Charles Bradlaugh: a Record of His Life and Work, Volume 2 (of 2)

69

Through the generosity of "Edna Lyall," I was able to buy these for myself.

70

This is all that can be pleaded in favour of the deliberate representation of Voltaire as an Atheist by the late Archbishop Thomson, at the Church Congress of 1881. But the ignorance of the upper English clergy in general on such matters is amazing. In January 1881, Archdeacon (then Canon) Farrar, preaching in Westminster Abbey, represented Robespierre's Reign of Terror as a "reign of avowed Atheism;" identified the Deistic cult of the "Supreme Being" with that of the "goddess of Reason;" and accounted for the fall of Robespierre by the statement that, "God awoke once more, and with one thunderclap smote the sanhedrim of the insurrection, prostrated the apostate race." This orator once expressed horror at the thought that Disestablishment might enable Bradlaugh to speak in St Paul's. Bradlaugh might have remarked on what the Establishment permitted at Westminster Abbey.

71

The English translation, in the original issue, is in parts completely perverted to the language of Theism, whether out of fear or of Deistic prejudice on the part of the translator. Even the edition prefaced by Bradlaugh – who did not think of checking the text – preserves the perversions of the first translator.

72

This fact is entirely ignored by Professor Flint in his defence of the old plea of Foster and Chalmers against Mr Holyoake in "Anti-Theistic Theories," App. ii.

73

John Mill, after stating that his father held that "concerning the origin of things nothing whatever can be known," remarks that "Dogmatic Atheism he looked upon as absurd; as most of those whom the world has considered Atheists have always done" ("Autobiography," p. 39). It is difficult to guess what is here meant by "dogmatic Atheism;" but certainly no statement made above is more "dogmatic" than the proposition cited from Mill, senior. It clearly involves rejection of all Theism.

74

One of the most capable metaphysicians I have personally known was an inferior stone-mason.

75

It was not merely the orthodoxy of past ages that saw virtual Atheism in the position of Spinoza. Jacobi expressly and constantly maintained that Spinozism and Atheism came to the same thing. A God who is not outside the world, he argued, is as good as no God. At the same time, he admitted that the understanding had no escape from the logical demonstration of the impossibility of a personal God; and that the Theist must throw himself "overhead into the depths of faith." See Pünjer's "History of the Christian Philosophy of Religion," Eng. tr., p. 632.

76

Pamphlet on "Heresy: its Utility and Morality. A Plea and a Justification," 3rd. ed. p. 35.

77

It is unnecessary here to put the further argument that if we infer intelligence behind the universe by human analogy, we are bound in consistency to infer organism for the intelligence. Dr Martineau in his "Modern Materialism," takes refuge from this argument in declamation, treating the demand for consistency as if it had been a substantive plea.

78

See an examination of the positions of Knight, Davidson, and Kaftan, in the Free Review, August, 1894.

79

"Anti-Theistic Theories," 4th ed. p. 517.

80

Id., pp. 518, 519.

81

Pamphlet, "Is there a God?" p. 1.

82

Second reply to Bishop Magee, p. 35.

83

Mr Spencer (p. 31) represents the "Atheistic theory" as professing to "conceive" an infinite and eternal universe, and thereby to "explain" it, when the very essence of Atheism is to insist (as does Mr Spencer) that infinity is only the negation of conceptions, and that an infinite universe cannot be "explained."

84

"Naturalist" seems first to have been used in this sense by Holbach.

85

"What we call the operations of the mind are functions of the brain and the materials of consciousness are products of cerebral activity" ("Hume," p. 80). Mr Huxley goes on, "It is hardly necessary to point out that the doctrine just laid down is what is commonly called Materialism."

86

Section on "The Value of Matter" (Werth des Stoffs), Eng. tr., p. 68.

87

Section on "Motion," end.

88

Section on the "Value of Matter" (Werth des Stoffs), end.

89

Section on the "Value of Matter" (Werth des Stoffs), end.

90

Section on the "Value of Matter" (Werth des Stoffs), end.

91

See his "Critiques and Addresses," p. 306.

92

A refinement on the old simplicity is reached when we find Mr Huxley sneering at Materialists whose teaching is really more circumspect than his own, and Mr Harrison in turn execrating in the name of "religion" the medical materialism of Mr Huxley, where the latter is simply putting forward as an original speculation a well-established pathological fact.

93

This is, of course, a widely different doctrine from what is commonly known as Spiritualism: the belief in the perpetuity of human personalities, in a bodily form, without other bodily qualities.

94

Tyndall answered to this argument that the flash of light from the union of oxygen and hydrogen "is an affair of consciousness, the objective counterpart of which is a vibration. It is a flash only by our interpretation." But that is no answer at all. Tyndall never went into the psychological problem fully.

