There were perhaps others who cared for the College, who realised no less strongly than Miss Beale the advantage it would be to bring on to the Council those who were less interested in it as a local institution than as one of educational value for the country at large, but it was she who undoubtedly took the lead in the steps made to this end. In this she showed courage, for even those members of the Council who best understood her views hesitated to support them, fearing an abrupt change which would do more harm than good. They wrote to caution her:— ‘You must not expect men of Mr. Lowe’s mark to work on the C.L.C. Council; and you must not expect to see all go as you would wish at the meeting. You will find no member of Council but myself anxious to increase the powers of the Lady Principal, and probably they will not be much increased. And if you secure the majority of Council being non-local, which will be hard to secure, you will not secure their attendance at meetings held out of London. ‘And to get a satisfactory List to propose to Shareholders will be hard, for the best-known men in England will not join; and those who will join will not command votes largely; and so I advise moderation. I did my best at this last Council meeting to prepare the way for a “bloodless revolution” or quiet transition ... and I have seen Mr. Verrall. He is very friendly to you and to the College, and is a man of very good judgment as well as energy, and you are safe in talking or writing to him. For myself I feel less and less inclined to advise strong measures; and I do not see my way to getting the College on as broad a basis as I think it should stand on.... I advise you to think well and long before you get into an inextricable difficulty; and I think you will find your best friend and best support in one who for fifteen years (or nearly) has given much time and thought to the College, Mr. Brancker. ‘At the last Council meeting you showed great wisdom in accepting the adverse Resolution with equanimity.’ Differences of this kind pointed to a change of administration. As early as 1865, in her address at Bristol, Miss Beale had pointed out the difficulties besetting a school organised on the lines of Cheltenham:— ‘The machinery of proprietary colleges is somewhat complicated, and it is liable to get out of order. Thus, for example, if the shareholders agitate when a measure does not at once commend itself to their judgment, they may interfere with the efficiency, and endanger the existence of the institution. Secondly, none must attempt to carry out reforms in education, unless they have faith enough in their own system to work on quietly for a time, in the face of popular opposition, and unless they have a capital to fall back upon.’