New-York tribune., 1882-03-03
PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.
srur RRADLAUGH BUSINESS-EARLY Spell
MEMS OF PARNELLITE POLICY

II cannot be said that the session mas oponeu
we'll for the Government. They have been met Vi,
the threshold with the Bradlaugh question anu
thew have endured what must, after all allowances
have been made. be called an awkward uelea''
They are paying the penalty of their original mis-
take IN not enforcing party discipline on this as on
other matters on which the Ministry had them
selves made up their minds When Mr.. Gladstone
gave H. 70 be understood that his supporters were
at liberty 20 consult their consciences as TO the
admission of Mr.. Bradlaugh he eowed the seeds OF
ali the ills that have since sprung up secohu not
less fatal mistake was made when upon MT. brau'
laprh's reelection as member for Northampton the
Speaker allowed Sir DrummOnd Wolff to inteipose
at the table with an objection to his taking the
oath. which Mr. Bradlaugh by that time had Ie'
solved to take if allowed. The want of tirmness at
the right moment In such q matter Is the secret OF
all the mischief that has ensued, and OF more thaV
is lkely-nay. certain-to ensue.
The Tories who are seldom blind to the chance OF
turninC a blunder to immediate party profit, have
avaied themselves of the Bradlaugh incident IN
wav which must be called equally clever and un-
scrupulous. The good Sir Stafford Northcote' by
nature prone to fairness. hesitated. 1t is to his
credit that he showed himself at first by no means
eager TO nurse the scandal. But the fiery soul
which DER informs Lord Randolph Churchlls tene-
,nent of clay wrought as usual upon Sir Staifords
mildpess For the sake of discrediting Mr. Cad
stone with the dull bigotry which abounds In the
country the Opposition leader has embarked upon
n contest the end of which can be nothing but dis
graceful to himsef TO his party, and to the House
itself In no respect has the question at issue
altered since last year save fer the worse-the
worse foI the House and for Mr.. Bradlaugh's oppo-
nents Nobody disputed that Mr. Bradlaugh is the
legally elected member for NOrtha mpton. ana mas
legal right 10 take the oath and bis seat The sole
hiS q
pseudo-religious ground. They say 1t would be
profanation of the oath to allow Atheist to take
it, And upon that profession of personal sentiment
they proceed by resolution of one House TO override
and annul an Act of Parliament.
They do it, moreover IN the most dangerous and
offensive way. They have established the princi-
PIE of a religious inQuisiton into the theological
belief of a member 1t is certain that the principle
will presently be overturned but it might he possible
meantime to make some very interesting applica-
tions of it, Some OF the men who are most active
IN resisting that they call PROCLAMATION are men 10
whom profanity is an hourly habit Suppose the
House should take into its collective head TO inquire
whether a man who hourly uses the name of the
Deity in vain-in the conventional phrase-could
properly use it by way of oath without further pro-
flaming it! 1t would be just as logical thing to do
as Is done in Mr.. Bradlaughs case. Or course III Is
not likely. A sense OF decency and good manners
forbids. On the other hand, Mr.. Newdegate's
conduct discredtabe to him it is. is dictated by
sincere fanaticism The same may he said of the
votes of sundry Liberals and of the absteniOns of
others
To Mr. Gladstone himself, the duty of pressing for
Mr. Bradlaugh's admiss is for many reasons ex-
ceedingy distasteful. All his religious convictions
are outraged by Mr.. BradlaUgh's militant atheism
and ostentatious irrevercnce. But Mr.. Gladstone
knows that the Atheist member for Northampton
Il aHN,, Il, -
Churchman, and nothing in the Prime Ministers
career is more honorable to hIm than the decision
he took and maintained as to his personal action
in the matter He stated the case again Tues
day with unmatched and unanswerable force. The
whips made more effort than last year to bring the
more feeble-minded Liberals up to the mark. But
the party screw was not really pat on-perhaps it
was too late to insist that Liberals who had last
year been allowed to vote no. or to stay away,
should now support their leaders
But tne majority of ffty-eght on the first day of
- great session against Government which has
clear right to majority great in its favor is all
but disaster The Ministry do not own they are
beaten. They have "A right 90 say what questions
they will regard as Cabinet questions and what
not But the country is SLOW TO draw nice distinc-
tions II sees Ministers voting one side, and the
Tories on the other, and the Tories carrying the
day The inference cannot but be damaging TO the
Government, and damaging at a moment when,
powerful a. it is IL can i'll afford to throw chances
away or give points TO its adversaries 1t is the
general testimony of members arriving from all
parts of England and Scotland that the Bradlaugh
business has been most potent weapon in the
hands of the Tories and that the Liberal party has
suffered seriously by the often successful effort to
identify it with the principles or want of principles
which Mr. Bradaugh is supposed to impersonate
The more reason why the party should have used
its undoubted power to silence the outcry III the
only way il can properly be senced-by the adnls-
sion of Mr.. Bradaugh to the seat which he has
legal right 10 occupy.
II is likely enough that Mr.. BrGdaugh would
have Jared better If he had been able TO arouse any
sympathy of IA personal kind The House Of Com
mons, which prides itself on being practical, Is
curOusly susceptible body, often governed by i'm
pulses swayed hither and thither by Its likes and
dislikes. IL does not like Mr. Bradlaugh. Few of
the men who vote for him like him. Many of those
who vote against him would readily admit that
their zeal for what they call the of religion is
stimulated by their antpathy to the individual
whom they regard as its enemy Mr. Bradlaugh
has fought his battle with perseverng courage and
at times with much ability. Beyond that, it is hard
TO praise him. He has shown want of tact and of
temper He has made many wrong moves. His
speeches. vigorous they were. have been per-
fectly calculated to iIritate and sometimes to eXas-
perate the audience they meant to win over
i have heard Liberals who vote punctually for
every motion in his favor declare that they hope he
will never enter the House again. Yet he was an
iDconsderable person while he sat in il. He Is only
formidable so long as he is denied the right TO sit
there
Perhaps it is not altogether a bad sign that the
Parnelite members of the House have shown them