The Portland daily press., 1881-08-10
Bradlaugh Rampant.

The violent expulsion of Mr.. Charles
Bradlaugh from the lobby of the House of
Commons last week revives question of
the personal rights of a legislator which is
Of recent origin and must be settled in some
way very soon; and the disgraceful scene in
and about Westminster Hall indicates that
the British Parliament proposes to dispose
Of the subject by crushing it. Mr.. Brad
laugh, a radical republican and atheist, was
chosen, about two years ago, to represent
Northampton in the House OF Commons,
and on appearing at the bar of the House
for qualification before taking his seat, re-
fused to take the oath which recognizes the
existence of Supreme Being, and was de-
MED qualification by the Speaker. Subse-
quently, after heated and undignified dis
cussion, Mr.. Bradlaugh offered to qualify
by affirmation, but the House refused him
the privilege on the ground that he had re-
pudiated all belief in the sanctity of an oath.
Mr.. Bradlaugh appealed to his constituents,
and was returned by very decisive ma
jority, but was second time refused seat
in the House for the same reason as before.
There was no question of his eligibility as
candidate or the legality of his election. Mr..
Bradlaugh gave notice to the country that
he should demand his seat and resort to
force in the last extremity to obtain it.
Public meetings were held in London, and
other means used to arouse his adherents to
his support and effect an influence upon
the House by show of popular opin-
ion, but the only member of the Gov
ernment who rose to sustain Mr.. Brad
laughs conduct in the proceedings which
followed the expulsion was John Bright.
Mr.. Labouchere raised question of privi-
lege that the resolution in regard to Mr..
Bradlaugh did not deny him access to the
lobby and that the Speaker had exceeded
his authority in ordering his expulsion
therefrom: but the action of the Speaker
was sustained by vote of 191 to 7; several
Liberal members lodging the vote by leav-
ing their seats. On Friday Mr.. Labouchere
attempted to have the resolution rescinded !;
but the House was in no temper to enter
tain such propositi on. On Saturday Mr..
Bradlaugh addressed his constituents at
Northampton, saying that unless the House
of Commons declared the seat from North
ampton vacant, he should vigorously defend
his rights, and if his constituents continued
their support he would maintain the con-
test to the end of his life.
The case of Mr. Bradlaugh is anomalous.
With the removal of the Jewish disabilities
the question of religious qualification in an
English legislator vanished. A Mohamme-
dan might occupy a seat in the British
House of Commons for all the religious test
that the law imposes. But Mr.. Bradlaugh
presents the matter in a new phase. He is
not only pronounced Atheist but radical
republican agitator who has offered no prac-
tical reforms for the governmental evils that
he complains of; and his personal following,
though small has been somewhat noisy.
This popularity of Mr.. Bradlaugh's political
faith does not appear to enter into the pres
ent controversy, but no doubt it has its
weight. The apparent question is whether
Mr.. Bradlaugh, the positive atheist he
boasts he isis suitable legislator; wheth-
er his denial of the existence of Supreme
Being does not disqualify him from partici-
pating in making the laws for the English
people and shaping the future of a nation
that owes its greatness to its positiveness to
truth to its firm practical belief in God.
Mr.. Bradlaugh is only one man; but he is
the pioneer who introduces new and mo-
mentous question for the consi deration of
self-governing peoples. He may succeed
in obtaining his seat in the British Parlia-
ment, but it will not be while Mr.. Gladstone
is at the head of the Government.