The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-06-26 00:00:00

SATURDAY, JUNE 26, 1880.

lIYIPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

the 1310
1 11SE OF LORDS, June 91, Lord Kimberley stated,
913' to Lord Cado,gan, that an official telegram had been
„"Leived to the effect that the Chief of the Basutos had,
'zeareeped the decision of her Majesty's Governmen twith re-
liver L° disarmament as final, ordered all his people to de-
uP their arms, and promised to surrender his own.
Lordbe tO La Warr moved for a select committee to inquire
the operation of the Highway Acts.
thle'°._rd Enfield, on the part of the Government, acceded to
woutTation, and expressed a hope that Lord be La Warr
itietPl serve on the select coimnittee as its chairman. The
lon was agreed to.
bord •
pen,i, Kimberly, answering Lord 13rabourne, stated that
side-4E the meeting of the Conference which was to con-
t r the question of Confederation, it was not his intention
lactiviae the Crown to sanction the Bill passed by the Legis-
by °I -Natal for altering the marriage law in that colony
,„
zing marriage with a deceased wife's sister.
lie—a, Earl of Leitrim moved for a return of the number of
12tried labourers employed during the week ending the
June by landlords or sanitary authorities, or on
d•—a
-a undertaken by baronial sessions, in the scheduled
Alelticts in Ireland under the Relief of Distress (Irelapd)
iJilj'eB43. In supporting the motion the noble earl said 1l is
14 d was to correct certain statements which had been
eh' reference to the manner in which the money lent to
°fiords and to sanitary authorities had been applied.
After seine observations from Lord Oranmore and Browne,
Earl a
be, • .Pencer, in reply, said the returns asked for would
w-,:tubalest inapossible to collect, and the attempt to do so
ta re, be exceedingly costly. He was therefore compelled
'use them, and hoped the motion would be withdrawn.
Motion was then withdrawn.
r Lordships adjourned at ten minutes past seven
eek.

Itirntthe HOUSE or COMMONS, the expected re-appearance of
the pellad!augh drew together an unusually large House, and
liowba'rs and Strangers' Galleries were also filled to over-
out ofg'„_ Forty-one questions, and numerous other p arising
(141,08 Ta replies or relating to matters of urgeftcy were
fake, eu of before the first business on the paper were
Past inane' "Question time" was protracted from a quarter-
tev„„„s'llr until close upon six o'clock, during which Mr.
;,.."410,.n, In order to comply with the rules of the House,
th-e'io him te bring on his motion on Friday in favour
l
of the "'„4ndaY Closing of Public Houses, moved the discharge
eathuer for the second reading of the Sale of Intoxi-
-14.•',-"qUors on Sunday Bill, which was agreed to.
`-,exton presented a petition from Ireland praying that
the nof the £4,000,000 annually derived as revenue from
the eZe of intoxicating liquors in that country be devoted by
fait• verlinient to the maintenance of drunkards and their
- es in the workhouses.
Six I)
the c Wedderhurn asked the Under-Secretary of State for
reeg,onies whether it was the fact that, down to the most
alitt7ol' dates from the Cape, the Zulu King had not been per-
laaaz,..' to see his personal friends, who understood his
azy7e and could learn from him what he might have to
tion Utouls ovro behalf, and whether, in particular, permis-
/"rere f„ Catywayo had been refused by Sir Bartle
Weak Lao sons of Bishop Colenso on two separate occa-

