Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-05-19
THE OATH.
OATH OR AFFIRMAFIoa-cIviL LIBgRTI
AND RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.
The Easterly Eloquencs Of Gladstone
The Speech on the Affirmation Bill
In the House of Commons.

The Masterly Eloquenes Of Gladstone
The Speech on the Affirmation Bill
in the House of Commons.
Below we give the concluding portion of
the mastery speech of Gladstone, deliv.
cred few days ago in the English House
OF Commons in favor of the affirmation
bill, by which Mr.. Bradlaugh, who had
refused to take the usual oath, might have
affirmed and have taken his seat in Par
lament. Mr.. Gladstone said
am convinced that on every religious
ground, as well as every political ground,
the true and the wise course is not TO deal
out religious liberty by halves, quarters
and fractions, but to deal it out entire, and
make no distinctions between man and
man, ON the ground Of religious difference,
from one end of the land to the other.
tCheers.] But go little farther in en-.
deayoring to probe this contention, which
has been so well put forward by honorable
gentlemen opposite, and l want to know,
is your religious distinction real distinc-
ton az all? | will, for the sake of argu.
ment, go with you on this dangerous
ground of splitting theology into slices,
and ask you where you will draw the line.
YOU DRAW YOUR LINE
At the point whare the abstraes denial of
God IS severed from the abstract admission
Of the Deity. My proposition is that your
line thus drawn is worthless, and that
much on this side Of the lire is as objec-
tionable as the atheism on the other. If
you call upon me to make distinctions, let
them at least be rational do not say let
them be Christian distinctions, but let
them be rational. l can understand one
rational distinction, that you would frame
the oath in such way as to recognize and
indicate not only the existence of the Deity,
but mans responsibility TO the Deity; but
is that your present rule No; you know
very well that from ancient times there
have been sects and classes that have adj
mitted in the abstract as freely as Chris
tians the existence OF the Deity, but have
held that of practical relations between
Him and man there can be none. Honor
able members will recollect the majestic
| lines
| omnis enim per Sc Divom natura necesse est
| immortal @vo summa cum pace fruatur,
q
| Nam privata dolore omui, privata perielis,
| Ipsa sus pollens opbus nihll indiga nostri,
| Nee bene promeritis capitur, nee tangitur ira.
YoLTAIRE.
The sects I have mentioned hold, as did
the writer of these lines, the existence of
| the Deity, but in modes and in places
where He can have no concern with man.
kind. | do not hesitate to say that the
g. e
with which in the educated world of the
country you have to contend, is not blank
atheism. That is rare opinion very sci.
dom met with but what is frequently met
with, is the varying form of opinion that
would teach US that whstever may be be-
yond the visible things of this world, you
can know nothing of it, and that it is
bootless undertaking to attempt to estab-
lish relations with it. That is the mischief
of the age, and that mischief you do not
attempt to touch. [Cheers.l What is
more, you glory in the state of the law
that now prevails you wish TO tolerate all
differences of religion; you wish TO allow
every one to enter into your chamber who
admits
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEITY.
You would seek to admit Voltaire.
[" Hear."l That is specimen of your
federation. Voltaire was not taciturn foe
of Christianity. He was the author of that
painful phrase, which goes to the heart of
every Christian, ecraser PinfaDae. ["Hear,
hear ~ And that is the state of the law
from which you are working up the country
[cheers and counter cheersl, to strengthen
in the minds of the people the false notion
that you have got a real test, a real safe.
guard that Christianity is still safe, with |
certain unavoidable exceptions, under |
protecting e us within the walls of this |
chamber, and for that you excite q great |
religious war; hold that this contention |
of our opponents is disparaging to religion |
[cheers] it is idle, It is irrational. For if |
you are to have a religious test at all, a |
test of theism, it ought to be a test of
well-ascertained theism, not a mere abstract |
idea dwelling in tie air and the clouds, but |
practical recognition of divine govern
ment and power to which we are to &C.
count for every thought we conceive, for
every word we utter.
FORM OF oATHs.
I contend with my whole heart and soul
that the interests of religion as well as the
interests of civil liberty are concerned in
the passage of this bill. [Cheers.1 My
reason for saying that may be given in a
very few words If | were asked to put
construction upon this oath | should prob
ably give it higher meaning than most
gentlemen opposite. It is my opinion that
the oath has in it very large flavor of
Christianity. l am well aware that the
doctrine of my honorable and learned
friend, the Attorney. General, is, as l be-
lieve, that there are other forms of positive
attestation, according to other ceremonies Of
religion, that may enable the oath TO be
taken by the removal of the words so
help me God," and the substitution of
other words or some othsr symbolical act
involving the notion of the Deity and re-
sponsibility to the Deity. But, remember,
the oath does not consist of spokea words
alone. The spoken words are accompanied
by corroborative act, which is kissing the
book, that according to the intention of the
Legislature ought TO import the accept
ance of
THE DIVINE REVELATION.
There have been other forms in other
countries. / do not know whether there
is still in Scotland the form of holding
up the hand. Hear, hear J In Spain,
believe, the form is that of kissing the
cross in Italy, that of laying the hand
upon the Gospel. But in this, according
to the original intention, there is some.
thing which involves the acceptance of
Christianity. You do not mean that the
law is or can be applied in this sense.
A law of this kind is like a coin spicz
and span new from the mint, carrying
with it those edges and characteristics
with which we are all familiar. But it
wears down in passing from hand to
hand, and though there is residuum yet
it's distinguishing features disappear. So
IL is with the oath. As TO the original in
tention of the oath there is very little diff
ference OF opinion. But what has it be-
come? II has become theistic test It
does, as l think, involve q reference to
Christianity in the conscience of some gen.
tlemen in the other House of Parliament,
and in this also But undoubtedly it is not
good for any of ia to force this test SO
favored, OF even not so favored, upon men
who cannot take it with cordial accept
ance. Il ia bad; it is demoralizing.
[Cheers.l
THE PERoRATI0N.
l have no fear Of theisIn Ia this House.
| Religion is the expression of the divine
Wind and hoxvever little our feeble vision