some men who believe in ,god and fear him4 ,do you do either8 ,you1 who declared1 ,so help me1 ,god that no foreign prelate 444 ought to have any jurisdiction or authority ecclesiastical or spiritual within this realm4 ,and you--who in spite of your declaration on oath have courted and won1 intrigued for and obtained1 the archbishop's authority and the cardinal's hat from the ,pope of ,rome--you rebuke ,lord ,sherbrooke for using the words sin and shame in connexion with oath-taking2 do you hold now that there was no sin and no shame in your broken oath8 ,none either in the rash taking or the wilful breaking8 ,have you no personal shame that you have broken your oath8 ,or do the pride and pomp of your ecclesiastical position outbribe your conscience8 ,you talk of the people understanding the words so help me1 ,god4 ,how do you understand them of your broken oath8 ,do they mean to you3 ,may ,god desert and forsake me as ,i deserted and forsook the ,queen's supremacy1 to which ,i so solemnly swore allegiance8 ,you speak of men being kept to their allegiance by the oath which binds them to their sovereign4 ,you say such men may be tempted by ambition or covetousness unless they are bound by the higher and more sacred responsibility involved in the recognition of the lawgiver in the oath4 ,was the ,rector of ,lavington and ,graffham covetous of an archbishopric that he broke his oath8 ,was the ,archdeacon of ,chichester ambitious of the ,cardinal's hat that he became so readily forsworn8 ,lord ,archbishop of ,westminster1 had you1 when you were apostate1 remained a poor and simple priest in poverty and self-denial1 although your oath would have still been broken1 yet you might have taunted others more profited by their perjuries4 ,but you1 who have derived profit1 pride1 and pomp from your false swearing--you1 who sign yourself ,henry ,edward1 ,cardinal-,archbishop by favor of the very authority you abjured in the name of ,god--it is in the highest degree indecent and indecorous for you to parade yourself as a defender of the sanctity of the oath4 ,as a prince-prelate of the ,church of ,rome you have no right to meddle with the question of the ,english ,parliamentary oath4 ,your ,church has been the foe of liberty through the world1 and ,i am honored by your personal assailment4 ,but you presume too much on the indifference of the age when1 in this free ,england1 you so recklessly exhibit as weapons in an election contest the outward signs of the authority the ,vatican claims1 but shall never again exercise1 in ,britain4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 ,,northampton ,,and ,,the ,,house ,,of ,,commons4 ,,correspondence ,,between ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 ,m4,p41 ,,and ,,the ,,right ,,hon4 ,,sir ,,stafford ,,northcote1 ,m4,p4 ,illustration ,,london ,,freethought ,,publishing ,,company1 #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street ,e4,c4 #ahhd4 ,,price ,,twopence4 ,,london3 ,,printed ,,by ,,annie ,,besant ,,and ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street1 ,e4,c4 ,,northampton ,,and ,,the ,,house ,,of ,,commons4 #bj1 ,circus ,road1 ,st4 ,john's ,wood1 ,london1 ,n4,w41 ,march #ast1 #ahhd4 ,to the ,right ,hon4 ,,sir ,,stafford ,h4 ,,northcote1 ,m4,p41 ,g4,c4,b4 ,,sir1--,if1 on either of the occasions when recently moving against me in the ,house of ,commons1 you had accorded or claimed for me opportunity of speech in self-defence1 ,i might have been spared the need for this letter4 ,apparently your view is that a member unfortunate enough to have the majority of the ,house against him need not have even the semblance of fairness shown him--that you1 being strong1 need not be troubled with scruples1 and that the mere fact that the member is1 like yourself1 the chosen member of a constituency does not entitle him to the smallest courtesy or consideration4 ,you have taught me1 ,sir1 many lessons during the past four years4 ,some of these ,i trust to remember and profit by in the future4 ,you have taught me that a temporary majority of the ,house may1 year after year1 exclude any member of ,parliament from his seat1 although he has strictly obeyed every ,standing ,order--and this without vacating that seat--that it may so exclude the member although he has been a decent and orderly member of the ,house1 attending regularly for months to all its duties1 and one against whom no charge or pretence of ,parliamentary misconduct was made whilst he so served in it4 ,you have taught me1 ,sir1 that the leader of a great party may sit silent1 and acquiesce in it by his support1 while the law-abiding electors of a great constituency are called mob1 dregs1 and scum--that such a leader may permit his followers to openly accuse two of the highest judges of our country of having judicially decided unfairly from corrupt party motives--that he may even1 without dishonor1 keep silence whilst it is suggested that the whole judicial bench is so corrupt that it will be ready to decide unjustly at the bidding of a government--and that the first law officer of the ,crown is ready to be fraudulently collusive with myself4 ,did you believe these things1 ,sir1 when they were stated and loudly cheered by those who sit around you on your side of the ,house8 ,if yes1 ,i am glad that your experience of humanity has been less fortunate than my own4 ,i have regarded our judges as at least striving to be just and independent4 ,you seem to think it nothing that the highest judges should1 in your presence1 be charged with judging unjustly from favoritism for the government of the day4 ,you have encouraged and practised deliberate violation of the law1 and1 to cover this law-breaking1 you have connived at1 and been party to1 the basest insinuations against those whose duty it is to judicially pronounce on matters of legal dispute4 ,you have1 without rebuke1 permitted your followers to declare that if the ,high ,court of ,judicature declared the law to be in my favor1 that then they and you still intended to defy and disobey the law4 ,the first resolution you moved against me1 on the #aath ,february1 was worse than futile1 for it forbade me to do that which ,i had already done1 and which you well knew that ,i had so done1 in order to compel the submission to the judgment of a competent tribunal of the legality of my act4 ,the ridiculous form of your resolution arose because you--having bargained with me in writing through ,mr4 ,winn that ,i should come to the table immediately after questions1 and not before--intended to interpose ere ,i could reach the table4 ,this would have been a dishonest trick had you succeeded2 it became contemptibly ridiculous when you failed2 but it is a lesson to me that ,i must be careful1 indeed1 when ,english gentlemen of name and family make treaties with me4 ,your second resolution1 on ,february #aath1 was a spiteful1 paltry1 and cowardly insult to myself and to my constituents1 for it was pressed by you despite that my colleague offered for me the express undertaking that you pretended you wished to secure1 and was still pressed by you though ,mr4 ,burt offered for me that ,i would at once personally give such undertaking4 ,these two resolutions1 utterly illegal and dangerous to ,parliamentary repute1 you have renewed on ,thursday1 the #bast1 although you had heard read by ,mr4 ,speaker an undertaking from me to the ,house that ,i would not attempt to take my seat until the judicial interpreters of the law had given formal judgment4 ,and they are very cowardly and inexcusable resolutions1 spiteful in excess of any ever passed in previous years4 ,they exclude me1 not only from the ,house1 but from the reading-room1 library1 tea-room1 dining-rooms1 and exterior lobbies1 though there is not the faintest suggestion that ,i have used my right to go to those places to enable me to disturb the ,house4 ,if ,i had not taken the precaution to anticipate your malice1 ,i should actually have been hindered by force from going to the proper officer to obtain the certificate of my return4 ,yours is a mean and spiteful act1 ,sir1 unworthy an ,english gentleman4 ,and ,i admit that you have inconvenienced me1 for you have deprived me of access to the library of the ,house1 and you may thus put me to some expense and annoyance in the procurement of law books and ,parliamentary records in the litigation in which ,i am involved in defending the rights of my constituents4 ,it is too much that1 in #ahhd1 a duly-elected and properly-qualified burgess of ,parliament should be shut outside by such votes4 ,to repeat to you words signed1 in ,september1 #afef1 by your own ancestor1 ,sir ,john ,northcote1 ,m4,p4 for the ,county of ,devon3 we who have been duly chosen to be members of the ,parliament1 have an undoubted right to meet1 sit1 and vote in ,parliament1 and no part of the representative body are trusted to consent to anything in the nation's behalf if the whole have not their free liberty of debating and voting in the matters propounded4 ,to continue the language of your sturdy ancestor1 you have now declared that the people's choice cannot give a man a right to sit in ,parliament1 but the right must be derived from your gracious will and pleasure4 ,you reply that you have the force