Charles Bradlaugh: a Record of His Life and Work, Volume 2 (of 2): With an Account of his Parliamentary Struggle, Politics and Teachings. Seventh EditionRobertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Religion
Charles Bradlaugh: a Record of His Life and Work, Volume 2 (of 2): With an Account of his Parliamentary Struggle, Politics and Teachings. Seventh Edition
Robertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Bradlaugh, Charles, 1833-1891
"let them compare the condition of the two countries. While the wealth
and the population of France were stationary, and the prestige of her
arms was gone, England's wealth had increased and her kingdom expanded
into empire. The fundamental difference between the two countries
was this--that in the coronation oath taken by the Sovereign, and in
the oath taken by members of both Houses of Parliament, a Deity was
recognised, and the people venerated the obligation. There was but one
other country in the world besides England that had not been conquered
or had not suffered from revolution, and that was Russia.... Both
countries based the claim of their Government to the respect of their
subjects upon the Word of God. The United States had not adopted that
system, and they had seen a civil war and two Presidents murdered
there."
Bradlaugh was then allowed to make his Third Speech at the Bar. He
struck briefly but sufficiently at the speech of Newdegate; and once
more nailed down the eternal misrepresentation as to his having
"paraded his opinions." When he reminded the House that his letter
of 20th May was outside the House, and that he had objected to the
Committee taking cognisance of it, the Opposition laughed. He reminded
them that judges give a silent hearing to a man pleading his case. "If
you are unfit to be judges, then do not judge." Again he put the plain
dilemma: "If what I did entitles the House not to receive me, why has
not the House had the courage of its opinions and vacated the seat?"
Then came a graver challenge:--
"I have read within the last few days words spoken, not by members
of no consequence, but by members occupying high positions in this
House, which made me wonder if this is the House of Commons to which
I aspired so much. I have read that one right hon. member, the member
for Whitehaven[159]--(laughter from the Ministerial side)--was
prompted to say to his constituents that I was kicked downstairs last
session, and that he hoped I should be again. If it were true that I
was kicked downstairs, I would ask the members of the House of Commons
on whom the shame, on whom the disgrace, on whom the stigma? I dare
not apply this, but history will when I have mouldered, and you too,
and our passions are quite gone. But it is not quite true that I was
kicked downstairs, and it is a dangerous thing to say that I was, for
it means that hon. members who should rely on law rely on force. It
is a dangerous provocation to conflict to throw to the people. If I
had been as wicked in my thought as some members are reported to have
been in their speech, this quarrel, not of my provoking, would assume
a future to make us all ashamed."
[Footnote 159: Mr Cavendish Bentinck.]
As the speech went on, he came into more and more sharp conflict with
his antagonists.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account