I feel, indeed, much indebted to your Lordship for your letter of the 11th inst., and we are all grateful to you for your criticisms on the Bills; and this I should have told you before, but that I was entirely occupied by professional business throughout yesterday morning, and, besides, I wished to consult with Lord Grenville (with whom I was engaged to dine yesterday) as to the policy of some of the amendments you have suggested. Some are obviously improvements on the face of them. The difficulty, as I foresaw, arises as to the insertion of the additional words to express, "That no one shall exercise the function of a bishop who shall not have been approved by the King." We discussed this point fully last night, and Lord Grenville is decidedly of opinion (and this he desired me to mention to you, as from him) that if we venture upon it we shall _shipwreck_ the whole measure. By having the negative of the King to the nomination of any person whose loyalty and good conduct may be suspected, we surely have, in substance and effect, all the security which can be necessary for the protection of the Protestant establishment; and it would be a sad pity to hazard a measure which, to a certain extent, at least, is happily advanced, for the sake of expressions, preferable certainly, but not essential for our security. I have been with Plunket on the subject this morning, and his view coincides with Lord Grenville's entirely. He says it would be laid hold of immediately by the enemies to the measure amongst the Catholics, and made the source of much discontent and irritation, and that the rather because the Bill has been transmitted to them in its present shape, as the measure to be proposed on this branch of the subject. I should add, that Plunket expressed the greatest anxiety to concur in any suggestion which came from you.