on your side2 but ,sir ,john ,northcote declared that3 ,the violent exclusion of any of the people's deputies from doing their duties and executing their trust freely in ,parliament doth change the state of the people from freedom into a mere slavery2 and if you tell me that the majority of the present members of the ,house are with you in what you do1 ,i recall ,sir ,john ,northcote's protest3 ,that all such chosen members for ,parliament as shall take upon them to approve of the forcible exclusion of other chosen members1 or shall sit1 vote1 and act by the name of the ,parliament of ,england while1 to their knowledge1 any of the chosen members are so by force shut out1 we say such ought to be reputed betrayers of the liberties of ,england4 ,you cannot now pretend with any hope that sane men will believe you1 that you desire to prevent the profanation of the oath4 ,in #ahhj you prevented the second reading of the ,affirmation ,bill1 introduced by my colleague1 ,mr4 ,labouchere1 under the pretext that such a measure ought to be introduced by the ,government4 ,in #ahha1 after you yourself had said the matter should be dealt with by legislation1 you prevented the ,government from introducing it4 ,in #ahhb your friends blocked the ,affirmation measure again proposed by my colleague1 and in #ahhc you exerted every influence to defeat1 and successfully defeated1 the ,affirmation ,bill brought forward by the ,government4 ,if you had really believed the oath profaned by me1 you would have been one of the first to aid in removing the possible profanation by substituting the right of affirmation4 ,in ,ulster you took credit for keeping an ,atheist out of ,parliament1 but it was not my ,atheism you kept out1 for ,i actually sat with you day by day1 speaking1 voting1 and serving1 from the beginning of ,july1 #ahhj1 until the end of ,march1 #ahha4 ,and1 during the whole of that time1 my care was to be at least as good and loyal a member of that ,house as any sitting within its walls4 ,i do not plead my conduct there1 whilst using all my right1 as anything on my behalf1 for ,i at most could do no more than my duty2 but at least ,i have the right to say that it was never suggested that ,i was other than a good working member of the ,house1 strict in my attendance at and during every one of its sittings4 ,it cannot be pretended that ,i used my right of speech to force upon the ,house one word which did not relate to the business then being dealt with1 or that in any fashion ,i obtruded upon what should be a purely political assembly any views of mine on matters of religion4 ,you have permitted in public my conduct to be misstated in your presence1 and utterances in ,parliament to be attributed to me which are none of mine1 and you have done this because you hoped that1 by exciting religious and social prejudice against me1 you might weaken the ,government1 and crawl back into office4 ,to injure the ,liberal party1 you have allowed words which you pretend are sacred to be used as party cries1 and you have made hundreds of thousands examine into and declare in favor of my opinions and expressions on religious questions who but for you might perhaps have never even known my name4 ,you have allied yourself at ,westminster with men whom you denounced in ,ireland as traitors and disloyal1 in order that1 with their help1 you might insult an ,english constituency2 and you have succeeded in bringing ,parliamentary ,government into contempt by parading the ,house of ,commons as the chief law-breaking assembly in the world4 ,in four years against me you have done your worst to destroy me2 with your own purse you have helped the various projects to ruin me2 and you have so failed that clergymen and ,nonconformist ministers have been driven to support me from very indignation against the injury you have done to the cause of religion4 ,your ,conservative associations have flooded the country with leaflets containing garbled and misleading extracts from my speeches and writings1 and have thus excited the curiosity of many whom ,i could have never reached4 ,these1 procuring my works1 and finding that my words have been distorted and taken out of context1 give a favor to me that ,i should perhaps have never otherwise won4 ,few believe that you are moved by religious motives4 ,mr4 ,newdegate is regarded as sincere1 though his sanity is doubted2 but when men recollect the past and even present lives of many of those around you1 whose tongues so loudly declare their piety1 they come1 not unnaturally1 to the conclusion that he is the worst infidel who trails the banner of his church in the mire of political warfare1 and permits the votes of the drunken1 the dissolute1 the dishonest1 and the disloyal to be canvassed by his whips so that they may be counted on the side which he parades as that of the pure and the holy4 ,on the #gth ,february1 #ahhb1 ,i told you and your majority3 ,if ,i am not fit for my constituents1 they shall dismiss me1 but you never shall4 ,i have gone since voluntarily to my constituents--to those from whom you presented a petition with #aj1djj mock signatures upon it4 ,the answer has come at the ballot-box4 ,my constituents bid me resist you1 and ,i will4 ,they trust me to defeat you1 and ,i will4 ,the law is on my side1 and you fear its pronouncement4 ,you kept me from the possibility of obtaining a decision as long as you could1 but on the #aath ,february ,i broke through your barriers4 ,then you fruitlessly tried to erase all trace of my voting1 and when you found that ,i beat you on this by adding a new vote as you rubbed out the vote before1 then1 in malicious spite1 you shut me out of the tea-room1 dining-room1 cloak-room1 and library4 ,for shame1 ,sir ,stafford ,northcote6 ,this was worthy of ,o',donnell1 but not of the leader of a great party4 ,you wear knightly orders4 ,you should be above a knave's spitefulness4 ,my turn is coming4 ,you have won sympathy for me throughout the land2 you have made ,northampton men stand by me closer than ever2 you are now awaking the country to stand by ,northampton4 ,mr4 ,justice ,stephen says that the appeal is to the constituencies1 and ,i appeal4 ,in the name of justice1 by the hope of liberty1 in memory of ,english struggles for freedom1 ,i appeal1 and ,i hear the answer growing as you shall hear it1 too1 on the day when1 from my place in the ,house1 ,i move3 ,that all the resolutions respecting ,charles ,bradlaugh1 member for ,northampton1 hindering him from obeying the law1 and punishing him for having obeyed the law1 be expunged from the ,journals of this ,house as being subversive of the rights of the whole body of electors of this kingdom4 ,,charles ,,bradlaugh4 99 99 99 99 99 #cj1 ,st4 ,james' ,place1 ,s4,w4 ,march #dth1 #ahhd4 ,,sir1--,there are some points in the letter you have addressed to me which ,i am unwilling to pass over in silence lest ,i should be taken to admit your assertions4 ,in the first place1 it is necessary that ,i should point out to you that the action of the ,house of ,commons with respect to yourself has not been arbitrary or capricious1 but has been founded on principles deliberately adopted by a large majority of its members of various political opinions1 to which principles they have steadily adhered1 and which they have always been prepared to justify4 ,in the second place it should be clearly understood that in all the steps which we have taken with respect to yourself1 including some which we took with the greatest reluctance1 we were acting on the defensive1 in consequence of your repeated attempts to override or to evade the repeated decisions of the ,house of ,commons4 ,the brief history of your case is this4 ,you were duly elected member for ,northampton at the ,general ,election of #ahhj4 ,on presenting yourself to take your seat you tendered an affirmation instead of an oath1 and supported your claim to affirm by reference to the fact that you had been permitted to do so in a court of law under the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts of #ahfi and #ahgj4 ,that claim at once1 and necessarily1 brought under the notice of the ,house that you must either yourself have objected in a court of law to take an oath1 or must have been objected to as incompetent to do so1 and that the presiding judge must have been satisfied that the taking of an oath would have no binding effect upon your conscience4 ,that being so1 a ,committee was appointed by the ,house to consider whether the ,evidence ,amendment ,acts were applicable to the case of a member of the ,house of ,commons desiring to take his seat and to comply with the necessary conditions4 ,it was held by the ,committee that they were not so applicable1 and this finding of the ,committee was subsequently confirmed by the judgment of the ,court of ,appeal4 ,upon being refused permission to affirm1 you immediately came to the table of the ,house and offered to take the oath4 ,this proceeding was objected to1 and the majority of the ,house 7still1 as theretofore1 composed of members of different shades of politics7 refused to allow you to go through the form of taking an oath1 which1 by the hypothesis on which your original claim to affirm was founded1 as well as by the evidence afforded by a