.
fir4lr st ss,:rams, t Duff said,-In reply to my hon. friend's
as to &-stLell, I have to say that I cannot speak generally
lvtosenaeWaYo's personal friends, not having information
a sss_ toe to do so; but it is quite true that permission
r
title , and, as Her Majesty's Government thinks,
desistanately refused, to the sons of Bishop Colenso, who
Bed to visit Cetywayo. With reference to this matter,
effeeseseretarY of State sent on June 14 a telegram to the
be, ,hate did not consider that permission should have
Peri-eroefused to the family of Bishop Colenso, and that all
Into Whom Cetywayo wished to see should have access to
he s'"'s,'ess it was distinctly unsafe. (Hear, hear.) I have
as if 'section to lay the correspondence on the table as soon
Inseqs eofiPlete, but it is at present very imperfect, and we
that
an important dispatch is on its way.
the o'''s Tyler said, perhaps the hon. gentleman would state
anther of wives allowed to Cetywayo. (Laughter.)
&tr. si
Pres,. radlaugh's case being a matter of privilege, it took
soueciuence of all the Orders of the Day, but before it was
the di°.,_n Sir J. Kennaway presented a petition praying for
ErieseiZsca_, nchisement of Northampton. Sir R. Knightley
a petition from Northampton against admitting
W. ri loafient any person of atheistical opinions; and Mr.
LitZho *filth presented a petition to the same effect. Mr.
Isorthere, on the other hand presented a petition from
'bake inlaton praying that Mr. Bradlaugh be admitted to
regodtrao affirmation or declaration instead of the oath
T ebY law
sa . •
capigng his resolution to this effect.
Mr. Labouchere, re-
the s-"`"ved the history of the case, pointing out that between
be allrrts of the two committees Mr. Bradlaugh would not
howevf_ed either to affirm or swear. His legal right to affirm,
resiniv`re,nne contended, was perfectly clear. He grounded it
*hist,' the 4th section of the Parliamentary Oaths Act,
tor th Permitted
ss, Quakers, &c., "and every other person
ares-e tune ue'ng appointed by law to make affirmation,'
liasio-nsoi instead of swearing; and Mr. Bradiaugh
occokgs °e'en Permitted by the presiding Judge on severe,
Set 0,"418, under the Evidence Amendment Act, to affirm,
Withi,Z,Ysas a witness, but as a juryman, came, he contended
eat. lots category of "every other person." He pointed
se,„_nirther, that to permit Mr. Bradlaugh to affirm would
of",,uve the question into the calm and judicial atmosphere
'en:teeseart of law, an dilated on the practical inconveniences
hie 55 flight ensue from refusing to allow him to take
Sire, t'
s, Allaren seconded the motion, and
to et Giffard moved as an amendment that, having regard,
rePOrts and proceedings of the two select committees,
scs_radlaugh be not permitted to take the oath or make
aoti%sulnation. At the outset he pointed out that there was
abse.:"l? insidisitorial in the opposition to Mr. Bradlaugh,
lie had taken the oath without objection. nobody
sDZu have stopped him. When the second committee was
thr'ated it was in terms, he argued, whiiih assumed that
oeps nrst committee was right, and the report of the
ha-0d corrunittee not only went beyond its instructions,
„all absolutely recommended that the House should
13y e„s„tieu what it had already pronounced to be an illegality.
ting the decision of a question to the Courts of Law
takin'tcose would be shirking a plain duty, and would be
Sir -4 a course expressly condemned by Lord Russell and
4, A.g cockburn in the Salomons case. How, he asked, was
etlaeteadl ? decision to be obtained? Was a special case to be
to oft And would not the vote of the House to allow him
rill be assum that ed by the jury as a proof at he was
'Laegally entitled to affirm? Moreover, part of the penalty
s_the forfeiture of the seat, and the House might, after
rbe lataeg. the motion, be involved immediately in fresh
Alderman ether the seat were vacant.
Fowler seconded-the amendment.
Mr. serje
oirtttees
by Mr. Laboan„stOolen maintained that the question as raised
reports of Must be considered independently of the
y in theeenunp
inconsistenc
in!' thought offered threernost , but argued that there was no
ofrotpheer secondsnlutin
solution
onnfmtbdettde
e, which
Without Mr. Bradlaugh
thout questiohe n
as a Quaker.
assertedp had as much right to affirm
Warton made
evernMent, and some remarks on the silence of the
Mr. Whitehea
to take the argued in favour of Mr. Bradlaugh's right
to. oath, and asserted that there was no precedent
reaming the
Professed h" oath to any man who came forward and
ss„„s is willingness to take it. It made no difference
Bradlaugh had before that objected to the oath,
Rouse had no right to go behind the conscience of
-.Mats
After
Genernl Burnaby, Mr. Hinde Palmer, Mr. Hubbard,
olli)% Mr. Beresford-Hope had expressed their views on the
arAct, 141 r. Hopwood spoke in favour of the resolution,
n fr. A. O'Connor against it.
,ent N Attorney-General dissented from Sir H. Giffard's argu-
Z that the Illegality of an affirmation had been decided
4the firs commttee' and pointed out that no time had
t'4l gi/en to the Government to take any action on thati
p,ort. Tracing the history of the oath, he showed that t
b7fhaever been intended as a religious test, and argued that,
",;', fourth section of the Parliamentary Oaths Act, when-
affitt-La Person could affirm in a court of justice he could
50,,, also in Parliament. At any rate, there was
"ullh doubt about it that the House was justified
ei taking a course which, without depriving a duly-
-1 "sited Person of any of his rights, would leave the
ottgLia bearing of the case to be settled by a Court
st 'saw. He denied, however, that by passing this resolu-
(Len the House would be relegating this matter to the
b."starts, for the Courts would have jurisdiction to decide
i'sqether the oath had been legally taken even if no such
0',°_,,1 Ilition were passed. He had agreed with those who
I.` that Mr. Bradlaugh could not take the oath, but he
te
ueld,