95

Debate with Dr M'Cann, p. 17.

96

Preface to "The Bible: What it is," 1865.

97

There is some reason to suspect that there has happened in this country what Bibliophile Jacob, in his preface to his addition of Cyrano de Bergerac, declares to have happened on a large scale in France – a zealous destruction of Freethinking works by pious purchasers. But it lies with these to supply the main evidence.

98

Pamphlet on Heresy, p. 48.

99

Thus, when in July or August 1882 an open-air Freethought meeting was attacked by riotous Salvationists, Bradlaugh strongly urged avoidance of provocation, and that, "above all, Freethinkers must avoid being drawn into physical conflict with Salvationists" (National Reformer, August 13, 1882).

100

Fisher Unwin.

101

The matter was dealt with at some length in the National Reformer of January 15, 1893.

102

In October (?) 1882, the Quaker Friend testified to the "melancholy" fact that "with, of course, honourable exceptions, the most inveterate opponents of militarism are to be found among secularists and socialists." Soon afterwards Bishop Ellicott regretfully avowed that unbelief had acquired new and dangerous characteristics, in that it "now was very often found co-existent with what they were bound to speak of as a moral and in many cases a philanthropic life."

103

Address at the National Secular Society's Conference.

104

Published in 1861. Reprinted 1883.

105

J. S. Mill's Autobiography, pp. 107, 167. A still more striking illustration of the way in which one rationalist may "steal the horse" while another may not "look over the hedge," is the following passage in Mill's book: – "On these grounds I was not only as ardent as ever for democratic institutions, but earnestly hoped that Owenite, St. Simonian, and all other anti-property doctrines might spread widely among the poorer classes; not that I thought these doctrines true, or desired that they should be acted on, but in order that the higher classes might be made to see that they had far more to fear from the poor when uneducated than when educated."

106

His comment on Mr Gladstone's reply to Colonel Ingersoll is, however, a model of respectful exposure of a very bad case.

107

"Five Dead Men whom I knew," p. 6.

108

Of Henry Loader, a professed Christian.

109

He was fined £40, while two brothel-keepers were fined only £5 each in the same week.

110

Pamphlet on "The Land, the People, and the Coming Struggle," fourth ed., p. 8.

111

This stipulation was often ignored, and he was accused of wanting to parcel out Hyde Park in allotments.

112

For the details of the case in favour of compulsory cultivation of land, see Bradlaugh's pamphlet on the subject, published 1887.

113

It has lately been advanced by a "Unionist" politician, Mr T. W. Russell, in the New Review.

114

November 1881, p. 842.

115

His longer criticisms of Socialism make a fair volume. They are: (1) Socialism; For and Against: written debate with Mrs Besant, 1887; (2) Will Socialism benefit the English People? debate with Mr Hyndman, 1883; (3) Written debate with Mr Belfort Bax, under same title; (4) "Socialism; its Fallacies and Dangers," article in North American Review, January 1887, reprinted as a pamphlet; Pamphlet, "Some objections to Socialism," 1884. See also his articles and debate on the "Eight Hours Question," and his lecture on "Capital and Labour."

116

I happened to be standing by when, at a Freethought Conference, the late Dr Cæsar de Pæpe, a leading Belgian Socialist and Freethinker, personally and fraternally remonstrated with Bradlaugh on his opposition to Socialism. He vehemently answered that he had found the English Socialists among the most unscrupulous of his enemies, they having not only lied about him freely, but put in his mouth all sorts of things he had never said or thought.

117

"Parliament and the Poor."

118

National Reformer, Nov. 20, 1888.

119

Then edited by Mr Frederick Greenwood.

120

Those were "the days of all-night sittings," forced by the policy of the Nationalists; and Bradlaugh missed voting on the motion for leave to bring in the Coercion Bill, by reason of having gone home to rest after having sat for twenty-six hours out of thirty, the vote being suddenly taken in his absence on the decision of the Speaker.

121

In the action of Richards v. Hough and Co., however, in May 1882, Mr Justice Grove expressly remarked that some judges did not think it necessary to enquire at all as to the belief of a witness claiming to affirm. In the prosecution of Bradlaugh, Foote, and Ramsay in 1883 for blasphemy, on the other hand, Lord Coleridge, a very considerate judge, expressly asked Mr Foote, before letting him affirm, whether the oath "would be binding on his conscience," though Mr Foote, declaring himself an atheist, rightly objected to such a query. His lordship after discussion agreed to modify the question, making it apply only to the words of invocation; and he put the question with still more modification to Mrs Besant, who, warned by what had been done to her partner, declared in so many words that any promise she made would be binding on her, whatever the form.

122

Sir Henry James later avowed that they adhered to that opinion all along.

123

In the discussion on the Burials Bill, 1881.

