One thing is clear; we cannot permit Russia, as a belligerent, to defeat the objects of the Treaty of London, and yet act with her under that treaty. _April 2._ Second reading Catholic Relief Bill. The Duke made a very bad speech. The Archbishop of Canterbury drivelled. The Primate of Ireland made a strong speech, his manner admirable. Both these against. The Bishop of Oxford had placed himself at our disposal to be used when wanted. We put him into the debate here, wanting him very much. The first part of his speech was very indifferent, the latter excellent. Lord Lansdowne spoke better than he has done for some time, indeed for two years. The Bishop of London against us; but he made a speech more useful than ten votes, in admirable taste, looking to the measure as one to be certainly accomplished, &c. The Duke of Richmond spoke very shortly, but better than he has ever done, in reply. We adjourned at 1. 229 members in the House. Room for thirty more; the House not oppressively hot; numbers of women. The tone of the debate temperate. _April 3._ A speech from the Bishop of Durham, full of fallacies and extravagant, but having its effect. The Chancellor spoke admirably, endeavouring to bring up Eldon, but the old man would not move. He wanted more time to consider his answer, by which he will not improve it. A speech from Goderich, very animated in his way, and very heavy. The House did not cheer him once. He pressed himself upon it with bad taste. He spoke upon all the collateral and unimportant points. He swung his arm about like a boy throwing a stone from a sling. Lord Mansfield spoke, sleepily and ill-naturedly. I was exhausted, and could not have answered him, had he said anything worth answering. We adjourned at two till one to-morrow. _April 4._ House at 1. A long absurd speech from Lord Guildford, which must have given much pain to Lady Ch. Lindsay, who sat under the throne, and who must have been much annoyed at seeing to what her family had fallen. We had then Lord Lilford, who rested too much on his notes, but who has a good manner. He drew his points well, and spoke like a man, not like a boy. Lord Tenterden was not powerful. Lord Grey spoke better than he has done since 1827. He made a speech too long, and indeed the last half-hour was of no use. He beat the brains out of the Coronation Oath, as an obstacle to Catholic Concession, and read a curious letter of Lord Yestor to Lord Tweddale, dated April, 1689, before William III. took the Coronation Oath, in which Lord Tester mentions that it was understood that the king had in council declared his understanding of the sense of the Coronation Oath-- that it bound him in his executive capacity, not in his legislative. Lord Westmoreland made an odd, entertaining from its manner, and really very good speech. He supported the Bill.