308 " MY KINGDOM FOR A HORSE ! " 



the House of Commons down in his pretended desire for immediate 

 enquiry, and seeking in secret, by legal quibbles, to evade inquiry 

 for another month. 



Nor is this the first similar step Mr Bradlaugh has taken in this 

 action. It was brought in the Lord Mayor's court in the first 

 instance, where it would have come to a speedy issue, but his 

 solicitors artfully prevented this by getting the same Master 

 Manley Smith to remove it by certiorari to the High Courts, and, 

 even before that, they had obtained seven days' extension of time 

 for delivering defence. Mr Justice Field, on being appealed to, 

 did not reverse the order, but advised the parties to bring the case 

 on as quickly as possible. Now Mr Bradlaugh is trying for another 

 month's time, and Mr Peters meanwhile rests under the imputa- 

 tion of having received Lord Salisbury's cheque to promote 

 Trafalgar Square meetings. The thing is monstrous ; more especi- 

 ally as Mr Bradlaugh is acting not merely for self-advertisement, 

 but to keep an accusation which he knows to be false, as 

 long as possible without legal refutation, so that the public mind 

 may be poisoned by it and the impending elections influenced. 

 It is to be hoped Master Manley Smith has too much sense of the 

 dignity of his position to fall in with Mr Bradlaugh 's views. 



The above was written very hastily, as the paper was 

 going to press ; but I knew the facts were correctly stated, 

 and being circulated broadcast in Deptford next day it 

 produced a strong revulsion against Mr Bradlaugh and 

 the campaign of calumny which he had been conducting 

 throughout the constituency. Darling got in, and I got 

 thanked for what I had done. So far, so good. 



Now we come to the other side of the picture. The 

 enemy had been stung to the quick by what had happened, 

 and not long afterwards I was summoned to appear in the 

 Court of Queen's Bench to answer for Contempt of Court, 

 and the leader in the proceedings against me was no other 

 than Mr H. H. Asquith ! I was supposed to have inter- 

 fered with the course of justice, by commenting as I had 

 done on the case of Peters v. Bradlaugh which was sub 

 judice. 



In the first instance we retained Sir Robert Finlay 

 as leader and had a conference with him. He will re- 

 member it, I have no doubt, for he was much amused over 

 the situation ; but for some reason his engagements did 



