At this time also I met George Bernard Shaw, one of the most brilliant of Socialist writers and most provoking of men; a man with a perfect genius for “aggravating” the enthusiastically earnest, and with a passion for representing himself as a scoundrel.  On my first experience of him on the platform at South Place Institute he described himself as a “loafer,” and I gave an angry snarl at him in the Reformer, for a loafer was my detestation, and behold!  I found that he was very poor, because he was a writer with principles and preferred starving his body to starving his conscience; that he gave time and earnest work to the spreading of Socialism, spending night after night in workmen’s clubs; and that “a loafer” was only an amiable way of describing himself because he did not carry a hod.  Of course I had to apologise for my sharp criticism as doing him a serious injustice, but privately felt somewhat injured at having been entrapped into such a blunder.  Meanwhile I was more and more turning aside from politics and devoting myself to the social condition of the people I find myself, in June, protesting against Sir John Lubbock’s Bill which fixed a twelve-hour day as the limit of a “young person’s” toil.  “A ‘day’ of twelve hours is brutal,” I wrote; “if the law fixes twelve hours as a ‘fair day’ that law will largely govern custom.  I declare that a ‘legal day’ should be eight hours on five days in the week and not more than five hours on the sixth.  If the labour is of an exhausting character these hours are too long.”  On every side now the Socialist controversy grew, and I listened, read, and thought much, but said little.  The inclusion of John Robertson in the staff of the Reformer brought a highly intellectual Socialist into closer touch with us, and slowly I found that the case for Socialism was intellectually complete and ethically beautiful.  The trend of my thought was shown by urging the feeding of Board School children, breaking down under the combination of education and starvation, and I asked, “Why should people be pauperised by a rate-supported meal, and not pauperised by, state-supported police, drainage, road-mending, street-lighting, &c?  “Socialism in its splendid ideal appealed to my heart, while the economic soundness of its basis convinced my head.  All my life was turned towards the progress of the people, the helping of man, and it leaped forward to meet the stronger hope, the lofty ideal of social brotherhood, the rendering possible to all of freer life; so long had I been striving thitherward, and here there opened up a path to the yearned-for goal!  How strong were the feelings surging in my heart may be seen in a brief extract from an article published second week of January, 1885:  “Christian charity?  We know its work.  It gives a hundred-weight of coal and five pounds of beef once a year to a family whose head could earn a hundred such doles if Christian justice allowed him fair wage for the work he performs.