its own
doctrine. This opinion, I may say, is shared by many critics. He says
"Wedlock is to Mr. Grant Allen _Nehushtan_. And the odd thing about it
is that the net effect of the book which he has written with his
heart's blood to destroy this said _Nehushtan_ can hardly fail to
strengthen the foundation of reasoned conviction upon which marriage
rests." And again--"Those who do not know the author, but who take
what I must regard as the saner view of the relations of the sexes,
will rejoice at what might have been a potent force for evil has been
so strangely overruled as to become a reinforcement of the garrison
defending the citadel its author desires so ardently to overthrow.
From the point of view of the fervent apostle of Free Love, this is a
Boomerang of a Book."

Believing this--that the book would be its own best antidote--Mr.
Stead epitomized it in his _Review_, printed copious extracts, and
wound up by indicating his own views and what he deemed the true moral
of the discussion. The _Review_ was published and, so far as Messrs.
W.H. Smith & Son were concerned, passed without comment. But to the
Editor's surprise (he tells the story in the _Westminster Gazette_ of
the 2nd inst.), no sooner was it placed on the market in Ireland than
he received word that every copy had been recalled from the
bookstalls, and that Messrs. Eason had refused to sell a single copy.
On telegraphing for more information, Mr. Stead was sent the following
letter:--

"DEAR SIR,--Allen's book is an avowed defence of Free Love, and
a direct attack upon the Christian view of marriage. Mr. Stead
criticises Allen's views adversely, but we do not think the
antidote can destroy the ill-effects of the poison, and we
decline to be made the vehicle for the distribution of attacks
upon the most fundamental institution of the Christian
state.--Yours faithfully,
------."

Mr. Stead thereupon wrote to the managing Director of Messrs. Eason &
Son, and received this reply:--

"DEAR SIR,--We have considered afresh the character of the
February number of your _Review_ so far as it relates to the
notice of Grant Allen's book, and we are more and more confirmed
in the belief that its influence has been, and is, most
pernicious.

"Grant Allen is not much heard of in Ireland, and the laudations
you pronounce on him as a writer, so far as we know him,