[Footnote 25: On the 4th of December the matter came before the Cabinet. No formal resolution was adopted, but regret was expressed at Palmerston's want of caution in not ascertaining in advance the tenor of the addresses, and in admitting unreliable reporters.]



[Pageheading: DEATH OF KING OF HANOVER]

Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 21st November 1851.

The Queen has just received Lord Palmerston's letter with the Memorandum relative to the mourning of her Uncle, the late King of Hanover,[26] and she has to say in reply that she thinks the mourning ought not to be for a Foreign Sovereign but for a Prince of the Blood Royal, which was the nearest relation in which he stood to the Throne.

[Footnote 26: King Ernest died on the 18th of November, aged eighty, and was succeeded by his son, King George V., who reigned till 1866, and died in 1878.]



Queen Victoria to the King of Hanover.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 21st November 1851.

MY DEAR GEORGE,—Your kind letter of the 18th, announcing to me the melancholy news of the death of your Father, was given to me yesterday by Mr Somerset, and I hasten to express to you in both our names our sincere and heartfelt condolence, and beg you to do so in our names to our dear Cousin Mary.[27]

It must be a consolation to you that the end of the King was peaceful and so free from pain and suffering. Most truly do I enter into your feelings as to the responsible position into which you are now placed, and my best wishes for your welfare and happiness as well as that of Hanover will ever accompany you. I am happy to hear from Mr Somerset that you were well, as well as your dear Mary and dear children.

Albert desires me to say everything kind from him to you as well as to our cousins, and with every possible good wish for your health and prosperity, believe me always, my dear George, your very affectionate Cousin,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 27: Princess Mary of Saxe-Altenburg (1818-1907), wife of King George V. of Hanover.]



Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.

CARLTON GARDENS, 22nd November 1851.

Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty and has taken the proper steps according to your Majesty's commands, about the mourning for the late King of Hanover; and he would wish to know whether it is your Majesty's desire that he should have letters prepared for your Majesty's signature, announcing to Foreign Sovereigns the decease of the late King.



Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.

OSBORNE, 22nd November 1851.

The Queen has just received Lord Palmerston's letter.

The Queen does not think it necessary for her to announce the King of Hanover's death to other Sovereigns, as there is a head of that branch of her Family who would have to do so. She declared the present King's marriage in Council, but she does not think that she announced it. This Lord Palmerston would perhaps be able to ascertain at the Office.



[Pageheading: THE REFORM QUESTION]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

OSBORNE, 3rd December 1851.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of the 30th ult., and has carefully considered his Memorandum on the report of the Committee of the Cabinet; she now returns Sir Charles Wood's Memorandum.

Considering the question of Reform under its two bearings—on the Franchise and on the Suffrage—the Queen thinks the proposal of merely adding neighbouring towns to the small boroughs an improvement on the original plan, which contemplated the taking away of members from some boroughs, and giving them to others. Thus the animosity may be hoped to be avoided which an attack upon vested interests could not have failed to have produced. Much will depend, however, upon the completeness, fairness, and impartiality with which the selection of the towns will be made which are to be admitted into the electoral district of others. Sir Charles Wood's Memorandum being only a sketch, the Queen hopes to see a more complete list, stating the principle also upon which the selection is made.

With regard to the Suffrage, the proposals of the Committee appear to the Queen to be framed with a due regard to the importance of not giving an undue proportion of weight to the Democracy. In the Queen's opinion, the chief question to consider will be whether the strengthening of the Democratic principle will upset the balance of Constitution, and further weaken the Executive, which is by no means too strong at present. The Queen is well aware of the difficulty of forming a correct estimate beforehand of the moral effect which such extensive changes may produce, but thinks that they cannot even be guessed at before the numerical results are accurately ascertained; she hopes therefore that the statistics will be soon in a state to be laid before her.

The Queen regrets that the idea of reviving the Guilds had to be abandoned, but can quite understand the difficulty which would have been added to the measure by its being clogged with such an additional innovation.



Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

OSBORNE, 2nd December 1851.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—Accept my best thanks for your kind letter of the 28th. I am truly grieved to hear that you have got so bad a cold; nothing is more trying and annoying than those heavy colds, which render all occupation irksome and trying in the highest degree. I hope that it will soon be past.

