To discredit him as politician they maligned him socially, and the idea that a man desires "to abolish marriage and the home," is a most convenient poniard, and the one most certain to wound.

This was the origin of his worst difficulties, to be intensified, ere long, by his defence of Malthusianism.

On me also fell the same lash, and I found myself held up to hatred as upholder of views that I abhorred.
I may add that far warmer praise than that bestowed on this book by Mr.Bradlaugh was given by other writers, who were never attacked in the same way.
In the _Reasoner_, edited by Mr.George Jacob Holyoake, I find warmer praise of it than in the _National Reformer_; in the review the following passage appears:-- "In some respects all books of this class are evils: but it would be weakness and criminal prudery--a prudery as criminal as vice itself--not to say that such a book as the one in question is not only a far lesser evil than the one that it combats, but in one sense a book which it is a mercy to issue and courage to publish." The _Examiner_, reviewing the same book, declared it to be-- "A very valuable, though rather heterogeneous book....

This is, we believe, the only book that has fully, honestly, and in a scientific spirit recognised all the elements in the problem--How are mankind to triumph over poverty, with its train of attendant evils ?--and fearlessly endeavoured to find a practical solution." The _British Journal of Homoeopathy_ wrote:-- "Though quite out of the province of our journal, we cannot refrain from stating that this work is unquestionably the most remarkable one, in many respects, we have ever met with.

Though we differ _toto coelo_ from the author in his views of religion and morality, and hold some of his remedies to tend rather to a dissolution than a reconstruction of society, yet we are bound to admit the benevolence and philanthropy of his motives.