Feb. 20th.—Daily News says Bill will be carried by large majorities, and will be regarded by the House and the country as the appropriate settlement of an unfortunate controversy.
The Times says the leaders of the opposition will not succeed in finally preventing the Bill from becoming law. Its real concern is that Mr. Bradlaugh has been substantially in the right; that he has been unjustly excluded from taking the seat which belongs to him.
The Morning Advertiser thinks the Government may yet find it difficult to persuade the House to adopt the Bill.
The Morning Post justifies the irregular opposition to the first reading of the Bill, and thinks notice of the measure should have been given in the Queen’s Speech. No measure had created more excitement or raised more indignation in the country, which desired to see it rejected by a decisive majority.
March 5th.—Appeal case Bradlaugh v. Clarke part heard before the House of Lords.
March 6th.—Case concluded; judgment deferred.
March 9th.—Action for maintenance—Bradlaugh v. Newdegate—tried before Lord Coleridge and a special jury. Henry Lewis Clarke, the common informer, swore that he had not the means to pay the costs, and would not have brought the action if he had not been indemnified by Mr. Newdegate. Case adjourned for argument of legal points.
March 17th.—Maintenance action argued; four counsel appearing for Mr. Newdegate. Lord Coleridge reserved judgment.
March 20th.—The Solicitors to the Treasury compelled Mr. Bradlaugh to pay the costs of the House of Commons in the action against the deputy Sergeant-at-Arms.