The two brothers here are quite astounded at the importance which you and Charles attach to Lord Castlereagh's attack upon the Government of 1806-7, and still more at the influence which both of you seem disposed to give to it in your conduct on the impending motions in Parliament. In the first place, it is to be observed that it is not fair dealing to expect Castlereagh to forbear from attacking Lord Grey, Lord Lansdowne, and Mr. Tierney, on their hostility to the Queen fourteen years ago, because he cannot do so without including Lord Grenville, as well as Lord Spencer and Lord Erskine, as members of that Government. I think Lord C---- fully entitled to reproach that inconsistency of conduct to Lord Grey and his colleagues--an inconsistency which in no degree applies to Lord Grenville; but even if it did, surely Lord C---- is not to be deprived of his legitimate warfare upon those to whom he is opposed, because Lord Grenville was in those days politically connected with them. But even supposing that you had reason in this respect to complain of Lord C---- (which I utterly deny), still it would be a most unjustifiable, and unbecoming, and culpable course, to suffer any such personal considerations to influence your conduct upon the great public questions which are impending. Those questions are to decide whether the Opposition is to be suffered, from its base alliance with the Radicals and with the Q----, to take violent possession of the Government, in order to overturn the whole system of our constitution; to bring in annual or triennial Parliaments; to do little short of introducing universal suffrage; to disband the army, which now holds the Radicals in check; and, very probably, to let loose Bonaparte, under pretence of mitigating his confinement. These are some of the first fruits of what is to be expected from Lord Tavistock's motion, if, by its success, it removes the present Government; and can you look at any part of this picture, and yet suffer any personal considerations to weigh for one moment in your mind, while such superior considerations are at stake? I could have added much upon the disgrace you would throw on Lord Grenville, if he could be suspected, as he would, of being a party to so much personal irritation in questions of the very vital existence of the constitution of the country. But he writes himself. The next letter commences with a reference to the judgment passed by Judge Bailey on that popular leader, Sir Francis Burdett. It was merely a fine of L2000, and imprisonment for three months in the King's Bench:-- MR. CHARLES W. WYNN TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM. Whitehall, Feb. 10, 1821.