Editor’s NoteEditor’s Note965To Archbishop Markham9 June 1794 (Aet 46)

My Lord

I had had the satisfaction of hearing more than once from Mr pg 35Long of the Treasury as also from Mr Dundas who spoke in terms of eulogium of the liberality displayed by his Lordship on that [the] occasion that Lord Spencer had declared he should give no opposition to the Penitentiary House Bill. Your Grace will thence judge of my surprize at learning from the public prints that on Thursday last the Bill being at its last stage an order [was made] at his Lordship's instance for the printing of the Bill, an operation altogether useless but for the purpose of opposing it: which shows that on one side or other some misconception must have taken place. As Mr Hastings's trial renders your Grace, as I understand a pretty constant attendant at the House, and on which occasion your Grace would naturally hear something on that subject from his Lordship, it has been suggested to me by some friends of mine who have the honour to be numbered among those of your Grace.² Recalling to mind at this moment of alarm the kind assurances your Grace was pleased to give me, it occurred to /me/ some friends of mine who have the honour of being numbered among those of your Grace /that after such a lapse of time/ that it might be /after an interval of such length as easily to admitt in the course of such a business of this sort might easily have escaped out of any one's remembrance/ agreable to your Grace /not only/ to be reminded not only with the general tenor of those assurances but with the very words to save discussions and to serve as a short answer upon occasion to any thing that might be urged on the other side. I have the honour to be with all respect.

• My Lord Your Graces most obedient
• and much obliged humble servt

J.B.                

The Paper which I take the liberty of inclosing³ was drawn up for the purpose of encountering, had it been found necessary, an opposition which manifested itself in some degree in the Lower House.