124

He wrote in his diary at the time: "It seems strange to require an oath from a Christian, and to dispense with it from an Atheist. Would it not be better to do away with the member's oath altogether, and make the affirmation general?" (Mr Lang's "Life of Northcote," ii. 154.)

125

These were Mr Gorst, Lord Randolph Churchill, and Mr A. J. Balfour. The latter took little oral part in the Bradlaugh struggle, but always voted with his party.

126

Northcote's diary, so far as published, naturally offers no confession or explanation as to the change in his attitude. Under date May 24, he simply records that "we agreed to stand firm for Wolff's motion" (Mr Lang's "Life," ii. 159).

127

Macmillan & Co., "The English Citizen" series.

128

A technical assent to this ambiguous question was, as we have seen, the condition attached to affirmation in the law courts. But common decency usually gave the formula there a purely technical and non-natural force.

129

Printed in National Reformer of 30th May 1889, p. 338, and in several London newspapers.

130

Some years afterwards he stated in the House that what he had really said was "one Deity or the other," meaning either the Unitarian or the Trinitarian God. The explanation did not seem to be credited.

131

It is worth noting that Mr Keir Hardie, a professed Christian Socialist, when recently (28th June) protesting against the foolish ceremony of congratulating the Queen on the birth of a great-grandchild in the direct line, went the length of declaring, "I owe no allegiance to any hereditary ruler" – this after he had sworn allegiance to the Queen. Bradlaugh never stultified himself in this fashion.

132

Report in Standard of 11th June 1880.

133

See the report of the Committee's proceedings, reprinted in his "True Story of my Parliamentary Struggle."

134

In a case not legally reported, however – that of ex parte Lennard vs Woolrych, in the Court of Queen's Bench, in April 1875.

135

On the other hand, Tory journalists went much further astray in asserting that Bolingbroke believed in future rewards and punishments.

136

It should be noted that the "kicked-out" idea is a favourite one with the cartoonist. He used it lately in the case of the Irish Evicted Tenants Bill.

137

The Select Committee persistently examined him to get avowals which he had not made, and had no wish to volunteer.

138

The Echo of 25th May 1880 has the passage: "Say what we like, occupants of the Tory benches are penetrated with deep and undying religious convictions. The very reference to an unbeliever, unless it is in fierce denunciation of him, reddens their faces… But strange to say, the very men who apparently were so jealous of religious or semi-religious forms last evening will this evening vote that Parliament shall not sit to-morrow because it will be the Derby day. Now if there be one place on this wide earth which may be denominated a pandemonium it is the Epsom Downs on a Derby day."

139

See the verbatim report reprinted in the volume of his Speeches.

140

The reference was to the ever-offensive Sir Henry Tyler, who had made a cowardly allusion to Mrs Besant.

141

This perhaps understates Beaconsfield's protest. Bradlaugh heard that he condemned the whole proceedings, and called his followers "fools" for their pains.

142

Again he was surrendering his own convictions to the partisanism of his colleagues. He had been personally willing to support legislation for the settlement of the difficulty, but was overruled as usual by his associates. See Mr Lang's "Life," ii. 172.

143

A friendly action by Mr Swaagman, for all the remaining penalties that might arise, served to forestall other speculative suits.

144

Mr Lang, in the page of random jottings in which he "sketches" the Bradlaugh story, makes the misleading statement that he only sat "for a few weeks under statutory liability" ("Life of Northcote," ii. 137).

145

The same member tried to raise the question on a vote in supply.

146

"Language fit for a Yahoo," was the description given of Hay's scurrility by the Scotsman.

147

For publishing the "watch" libel.

148

The National Reformer of 16th January 1881 contains, besides Bradlaugh's own protest, articles by two leading contributors strongly condemning the measure and criticising its defenders, including Bright.

149

See above, p. 201.

150

Bradlaugh put the technicalities thus to the Lord Chancellor in the Court of Appeal on 27th March: – "There are issues of fact untouched by the demurrer, and there is the first paragraph of the statement of defence, on which I may possibly defeat the plaintiff even should the allowance of the demurrer be maintained."

151

In the House of Commons on 7th February 1882 Earl Percy asserted that Bradlaugh's friends had fabricated tickets for the meeting. The statement was absolutely false.

152

April 27, 1881.

153

May 6, 1881.

154

Given in a special number of the National Reformer.

155

Formally, Newdegate was bound to pay Bradlaugh's costs if Bradlaugh won, but had the fact of the maintenance never come out, it would have been an easy matter for Clarke to become bankrupt, and leave Bradlaugh no redress, while he himself could be privately reimbursed by Newdegate.

156

Mr Vaughan had twice previously given decisions against Bradlaugh, and both had been upset on appeal.

