New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-02-16
otru 1ND AFFIRMATION.

Tho session of the British Parliament has
opened with the usual Bradlaugh episode. A
dense thIong of 1000 people. cheered the mem-
Der for Northampton in Trafalgar Square, rep
resentatves from 0workingmeh's associations
in London and the provincial towns giving
countenance to his grievances. The demonstri-
ton seems to have been orderly, If not partlcu-
larly impressive and the assurances which Mr.
Bradlaugh's colleague received at Westminster
rendered any further expressions of sympathy
on the part of his adhercnts not only supeifiu-
ous but inexpedient. Lord Harrington, as the
leader of the Commons in Mr.. Gladstone's ab-
sence, stated that the Government would intro
duce at once a bill authorizing members to
make Affirmation.
I'm this matter of Parliamentary oaths the
legislative practice of the world Is flexible
rather than rigid. In the Frer cb Chambers anu
in the German Rechstag neither oath nor
affirmation is required In the Austrian Reichs-
rath the oath is dispensed with ana simple
form of affirmation is made compulsory. Inc
oath is retained in the United States. but ailr-
nation is optional. In Norway and Sweden the
Presidents and Vice-PIesidents of the Cham
bers are sworn into Office. but the members
neither make oath nor affirm. The oath Is
optional in Holland, and II Is not thelstic
form in Belgium. In Prussia and Switzerland
the practice is more rigid, affirmation beng
permitted only when the representatives oil the
people object or religious grounds to the oath
In Servia, Greece, Portugal, Denmark, and
the minor German States, stringent oathS oil
allegiance are required. In Spain, where the
oath has heen obligatory, the Government has
recently proposed TO make Affirmation, when
coupled with a promise of fidelity to the King,
a substitute tor the oath. ] he Italian Ministry
ON the contrary, has been increasing the re-
straints Of the Parliamentary oath. Fallcroni,
Radical Deputy refused to take the oath when
the Chambers met last November. lie was for
chilly elected, motion declaring bis seat To be
vacant was subsequently, debated, aud a strin-
gent oaths bill was passed by a vote OF OBJ to -.
Under this act any Deputy who refuses to take
the oath is deprived of his seat and new clec-
ton is ordered.
Iisulain. therefore, that the Libera Ministry
in making affirmation a substitute for the Par
liamentary oath in special cases II not proros-
ing anything that Is new or startling In the
legislative experience of civilized countries. III
all the great parliamcuts of the world save those
of Great Britain. Italy and Spain, the oath has
either been dispensed with, OF been left
optional. whenever Affirmation L. preferred.
The Liberal Government has not dealt coura-
geously with this yexatious question heretofore.
II has played with it and on several occasions
shirked responsibility and suffered the Conser-
NATIVES to usurn the leadership of the House.
The time has now come when a resOlute effort
can he made to dispose Of the question III an
honest. reputable and rational way. The con
stituency of Northampton is entitled to repre-
sentation in the Commons, and ought not TO be
cheated ont Of its rights through inaction,
timidity and partisanship. Mr.. Bradlaugh may
have gwen offence to public morals and the re-
lgous instincts of the community, but he and
his constituents have their constitutional rights,
and these should not be denied them. Under
the latest aspect of his case he is legally
elected member who is not allowed to take the
oath because his colleagues are convinced that
it will not he binding upon his conscience. If
they will not permit him to decide this matter
of conscience for himself, they onght to lose no
time in enabling him to take his seat by max
ing affirmation optional. II they will not do
this, they ought, at least, to ADOPT the Italian
principle declaring his seat vacant and ordering
another election. Northampton ought not to be
DISTINGUISHED session after session.