letter of your own1 they held you to be incompetent really to take1 and which they considered it would be a profanation to allow you to pretend to take4 ,that was the ground taken by the ,house on the #bcrd ,june1 #ahhj1 and it is the ground which it has maintained ever since4 ,you have1 since the adoption of that resolution1 made various attempts to force the ,house to admit you to a seat1 while still maintaining its objection2 and those attempts have1 on more than one occasion1 led to scenes of a very indecent and disorderly character4 ,in its anxiety to prevent the recurrence of such scenes1 the ,house has felt itself obliged to adopt measures of rigid exclusion1 which it would gladly have avoided4 ,i do not think it necessary to enter into the details of these scenes4 ,i am1 however1 obliged to take notice of your allegation that my action on the #aath ,february involved a breach of an arrangement previously made through ,mr4 ,winn4 ,the arrangement which ,i authorised ,mr4 ,winn to make in my name1 and which he did make in a letter to ,mr4 ,labouchere1 was as follows3 ,if ,mr4 ,bradlaugh will write you a letter to the effect that he will not go up to the table to take the oath1 nor make any other move with regard to his seat until ,monday1 ,february #aath1 and will do so on that day1 say immediately after questions1 ,i am quite sure that ,sir ,stafford will neither move anything himself respecting ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's seat1 nor employ anyone else to do so1 previous to that day4 ,the meaning of this is perfectly obvious1 and it was in strict conformity with it that ,i myself abstained1 and urged my friends to abstain1 from taking any step whatever in relation to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh until the day named4 ,when1 upon that day1 you came forward in defiance of the ,speaker's repeated calls to order1 and began to go through the form of taking the oath1 ,i had no option but to support the ,chair1 and to support also the repeatedly pronounced resolutions of the ,house in former sessions4 ,i do not take notice of other passages in your letter reflecting on the course of the majority1 and more particularly of myself4 ,but ,i will add1 in conclusion1 what your letter does not show1 that your exclusion from the precincts of the ,house is terminable at any moment when you may be willing to undertake not to disturb the proceedings of the ,house4 ,the inconveniences of which you complain are inconveniences which you might1 if you chose1 put an end to to-morrow4 ,i have the honor to remain1 ,your obedient servant1 ,,stafford ,h4 ,,northcote4 ,c4 ,,bradlaugh1 ,esq41 ,m4,p4 99 99 99 99 99 #bc1 ,circus ,road1 ,st4 ,john's ,wood1 ,london1 ,n4,w41 ,march #gth1 #ahhd4 ,to the ,right ,hon4 ,,sir ,,stafford ,,northcote1 ,bart1 ,m4,p4 ,,sir1--,in reply to your favor of the #dth instant1 in which you say that the ,house held me to be incompetent to take the oath1 will you permit me to answer3 #a4 ,that the question of competence or incompetence to take the oath is one of law1 fit only for the decision of a judicial tribunal1 to which tribunal ,i have always desired and endeavored to refer such question4 #b4 ,that if the principle deliberately adopted by a large majority of the members of the ,house of ,commons had been that they desired to prevent a profanation of the oath1 then they ought1 during the sessions of #ahhb--ahhc1 to have gladly facilitated the passage of the ,affirmation ,bill1 which would have prevented the necessity for the fulfilling by me of that which you describe as profanation1 but which ,i contend is the duty imposed on me by law4 ,in your very temperate historic narrative1 you omit the fact that when the ,house passed its resolution of the #bcrd ,june1 #ahhj1 it had before it my declaration1 made three weeks earlier1 in answer to question #ajb of the second ,select ,committee3 ,any form that ,i went through1 any oath that ,i took1 ,i should regard as binding upon my conscience in the fullest degree4 ,i would go through no form1 ,i would take no oath1 unless ,i meant it to be so binding4 ,and as you refer to my letter of the #bjth ,may1 printed in the report of that committee1 it is also fair to recall my answer thereon on the same day to question #aig3 ,i ask the ,committee in examining it to take it complete1 not to separate one or two words in it and to take those without the countervailing words1 and to remember that in this letter ,i declare that the oath1 if ,i take it1 would bind me1 and ,i now repeat that in the most distinct and formal manner2 that the ,oath of ,allegiance1 viz43 ',i do swear that ,i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her ,majesty ,queen ,victoria1 her heirs and successors1 according to law1' will1 when ,i take it1 be most fully1 completely1 and unreservedly binding upon my honor and conscience2 and ,i crave leave to refer to the unanimous judgment of the full ,court of the ,exchequer ,chamber1 in the case of ,miller v4 ,salomons1 #agth ,jurist1 page #dfc1 and to the case of the ,lancaster and ,carlisle ,railway ,company v4 ,heaton1 #dth ,jurist1 new series1 page #gjh1 for the distinguishment between the words of asseveration and the essential words of an oath4 ,but ,i also desire to add1 and ,i do this most solemnly and unreservedly1 that the taking and subscribing1 or repeating of those words of asseveration1 will in no degree weaken the binding effect of the oath on my conscience4 ,in your reference to my attempts to take the seat to which ,i am by law entitled1 you have omitted to state that on the #bgth ,april1 #ahha1 you personally advised me to wait for legislation1 and that when ,i did so wait1 your friends of the majority and yourself prevented such legislation4 ,in recalling the arrangement made by ,mr4 ,winn on your behalf1 you have omitted his most explicit and latest letter3 ,nostell ,priory1 ,wakefield1 ,january #bhth1 #ahhd4 ,,dear ,,mr4 ,,labouchere1--,on the distinct understanding and agreement that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh does not come to the table to take the oath1 or adopt any other course with reference to his seat in the ,house of ,commons1 until immediately after questions on ,monday1 the #aath of ,february next1 and that he will on that day and time come to the table1 as he has intimated his intention of doing1 ,i am prepared to say that ,sir ,stafford ,northcote will not previous to ,monday the #aath make any motion hostile to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 nor support any motion coming from any of our independent friends on the subject4 ,i am1 yours very truly1 ,,row4 ,,winn4 ,h4 ,labouchere1 ,esq41 ,m4,p4 ,my charge against you is that1 despite this agreement1 you had gone down to the ,house with a resolution prepared beforehand1 and by its wording showing that it was intended to be moved before ,i should be able to get near the table to which you had made me specifically agree then to come4 ,you conclude by saying that ,i can put an end to any personal inconvenience by undertaking not to disturb the proceedings of the ,house4 ,i gave such an undertaking last year in express words2 it is printed in the journals of the ,house1 and you did not accept it4 ,immediately before you moved your resolution of #bast ,february1 you heard ,mr4 ,speaker read my undertaking to do nothing until a legal decision was obtained4 ,this you refused1 and ,i have no reason to suppose that any second offer from me would be accepted4 ,if what you really desire is that1 if the law decides in my favor1 ,i shall none the less join in your insult to my constituents by refusing to try to serve in the ,parliament to which they have lawfully returned me1 ,i can only say that ,i will never give such an undertaking4 ,i have the honor to be1 ,sir1 ,your most obedient ,servant1 ,c4 ,,bradlaugh4 ,,the ,,latest ,,constitutional ,,struggle3 ,a ,,register ,,of ,,events ,which have occurred since ,april #bnd1 #ahhj4 ,,by ,w4 ,,mawer4 ,no1 not an oath4444 ,swear priests1 and cowards1 and men cautelous1 ,old feeble carrions and such suffering souls ,that welcome wrongs2 unto bad causes swear ,such creatures as men doubt2 but do not stain ,the even virtue of our enterprise1 ,nor the insuppressive metal of our spirits1 ,to think that or our cause or our performance ,did need an oath4--,julius ,caesar1 ,act ,,ii41 ,scene #a4 ,illustration ,,london3 ,,freethought ,,publishing ,,company #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street1 ,e4,c4 #ahhc4 ,,price ,,twopence4 ,,london3 ,,printed ,,by ,,annie ,,besant ,,and ,,charles ,,bradlaugh1 #fc1 ,,fleet ,,street ,e4,c4 ,,the ,,latest ,,constitutional ,,struggle4 #ahhj4 ,april #bnd4--,after twelve years' fight and three repulses1 ,mr4 ,charles ,bradlaugh is elected member of ,parliament for ,northampton4 ,the polling was as follows3-- ,labouchere 7,l47 #d1aeh ,bradlaugh 7,r47 #c1hbg ,phipps 7,c47 #c1aeb ,merewether 7,c47 #b1hbf ,the ,weekly ,dispatch said3 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's achievement of the position he has been aiming at so long and so zealously is a notable sign of the times4 ,whatever his critics may think of him1 he will enter ,parliament as the representative of a vastly larger constituency