William C. Langley, Newport, R. I., says: “While all would be benefited from reading it, I would especially commend it to those who, from inherited feebleness, or who, like myself, had declined deeply, feel the need of making the most of their limited powers. I may add, that this work bears evidence that the author has had wide range and extensive reading, together with a natural fitness for physiological and hygienic research, keen perception of natural law and tact in its application.”
Solomon Alexander, No. 252 East Fifty-second Street, New York, says: “I have been greatly benefited by Dr. Page’s treatment for inflammatory rheumatism and Bright’s disease, and am now steadily improving under his direction.” July 27, 1883. (Now well, November, 1883.)
Mrs. Dr. Densmore, 130 West 44th Street, New York, says: “You can judge of my opinion of ‘Natural Cure’ when I tell you that I am buying it of the publishers by the dozen to distribute among my patients.”
The Popular Science Monthly for September, 1883, says: “The author gives several remarkable examples of wonderful cures which he knows of having been effected by following the principles he lays down—principles which may be followed with profit, and the following of which may relieve many cases regarded as desperate; and he has given the public a most valuable manual of hygiene.”
The Atlantic Monthly for August, 1883, says: “An effort at impressing common-sense views of preserving and restoring health.”
Several hundreds of most flattering notices from secular and religious journals, on file at the publishers’ office, indicate how this work is being received by the public.
SPECIAL NOTE.
It is evident from the nature of the press notices of “The Natural Cure,” that the prefatorial request has been very generally complied with, and that not only have critics managed to obtain an understanding of the author’s position as regards the only certain means for physical improvement from low conditions, but they are disposed to sustain him in that position. Here and there one, however, as was to be expected, from ignorance of natural law, from personal preferences or notions, from faith in the old way (which has so long been on trial and so signally failed), has failed to comprehend the matter. Diving into the middle of the book, selecting some chapter or paragraph which forbids a consumptive or any frail patient, while doing nothing, to eat like a woodchopper or a railroad hand, and especially warns such from eating worse kinds of food than the man of mighty strength who might, through the influence of active outdoor pursuits, get rid of considerable coffee, pie, cakes, pickles, etc., and (providing his diet included plenty of coarse food) even thrive in spite of a good deal of such material (for we know that many indoor loafers, even, are too tough to be speedily killed by such a diet)—carping critics, we mean to say, selecting some special paragraph have held the advice up as “too radical in theory.” But no person of sound mind can read this book through with even a fair degree of care, and not learn that its chief aim is to teach people who are now starving, or who are at best poorly nutrified, and, next to these, the well ones who mean to keep on the safe side, the way to live in order to be well nourished and free from the pains, aches, and sicknesses which cover the land with wrecks of human beings—dying—who might better live in clean, sound, and easy bodies.