Commons, is seized at the door of the House by fourteen men, police and
ushers (Inspector Denning said ten), and roughly hustled out into Palace
Yard, Mr. Bradlaugh protesting against such treatment as illegal. "In the
passage leading out to the yard Mr. Bradlaugh's coat was torn down on the
right side; his waistcoat was also pulled open, and otherwise his toilet
was much disarranged. The members flocked down the stairs on the heels of
the struggling party, but no pause was made until Mr. Bradlaugh was
placed outside the precincts and in Palace Yard."--_Times._ Alderman
Fowler was heard to call, "Kick him out." This he afterwards denied, but
there is evidence that he did so. (Mr. Bradlaugh suffered the rupture of
the small muscles of both his arms, and erysipelas ensued).
Many thousands of people went up to the House with petitions, urging the
House to do justice to Northampton and Mr. Bradlaugh.
In the House Mr. Labouchere moved a resolution condemning, as an
interference with the privilege of members, the action of the authorities
in expelling Mr. Bradlaugh from the lobby. This was rejected by 191
votes against 7, and a motion of Sir Henry Holland, declaring the
approval of the House of the course taken by the Speaker, was agreed to
without controversy.
At a crowded meeting at the Hall of Science the same evening Mr.
Bradlaugh stated that he had told Inspector Denning in Palace Yard that
he could come back with force enough to gain admittance, but that he had
no right to risk the lives and liberties of his supporters.
Aug. 4th.--The _Times_ declares, in an article favorable on the whole to
Mr. Bradlaugh's claims, that the House of Commons was yesterday the real
sufferer in dignity, authority, and repute. It says: "the question
contains within itself the baleful germ of a grave constitutional contest
between the House of Commons and any constituency in the land;" and "such
a conflict can but have one conclusion, as all history shows."
The _Daily News_, in a similar article, concludes thus: "Sooner or later
it will be generally acknowledged that Mr. Bradlaugh's exclusion was one
of the most high-handed acts of which any legislative body has ever been
guilty."
The following unique paragraph from _The Rock_ is worth preserving in its
original form: "The question now is whether the Christian people of this
realm will quietly allow clamorous groups of infidels, Radicals, and
seditionists, by organised clamor, bluster, and menace, to overawe the
legislature, and by exhibitions of violence--not at all unlikely, if
permitted to develop into outrage and riot--to cause an organic and vital
change to be made in our Constitution and laws, in order that
brazen-faced Atheism might display itself within the walls of the British
Parliament."
Mr. E. D. Girdlestone writes: "If the present Cabinet does not secure
your admission to the House in some way or other, I can only wish they
may soon be turned out of office. I don't know what more I can do than
say, 'Go on! and go in!'"
Aug. 5th.--Mr. Bradlaugh's application at Westminster Police Court for
summons against Inspector, for having assaulted him at the House of
Commons on the 3rd inst., refused.
Mr. Bradlaugh confined to the House with severe erysipelas in both arms,
resulting from the injuries inflicted. Attended by Drs. Ramskill and
Palfrey. The latter, on August 12th, ordered his immediate removal from
town, to prevent yet more dangerous complications.
Aug. 13th.--Mr. Bradlaugh went to Worthing to recruit his health. Outside
the station there, weary and exhausted, both arms in a sling, he was
rudely stared at by a clergyman, who, having satisfied himself as to Mr.
Bradlaugh's identity, walked away saying loudly: "There's Bradlaugh; I
hope they'll make it warm for him yet."
The _Northern Star_ (a Tory paper) suggested that Mr. Bradlaugh was
malingering--"simply carrying on the showman business."
Aug. 24th.--Sir Henry Tyler, in the House of Commons, attempts to
discredit the South Kensington department for allowing science and art
classes at the Hall of Science. Mr. Mundella gives those classes great
credit.
Aug. 27th.--Parliament prorogued.
Further appeal to England.
1882.
Jan. 9th.--The Earl of Derby, in a speech at the Liverpool Reform Club,
says: "For my part I utterly disbelieve in the value of political
oaths.... I should hope that if Mr. Bradlaugh again offers to take the
oath, as he did last year, there will be no further attempt to prevent
him."