also, that as the oath was not binding on his con-
he had a right, therefore, to affirm. Fnally, he
sed out that to pass the amendment would be to refuse
right of affirmation to all persons who had religious
1,31 es against the oath, except those specially mentioned
,the Act.
its-ir• Grantham exhorted the House to have the courage of
ss-,,°Pinions and decide the matter for itself, without rele-
ers'ag it to a Court of Law. The words "or other persons "
to"„aot refer to such persons as Mr. Bradlaugh, but solely
.161'ae classes of persons, such as Quakers, &c., who had re-
scruples.
coo , • Walpole pointed out that the legal question depended
soZtbree chi-saes of Acts-the,Promissory Oaths Act, the Acts_
relisLag to evidence, and the exceptions made on account of
haa''''as belief. With regard to the first, the oath was
exCae.d on every member of both Houses, and the only
entions admitted were on account of religious scruples.
every other person" referred to Moravians and
thematasus, ta-who were not mentioned specifically- and to
might hereafter be exempted by Act of Parliament,
vcf Persons in the position of Mr. Bradlaugh. The
leeti"ce Acts applied solely to proceedings in courts of
ea otene, and afforded no justification whatever for allowing
/Illation to be made in Parliament.
bole ._,_Light traced in detail the history of the case from the
the "oen Mr. Bradlaugh appeared at the table down to
the kresentation of the last report. Ile laid great stress on
,eath et that Mr. Bradlaugh had never refused to take the
, that he lisd merely expressed a preference fora firm-
e„c_sgs and that he had always declared the oath to be binding
ta liAs honour and conscience. As to the first report, ith-
t to
disparage its authority, it left the nllttbeer
tho,r- doubt. and with regard to the second
erused
in 17eirgy 13radlaugh had not been fairly treated
the am
into rination. e the oath because he had asked for
There was no precedent for this inquisition
my a tam's religious views when he came to the table to be
tean This i
aterference, he contended, would set up a new
and would divide members into two classes.
Isetejnr that 'many people have much greater power of be-
ef th"4o others have,' said Mr. Bright, and lam not one
epod°B6--having myself passed through many doubts-to
able ern's, without sympathy at any rate, those who are not
toe to adopt the views which I myself hold. There are
alialhera of this House of different Churches, but generally
ou...s.,trust, of one religion, of the religion which inculcates
11,7" LY, and forbearance, and justice and even generosity.
is ere are those who belong to the ItZman Cathohc Church.
tZeed not remind them of what they and their ancestors
240 e Sone through in Ireland (hear) for the last
sser or 300 years or more, or of how long a time they
Soo: kePt out of this House, and by the very
sae cbssa of arguments which the hon. and learned
.t\e fiber for Surrey used. (Cheers.) He tells us that, for a
iser:Ya long time past there has been a gradual relaxation.
son 2 1,0 doubt. Did he ever sit among those who had pro-
,kat these relaxations? I have been here for 37 years, and
but c heard these questions discussed over and over again;
op si ,sl6, vor found that the time had come when the party
Nviti' !'w., represented by gentlemen who now sit there, were
sk"Z' to Wake those relaxations. They submitted net to
fulnent, not to sentiments of generosity or of justice ;they
the'olitted only to a majority which sat on this side of
I 11ase. (Cheera.) Then there are the Nonconformists.
thr 'old that there are some Nonconformists even-but I
.4k it is rather in the nature of a mistake or of a slander
pee 49 have great doubts as to how they should vote on this
pshit'on. It is occasions like this that try men and try
D4I3CDIeB. iliear, hear.) Do you suppose that in times
thi.. the Foun•tler of Christianity has required an oath in
rso‘blfouse to defend the religion which he founded 1' Or
eaaTl suPPose now that the Supreme Ruler of the World
tas4e Interested in the fact that one man L comes to this
erasmand takes his name-it may be often in vain-
oa -41110-awl another is permitted to make an affirina-
-141, reverently and honestly, in which His name is not
Coa,ll,sle4l? But one thing is essential for us, the House of
rusi„r,ns representing ths English people, which is to
•-sss-asal as far as we ean (be great principles of freedom
(tiekeT,'can of political action ad freedom of conscience.
s' hear.) The electors, I know not how many pen-
of the borough of Northampton have returned two
elad 'ern to Parliament. You admit the one and you ex-
soa e the other. All the constituencies of the kingdom, you
(OLre,IY upon it will consider this cause is their own.
this,-,,s'bton and counter cheers.) Now, my belief is that
you-Airout the whole of the great boroughs of the kingdom
40-7111 End the working classes taking part, mot with the
tho'rse of Commons in excluding Mr. Bradlaugh, but with
I 0 wish him to be permitted to make the affirmation.
hear.) To a
lars-' of that opinion nrarself, (Hear,
ssos,e sxtent the working people ef this country do not care
cis2nore for the dogmas of Christianity than the upper
d
10;1'es care for the practice of that religion. (cheers) an
cries of 'Oh!' and Withdraw.) I wish from my heart
417-.. E it were otherwise. (Cheers and renewed cries of With-
But of this I am certain, that ths course which it Is
ii3sPosed to take in dealing out this rigid measure to a gen'
to'll'utin honestly, openly, fairly, and legally elepted by a great
this rency. Will be productive of great evils, may bring
atita use Into continual conflict with at least one con-
and may bring us ultimately to the humiliation
,ho,sts the Holm of Commons underwent in connexion with
eslist?! case some 100 pars ago. (Cheers.) Hon. members
"'ye will, I daresay, represent to themselves and to
ot.F's that they are the advocates of religion, of orthodoxy,
'tuba% and of 1 know not what, I am here as the