than the whole electorate or the whole population of ,northampton4 ,the ,birmingham ,daily ,mail3 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh holds extreme views on some subjects1 but he will none the less be a useful man in ,parliament1 his unflinching courage in the exposure of abuses being unquestionable4 ,the ,standard3 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 now that he has got to the ,house of ,commons1 is not likely to efface himself in speechless obscurity4 ,the ,southampton ,times3 ,the most signal and portentous triumph is that which has been achieved by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh4 ,his election shows what the unity of the ,liberal party must have been4 ,the ,christian ,world3 ,his contributions to the discussions of the ,house may not be without value4 ,during the election ,mr4 ,samuel ,morley telegraphed to ,mr4 ,labouchere as follows3 ,i strongly urge necessity of united effort in all sections of ,liberal party1 and the sinking of minor and personal questions1 with many of which ,i deeply sympathise1 in order to prevent the return1 in so pronounced a constituency as ,northampton1 of even one ,conservative4 ,april #aeth4--,mr4 ,s4 ,morley1 speaking at ,bristol said1 respecting his telegram to ,northampton3 ,he made no reference to candidates1 nor did the friend who wrote the telegram go into detail1 but he advised union4 ,those who had known him all his life would believe that he viewed with the intensest repugnance the supposed opinions1 both social and religious1 of one of the candidates4 ,afterwards1 writing to the ,record1 ,mr4 ,morley said he deeply regretted his telegram4 ,the ,weekly ,dispatch1 commenting on ,mr4 ,morley's conduct1 said3 ,let the bigots who have taken him to task for his temporary aberration from the path of pharisaism make what they can of his pitiful excuse4 ,other people can only regret that a man so useful in many ways1 both as a politician and a philanthropist1 should show himself so narrow-minded4 ,the ,edinburgh ,evening ,news3 ,in their disappointment1 the defeated party have eagerly caught at the election of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh as supplying the most pungent taunt that can be thrown at their victorious opponents4 ,the ,sheffield ,telegraph3 ,bradlaugh is an ,m4,p4 444 the bellowing blasphemer of ,northampton4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh announces that he considers he is legally entitled to avail himself of the ,freethinkers' affirmation1 and that there is some reason to hope that other members will join him in that course4 ,april #agth4--,sheffield ,independent's ,london ,correspondent says3 ,tenets which constitute the religious faith of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh are understood to constitute an insuperable difficulty in the way of his being sworn a member of the faithful ,commons4 ,april #bith4--,parliament opens4 ,may #crd4--,at the table of the ,house ,mr4 ,bradlaugh handed in a written paper to the ,clerk of the ,house2 on this were written the words3 ,to the ,right ,honorable the ,speaker of the ,house of ,commons4 ,i1 the undersigned ,charles ,bradlaugh1 beg respectfully to claim to be allowed to affirm1 as a person for the time being by law permitted to make a solemn affirmation or declaration1 instead of taking an oath4 ,charles ,bradlaugh4 ,asked if he desired to state anything to the ,house1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh said3 ,i have to submit that the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act1 #ahff1 gives the right to affirm to every person for the time being permitted by law to make affirmation4 ,i am such a person2 and under the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1 and the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahgj1 ,i have repeatedly1 for nine years past1 affirmed in the highest courts of jurisdiction in this realm4 ,i am ready to make the declaration or affirmation of allegiance4 ,at the request of the ,speaker ,mr4 ,bradlaugh then withdrew1 in order that the ,house might consider the claim1 and ,lord ,f4 ,cavendish1 urging that it would be manifestly inconvenient that when any hon4 member had applied to take his seat in the ,house1 any unnecessary delay should intervene1 moved the appointment of a committee of inquiry which should lay before the ,house the material on which the ,house itself should found its decision4 ,sir ,stafford ,northcote seconded4 ,several other members spoke1 and ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope said that the grievance of one man was very little compared with a great principle2 at present the ,house of ,commons was only a half-hatched chicken4 ,the committee was then agreed to4 ,may #aath4--,appointment of committee carried by #aga votes against #gd1 after a two hours' debate4 ,may #bjth4--,the committee report3 that in the opinion of the committee1 persons entitled under the provisions of 'the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahfi1' and 'the ,evidence ,amendment ,act1 #ahgj1' to make a solemn declaration instead of an oath in courts of justice1 can not be admitted to make an affirmation or declaration instead of an oath in the ,house of ,commons1 in persuance of the ,acts #bi and #cj ,vict41 c4 #ai1 and #ca and #cb ,vict41 c4 #gb4 ,the draft report1 proposed by the ,attorney-,general1 was to the effect that persons so admitted1 etc41 may be admitted1 etc4 ,this was lost by the casting vote of the chairman 7,mr4 ,walpole71 the other members of the committee voting as follows4 ,ayes3 ,mr4 ,whitbread1 ,mr4 ,john ,bright1 ,mr4 ,massey1 ,mr4 ,sergeant ,simon1 ,sir ,henry ,jackson1 ,mr4 ,attorney ,general1 ,mr4 ,solicitor-,general1 ,mr4 ,watkin ,williams4 ,noes3 ,sir ,john ,holker1 ,lord ,henry ,lennox1 ,mr4 ,staveley ,hill1 ,mr4 ,grantham1 ,mr4 ,pemberton1 ,mr4 ,hopwood1 ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope1 ,mr4 ,henry ,chaplin4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh makes a public statement of his position with regard to the oath4 ,he considered he had a legal right to choose between the alternatives of making an affirmation or taking the oath1 and he felt it clearly his moral duty1 in that case1 to make an affirmation4 ,the oath included words which1 to him1 were meaningless1 and it would have been an act of hypocrisy to voluntarily take this form if any other had been open to him4 ,he should1 taking the oath1 regard himself as bound not by the letter of its words1 but by the spirit which the affirmation would have conveyed1 had he been allowed to make it1 and as soon as he might be able he should take steps to put an end to the present doubtful and unfortunate state of the law and practice on oaths and affirmations4 ,may #bast4--,amid a tumult of cries from the ,conservative benches ,mr4 ,bradlaugh goes to the table for the purpose of being sworn4 ,sir ,h4 ,d4 ,wolff objecting1 the ,speaker requested ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to withdraw4 ,he 7the ,speaker7 was bound to say he knew of no instance in which a member who had offered to take the oath in the usual form was not allowed by the ,house to do so4 ,sir ,h4 ,d4 ,wolff then moved that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh should not be allowed to take the oath1 alleging against ,mr4 ,bradlaugh his repute as an ,atheist1 and his authorship of ,the ,impeachment of the ,house of ,brunswick4 ,mr4 ,alderman ,fowler seconded the motion1 stating that he held in his hand a petition praying the ,house not to alter the law and the custom of the realm for the purpose of admitting an ,atheist to ,parliament4 ,mr4 ,gladstone1 in the course of replying1 said3 it was not in consequence of any regulation enforced by the authority of this ,house--of a single branch of the legislature1 however complete that authority may be over the members of this ,house1 that the hon4 member for ,northampton presents himself to take the oath at the table4 ,he presents himself in pursuance of a statutory obligation to take the oath in order that he may fulfil the duty with which1 as we are given to understand1 in a regular and formal manner1 his constituents have entrusted him4 ,that statutory obligation implied a statutory right4 ,he moved that it be referred to a select committee to consider and report for the information of the ,house whether the ,house has any right to prevent a duly-elected member1 who is willing to take the oath1 from doing so4 ,a long debate ensued1 characterised by the fierceness with which ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's admission to ,parliament was opposed4 ,mr4 ,john ,bright1 however1 asked if the ,house were entitled thus to obstruct what he called the right of a member to take his seat on account of his religious belief1 because it happened that his belief or no belief had been openly professed1 what reason was there that any member of the ,house should not be questioned as to his beliefs1 and if the answer were not satisfactory that the ,house should not be at liberty to object to his taking his seat8 ,after two or three adjournments of the debate the ,premier's amendment was virtually withdrawn1 and a motion by the ,attorney-,general was