On the passage of the Bill for suppressing those foundations under £200 a year, in the spring of 1536, only a few months after the completion of the visitors’ _Comperta_, the Crown issued a commission to report on the number of professed inmates and their dependents, and the “conversation of their lives,” together with a statement as to the income, debts, and condition of the buildings. The commissioners were to be six in number for each district--three officials, namely, an auditor, the receiver for each county, and a clerk; whilst the remaining three were to be nominated by the Crown from “discreet persons” of the neighbourhood. The returns of these mixed commissions for the counties of Huntingdon, Leicester, Rutland, Sussex, and Warwick, with a condensed form for Lancashire, were known to exist when Dr. Gairdner issued the Calendar dealing with the documents of 1536. Some of the very houses against which Legh and Layton had breathed forth their pestilential tales were found by the second set of visitors--who were not Cromwell’s tools, but now that their suppression was resolved the Crown cared little or nothing whether the moral report was good or bad--to be “of good and virtuous conversation,” and the whole tone of the reports is for the most part so favourable that Dr. Gairdner remarks: “The country gentlemen who sat on the commission somehow came to a very different conclusion from that of Drs. Layton and Legh.” A few years after Dr. Gairdner had thus expressed himself, Abbot Gasquet came upon the reports of the mixed commissions relative to the religious houses of Gloucestershire (and city of Bristol), Hampshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Wilts, which had been misplaced. Those for Norfolk have been printed by Dr. Jessopp in the _Norfolk Miscellany_, those for Hampshire by Dr. Cox in Volume II of _Victoria County History of Hants._, and the whole of them by Dr. Gasquet in the _Dublin Review_ for April, 1894. Space forbids mentioning more than that house after house is named as “of good conversation,” “of good religious conversation,” “of honest conversation,” “of convenient conversation,” “of very good name and fame,” or “of virtuous living.” Occasional defaulters from a virtuous or orderly life are named, which make the generally favourable reports all the more valuable. The extant reports deal with 376 religious men and women; of this number only twenty-two men and three women are noted as not of good repute. The great relief that the houses were to the poor and distressed of the district is mentioned time after time by the commissioners, who were occasionally bold enough to beg for the continuance of a particular foundation.