It is a great pity that you do not venture to come to us, as I am sure you might do it easily. I do not think that there will be any outburst yet awhile in France....

I am rather unhappy about dear Uncle Mensdorff, who, I hear, has arrived at Vienna with gout in his head. I hope, however, soon to hear of his being much better....



[Pageheading: THE COUP D'ETAT]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

OSBORNE, 4th December 1851.

DEAREST UNCLE,—I must write a line to ask what you say to the wonderful proceedings at Paris, which really seem like a story in a book or a play! What is to be the result of it all?[28]

I feel ashamed to have written so positively a few hours before that nothing would happen.

We are anxiously waiting for to-day's news—though I should hope that the Troops were to be depended upon, and order for the present would prevail. I hope that none of the Orleans Family will move a limb or say a word, but remain perfectly passive.

I must now conclude. Ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 28: On the 2nd of December, Louis Napoleon seized the Government of France, arrested his chief opponents, put an end to the National Assembly and Council of State, and declared Paris in a state of siege.]



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

OSBORNE, 4th December 1851.

The Queen has learnt with surprise and concern the events which have taken place at Paris.[29] She thinks it is of great importance that Lord Normanby should be instructed to remain entirely passive, and to take no part whatever in what is passing. Any word from him might be misconstrued at such a moment.

[Footnote 29: On the 3rd the tidings of the coup d'etat reached London. Count Walewski announced it to Lord Palmerston, who expressed his approval of it, and wrote to Lord Normanby the letter printed in his Life, disavowing surprise that the President had struck the blow when he did, "for it is now well known here that the Duchess of Orleans was preparing to be called to Paris this week with her younger son to commence a new period of Orleans dynasty."]



Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

DOWNING STREET, 4th December 1851. (6 P.M.)

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. Your Majesty's directions respecting the state of affairs in Paris shall be followed. Lord Normanby[30] has asked whether he should suspend his diplomatic functions; but the Cabinet were unanimously of opinion that he should not do so.

The result is very uncertain; at present the power is likely to rest in the Army, to whose memory of victories and defeats the President has so strongly appealed.

[Footnote 30: Lord Normanby, having applied for instructions as to his future conduct, was desired to make no change in his relations with the French Government, and to abstain from even the appearance of interference in her internal affairs. Having made a communication to this effect to M. Turgot, the latter replied that M. Walewski had notified to him that Lord Palmerston had already expressed to him his "entire approbation of the act of the President," and his "conviction that he could not have acted otherwise."]



[Pageheading: LOUIS NAPOLEON]

The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.

LAEKEN, 5th December 1851.

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,—Receive my best thanks for your dear gracious letter of the 2nd, the date of the battle of Austerlitz, and the coup d'etat at Paris. What do you say to it?

As yet one cannot form an opinion, but I am inclined to think that Louis Bonaparte will succeed. The country is tired and wish quiet, and if they get it by this coup d'etat they will have no objection, and let le Gouvernement Parlementaire et Constitutionnel go to sleep for a while.

I suspect that the great Continental powers will see a military Government at Paris with pleasure; they go rather far in their hatred of everything Parliamentary. The President takes a little of Napoleon already. I understand that he expressed himself displeased, as if I had too much supported the Orleans Family. I render perfect justice to the President, that hitherto he has not plagued us; but we have also abstained from all interference. I think that Helene has been imprudent; besides, it is difficult for the poor Family to avoid to speak on these subjects or to express themselves with mildness.

If something like an Empire establishes itself, perhaps we shall for a time have much to suffer, as the gloire francaise invariably looks to the old frontiers. My hope is that they will necessarily have much to do at home, for a time, as parties will run high.... Your devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

OSBORNE, 6th December 1851.

The Queen has to acknowledge Lord John Russell's letter of yesterday. She is glad to hear that the Cabinet occupy themselves assiduously with the Reform Question, but hopes that they will not come to a final decision without having first ascertained how the proposed plan will operate when practically applied to the present state of the Franchise and Suffrage. The Queen is very anxious to arrive at a definite opinion on this subject herself.

The Queen sees from the Manchester Speeches that the Ballot is to be made the stalking-horse of the Radicals.



[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON'S LETTERS]

The Marchioness of Normanby to Colonel Phipps.

PARIS, 7th December 1851.