carried to the effect that a committee should be appointed to report whether it was competent to the ,house to prevent ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 by resolution1 from taking the oath4 ,may #bhth4--,committee nominated--twenty-three members4 ,mr4 ,labouchere gives notice to ask leave to bring in a ,bill to amend the law of ,parliamentary ,oaths1 to provide that any member may1 if he desire1 make a solemn affirmation in lieu of taking the oath4 ,june #bnd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh gives evidence before ,select ,committee1 in the course of which he said3 ,i have never at any time refused to take the oath of allegiance provided by statute to be taken by members2 all ,i did was1 believing as ,i then did that ,i had the right to affirm1 to claim to affirm1 and ,i was then absolutely silent as to the oath2 that ,i did not refuse to take it1 nor have ,i then or since expressed any mental reservation1 or stated that the appointed oath of allegiance would not be binding upon me2 that1 on the contrary1 ,i say1 and have said1 that the essential part of the oath is in the fullest and most complete degree binding upon my honor and conscience1 and that the repeating of words of asseveration does not in the slightest degree weaken the binding effect of the oath of allegiance upon me4 ,it had been persistently represented that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had refused to take the oath4 ,any form that ,i went through1 any oath that ,i took1 ,i should regard as binding upon my conscience in the fullest degree4 ,june #afth4--,the committee report that the compliance by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh with the form used when an oath is taken would not be the taking of the oath within the true meaning of the statutes2 that if a member make and subscribe the affirmation in place of taking the oath it is possible by means of an action in the ,high ,court of ,justice1 to test his legal right to do so2 and that the committee recommend that should ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again seek to make and subscribe the affirmation he be not prevented from so doing4 7,majority in favor of his being allowed to affirm--four47 ,june #bast4--,mr4 ,labouchere moved in the ,house of ,commons that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh be admitted to make an affirmation instead of taking the oath1 seconded by ,mr4 ,m',laren4 ,sir ,h4 ,giffard moved a resolution seeking to debar ,mr4 ,bradlaugh from both oath and affirmation4 ,alderman ,fowler seconded1 a man who did not believe in a ,god was not likely to be a man of high moral character4 ,the majority of the people were opposed to an ,atheist being admitted to ,parliament4 ,many other members spoke4 ,general ,burnaby said the making of the affirmation by ,mr4 ,bradlaugh would pollute the oath4 ,mr4 ,palmer said ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had a legal right with which the ,house had no power to interfere4 ,the ,attorney-,general said he had come to the conclusion that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh could not take the oath1 chiefly on the consideration that he was a person entitled to affirm4 ,mr4 ,john ,bright said it was certainly open to any member to propose to take either oath or affirmation2 probably if ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had had any suspicion that the affirmation would have been refused him1 he would have taken the oath as other members take it--very much1 he was afraid1 as a matter of form4 ,debate adjourned4 ,june #bbnd4--,mr4 ,gladstone said that the ,house1 by agreeing to the amendment1 would probably be entering on the commencement of a long1 embarrassing1 and a difficult controversy1 not perhaps so much within as beyond the limits of the ,house1 perhaps with the result of ultimate defeat of the ,house4 ,the more he looked at the case the stronger appeared the arguments which went to prove that in the essence of the law and the constitution the ,house had no jurisdiction4 ,in interfering between a member and what he considered his statutory duty1 the ,house might find itself in conflict with either the courts of law or the constituency of ,northampton4 ,no doubt an action could not be brought against the ,house1 but he was not so clear that an action could not be brought against the servants of the ,house4 ,he was still less willing to face a conflict with the constituency4 ,the ,house had commonly been successful in its controversies with the ,crown or ,house of ,lords1 but very different was the issue of its one lamentable conflict with a constituency4--,sir ,henry ,tyler1 with execrable taste1 dragged in the name of a lady with whom ,mr4 ,bradlaugh is associated in business4 ,at last1 by a majority of #de--the numbers voting being #bge and #bcj--;another triumph against liberty was scored4 ,the ,christian ,world regretted that some ,nonconformists helped to swell the ,tory majority4 ,the ,jewish ,world held it as a reproach to ,judaism1 that members of their community should have gone over to the party which once strove to detain them in bondage4 ,in #ahea1 ,mr4 ,newdegate protested against the idea that they should have sitting in the ,house1 an individual who regarded our redeemer as an impostor1 and yet ,baron de ,worms voted with ,mr4 ,newdegate for the exclusion of a man with whose tenets he disagreed4 ,the ,whitehall ,review headed an article ,god v4 ,bradlaugh1 and said the majority had protected ,god from insult4 ,june #bcrd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh again claimed at the table of the ,house of ,commons to take the oath1 and the ,speaker having informed him of the resolution passed the previous evening1 requested his withdrawal4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh thereupon asked to be heard1 and after some debate the demand was complied with4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh spoke from the bar of the ,house1 asking no favor1 but claiming his right1 and warning hon4 members against a conflict with public opinion4 ,mr4 ,labouchere moved1 and ,mr4 ,macdonald seconded1 the rescindment of the resolution of the #bbnd1 which was lost on division4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was then recalled and requested to withdraw from the ,house4 ,standing by the table1 he said3 ,i respectfully refuse to obey the order of the ,house1 because the order is against the law4 ,the raging of the bigots and ,tories recommenced4 ,mr4 ,gladstone declined to help them out of the pit into which they had leapt3 ,those who were responsible for the decision might carry it out as they chose4 ,after a sharp discussion ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was1 on the motion of ,sir ,stafford ,northcote1 committed to the ,clock ,tower4 ,in the division the numbers were #bgd for and #g against1 the ,radicals having left the ,house4 ,june #bdth4--,on the motion of ,sir ,stafford ,northcote1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh is released from custody1 not upon apology1 or reparation1 or promise not to repeat his offence1 but with the full knowledge and clear recollection of his announcement that the offence would be repeated toties quoties till his object was effected4 ,june #beth4--,mr4 ,labouchere gives notice of motion to rescind the resolution of the #bbnd1 and ,government agreed to give an early day for the discussion of the same4 ,june #bhth4--,baron de ,ferrieres announced his intention to move that the seat for ,northampton be declared vacant1 and that a ,bill be brought in providing for the substitution of an affirmation for the oath at the option of members4 ,mr4 ,wyndham 7,conservative7 asked ,mr4 ,gladstone whether the ,government would bring in a ,bill to remove all doubts as to the legal right of members to make a solemn affirmation4 ,mr4 ,gladstone said the ,government did not propose to do so1 and gave notice for ,thursday 7#ast ,july7 to move as a standing order that members-elect be allowed1 subject to any liability by statute1 to affirm at their choice4 ,mr4 ,labouchere then said he would not proceed with his motion4 ,on another motion1 however1 by the same member1 leave was given to bring in a ,bill for the amendment of the ,parliamentary ,oaths and ,affirmations1 which was read a first time4 ,july #ast4--,after a futile attempt made by ,mr4 ,gorst to show that ,mr4 ,gladstone's resolution was a disorderly one1 the ,premier1 in moving it said1 in the course of an extremely fair speech1 that the allegation of members that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had thrust his opinions upon the ,house was untrue4 ,his 7,mr4 ,bradlaugh's7 reference to the ,acts under which he claimed to affirm had only been named in answer to a question from the clerk of the ,house4 ,sir ,erskine ,may1 in his evidence before the recent committee1 stated that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh simply claimed to affirm4 ,sir ,stafford ,northcote admitted that when ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was called upon to affirm he was not disrespectful1 but firm4 ,he opposed the resolution as humiliating to the ,house4 ,several members protested against