? ME BRADLAUGH DIFFICULTY.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.")
SIR,—If I were now in Parliament, I would vote against any measure that could be considered a Bradlaugh Relief Bill. It is useless to discuss the reasons why, but I think it will be difficult to induce Catholic Members to support a Bill having for its object the admission of Mr. Bradlaugh into the. House of Commons. Nevertheless, I should feel myself at liberty to vote in favour of a measure to dispense with the oath in the House in all cases in which the candidate had, before his election, deposited with the returning officer a declaration of loyalty, made before such officer or before a Justice of the Peace, and in such form as the Act should direct.
I should feel myself, by the adoption of this course, relieved from the possibility of being involved at a future time in a dis- cussion so odious and unprofitable as that which has arisen upon the opinions of Mr. Bradlaugh. Considering the course that was taken by the House in the case, of such an eminent statesman as. Daniel O'Connell, Mr. Bradlangh can scarcely complain of being again sent back to his constituents.—I am,
[We have always thought the abolition of all these formal and perfectly inoperative oaths the most final and most natural solution of the difficulty, though we cannot understand on what principle Mr. Bradlaugh is refused permission to take an oath which the law requires him to take. The delicacy of the scruples felt on behalf of Mr. Bradlaugh's conscience seems to us a little suspicions.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
