Bradlaugh and the Oath.

Auckland Star, Volume XVII, Issue 15, 19 January 1886, Page 4

Bradlaugh and the Oath.

(To the Editor.)

Sih,—ln your leader of 15th instant you remark :—"lf Mr Bradlaugh had ohosenin the boginning to do what he has dono now, ho might longago have been in the full enjoyment of his privileges as a representative." Perhaps I mistake, but it soems to mo many poi-ona will deduce from tho sentence quoted that Mr Bradlaugh, through obstinacy, freak, or ill-temper, had previously declined to mako oath. Bueh, at least, io frequently stated. Will you permit mo then briefly to recount tho facts ?' Mr bradlaugh was first elected for Northampton on April 2, 1880, and although Parliament openod on 29th idem, ho refrained from presenting himself until the opinion of the law officers of tho Crown wob taken touching his right to affirm. He had beon, please remember, fighting the oath question in Law Courts for years. Tho opinion of the law officers was in his favour. On May 3rd, 1880, at tho table of tho House, Mr Bradlaugh handed in a written paper, in which he ro spcctfully begged to bo allowed to affirm, "asa person, for tho time, being by law permitted to make a solemn affirmation, &c, instead of taking an oath." Lord F. Cavendish thereon moved for the appointmont of a special committee of inquiry. Said Committee was appointed, and, on May 20, reported, in effect, that Mr Bradlaugh was not entitled to affirm, and on tho samo date that gentleman made a public statement of his position with regard to the oath. Ho considered, ho said, that ho " hnd a legal right to chose between tho alternatives of making an affirmation or taking the oath, and he felt it clearly his moral duty in that case to make an affirmation.'" The oath ' included words which, to him, were meaningless; and, it would havo been an act of hypocrisy to voluntarily take this form, if any other had beon open to him. He should, taking tho oath, regard himself as bound not by its words, but by the Bpirit which the affirmation would have conveyed." On May 21st, 1880, amid a tumultofcriesfromtheConservative benches, Mr Bradlaugh went to the table for the

purpose of being sivorn 4Wm moved, and Alderman Fowl, 'Bβ tlmt Mr Bradlaugh fi ,. ou 7 «|| to tako the oath. Another <S« appointed. On Juno 2"nd T ,si £ of 45 in a House of 505 "it J! H H Mr Bradlaugh bs not permitted oath.—l am, etc., ■*»