THE COMMONS AND THE AFFIRMATIONS BILL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 987, 5 July 1883, Page 4

THE COMMONS AND THE AFFIRMATIONS BILL.

Writing underrate May 4, the Argus correspondency 8 • t h e affirmation Bill the Goyerndefeated by a majority : ?,Not all the eloquence of the ,iier has availed to avert this lit The ivhips did their best on er side, and the decision was taken 5 a full House. The one certain seduenre will be the immediate val ot Mr Bradlaugh’s personal

lie speech bf Mr Gladstone lifted ' debate froth- the dreary 1?”»1 to ch it had fallen, enlivened only by mohious personalities. It threw . dr,splendid, glow of his genius across {jit.* whole subject, znd brought into c-i'et many unsuspected points of mu cst By crimmott consent, -it. is long since the House listened to so ttiasterly ?,n effort. The speech at once took rs’ik among the of Parliaviieat, and its effect was great, though n -vt sufficient l to carry the measure, n-v. whole House, without regard to t ; , jy opinion, felt and admitted its. :.', v , e r. Every spot within hearing was 0.. unied, ..every gallery thronged. T ' en the Premier laid his notes on the n -’e there was a certain weariness in y- manner; but as he developed his subject the old energy soon appeared. His low-iind solemn tones v. ! 'or£he tooched’the mbre religious ■ s i ect%fehis subject. With .the mam Outline ofTiirargunient your readers viji be already acquainted. The point .*-•* new was-hla. contention that the = of Theism was neither rational nor -■rantageous for the interests of relin. “I can nnderstand,” he said, ' rne rational distinction —that you v <ild frame the oath in such a way as 1:- ecognise and indicate not only the existence of the Deity, but man’s responsibility to the Deity ; but is that vour present rule? ... The rv.. ;ific form ol irreligion with which in : < l educated, world you have to contend is not blank Atheism. That is_a i £ opinion, very seldom met with; what is frequently met with is that r ing form of opinion that would ■; , a . h us that, whatever may be beyond visible things 1 - of : this' world, ' you ii; know nothing of it, and that it is a o dess undertaking to attempt to . blish relations with it. That is the chief of the age, and that mischief / <do not attempt to touch. What w e,. you glory,in the state of the law diet now prevails; you wish to tolerate ■T differences of religion, you wish to rti v everyone to enter into your ■ h mber who admits'the L existence of d a Deity. You would seek to admit , j raire—that is a of your ration. Voltaire was not a taciturn f<>-. of Christianity. He was the author ' hat painful phrase which goes to heart of every Christian —ecraser > ' And this is the state of the ! . from which you are working up the ; ; itry to strengthen in the minds of people the false notion that you - got a real test, a real safeguard; ; Christianity is still safe within ■. in unavoidable exceptions under • electing segis within the walls of ! Chamber, and for that you excite . eat religious war.”

if Bradlaugh, speaking to a gather- ■ • if his supporters subsequently, said i, vvuwijiu diAru v crcuine whh emotion” as he listened to this ;h, and “reflected how wide was t - : i „■ abyss which separated him in from the speaker. He was ■ . ,ful. for the generosity which -1; pted a speech which could not 0:1 ause its author pain.” The debate languished after Mr ..... stone sat down. Mr Gibson con:d premier had proved T: much.. Lord A. Percy thought the ; had, taken up the cry the Parisian mob “ A has Dieu P’ - "r the Premier subseqflently assented ' r tfuljy to. an adjournment.. Sir hrd Northcote told him that his , :h had “ enormously enhanced the T r rtance of the Bill, which was of r. . conseqiience^tban-the* repeal- of •T Corn Laws, a matter that occupied Teen or fourteen nights'” Lord lolph Churchill held that the Prime Vi : ■ster’s speech was as much -above question as a discourse -from one he fathers ofuthe Church or the • olmen of t ,the Middle Ages, lyasv. ,aq ; insult to the Jews :an.k thexn with atheists in this i : :ion of “relief.”. Atheists, he conn ’ id, both by cornon law and statute, of holding official cions, and in opposition to Lord To ;ridge’s recent dictum—in which he ■■ hia; political opinions on the u; ial bench.—rto - the effect that ; ; itianity is no longer a part of the . . non law- Lord Randolph cited the n-’ons of L.6rd Erskine, Sir F. Kelly, r 1 *Bait)nsl , 'Marfin : '-and" Bramwell. V chhnge - proposed ought, not to be : U: without an appeal to the country. ■ ; : :riilg .tct the, petitions against the ; o , he said they had: mounted .up to ; wjth , signatures. Mr : ; ucherej who ridiculed lit ’ petitions as ' sighed by “ babes sucklings;” and ventured further • - assertion; that there 1 .were some ; . bens in the House who by an acci- , c had never taken the oath. ‘ gtyflgrd Northcote spoke briefly, :; nencing with , a personal explanaspeech, be said, r extremely’ fine and impressive,” that: djd.it all ppean ? The effect T i Ifegisllltiori proposed would be to *. the idea that, “the Parliament of Britain had struck out the name V .mighty .God-from- its proceedings .. idea which, however exaggerated r r ;ht be, would produce most serious ; ..iii, In conclusion, he aj:u<r what was. ( the meaning of the ; I. .:e which had been used as to “regious tests for a political object?” “If °7 political object was meant an object of ihapoftance to the body politic,: he maintained that there was no object inything like so important as retaining had beeqjaid down as a recognition of the Almighty.—(Cheers.) Truer civil freedom:.rested upon the Pf the moral character of the ifHKey-did away with the great law which had hitherto maintained that they must be prepared .for, the Ipss of the.foundation on which'"tHal glorious- fabric-' had - been i built.—(Opposition cheers). . . . ' The House ought to- address itself to the confidgnatiprvof: the question ip, a t spirit of earnest conviction.—(Cheers .and counter: cheers.) ' He 7 asked those JdiO believed in the value of the recog- i ||3i ~ faK-h-l'J ~.. . • <t ;t

nition of the Divine authority sider well before they passed a measure which would do no good, but which would produce an impression of a fatal and disastrous character. They stood upon the ground won by their ancestors, not ’.without conflicts, not without dangers, and it might be not without faults and errors. They stood upon it, and wereibound to maintain as they could against aggression ; and if they were unsuccessful the Opposition would have the consciousness of knowing that they had done their duty.” (Loud Opposition cheers). The numbers were : For the second reading, 289; against, 292. Ihe result was received by the Opposition with tremendous cheers;