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 — John Shaqi
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
"The Court of Appeal holds that they [the Judges of the Queen's
Bench Division] ought to have closed their eyes to everything but
the partial evidence given at the trial, some of which at all events
both the Court of Appeal and the Court below pronounced to be
unsatisfactory. Nor does it seem perfectly fair to make so much as
Lord Justice Brett does of the imputation of perjury to one of Mr
Newdegate's witnesses. The Lord Justice himself admits that there were
blemishes in his testimony, and that he 'somewhat prevaricated and
coloured his evidence, etc.' We fail to see 'the enormous difference'
between evidence of this character and perjury, at least for the
purpose of such an action. If a man is to be condemned in a penal
action he has a right to insist that it shall be on perfectly honest
and straightforward evidence only."
The curious reader who cares to form his own opinion on the subject of
the evidence referred to will do well to turn to the verbatim report
preserved in the _National Reformer_.
The Clarke-Newdegate combination seemed now to see their way partly
clear to their great end of making Bradlaugh bankrupt. On 29th March
they moved before Justice Grove and Baron Huddleston for judgment--that
is, for power to compel Bradlaugh to pay the penalty sued for and the
costs. Bradlaugh admitted that at that stage he could not resist a
judgment for the penalty, but resisted the motion so far as it claimed
costs. To this the judges agreed; and on 30th March they gave judgment
for the penalty, but reserved the costs pending the appeal to the House
of Lords. Bradlaugh had thus to pay £500 into Court within fourteen
days. Already, too, he had had to give securities for £500 on the
appeal to the House of Lords, in addition to the £200 he had paid down
according to rule. For these heavy payments he had to go into debt, his
normal means of earning his livelihood being in part suspended by the
very lawsuits themselves.
In course of the arguments on the plaintiff's appeal it was noticeable
that Justice Grove pointed to the possibility of an action against
Newdegate for maintenance, and, on Bradlaugh mentioning that the
magistrate had dismissed the summonses against Newdegate and his
solicitor on the ground that the law was obsolete, observed, "But it is
by no means obsolete. I set aside an agreement for maintenance only a
little while ago."
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