Feb. 7th.--Reopening of Parliament. Mr. Bradlaugh again attended at the
table to take the oath, and Sir Erskine May, the clerk of the House, was
about to administer the same when Sir Stafford Northcote, interposing,
moved that Mr. Bradlaugh be not allowed to go through the form. Sir W.
Harcourt, in moving the previous question, said the Government held the
view that the House had no right to interpose between a duly-elected
member and the oath.
Mr. Bradlaugh, addressing the House from the bar for the third time,
begged the House to deal with him with some semblance and show of
legality and fairness. He concluded: "I want to obey the law, and I tell
you how I might meet the House still further, if the House will pardon me
for seeming to advise it. Hon. members had said that an Affirmation Bill
would be a Bradlaugh Relief Bill. Bradlaugh is more proud than you are.
Let the Bill pass without applying to elections that have taken place
previously, and I will undertake not to claim my seat, and when the Bill
has passed I will apply for the Chiltern Hundreds. I have no fear. If I
am not fit for my constituents they shall dismiss me, but you never
shall. The grave alone shall make me yield."
When a division was taken there were for the previous question 228,
against 286. Mr. Samuel Morley voted with the majority against the
Government. Sir Stafford Northcote's motion was then agreed to without a
division.
Feb. 8th.--Mr. Labouchere, in committee of the whole House, proposed for
leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law of Parliamentary Oaths and
Affirmations. The Bill was afterwards formally blocked by Mr. Molloy.
Feb. 17th.--Mr. Labouchere asked the Attorney-General whether the
resolution of Feb. 7th had not vacated the seat. Sir Henry James answered
that it had not.
Feb. 18th.--Mr. Gladstone writes Mr. Bradlaugh that the Government have
no measure to propose with respect to his seat.
Feb. 21st.--Mr. Bradlaugh of himself takes and subscribes the oath, and
takes his seat.
Feb. 22nd.--Mr Bradlaugh expelled the House of Commons.
Mar. 2nd--Re-elected for Northampton. For Bradlaugh, 3,796; for Corbett,
3,688.
Mar. 6th.--On the motion of Sir Stafford Northcote, the House reaffirms
its motion of the 7th Feb., Mr. Gladstone supporting an amendment moved
by Mr. Marjoribanks, by which the House would have declared the
desirability of legislation, for the purpose of giving members an option
between oath and affirmation.
Mar. 7th.--Lord Redesdale introduces in the House of Lords a Bill,
requiring every peer and every member of the House of Commons before
taking the oath or making the affirmation, to declare and affirm his
belief in Almighty God. The Bill, introduced "from a sense of what was
due to Almighty God," was afterwards withdrawn "in deference to Lord
Salisbury."
To this date, 317 petitions with 62,168 signatures had been presented
against Mr. Bradlaugh being allowed to take his seat; while in favor of
the same 1,051, with 250,833 signatures, had been presented.
Mr. Labouchere's Affirmation Bill blocked by Earl Percy.
1883
Jan. 11th.--Mr. Justice Field gave judgment that the privileges of the
House of Commons prevented Mr. Bradlaugh from obtaining any redress for
the assault upon him on August 3rd, 1881.
Feb. 15th.--Great demonstration in Trafalgar Square; from eighty to one
hundred thousand people present. (_Evening Standard_ says 30,000; _Daily
News_, 50,000 an hour before the meeting.) Mr. Adams, chairman; Rev. W.
Sharman, Jos. Arch, and Mr. Bradlaugh, speakers.
Opening of Parliament. (Mr. Gladstone at Cannes.) Government give notice
for to-morrow for leave to introduce bill to amend the Oaths Act, 1866.
Sir R. Cross gives notice of opposition on second reading of same. Mr.
Bradlaugh consents, with the approval of his constituents, expressed on
the 13th inst., to await the fate of the measure.
Feb. 16th.--Sharp succession of frantic speeches in the House of Commons
by Mr. Newdegate, Alderman Fowler, Mr. Warton, Mr. Henry Chaplin, Mr.
