New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-07-03

the use OF Roman Catholics. Inc thIee odVh9
of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuratlon were
subsequently abridged and run together III q
single form, ending with the clause Ana l
SNAKE this declaration upon the true taitl Oh
q Christian, so help me Cod" The religious
test was based on faith in Christianity ana
Ouakers and any others who should decline TO
rake the oath were left at liberty to affirm. The
acts of 1868 and 1871 opened the doors OF
Parliament to Jews by dispensing with the re-
quirement that members should swear on tne
. true faith of Christian" Nearly all the pre-
vlous statutes relating to Oaths and abJuratlonS
were repeaIed, and the oath OF allegiance IN
ordinary use was reduced to this simple form
at do swear that / will be faithful and bear
q true allegiance to Her Majesty, Queen VIC
@tora. her heirs and successors, according 10
claw. so help me God" This is the oath
which in the first instance Mr.. Bradlaugh, as a
consistent atheist, refused to take, but on
second thought was willing to repeat, inasmuch
"a the words meant nothing to him. 10 Is an
oath which can be taken by Christian jew, OF
Turk. There is no more religion In IL IMAM Is
absolutely required IN order to make 1t an Oatl'
II is not intended as q religious test, but as q
nledge of GOOD citizenship and personal 10y
atty. Nevertheless, as that pledge IS grounded
upon faith in God, rather than reliance upon
personal honor or abstract morality, IL Is one
which u thoroughgoing atheist like Mr. Brad
LAUGH should not be allowed TO make, even II
he be anxious to do 50 as grim plea 'antry' III
Quaker was authorized by statute to affirm In
Mace of taking the abridged oath otsalle-
glance, supremacy, and abjuration, for which the
present form has been substituted, there Is no
good reason why the same privilege should not
be extended to a free-thnker in the COmmo ms.
Mr.. Gladstoncs resolution disposes OF TINS
troublesome case in this way. The select
committee had decided that Mr.. Bfadlaugh
could not take the oath OF allegiance, Dut
had recommended that he should be allowed to
affirm at his own risks, if the case shOuid 90
before the courts on the legal merits OF an
Animation Under the leadership OF Sir
Stafford NOrthcote, the committees decision was
oyerrulcd, and Mr.. Bradlaugh was excluded
from the Commons. Ii they had persisted III
this course they would have sent HIM BACK 10
his constituents to be reelected and again Tor
hidden to take his seat The Commons would
have been brought face to face with diSfGan-
chised borough and the courts might have been
powerless TO extricate them from their difficult
ties. The Premier has had the courage, even
at the risk of a Parliamentary defeat which
might have involved the downfall OF the MN
istry, to give an atheist the same priYiiegeS
which lave been accorded to the Quakers. Ills
resolution provides that any person elected to
Parliament, who may be unwilling to take the
customary oath, shall be allowed to affirm. That
is to say, the form of the pledge Of personal
loyalty to the Queen shall not exclude from Par
lament any member who has been legally
elected. This is rational solution Of a per
picking problem. TIC close the doors OF Parlia-
ment upon an atheist is to promote atheism
Mr.. Bradlaugh in his own seat will be an in
significant figure. Outside, with his rights de-
MED him, and his constituency dcfed, he would
be n mischieVOus agitatOr.