I am naturally desirous of ascertaining, by the only mode of communication which seems open to me, your general opinion and sentiments as to the outline of the course we ought to shape in the stormy debates we shall probably have so speedily to encounter. Our situation as a party appears to be more critical than it has ever been. The Ministers have conducted themselves with great imbecility and indecision, and the Opposition have distinguished themselves by their violence and intemperance; and under these circumstances we are looked upon as a rallying point between the two extremes, and our opinion is very anxiously looked for by many persons who wish, if they can, to make it the guide of their conduct. It seems to me, therefore, very desirable to consider, as much as we can before-hand, any of the questions on which we may be called upon to give an opinion. The two first points expected to be brought forward are the Liturgy and the Palace. With respect to the Liturgy, I am strongly inclined to think, upon an examination of the subject (for at first I had considerable doubt upon it), that the King has the right to do as he has done; and though I do not think his exercise of the right discreet or advisable under the circumstances, still if he had the right, I should not be disposed to hold that the Queen's name ought _now_ to be placed in the Liturgy. The general opinion of lawyers is, I think, unfavourable to the King's claim; but then, perhaps, that opinion is frequently given without any examination of the subject. On the Palace, I feel no difficulties. If we are to allow her--as I understand it is to be proposed that we shall--L50,000 per annum, she may well afford to pay rent for her habitation. Questions may be expected to be raised also as to the policy of Government in bringing forward any measure against the Queen, and as to their mode of conducting it when brought forward. On both of these points it appears to me that much blame is imputable to the Ministers; but these are questions which cannot be brought forward substantively for some days at least, and therefore I trust I shall have an opportunity of discussing them with you before any occasion can arise on which we may be called upon to give any opinion respecting them. The Address, I suppose, will be such as not necessarily to compromise those who vote for it to any opinion as to the wisdom of Ministers; but I think, however bad, in point of tactics in general, it may be to propose an amendment, that, under existing circumstances, an amendment must be moved. The query then is, whether we should explain our vote? and if we do, what should be the nature of that explanation?