What were the comments of the Press on this great triumph so hardly won for them? After the trial of February 2nd, the _Morning Star_ printed a splendid article against the prosecution, but all the other daily papers of the metropolis persevered in their silence. "To struggle with the Treasury officials would be no mean task," said my father, "even if we had words of encouragement and more efficient aid from those, many of whom stand like ourselves, liable to be attacked as infringers of an oppressive law. As it is, we fight alone, and only one of the London journals has spoken out on our behalf." The _Manchester Courier_ wondered why the law had not been put in force against the _National Reformer_ before. The _Blue Budget_ reviled Lord Enfield for merely presenting a petition. The _Times_ report of the lengthy proceedings before the three judges on April 15th occupies only twenty-five lines. The only London papers which printed Mr Melvill's offer of a _stet processus_ and Mr Bradlaugh's rejoinder were the _Times_, _Star_, _Reynolds' Newspaper_, and _Queen's Messenger_. "Not one paper said a word in our favour or congratulated us on the battle we have had to fight." Finally, the repealing Bill passed through all its stages and became law without notice or remark. The bigotry of the leading journals of the day was so great that although they themselves reaped an easy harvest from the toil and suffering of their Freethought contemporary, they had not the grace to utter a word of good fellowship or rejoicing. But the Government had not even yet done with Mr Bradlaugh and the _National Reformer_. After allowing him some years' respite, an attack was directed against him from another quarter. In the autumn of 1872 the Postmaster-General, Mr Monsell, gave my father notice that the _National Reformer_ was to be deprived of the privilege of registration, notwithstanding that for the past nine years it had been registered for foreign transmission as a newspaper, and had been within the last five years prosecuted by both Tory and Whig Attorney-General as a newspaper. This notice was quite unexpected, and, as might be imagined, my father did not take it very kindly. Quite an unusual number of papers took up the cudgels in his defence. Most, of course, professed either a profound dislike of his personality, or ignorance of the contents of his journal, but they were thoroughly alarmed at the prospects opened up by this novel method of press censorship.