In conclusion, the author remarks, that a knowledge of the check to population spoken of, and recommended by him, with other preventive means was for many years extensively disseminated in most of the populous towns in Great Britain; not only through the medium of “Every Woman’s Book,” but, previously to its publication, by hundreds of thousands of handbills, which were gratuitously distributed from benevolent motives. The men who were first instrumental in making them known in England, are all elderly men, fathers of families of children grown up to be men and women; men of unimpeachable integrity, and of first rate moral character; many of them men of science, and some of them known as the first political economists and philanthropists of the age. Besides the allusion to the subject already given from the Encyclopædia Britannica, it is adverted to in Mill’s “Elements of Political Economy;” in Place’s “Illustrations of the Principle of Population;” in Thompson’s “Distribution of Wealth,” and probably in other works with which I am unacquainted. It was also (disguisedly) broached in several English newspapers, and was preached in lectures to the labouring classes, by a most benevolent man, at Leeds. I do not believe the subject has ever been touched upon, in one single instance, except by men of irreproachable moral character, and generally of high standing in society. The chief difference between this little treatise, and the allusions made by the distinguished authors above mentioned, is, that what public opinion would only permit them to insinuate, I venture to say plainly. My readers may implicitly depend on the accuracy of the facts I have stated. Though in the present state of public opinion, I may not, for obvious reasons, give _names_ in proof, yet it is evident that I cannot have the shadow of a motive to mislead or deceive. I shall consider it a favour if any individuals who can adduce, _from personal experience_, facts connected with this subject, will communicate them to me. _Note._ The enlightened Condorcet, in his well-known “_Esquisse des progres de l’esprit human_,” very distinctly alludes to the safety and facility with which population might be restrained, “If reason should but keep pace with the arts and sciences, and if the idle prejudices of superstition should cease to shed over human morals an austerity corrupting and degrading, not purifying or elevated.” See his _Esquisse_, _pages_ 285 to 288, _Paris_ Ed. 1822. Malthus (See his “_Essays on Population_,” _Book_ 3, _chap._ 1) “professes not to understand” the French philosopher. No Frenchman could misunderstand him. CHAPTER VII. ADDITIONAL REMARKS.