problems of our time should be
sternly faced, not with a view to the generation of profitless emotions,
but with a view to its solution."[8]

Upon the publication of this book there arose a division of opinion in
regard to the scheme which was set forth. On the one hand, numbers of
noted philanthropists aided General Booth with money and moral support.
On the other hand, there was opposition from a certain class of
reformers, headed by that eminent scientist, Thomas Huxley. This
opposition, however, did not so much attack the principles advocated,
as the agency for their application, namely, the Salvation Army, itself,
characterized in Huxley's words as "Autocratic socialism, masked by its
theological exterior."[9]

From that time to the present many thoughtful men have continued this
opposition to the Army as an agent of social service. Further on we
shall consider the validity and strength of their arguments. At that
time the press on all sides took up the controversy, and it was finally
decided to appoint a committee of investigation to thoroughly examine
the Army's methods and institutions and publish a report. This committee
was composed of some of the leading business and public men of England,
headed by Sir Wilfred Lawson. They examined the books of the Army and
studied the system and methods of the movement. They reported that all
was entirely satisfactory and not only so, but that the movement and
work was worthy of commendation.[10]

The report of this Committee, together with a demonstration of the work
already accomplished, served to silence the critics to some extent, and
public favor began to turn toward the movement. Since that period the
Army has had, generally speaking, the support of the press and many of
the leading men throughout the world, a support which it has not been
slow to recognize, or to utilize. For instance, about this time, we find
the following appeal issued through the English press:

"From personal witness or credible report of what General Booth has
done with the funds entrusted to him for the Social Scheme which he
laid before the country eighteen months ago, we think it would be a
serious evil if the great task which he has undertaken should be
crippled by lack of help during the next four months. We therefore
venture to recommend his work to the generous support of all, who
feel the necessity for some serious and concentrated effort to
grapple wi