one's in Northampton, because he stood upon the distinct issue that,
whatever the religious opinions of a candidate might be, they were
sending him to Parliament to perform certain political duties, and if
his political views were in accordance with theirs, religion had
nothing to do with it.[4]
The borough had previously returned two Tory members, Mr. Phipps, a
local brewer, and Mr. Merewether, a lawyer. They were not themselves
very formidable opponents to the Radical joint candidature. The
clergy and the press urged the theological motive, as well as his
greatly misunderstood views on Malthusianism against Bradlaugh. On
the Sunday before the election the Vicar of St. Giles intimated that
"to those noble men who loved Christ more than party, Jesus would
say, 'Well done.'" But, in spite of nearly 2000 years of
Christianity, heaven has not yet learned to bless the weaker cause,
and on the election day, the figures stood--Labouchere (L.), 4518,
Bradlaugh (R.), 3827, Phipps (C.), 3125, Merewether (C.), 2826. When
the news of the poll was brought to Mr. Labouchere, who was smoking
his cigarette in the coffee room of the hotel where he was staying,
his only comment was a quiet chuckle, and the remark, "Oh, they've
swallowed Bradlaugh, after all, have they?"
{145}
Great was the fury in the Conservative camp. "The bellowing
blasphemer of Northampton," as Mr. Bradlaugh was amiably called by
the _Sheffield Telegraph_, had to meet the full blast of popular
prejudice, which was exploited to the utmost by his political
opponents.
The Tories were soon to have more than popular prejudice to exploit.
On May 3, Mr. Bradlaugh, before taking his seat in the House of
Commons, handed to Sir Thomas Erskine May, the Clerk of the House,
the following statement:
_To_
THE RIGHT HONBLE. THE SPEAKER.
I, the undersigned, Charles Bradlaugh, beg respectfully to claim to
be allowed to affirm as a person for the time being by law permitted
to make a solemn affirmation or declaration, instead of taking an
oath.
On being invited by the Speaker (Sir Henry Brand) to make a statement
to the House with regard to his claim, he replied:
Mr. Speaker, I have only now to submit that the Parliamentary Oaths
Act, 1866, gives the right to affirm to every person for the time
being permitted to make affirmation. I am such a person; and under
the Evidence Amendment Act, 1869, and the Evidence Amendment Act,
1870, I have repeatedly for nine years past affirmed in the highest
courts of jurisdiction in this realm. I am ready to make the
declaration or affirmation of allegiance.
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