MY DEAR CHARLES,—I have an opportunity of writing to you not through the Foreign Office, which I shall take advantage of, as at present the Post is not to be trusted, and I am afraid I do not think the Office is either.

Palmerston has taken lately to writing in the most extraordinary manner to Normanby.[31] I think he wants to fix a quarrel with him, which you may be sure Normanby will avoid at present, as it would have the worst possible effect; but I do not understand it at all, and I wish you could in any way explain what it means. Palmerston seems very angry because Normanby does not unqualifyingly approve of this step here, and the results; the whole thing is so completely a coup d'etat, and all the proceedings are so contrary to and devoid of law and justice and security, that even the most violent Tory would be staggered by them. (For instance, to-day all the English papers, even Normanby's, are stopped and prohibited; they will of course allow Normanby's to come, but it is to be under an envelope), and yet Palmerston, who quarrels with all Europe about a political adventurer like Kossuth, because he was defending the liberties and constitution of his country, now tries to quarrel with Normanby, and really writes in the most impertinent manner, because Normanby's despatches are not sufficiently in praise of Louis Napoleon and his coup d'etat. There must be some dessous des cartes that we are not aware of. Normanby has always said, having been undertaken, the only thing now is to hope and pray it may be successful; but that is another thing to approving the way it was begun, or the way it has been carried out. The bloodshed has been dreadful and indiscriminate, no quarter was shown, and when an insurgent took refuge in a house, the soldiers killed every one in the house, whether engaged in the emeute or not.... It is very doubtful whether Normanby will be able to go on with [Palmerston] if this sort of thing continues, for he talks of "I hear this" and "I am told that," with reference to Normanby's conduct here, which no man in his position can stand, as, if Palmerston takes the on-dits of others, and not Normanby's own accounts, there is an end of confidence; but I must say his last letter appears to me a sort of exuberance of anger, which spends itself on many subjects rather than the one which first caused it, and therefore I suspect he has received some rap on the knuckles at home, which he resents here, or on the first person who is not of the same opinion as himself; but it is a curious anomaly that he should quarrel with Normanby in support of arbitrary and absolute Government. All is quiet here now, and will, I hope, continue so till the Elections, when I suppose we may have some more emeutes....

They have been told at the Clubs that they may meet, but they are not to talk politics. In short, I do not suppose that despotism ever reached such a pitch.... You may suppose what the French feel; it serves them all quite right, but that does not prevent one's feeling indignant at it. And this is what Palmerston is now supporting without restriction. We are entirely without any other news from England from any one. Would you not send me or Normanby a letter through Rothschild? I am rather anxious to know whether this is a general feeling in England; it could not be, if they know all that had happened here. Mind, I can quite understand the policy of keeping well with Louis Napoleon, and Normanby is so, and has never expressed to any one a hostile opinion except in his despatches and private letters to Palmerston.... I shall send this by a private hand, not to run the risk of its being read. Ever yours affectionately,

M. NORMANBY.

[Footnote 31: On the 6th, Lord Palmerston wrote to Lord Normanby the strange letter printed by Mr Evelyn Ashley in the Life, censuring Lord Normanby's supposed hostility to the French President; Lord Normanby in reply defended his attitude, and asked for an explicit statement as to the Foreign Secretary's approval or otherwise of the conduct and policy of the President.]



[Pageheading: AFFAIRS IN FRANCE]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

OSBORNE, 9th December 1851.

DEAREST UNCLE,—Your kind letter of the 5th reached me on Sunday morning. Much blood has been shed since you wrote....

What you say about arbitrary and military Government in France is very true, and I daresay will do for a time; but I do not know how Louis Napoleon is to proceed, or how he will get over the anger and enmity of those he imprisoned. Still, I see that the Legitimists have all given in their adhesion. Every one in France and elsewhere must wish order, and many therefore rally round the President.

A most extraordinary report was mentioned to me yesterday, which, however, I never could believe, and which is besides physically impossible, from the illness of the one and the absence of the other, viz. that Joinville and Aumale had gone or were going to Lille to put themselves at the head of the troops,[32] which would be a terrible and a very unwise thing. It would be very awkward for you too.

