If I felt that any one vote was likely to be lost to the general Catholic question in the event of the success of Canning's motion, I should be very much disposed to agree in your view of the impolicy of agitating it. But if there be a reasonable probability (as we have been told) that there are those who, adverse to a measure of general concession, would accede to this, I should anticipate a directly opposite result to what you expect. Supposing the Bill to be carried, or even to meet with an increased support in the House of Lords, upon neither of which points am I myself very sanguine, it could not fail to be a stepping-stone to further success. Independent of the immediate gain of six votes when they are most wanted, there are many who, having once voted for a motion of concession, though not intending to proceed further, would feel themselves drawn in, and perceive that they cannot maintain that if it be safe for a Roman Catholic to exercise the functions of the Peerage, he must necessarily overturn the Constitution if elected to the House of Commons or appointed a justice of the peace. Our adversaries are perfectly right when they say that no breach can be made in the present system without necessarily entailing the fall of the whole of it. I have, however, already told you that in my own opinion, this is so generally felt that there will be scarcely any difference in the division upon the particular and the general question. That it will be thought, as it is in fact, merely a new road to attain the same object. At the same time it is perfectly true, that by this means we get rid, or rather postpone, many of the difficult details which we have to encounter; and that the case of the Peers, who are deprived of a vested interest which they possessed without the slightest inconvenience to the public, long after the other Catholics were disabled from exercising their civil functions, is infinitely the strongest which exists.