To find contributors Miss Beale went even beyond the outer circle of the College. ‘We always hope to have some good writing in our Magazine, thus to maintain a high standard,’ she had said at the beginning. She liked to gain the notice of those who were eminent in literature or science for this dearly loved literary child, and as occasion brought her in contact with any who were distinguished for the things she appreciated she would send them the Magazine, often asking for a paper. Letters from people of widely differing thought and position, acknowledging the receipt of the Magazine, are now in the College archives. They vary in warmth and interest. The late Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol wrote in 1889: ‘However busy I may be, I always find time to read portions of [the Magazine], and I am always thankful to recognise not merely the cultivated, but the wise and—what we men specially value—the womanly tone that characterises it. I read with much interest your article on the Sorbonne gathering.’ Bishop Westcott in 1890 wrote, on receiving the number containing Miss Beale’s ‘In Memoriam’ article on Browning: ‘May I confess that when the copy of the Ladies’ College Magazine came this morning with the letters, my correspondence was at once interrupted? I felt constrained to read your words on Browning, just and wise and helpful and suggestive.’ Some notes are little more than the acknowledgment of a polite friend who had ‘already cut the pages.’ The request for contributions was not always granted; sometimes it was won by a little importunity. It brought about rather an amusing incident with Mr. Ruskin, whose letters on the subject and on some of Miss Beale’s own Magazine articles are too characteristic to be omitted. Miss Beale sent him the number containing her paper on ‘Britomart.’ He replied at once:— ‘_March 12, 1887._ ‘Have you not yet to add to your Britomart, at p. 219, due justification of Feminine—may we not rather call it Disguise—than Lie? And, for myself, may I say that I think Britomart should have sung to the Red Knight, not he to Britomart.—Ever faithfully yours, J. RUSKIN.’ Five days later he wrote:— ‘But I much more than like your essay on Britomart. ‘I am most thankful to have found the head of a Girls’ College able to do such a piece of work, and having such convictions and aspirations, and can only assure you how glad I shall be to find myself capable of aiding you in anything.... I trespass no further on you to-day, but have something to say concerning ball-play as a Britomartian exercise, before saying which, however, I will inquire of the Librarian what _ground_ spaces the College commands, being so limited in its bookshelves.—And believe me, ever your faithful servt., JOHN RUSKIN.’