From L. Sulivan 3 February 1826

My dear Sir

I have to return you my best thanks for three letters and their enclosures which having travelled after Lord Palmerston have this moment reached my hands all together, and which I shall dispose of as quickly as possible.

The trouble taken on these lists is I assure you well [illeg.], for in a case like ours the complete elucidation of every individual vote is of much importance and may turn the election. Your information as I receive it puts me daily in the way of fresh channels of application or clears away the rubbish of names not on the boards as not having votes. I rejoice at your statement of Trinity inaccuracy because the same imperfection will have in a degree attached to the lists made use of by the other candidates. Unfortunately however they or at least Copley have a number of active men of all standings whose personal knowledge of men & their addresses supplies much that was wanting.

I am sorry C.J.Ellis is linked with Thomas Flower. Ellis who I had hoped was new to your lists and who since I last wrote has been a most active and useful member of our committee.

Let me particularly caution you against inferring that a man who votes for Copley is not worth persuing, unless you have clearly ascertained the second vote. I observe that in your statement to Lord P. of today you have down Perrott of Trin as adverse but I had his promise for Lord P. yesterday thru' a friend at Edinburgh

I remain Dear Sir

Yours very faithfully

Law Sulivan