In June, 1858, she wrote the first letter, which lies before me, to her relative, Mr. Henry Reeve, the editor of the _Edinburgh Review_. In this, after telling him that she never before has offered or wished to write for that _Review_, because in politics she had generally disagreed with it (to her, it may be remarked in passing, Toryism was less odious than official Whigism), she says that she has now a subject in view which she thinks would be suitable for the pages of the good old Whig organ. Before entering into details, she begs him to tell her frankly if any article will be refused merely because it comes from her. She adds that her health is so sunk and her life so precarious, that all her engagements have to be made with an explanation of the chances against their fulfillment; still she _does_ write a good deal, and with higher success than in her younger days. Mr. Reeve replied cordially inviting her contributions, and the result was the establishment both of an intimate correspondence with him, and of a relationship with the _Review_ under his charge, which lasted until she could write no more. The particular subject which she offered Mr. Reeve at first did not seem to him a suitable one. The title of it was to have been _French Invasion Panics_; but as Mr. Reeve did not like the idea, the paper was not written. But for the _Edinburgh_ of April, 1859, she wrote a long article on _Female Industry_, which attracted much attention. Its purpose was to show how greatly the conditions of women's lives are altered in this century from what they were of old. "A very large proportion of the women of England earn their own bread; and there is no saying how much good may be done by a timely recognition of this simple truth. A social organization framed for a community of which half stayed at home while the other half went out to work, cannot answer the purposes of a society of which a quarter remains at home while three-quarters go out to work." After considering in detail, with equal benevolence and wisdom, the condition of the various classes of women workers--those employed in agriculture, mines, fishing, domestic service, needlework, and shop-keeping, and suggesting, in passing, the schools of cookery which have since become established facts, the article concludes: "The tale is plain enough. So far from our countrywomen being all maintained as a matter of fact by us, the 'bread-winners,' three millions out of six of adult English women work for subsistence, and two out of the three in independence. With this new condition of affairs new duties and new views must be adopted. Old obstructions must be removed; and the aim must be set before us, as a nation as well as in private life, to provide for the free development and full use of the powers of every member of the community." It scarcely needs to be pointed out that here she went quietly but surely to the foundation of that whole class of new claims