FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187  
188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   >>   >|  
ures in favour of his constitutional right, and on February 8th, 9th, and 10th 1,008 petitions, bearing 241,970 signatures, were presented; the House treated them with contemptuous indifference. The House refused to declare his seat vacant, and also refused to allow him to fill it, thus half-disfranchising Northampton, while closing every avenue to legal redress. Mr. Labouchere--who did all a loyal colleague could do to assist his brother member--brought in an Affirmation Bill; it was blocked. Mr. Gladstone, appealed to support the law declared by his own Attorney-General, refused to do anything. An _impasse_ was created, and all the enemies of freedom rejoiced. Out of this position of what the _Globe_ called "quiet omnipotence" the House was shaken by an audacious defiance, for on February 21st the member it was trying to hold at arm's length took the oath in its startled face, went to his seat, and--waited events. The House then expelled him--and, indeed, it could scarcely do anything else after such defiance--and Mr. Labouchere moved for a new writ, declaring that Northampton was ready, its "candidate was Charles Bradlaugh, expelled this House." Northampton, ever steadfast, returned him for the third time--the vote in his favour showing an increase of 359 over the second bye-election--and the triumph was received in all the great towns of England with wild enthusiasm. By the small majority of fifteen in a House of 599 members--and this due to the vacillation of the Government--he was again refused the right to take his seat. But now the whole Liberal Press took up his quarrel; the oath question became a test question for every candidate for Parliament, and the Government was warned that it was alienating its best friends. The _Pall Mall Gazette_ voiced the general feeling. "What is the evidence that an Oaths Bill would injure the Government in the country? Of one thing we may be sure, that if they shirk the Bill they will do no good to themselves at the elections. Nobody doubts that it will be made a test question, and any Liberal who declines to vote for such a Bill will certainly lose the support of the Northampton sort of Radicalism in every constituency. The Liberal Press throughout the country is absolutely unanimous. The political Non-conformists are for it. The local clubs are for it. All that is wanted is that the Government should pick up a little more moral courage, and recognise that even in practice honest
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187  
188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

refused

 

Government

 

Northampton

 

Liberal

 

question

 

February

 
country
 
Labouchere
 

defiance

 

favour


member

 

support

 

candidate

 

expelled

 

alienating

 

Parliament

 

enthusiasm

 

warned

 

fifteen

 
Gazette

election

 

members

 

friends

 

quarrel

 

received

 

voiced

 

majority

 

triumph

 
England
 

vacillation


political

 

conformists

 

unanimous

 

absolutely

 

Radicalism

 
constituency
 

wanted

 

recognise

 

practice

 

honest


courage

 
injure
 

feeling

 

evidence

 

doubts

 

declines

 
Nobody
 

elections

 

general

 
scarcely