_Hatchford, December 21st._--On Monday when I came to town from Goodwood, where I went on Sunday, I found a letter from Lady Palmerston, very friendly indeed. She said her son William had told her what I had said to him about Palmerston and his resignation, which had gratified her. She then went on to explain why he had resigned, and why at this moment instead of waiting longer; she said he would have accepted a Reform Bill, but wanted Lord John's to be altered, had proposed alterations, and written to Aberdeen to urge them, and upon Aberdeen's reply that his suggestions could not be taken, he had no alternative but to resign, and he had thought it fairer to the Government to do so at once, and give them time to make their arrangements, than to put it off till the last moment, when Parliament was on the point of meeting. I confess I think he was right in so doing, and I was greatly provoked with the 'Times' for attacking him, twitting and sneering at him, and finding fault with him for his desertion; so provoked that I wrote a letter to the 'Times,' which appeared on Tuesday, with my opinion thereupon. On Tuesday morning I was surprised at receiving a letter from Lord Lansdowne, entreating I would tell him what was said, and what was the state of public opinion about Palmerston's resignation, giving me to understand that he was as yet undecided what course he should adopt, and should not decide at all events till he had seen the Queen next Friday; he also said that he had been greatly surprised at this happening '_so soon_, whatever might have been the case later, having occurred (marvellous to say) before there had been any decision taken by the Government as such on the whole matter, or any ground for me at least to think that issue would be joined upon it without that apparently essential preliminary.' I wrote to him in reply all I had heard of the reports and notions floating about, and said I hoped his determination would eventually be not to withdraw, and I sent him Lady Palmerston's letter to me, which I said seemed to me somewhat at variance with his statement, in as much as Palmerston evidently considered that the matter was settled. I don't understand, however, why he wrote to Aberdeen, if the question was still before the Cabinet, and not yet definitively settled. Assuming Lord Lansdowne's statement to have been correct, Palmerston ought to have disputed the matter in the Cabinet, and if overruled there, he might have resigned, and not till then.