any course for facilitating the admission of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh4 ,general ,burnaby stated that in order to obtain authoritative opinions on the matter he had obtained letters or telegrams from the ,moravian body1 the ,bishop of ,london1 the ,roman ,catholic ,archbishop of ,ossory1 the ,bishop of ,ratho1 the ,archbishop of ,dublin1 the ,bishop of ,galway1 and the ,bishop of ,argyle and the ,isles1 and the ,secretary of the ,pope of ,rome1 all of whom expressed themselves in the strongest terms against the admission of an ,atheist into ,parliament4 ,mr4 ,spurgeon1 who was unfortunately from home1 had expressed his opinion strongly adverse to it1 and the ,chief ,rabbi--7loud laughter7--although refusing to interfere with political questions1 felt very deeply on the subject4 7,laughter1 and cries of the ,sultan1 and ,shah47 ,when the ,house divided the numbers were #cjc for1 and #bdi against4 ,july #bnd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh takes the affirmation of allegiance1 and his seat4 99 99 99 99 99 ,during the struggle several hundreds of indignation meetings were held in ,london and the provinces1 and petitions1 letters1 telegrams1 etc41 in immense numbers1 poured in upon the ,government and the ,house1 in favor of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's rights4 99 99 99 99 99 ,july #bnd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh gives his first vote1 and was thereupon served with a writ to recover against him a penalty of ,l#ejj for having voted and sat without having made and subscribed the oath1 the plaintiff being one ,henry ,lewis ,clarke1 who1 as subsequently appeared1 was merely the tool of the actual common informer1 ,charles ,newdigate ,newdegate1 ,m4,p4 ,this writ was ready so quickly that1 if not issued actually before ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had taken his seat1 it must have been prepared beforehand4 ,july #hth4--,mr4 ,norwood asks the first ,lord of the ,treasury whether1 considering the ,government declined to introduce a bill to amend the ,oaths ,act1 it would instruct the law officers of the ,crown to defend the junior member for ,northampton against the suit of the common informer4 ,mr4 ,callan asked whether the ,government would remit the penalty4 ,mr4 ,gladstone said no application had been received for remission of the penalties1 and that his reply to ,mr4 ,norwood must be in the negative4 ,july #adth4--,read first time in the ,house of ,commons1 a bill to incapacitate from sitting in ,parliament any person who has by deliberate public speaking1 or by published writing1 systematically avowed his disbelief in the existence of a supreme being4 ,it was prepared and introduced by ,sir ,eardley ,wilmot1 ,mr4 ,alderman ,fowler and ,mr4 ,hicks4 ,owing to an informality the ,bill could not come on for second reading4 ,the ,rev4 ,canon ,abney1 of ,derby1 speaks of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh as the apostle of filth1 impurity1 and blasphemy4 ,july #afth4--,parliament indemnifies ,lord ,byron against an action1 he having sat and voted without being sworn4 ,july #bjth4--,sir ,eardley ,wilmot gives notice of moving that it is repugnant to the constitution for an ,atheist to become a member of this ,honorable ,house4 ,he afterwards postponed his motion4 ,at a meeting of the ,dumfries ,town ,council1 a member said3 ,if the law courts should decide that it was legal for an ,atheist to sit in the ,house of ,commons1 he should feel it is duty to give notice of petition to ,parliament to have the law altered2 he would not allow ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to go into a hundred acre field beside cattle1 let alone the ,house of ,commons4 ,the ,rev4 ,chas4 ,voysey writes1 that he feels disgraced by the people of ,northampton electing ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 and declares that most of the speeches in the ,bradlaugh case in favor of his exclusion1 strike me as singularly good1 wholesome and creditable4 ,he repeats the myth of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh forcing his objections to the oath upon the ,house4 ,july #bast4--,sir ,john ,hay1 ,m4,p41 speaking about ,mr4 ,bradlaugh at ,new ,galloway1 made a most infamous1 cowardly1 and uncalled for attack on ,mrs4 ,besant4 ,the ,scotsman refused to print the remarks1 as the language was so coarse that it could hardly have dropped from a ,yahoo4 ,aug4 #ast4--,the ,nineteenth ,century prints ,an ,englishman's ,protest1 written by ,cardinal ,manning1 personally directed against ,mr4 ,bradlaugh4 ,aug4 #bdth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh gives notice that early next session he will call attention to perpetual pensions4 ,sept4 #gth4--,parliament prorogued4 ,hansard credits ,mr4 ,bradlaugh with about twenty speeches during the ,session4 7,mr4 ,newdegate told the ,licensed ,victuallers that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh had made one speech1 and proved himself a second or third-rate speaker47 #ahha4 ,jan4 #fth4--,parliament reopens4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh renews his notice as to perpetual pensions4 ,great interest in the question throughout the kingdom4 ,jan4 #bdth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh makes a speech in the ,house of ,commons against ,coercion in ,ireland4 ,jan4 #cast4--,mr4 ,newdegate1 speaking in the ,house1 described ,northampton as an oasis in the ,midland ,counties4 ,feb4 #dth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh makes a speech against the second reading of the ,coercion ,bill1 and concluded by moving that it be read that day six months4 ,feb4 #aeth4--,date of motion for inquiry into perpetual pensions fixed for ,march #aeth4 7,when the day arrived ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 on an appeal from ,mr4 ,gladstone1 allowed the motion to be postponed1 in order to allow supply to be taken4 #hdh petitions had been presented to the ,house1 with #bea1ccb signatures in favor of the motion47 ,feb4 #agth4--,mr4 ,dawson1 ,m4,p4 for ,carlow1 said that ,irish members were much indebted to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh for what he had done on the ,coercion ,bill4 ,feb4 #beth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh made final speech against third reading of the ,coercion ,bill4 ,march #gth4--,the case of ,clarke v4 ,bradlaugh heard by ,mr4 ,justice ,mathew4 ,march #ajth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh brought before the ,house the case of the imprisoned ,maoris4 ,march #aath4--,judgment in the case given1 which was for the plaintiff1 that he was entitled to recover the penalty1 subject to appeal4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh gave notice of appeal4 ,mr4 ,gorst gave notice to move that ,mr4 ,speaker issue his warrant for new writ for the borough of ,nottingham 64 ,march #adth4--,upon ,mr4 ,bradlaugh rising to present petitions against perpetual pensions1 signed by over #g1jjj persons1 ,mr4 ,gorst rose to order1 on the ground that the seat for ,northampton was vacant4 ,after discussion the ,speaker called upon ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to proceed with the presentation of his petitions4 ,march #aeth4--,at request of ,mr4 ,gladstone1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh postponed his motion for enquiry into perpetual pensions4 ,march #bcrd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh moved the ,court of ,appeal to expedite the hearing of his appeal1 and also to expedite the trial of the issues in fact4 ,the ,court gave the appeal priority over other cases4 ,march #bhth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh made his last speech in the ,house against flogging in the ,army4 ,march #cjth4--,appeal heard4 ,march #cast4--,judgment given against the defendant4 ,plaintiff not yet entitled to execution1 but seat vacated1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh undertaking not to appeal so far as the affirmation was concerned4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again seeks the suffrages of the electors of ,northampton4 ,april #fth4--,the ,tories serve notice on the ,mayor not to accept ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's nomination1 which the ,mayor disregarded4 ,mr4 ,edward ,corbett nominated by ,tories4 ,april #ith4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh re-elected by #c1dcg votes to ,corbett #c1cje4 ,april #bfth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 accompanied by ,mr4 ,labouchere and ,mr4 ,burt1 came to the table of the ,house1 and1 the book having been handed to him1 was about to take the oath when ,sir ,stafford ,northcote interposing1 he was requested to withdraw1 in order that the ,house might consider the new conditions under which the oath was proposed to be taken4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh withdrew to the bar of the ,house1 and ,sir ,stafford ,northcote moved that he be not allowed to go through the form of taking the oath4 ,mr4 ,davey moved and ,mr4 ,labouchere seconded an amendment to the effect that where a person who had been duly elected presented himself at the table to take the oath he