Onslow, Mr. Grantham, Mr. Beresford Hope, Lord H. Lennox, Lord C.
Hamilton, Mr. A. Balfour, Mr. Ashmead Bartlett, and Mr. A. O'Connor.
Divisions: from two to three to one for Government. The Marquis of
Hartington consents to adjourn the motion for Bill until Monday at
twelve.
Feb. 18th.--The _Observer_ says that when Conservatives ask Liberals
whether they really mean to alter the law for the purpose of admitting
Mr. Bradlaugh, it is fair for Liberals in turn to ask Conservatives
whether they really mean to maintain an admitted abuse and injustice for
the mere purpose of excluding Mr. Bradlaugh.
Feb. 19th.--First reading of Bill carried on division by 184 votes to 53;
second reading formally fixed for that night week.
Feb. 20th.--_Daily News_ says Bill will be carried by large majorities,
and will be regarded by the House and the country as the appropriate
settlement of an unfortunate controversy.
The _Times_ says the leaders of the opposition will not succeed in
finally preventing the Bill from becoming law. Its real concern is that
Mr. Bradlaugh has been substantially in the right; that he has been
unjustly excluded from taking the seat which belongs to him.
The _Morning Advertiser_ thinks the Government may yet find it difficult
to persuade the House to adopt the Bill.
The _Morning Post_ justifies the irregular opposition to the first
reading of the Bill, and thinks notice of the measure should have been
given in the Queen's Speech. No measure had created more excitement or
raised more indignation in the country, which desired to see it rejected
by a decisive majority.
March 5th.--Appeal case Bradlaugh _v._ Clarke part heard before the House
of Lords.
March 6th.--Case concluded; judgment deferred.
March 9th.--Action for maintenance--Bradlaugh _v._ Newdegate--tried
before Lord Coleridge and a special jury. Henry Lewis Clarke, the common
informer, swore that he had not the means to pay the costs, and would not
have brought the action if he had not been indemnified by Mr. Newdegate.
Case adjourned for argument of legal points.
March 17th.--Maintenance action argued; four counsel appearing for Mr.
Newdegate. Lord Coleridge reserved judgment.
March 20th.--The Solicitors to the Treasury compelled Mr. Bradlaugh to
pay the costs of the House of Commons in the action against the deputy
Sergeant-at-Arms.
TRANSCRIBERS' NOTES
Page 58, 59: Variable spelling of Chipping Wicomb/Wycomb as in the
original
Page 62: . added after "brought up in custody"
Page 70: " added after 'concluding with the words "So help me, God'
Page 75: " removed after '27 L. J., Q. B., 195.'
Page 83: aseembly corrected to assembly after "may say again, that this"
Page 88: Extra the removed from "lay it before the the Judges"
Page 96: " added after 'the man who stands before them--('
Page 100 (A Cardinal's Broken Oath Page 2): . added after E.C
Page 104 (A Cardinal's Broken Oath Page 6): inuendoes as in the original
Page 111 (Northampton and the House of Commons Page 5): , corrected to .
after "personally give such undertaking"
Page 113 (Northampton and the House of Commons Page 7): . added after
"sitting within its walls"
Page 121 (Northampton and the House of Commons Page 15): " corrected to
' after "heirs and successors, according to law,"
Page 127 (Diary of the Northampton Struggle Page 5): . added after
'"persons so admitted," etc'
Page 133 (Diary of the Northampton Struggle Page 11): v. italicised for
consistency after "The case of Clarke"
Page 140 (Diary of the Northampton Struggle Page 18): v. italicised for
consistency after "Appeal case Bradlaugh" and after "Action for
maintenance--Bradlaugh"
General: Variable spelling of Serjeant-at-Arms/Sergeant-at-Arms as in
the original
General: There are several words, which would normally have been spelt
with a "u" in British English, which have been spelt without in the
original text e.g. humor, endeavored, savor. These spellings have been
preserved.
General: Variable spelling of Lewis Price/Pryse as in the original