Adventure | Science Fiction | Ghost stories | Poetry | Children | History BookOpen Original Text hing what we could hardly get published
elsewhere. But I fear not to affirm that, by its essential character,
it is quite incomparably superior to such a paper as the _S. R._
It has clear principles, which it honestly believes will immensely
benefit the world; the _S. R._ is governed by hand-to-mouth expediency
for the sole benefit of itself. The former is devoted to certain
ideas; the latter has neither devotion nor ideas, but has a cool
preference for opinions of good fashion and of loose and easy fit.
The former is written throughout honestly, each writer stating with
the utmost sincerity and candour what he thinks and feels; the
latter--why, the latter would doubtless be ashamed to resemble in
anything its poor contemporary. The former, though not always choice
and accurate in its language, is generally written in plain clear
English (and I really account this of importance, and even of vital
importance, in an _English_ publication); the latter is not written in
any language at all, for a mixed jargon of the schools, the bar, the
pulpit, and the clubs is certainly not a language."
Amongst the papers which copied the _Saturday Review_ article was the
_Printers' Journal_; and this paper, determined not to fall behind its
aristocratic colleague, added a little slander on its own account,
that the _National Reformer_ was improperly printed by underpaid
compositors--although had the editor cared to inquire, he would have
found that the men were paid according to the regulations of the
Printers' Society.
In January and June of 1867 there appeared in the _National Reformer_
some noteworthy letters from the Rev. Charles Voysey. They are
specially remarkable when contrasted with his public utterances of
1880. These letters arose out of a sermon preached at Healaugh on
October 21st, 1866, in which Mr Voysey said that if it were urged
"that a belief in the Articles of the Christian Creed without
morality is better than morality without belief,[39] I frankly own
that, though I am a Churchman, I would rather see them put aside and
torn up as rubbish, than see the cause of morality, which is true
religion, for a moment imperilled. I would honestly prefer a morality
without any religious belief--nay, even without any religious hopes
and religious consolations--to the most comforting, satisfying creed
without morality.... Inexpressibly sad as it is to us, who rejoice
in our Maker, and whose hearts pant for the Living God, yet there
are some who cannot believe in him at all. Some of these are kept
steadfast in duty, pure and upright in their lives, models of good
fathers and mothers, good husbands and wives, and fulfilling God's
own law of love, which in mercy he has not made dependent on Creed,
but has engraven on our very hearts. They are living evidences of
morality without religion; and if I had to choose between the lot of a
righteous man who could not believe in a God, and the man of unlimited
credulity, who cared not to be righteous so much as to be a believer,
I would infinitely sooner be the righteous Atheist."
[Footnote 39: A dignitary of the Church was reported to have said
that it was better "to have a religion without morality than morality
without religion."]
Mr Bradlaugh made a short comment upon this, to which Mr Voysey
replied, and one or two further letters appeared. In a letter dated
January 13th he writes:--
"But I leave these minor matters to express my heartfelt sympathy
for what you call the 'Infidel party' under the civil disabilities
which have hitherto oppressed them. I think with sorrow and shame
of the stupid, as well as cruel contempt, with which some of my
brother-clergymen have treated you; and I cannot but deplore the want
of respect towards you as shown in the attitude of society, and in the
continuance of those nearly obsolete laws which our less enlightened
forefathers passed in the vain hope of checking the movements of the
human mind.... _I can do but very little, but that little I will do
with all my heart to remove the stigma which attaches to my order
through its blind and senseless bigotry._"
The italics here are mine, as I wish to draw special attention to the
sentiments of the Rev. Charles Voysey in 1867. In June of the same year
he wrote other somewhat lengthy letters, in which he expressed his
great respect for Mr Bradlaugh's "candour and honesty," and his thanks
for the "invariable courtesy" shown him. That is the Mr Voysey of
1867. In 1880 the Rev. Charles Voysey proved the value of his unsought
promise to work to remove the stigma from his order, by going out of
his way to preach a sermon at the Langham Hall upon the "Bradlaugh
Case," in which he explained that he felt "ashamed and disgraced by the
people of Northampton for electing him [Charles Bradlaugh] to represent
them;" he said that "most of the speeches in the Bradlaugh case, in
favour of his exclusion, strike me as singularly good, wholesome, and
creditable," and he felt thankful to the speakers for not mincing the
matter. Mr Bradlaugh, making an exceedingly brief commentary on Mr
Voysey's sermon, said:--
"We presume that this commendation included the various phrases
invented for Mr Bradlaugh by 'hon.' members, but never used by him.
Mr Voysey's belief in God seems to include approval of the use of
lies on God's behalf. Mr Voysey says: 'It is more than probable that
if Mr Bradlaugh had claimed to affirm without giving reasons for it
the Speaker would have at once permitted him to affirm.' Here Mr
Voysey writes in absolute and inexcusable ignorance of what actually
took place. For eightpence Mr Voysey can buy the Report of the Select
Parliamentary Committee, which, while unfavourable to me, gives the
exact facts, and this at least he ought to do before he preaches
another sermon full of inaccuracies as to fact, and replete with
unworthy insinuation."
"The whole affair," says Mr Voysey, "has been a perfect jubilee to the
martyr and his friends." And in the end it was--such a jubilee as is
never likely to fall to the lot of Mr Voysey. True, it was paid for
in years of care and terrific mental anxieties; true, it was heralded
with insult and actual personal ill-usage; true, it cost a life
impossible to replace; but the "jubilee" came when over the "martyr's"
very deathbed the House of Commons itself vindicated his honour; when
even a Tory statesman could be found to uphold my father's conduct in
the House, and a Tory gentleman to proclaim that he was "a man who
had endeavoured to do his duty." It was a jubilee of the triumph of
consistent courage and honesty over "blind and senseless bigotry" and
unprincipled malice.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE "NATIONAL REFORMER" AND ITS GOVERNMENT PROSECUTIONS.
On the third of May 1868 the _National Reformer_ appeared in a new
character. A startling announcement at the head of the Editorial
Notices sets forth that "the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Inland
Revenue having commenced proceedings to su Previous Next |