ought not to be prevented from doing so by anything extraneous to the transaction4 ,other members spoke1 and ,mr4 ,bright regretted the almost violent temper with which some hon4 gentlemen came to the consideration of the question4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 speaking at the bar1 claimed that his return was untainted1 that it had not been brought about by the ,liberal party1 but by the help of the people1 by the pence of toilers in mine and factory4 ,he begged the ,house not to plunge into a struggle with him1 which he would shun4 ,strife was easy to begin1 but none knew where it would end4 ,there was no legal disqualification upon him1 and they had no right to impose a disqualification which was less than legal4 ,mr4 ,gladstone made a lengthy and fine speech in favor of ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 the text of which was ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's own words given above as to imposition of a new disqualification2 on a division1 however1 the bigots again had it4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again stepped to the table1 and demanded the administration of the oath1 refusing to obey the ,speaker's order to withdraw4 ,sir ,stafford ,northcote asked the ,prime ,minister whether he proposed to offer the ,house any counsel4 ,mr4 ,gladstone said he should leave it to the majority to carry out the effects of their vote4 ,eventually the ,speaker called upon the ,sergeant-at-,arms to remove ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 who during the debate had been standing at the table4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh withdrawing with the ,sergeant three times to the bar1 as often returned to the table4 ,after further passages at arms between ,mr4 ,gladstone and ,sir ,stafford ,northcote1 the ,house adjourned4 ,april #bgth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh again found at the table of the ,house claiming to be allowed to take the oath4 ,at the bidding of the ,speaker the ,sergeant-at-,arms again caused ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to withdraw to the bar1 where he remained during the discussion which followed4 ,mr4 ,labouchere asked the ,prime ,minister whether he would give him reasonable facilities to introduce his ,affirmation ,bill1 if so ,mr4 ,bradlaugh would not interfere with the resolution passed last night4 ,mr4 ,gladstone said the giving facility for that purpose1 meant the postponement of very serious and very urgent business1 and he had no assurance as to the disposition of the ,house4 ,he could not see his way to consent if it was to be an opposed ,bill4 ,after further discussion1 however1 ,mr4 ,gladstone said it might be possible to test the feeling of the ,house by one or more morning sittings4 ,april #bith4--,mr4 ,gladstone announces the intention of the ,government of bringing in a bill amending the ,parliamentary ,oaths ,act4 ,may #bnd4--,the ,attorney-,general moved that the ,house resolve itself into committee with a view of his asking leave to introduce the ,bill4 ,debate on motion adjourned to the #eth with the view of fixing the time on the #fth1 when the discussion should be resumed4 ,mr4 ,mac,iver gave notice to ask the ,prime ,minister whether he was prepared to reconsider his decision of last session1 and will introduce a short measure for the partial disfranchisement of ,northampton4 7,the question was never put47 ,may #fth4--,further obstruction of the ,bigots4 ,may #ajth4--,after #a4ae a4m4 the ,government proposed a morning sitting for that day 7,tuesday71 to discuss the introduction of their ,bill4 ,further obstruction1 wrath1 and bitterness1 and the ,government abandoned the intention to hold a morning sitting4 ,at the afternoon sitting a resolution was arrived at1 which authorised the ,sergeant-at-,arms to prevent ,mr4 ,bradlaugh from entering the ,house4 ,lord ,selborne 7,lord ,chancellor7 in reply to a letter relative to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh and the oath1 says equal justice is due to ,christian and infidel2 he saw no possibility of refusing to afford by legislation to all who scruple to take the oath1 the same option in ,parliament as they have in courts of law1 to make an affirmation4 ,may #beth4--,mr4 ,newdegate formally blocked the ,bill1 of which ,mr4 ,labouchere gave notice1 for indemnifying ,mr4 ,bradlaugh against penalties for having sat and voted on affirmation4 ,june #aith and #bjth4--,the common informer's action tried at ,nisi prius before ,mr4 ,justice ,grove4 ,verdict against ,mr4 ,bradlaugh for penalty and costs4--,rule nisi for new trial afterwards1 granted by ,justices ,grove and ,lindley2 this rule was made absolute by ,justices ,denman and ,hawkins1 but was set aside by ,lords ,justices ,brett1 ,cotton and ,holker4 99 99 99 99 99 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh appeals to the country4 ,the country answers4 99 99 99 99 99 ,aug4 #crd4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 acting on his right to enter the ,house of ,commons1 is seized at the door of the ,house by fourteen men1 police and ushers 7,inspector ,denning said ten71 and roughly hustled out into ,palace ,yard1 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh protesting against such treatment as illegal4 ,in the passage leading out to the yard ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's coat was torn down on the right side2 his waistcoat was also pulled open1 and otherwise his toilet was much disarranged4 ,the members flocked down the stairs on the heels of the struggling party1 but no pause was made until ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was placed outside the precincts and in ,palace ,yard4--,times4 ,alderman ,fowler was heard to call1 ,kick him out4 ,this he afterwards denied1 but there is evidence that he did so4 7,mr4 ,bradlaugh suffered the rupture of the small muscles of both his arms1 and erysipelas ensued74 ,many thousands of people went up to the ,house with petitions1 urging the ,house to do justice to ,northampton and ,mr4 ,bradlaugh4 ,in the ,house ,mr4 ,labouchere moved a resolution condemning1 as an interference with the privilege of members1 the action of the authorities in expelling ,mr4 ,bradlaugh from the lobby4 ,this was rejected by #aia votes against #g1 and a motion of ,sir ,henry ,holland1 declaring the approval of the ,house of the course taken by the ,speaker1 was agreed to without controversy4 ,at a crowded meeting at the ,hall of ,science the same evening ,mr4 ,bradlaugh stated that he had told ,inspector ,denning in ,palace ,yard that he could come back with force enough to gain admittance1 but that he had no right to risk the lives and liberties of his supporters4 ,aug4 #dth4--,the ,times declares1 in an article favorable on the whole to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's claims1 that the ,house of ,commons was yesterday the real sufferer in dignity1 authority1 and repute4 ,it says3 the question contains within itself the baleful germ of a grave constitutional contest between the ,house of ,commons and any constituency in the land2 and such a conflict can but have one conclusion1 as all history shows4 ,the ,daily ,news1 in a similar article1 concludes thus3 ,sooner or later it will be generally acknowledged that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's exclusion was one of the most high-handed acts of which any legislative body has ever been guilty4 ,the following unique paragraph from ,the ,rock is worth preserving in its original form3 ,the question now is whether the ,christian people of this realm will quietly allow clamorous groups of infidels1 ,radicals1 and seditionists1 by organised clamor1 bluster1 and menace1 to overawe the legislature1 and by exhibitions of violence--not at all unlikely1 if permitted to develop into outrage and riot--to cause an organic and vital change to be made in our ,constitution and laws1 in order that brazen-faced ,atheism might display itself within the walls of the ,british ,parliament4 ,mr4 ,e4 ,d4 ,girdlestone writes3 ,if the present ,cabinet does not secure your admission to the ,house in some way or other1 ,i can only wish they may soon be turned out of office4 ,i don't know what more ,i can do than say1 ',go on6 and go in6' ,aug4 #eth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh's application at ,westminster ,police ,court for summons against ,inspector1 for having assaulted him at the ,house of ,commons on the #crd inst41 refused4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh confined to the ,house with severe erysipelas in both arms1 resulting from the injuries inflicted4 ,attended by ,drs4 ,ramskill and ,palfrey4 ,the latter1 on ,august #abth1 ordered his immediate removal from town1 to prevent yet more dangerous complications4 ,aug4 #acth4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh went to ,worthing to recruit his health4 ,outside the station there1 weary and exhausted1 both arms in a sling1 he was rudely stared at by a clergyman1 who1 having satisfied himself as to ,mr4 ,bradlaugh's identity1 walked away saying loudly3 ,there's ,bradlaugh2 ,i hope they'll make it warm for him yet4 ,the ,northern ,star 7a ,tory paper7 