New-York tribune., 1891-01-31
CHIRLES BRIDLA Ugh.

The death of Charles Bradaugh recalls 10
mind "A strange episode in British Parliamentary
history: an episode which il row half forgot
ten. and which would probably be wholly for
GOTTEN with gladnc>s and relief by the surylv-
ING actors in it. Ten years ago the Brad
LAUGH case" was at it, height Of interest. The
whole world was talking Of it, II was the one
dominant topic in British politics, the great
irish que Stion and every other being compelled
To grant it precedence. Crowded houses and
heated debates at st. Stephens. and columns
of discussion daily in the press, with mass
meetings speeches and elaborate resolutions
all over the land, marked lis fcycrish progress.
A. the end there VA, hysical violence, and
then complete collapse
The issue involved VA, = simple onc-to allow
or not to allow Nlr. Bradaugh to represent in
the House %. Comm. ms a constituency that hal
chosen him 50 10 do: and this IN turn hung
upon the question whether or not he should be
allowed to qualify IL Il member b. taking the
prescribed oath. Mr. BradIaUgh was Flce
Thinker Iii, opponent, called him an atheist
and nlde At any IA %. hc did not hold what
we're known a. orthodoA views on certain theo-
logical topics. That WAS the indictment against
him. There were other men in the House who
held about the Stmc Views ~ he did, at least
a, radical and hctcIod0K, but they were al
lowed to take the oath ana qualify and serve
without objection. But "A tight was made
again, Mr. Br5Idllugh, a> though to admit him
to =. stephens would overthrow the British
Constitution, or even turn Ministry out OF
office.
But the rell trouble with Mr.. Bradaugh was
not hi, atheism, but hi, honesty. Had he
thrown >cruplcS to the winds and sought his
seat p,lfunctorily. none would have balrd his
prgic>,. He did no, do 50. He said frankly
that the words of the oath meant nothing 10
him. and that therefore he desired to mako an
affirmation instead. Instantly religion, preiu-
diccs were appealed To. for party purposes, and
on an Intricate question of Law he was excluded
from hi, seat TLcn he declared that he was
willing TO take the oath though it world mean
nothing 10 him; AMI they still rejected him.
Again he presented himself. again elected by
his constituents, and this time elected on the
distinct understanding thai h. had con>clcn-
rioi,ly 50 far modified his views aS not only to
ilio the oath bul 10 regard 1t aS binding upon
him. I'm other words, he WAS ready to take an
oath that any man, Christian, jew or Turk,
might take which Wa, in no sense religious
test. but merely a pledge Of loyalty to the
Crown And yet again Conservatives ana Lib
cIal, united To say him nay and TO deprive the
electors cf northampton of the representative
of their choice.
1t was a curious example Of blended fanaii-
ci>m and parti,an>hip, agd more curious still
was the fact that Mr.. BIadaugh chief cham
Mon wa, MIR. Gladstone who stood for him on
the ground of common Justice, although he
doubtless. Of all men, regarded Mr.. liIadauShS
archaeological yagarcS with holy horror. l hat
such "A case could be maintained forever was
imuo>Sible and in the end Mr.. Bradlaugh ti
umphed. though only after year, of waiting
yaricgltcl with imprisonment and pe!sonal in
dignilcS II may also be added, not unhlndly
nor unjuStly, that this triumph was won alter
hi, pcrSccuti,n had given him prominence an
influence, and perhaps fame, which Otherwise
he probably never would have attained