“You will have heard the reason for my being here, so I will not repeat the history of my ailment. I am, through Divine mercy, much better, but this enfeebling climate is not favourable to the recovery of strength, especially at the age of forty-six. You accuse me of writing despondingly, I am not aware of any such feeling; though sickness induces reflection, and ‘it is a serious thing to die.’ Although my faith in the Redeemer is unshaken, and affords at times strong consolation, yet the presence of sin often clouds the view. But I will not fill my paper with such reflections. “On the death of the Archdeacon about two months after that of the Bishop, Parson and I were appointed Ecclesiastical Commissioners. The Archdeacon of Bombay remonstrated against our appointment, and some of the Chaplains have acted without reference to us. We have gone on quietly; as in fact, there is little for us to do officially; and I should not wonder to see in some of the high church Reviews, (if opportunity offer) accusations of neglect. The fact is, the Bishop has no authority whatever beyond what his personal character may procure him. The late Bishop laboured all his Indian life, to establish an authority independent of the local Government. This was resisted covertly by the Government, and was felt to be a grievance by the Chaplains. I rejoice greatly in Mr. Heber’s appointment, and trust it is a token for good to the established church in India. Nothing short of annihilation as a society, will be refused him by the Church Missionary Society in Calcutta; and in truth, everything short of a separate existence for it, was repeatedly offered to the late Bishop. “I should not have entered on this subject, except to tell you how in the providence of God, I have been affected by events.”