157

The essential unveracity of Northcote's political character is shown by the fact that after thus using the "numbers" argument against Bradlaugh, he himself solemnly denounced the principle. Speaking at Edinburgh in 1884 (see Mr Lang's "Life," ii. 218) he said: "I am afraid that the Government will take far too much to the numerical principle, and if you take to the principle of mere numbers, depend upon it you will be introducing the most dangerous change into the Constitution." Exactly what Bradlaugh had said to him.

158

In this particular speech he used the phrase "that grand old man" of Gladstone. It was probably he who set the fashion.

159

Mr Cavendish Bentinck.

160

Elected for Oxford.

161

Bradlaugh noted later in his journal that the petition was "alleged to be signed by 10,300 freemen of Northampton." This, he remarked, "cannot possibly be true, as the freemen do not amount to that number." They really numbered about 300! It turned out that thousands of the signatures were those of school-children.

162

National Reformer, April 2, 1882.

163

A question put to Mr Mundella on 18th June in the House elicited the fact that the Hall of Science classes had been established, and received grants, under the late Tory administration. On this Lord George Hamilton was petty enough to put the blame on his subordinates. Mr Mundella answered that for his part he was responsible for anything done by his subordinates.

164

Letter of 8th May 1883.

165

If further samples are needed of the general untruthfulness, they can be given by the dozen. Even men of good standing spoke with a disregard of scruple which put them outside courteous correction. Bradlaugh was driven to characterise Sir Edward Watkin as "an exceedingly and wantonly untruthful person." In November 1882 he represented to his Folkestone constituents that he would not have stood in the way of Bradlaugh either swearing or affirming, but that he resisted when Bradlaugh "distinctly outraged all that they held sacred." This presumably referred to the self-administered oath of 1882. But Sir E. Watkin had voted against Bradlaugh being allowed to swear on 27th April 1881. The Hon. Mr Stansfeld, speaking at Halifax in October 1882, actually represented that the oath was "on the true faith of a Christian;" and repeated the untruth that Bradlaugh had "said that the oath had no binding effect on his conscience." The Rev. Canon Gascoigne Weldon, of Rothesay, asserted in writing that Bradlaugh "boasted publicly that he sought entrance into the House of Commons to insult its members and all its past glorious history, and level it, if possible, with its sister House, to the ground."

166

Mr Samuel Morley, speaking at Bristol in November 1882, admitted to his constituents that "while Mr Bradlaugh was in the House of Commons, nothing could exceed the propriety of his conduct;" but declared he would oppose his re-entrance because Bradlaugh continued "his system of violent, offensive, and disgusting attacks on the faith which he (Mr Morley) in common with the great bulk of the English people, held." To men like Mr Morley, all rationalist propaganda was "violent, offensive, and disgusting;" but they had no scruples about violent, offensive, and disgusting attacks on rationalists. Soon afterwards Mr Morley grossly misrepresented Bradlaugh's action, and on being challenged admitted the fact and made a correction. Soon again, however, Mr Morley spoke of Bradlaugh as writing in the Freethinker, and on being challenged, made neither admission nor correction. The champions of the oath, generally speaking, exhibited a constitutional incapacity for accuracy.

167

In the summer of 1882 the total of petitions had mounted to over 100, and the signatures numbered over 250,000.

168

He sat for Harwich.

169

A jury had been sworn in, but it was agreed all round that there was no question of fact for them, and they were discharged on the 9th, Lord Coleridge trying the case as one of law.

170

This had been cited in the Court of Appeal for another purpose.

171

The introduction as a regular feature of "Comic Bible Sketches," of a kind which Mr Bradlaugh and Mrs Besant were not prepared to defend.

172

23rd January 1883.

173

March 1883.

174

To do Mr Morley justice, it should be acknowledged that he unsaid his vindication in the same book.

175

It was printed in the National Reformer of 1st April 1883.

176

Cited in National Reformer, 18th February, p. 101.

177

The hon. members were: Lord Galway, Messrs Foljambe and Nicholson, and Colonel Seely.

178

A barrister wrote to Bradlaugh enclosing a letter from his daughter, aged fifteen, at school at Frankfort, telling how the English chaplain there called and asked all the English girls at the school to sign a petition against the Affirmation Bill (National Reformer, 15th April 1883).

179

Lucretius, ii. 646-651. It was thought notable that the orator did not allude to the kindred passage in his beloved Homer (Odyssey, vi. 41), splendidly rendered by Lucretius (iii. 18-22), and choicely paraphrased by Tennyson in his poem "Lucretius." The best expression in English verse of the idea in the passage quoted by Gladstone is again Tennyson's – the great passage a the close of the "Lotos Eaters."

180

Bradlaugh later publicly specified Newdegate as having been tipsy, "not for the first time;" and Newdegate, though denying the charge, did not bring an action for libel.

181

It should be said that Sir Edward Watkin is understood to regret his action.