suggested that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh was malingering--simply carrying on the showman business4 ,aug4 #bdth4--,sir ,henry ,tyler1 in the ,house of ,commons1 attempts to discredit the ,south ,kensington department for allowing science and art classes at the ,hall of ,science4 ,mr4 ,mundella gives those classes great credit4 ,aug4 #bgth4--,parliament prorogued4 ,further appeal to ,england4 #ahhb4 ,jan4 #ith4--,the ,earl of ,derby1 in a speech at the ,liverpool ,reform ,club1 says3 ,for my part ,i utterly disbelieve in the value of political oaths4444 ,i should hope that if ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again offers to take the oath1 as he did last year1 there will be no further attempt to prevent him4 ,feb4 #gth4--,reopening of ,parliament4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh again attended at the table to take the oath1 and ,sir ,erskine ,may1 the clerk of the ,house1 was about to administer the same when ,sir ,stafford ,northcote1 interposing1 moved that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh be not allowed to go through the form4 ,sir ,w4 ,harcourt1 in moving the previous question1 said the ,government held the view that the ,house had no right to interpose between a duly-elected member and the oath4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 addressing the ,house from the bar for the third time1 begged the ,house to deal with him with some semblance and show of legality and fairness4 ,he concluded3 ,i want to obey the law1 and ,i tell you how ,i might meet the ,house still further1 if the ,house will pardon me for seeming to advise it4 ,hon4 members had said that an ,affirmation ,bill would be a ,bradlaugh ,relief ,bill4 ,bradlaugh is more proud than you are4 ,let the ,bill pass without applying to elections that have taken place previously1 and ,i will undertake not to claim my seat1 and when the ,bill has passed ,i will apply for the ,chiltern ,hundreds4 ,i have no fear4 ,if ,i am not fit for my constituents they shall dismiss me1 but you never shall4 ,the grave alone shall make me yield4 ,when a division was taken there were for the previous question #bbh1 against #bhf4 ,mr4 ,samuel ,morley voted with the majority against the ,government4 ,sir ,stafford ,northcote's motion was then agreed to without a division4 ,feb4 #hth4--,mr4 ,labouchere1 in committee of the whole ,house1 proposed for leave to bring in a ,bill to amend the law of ,parliamentary ,oaths and ,affirmations4 ,the ,bill was afterwards formally blocked by ,mr4 ,molloy4 ,feb4 #agth4--,mr4 ,labouchere asked the ,attorney-,general whether the resolution of ,feb4 #gth had not vacated the seat4 ,sir ,henry ,james answered that it had not4 ,feb4 #ahth4--,mr4 ,gladstone writes ,mr4 ,bradlaugh that the ,government have no measure to propose with respect to his seat4 ,feb4 #bast4--,mr4 ,bradlaugh of himself takes and subscribes the oath1 and takes his seat4 ,feb4 #bbnd4--,mr ,bradlaugh expelled the ,house of ,commons4 ,mar4 #bnd--,re-elected for ,northampton4 ,for ,bradlaugh1 #c1gif2 for ,corbett1 #c1fhh4 ,mar4 #fth4--,on the motion of ,sir ,stafford ,northcote1 the ,house reaffirms its motion of the #gth ,feb41 ,mr4 ,gladstone supporting an amendment moved by ,mr4 ,marjoribanks1 by which the ,house would have declared the desirability of legislation1 for the purpose of giving members an option between oath and affirmation4 ,mar4 #gth4--,lord ,redesdale introduces in the ,house of ,lords a ,bill1 requiring every peer and every member of the ,house of ,commons before taking the oath or making the affirmation1 to declare and affirm his belief in ,almighty ,god4 ,the ,bill1 introduced from a sense of what was due to ,almighty ,god1 was afterwards withdrawn in deference to ,lord ,salisbury4 ,to this date1 #cag petitions with #fb1afh signatures had been presented against ,mr4 ,bradlaugh being allowed to take his seat2 while in favor of the same #a1jea1 with #bej1hcc signatures1 had been presented4 ,mr4 ,labouchere's ,affirmation ,bill blocked by ,earl ,percy4 #ahhc ,jan4 #aath4--,mr4 ,justice ,field gave judgment that the privileges of the ,house of ,commons prevented ,mr4 ,bradlaugh from obtaining any redress for the assault upon him on ,august #crd1 #ahha4 ,feb4 #aeth4--,great demonstration in ,trafalgar ,square2 from eighty to one hundred thousand people present4 7,evening ,standard says #cj1jjj2 ,daily ,news1 #ej1jjj an hour before the meeting47 ,mr4 ,adams1 chairman2 ,rev4 ,w4 ,sharman1 ,jos4 ,arch1 and ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 speakers4 ,opening of ,parliament4 7,mr4 ,gladstone at ,cannes47 ,government give notice for to-morrow for leave to introduce bill to amend the ,oaths ,act1 #ahff4 ,sir ,r4 ,cross gives notice of opposition on second reading of same4 ,mr4 ,bradlaugh consents1 with the approval of his constituents1 expressed on the #acth inst41 to await the fate of the measure4 ,feb4 #afth4--,sharp succession of frantic speeches in the ,house of ,commons by ,mr4 ,newdegate1 ,alderman ,fowler1 ,mr4 ,warton1 ,mr4 ,henry ,chaplin1 ,mr4 ,onslow1 ,mr4 ,grantham1 ,mr4 ,beresford ,hope1 ,lord ,h4 ,lennox1 ,lord ,c4 ,hamilton1 ,mr4 ,a4 ,balfour1 ,mr4 ,ashmead ,bartlett1 and ,mr4 ,a4 ,o',connor4 ,divisions3 from two to three to one for ,government4 ,the ,marquis of ,hartington consents to adjourn the motion for ,bill until ,monday at twelve4 ,feb4 #ahth4--,the ,observer says that when ,conservatives ask ,liberals whether they really mean to alter the law for the purpose of admitting ,mr4 ,bradlaugh1 it is fair for ,liberals in turn to ask ,conservatives whether they really mean to maintain an admitted abuse and injustice for the mere purpose of excluding ,mr4 ,bradlaugh4 ,feb4 #aith4--,first reading of ,bill carried on division by #ahd votes to #ec2 second reading formally fixed for that night week4 ,feb4 #bjth4--,daily ,news says ,bill will be carried by large majorities1 and will be regarded by the ,house and the country as the appropriate settlement of an unfortunate controversy4 ,the ,times says the leaders of the opposition will not succeed in finally preventing the ,bill from becoming law4 ,its real concern is that ,mr4 ,bradlaugh has been substantially in the right2 that he has been unjustly excluded from taking the seat which belongs to him4 ,the ,morning ,advertiser thinks the ,government may yet find it difficult to persuade the ,house to adopt the ,bill4 ,the ,morning ,post justifies the irregular opposition to the first reading of the ,bill1 and thinks notice of the measure should have been given in the ,queen's ,speech4 ,no measure had created more excitement or raised more indignation in the country1 which desired to see it rejected by a decisive majority4 ,march #eth4--,appeal case ,bradlaugh v4 ,clarke part heard before the ,house of ,lords4 ,march #fth4--,case concluded2 judgment deferred4 ,march #ith4--,action for maintenance--,bradlaugh v4 ,newdegate--tried before ,lord ,coleridge and a special jury4 ,henry ,lewis ,clarke1 the common informer1 swore that he had not the means to pay the costs1 and would not have brought the action if he had not been indemnified by ,mr4 ,newdegate4 ,case adjourned for argument of legal points4 ,march #agth4--,maintenance action argued2 four counsel appearing for ,mr4 ,newdegate4 ,lord ,coleridge reserved judgment4 ,march #bjth4--,the ,solicitors to the ,treasury compelled ,mr4 ,bradlaugh to pay the costs of the ,house of ,commons in the action against the deputy ,sergeant-at-,arms4 ,,transcribers' ,,notes ,page #eh1 #ei3 ,variable spelling of ,chipping ,wicomb_/,wycomb as in the original ,page #fb3 4 added after brought up in custody ,page #gj3 added after 'concluding with the words ,so help me1 ,god' ,page #ge3 removed after '#bg ,l4 ,j41 ,q4 ,b41 #aie4' ,page #hc3 aseembly corrected to assembly after may say again1 that this ,page #hh3 ,extra the removed from lay it before the the ,judges ,page #if3 added after 'the man who stands before them--7' ,page #ajj 7,a ,cardinal's ,broken ,oath ,page #b73 4 added after ,e4,c ,page #ajd 7,a ,cardinal's ,broken ,oath ,page #f73 inuendoes as in the original ,page #aaa 7,northampton and the ,house of ,commons ,page #e73 1 corrected to 4 after personally give such undertaking ,page #aac 7,northampton and the ,house of ,commons ,page #g73 4 added after sitting within its walls ,page #aba 7,northampton and the ,house of ,commons ,page #ae73 corrected to ' after heirs and successors1 according to law1 ,page #abg 7,diary of the ,northampton ,struggle ,page #e73 4 added after 'persons so admitted1 etc' ,page #acc 7,diary of the ,northampton ,struggle ,page #aa73 v4 italicised for consistency after ,the case of ,clarke ,page #adj 7,diary of the ,northampton ,struggle ,page #ah73 v4 italicised for consistency after ,appeal case ,bradlaugh and after ,action for maintenance--,bradlaugh ,general3 ,variable spelling of ,serjeant-at-,arms_/,sergeant-at-,arms as in the original ,general3 ,there are several words1 which would normally have been spelt with a u in ,british ,english1 which have been spelt without in the original text e4g4 humor1 endeavored1 savor4 ,these spellings have been preserved4 ,general3 ,variable spelling of ,lewis ,price_/,pryse as in the original