I must now conclude, hoping soon to hear from you. You should urge the poor Orleans family to be very prudent in what they say about passing events, as I believe Louis Napoleon is very sore on the subject, and matters might get still worse. Ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 32: Mr Borthwick, of the Morning Post, had so stated to Lord Palmerston on the authority of General de Rumigny; seven years later Palmerston wrote the Memorandum on the subject printed in his Life.]



[Pageheading: PALMERSTON AND NORMANBY]

[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON'S INSTRUCTIONS]

[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON'S APPROVAL]

The Marchioness of Normanby to Colonel Phipps.[33]

PARIS, 9th December 1851.

MY DEAREST CHARLES,—I had written a long letter to the Queen, and upon second thoughts I have burnt it, because events have now become so serious between Normanby and Palmerston that I do not think that I should be the person to inform Her Majesty of it, in case anything was to be said upon the subject in Parliament. And yet as the affront has been given in Palmerston's private letters, I feel sure she does not know it. You have all probably seen Normanby's public despatches, in which, though as an Englishman he deprecates and deplores the means employed and the pledges broken—in short, the unconstitutional illegality of the whole coup d'etat—yet he always says, seeing now no other refuge from Rouge ascendency, he hopes it may succeed. One would have supposed, from the whole tenor of his policy, from his Radical tendencies, and all that he has been doing lately, that Palmerston would have been the last person to approve of this coup d'etat. Not a bit! He turns upon Normanby in the most flippant manner; almost accuses him of a concealed knowledge of an Orleanist plot—never whispered here, nor I believe, even imagined by the Government of Paris, who would have been too glad to seize upon it as an excuse; says he compromises the relations of the country by his evident disapproval of Louis Napoleon—in short, it is a letter that Morny might have written, and that it is quite impossible for Normanby to bear. The curious thing is that it is a letter or rather letters that would completely ruin Palmerston with his Party. He treats all the acts of the wholesale cruelties of the troops as a joke—in short, it is the letter of a man half mad, I think, for to quarrel with Normanby on this subject is cutting his own throat.... He has written also to Lord John. Louis Napoleon knows perfectly well that Normanby cannot approve the means he has taken; he talks to him confidentially, and treats him as an honest, upright man, and he never showed him more attention, or friendship even than last night when we were at the Elysee, though Normanby said not one word in approval....

There is another question upon which Normanby has a right to complain, which is, that two days before Palmerston sent his instructions here, he expressed to Walewski his complete approval of the step taken by Louis Napoleon, which was transmitted by Walewski in a despatch to Turgot, and read by him to many members of the Corps Diplomatique a day before Normanby heard a word from Palmerston. You will perhaps think that there is not enough in all this to authorise the grave step Normanby has taken, but the whole tone of his letters shows such a want of confidence, is so impertinent—talk of "we hear this," and "we are told that,"—bringing a sort of anonymous gossip against a man of Normanby's character and standing, that respect for himself obliges Normanby to take it up seriously.... In the meantime our Press in England is, as usual, too violent against Louis Napoleon. We have no friends or true allies left, thanks to the policy of Lord Palmerston; as soon as the peace of the country is restored the Army must be employed; it is the course of a Military Government; as much as an absolute Government is destroyed by the people, and the democracy again, when fallen into anarchy, is followed by Military Government. Louis Napoleon must maintain his position by acts: they will find out that Belgium should belong to France, or Alsace, or Antwerp, or something or other that England will not be able to allow, and then how are we prepared for the consequences?...

The more I think of Palmerston's letters, the less I can understand them; every sentence is in direct contradiction to his acts and words. He ridicules the idea of the Constitution; turns to scorn the idea of anything being due to the Members of the Assembly; laughs and jokes at the Club being fired into, though the English people in it were within an ace of being murdered by the soldiers; says that Normanby is pathetic over a broken looking-glass,[34] forgetting that the same bullet grazed the hand of an Englishman, "a Roman citizen!" who was between the window and the glass—in short, as I said before, he is quite incomprehensible, except, as I cannot help thinking, he read the private letter Normanby wrote to the Duke of Bedford upon the Kossuth business, wishing to take his advice a little upon a grave question, but which did not actually interfere with his position here. This would account for his extreme irritation....

All at present is quiet in Paris. There are Socialist risings in many parts of the country, but all these will do the President good, and strengthen his hands, for even the people who have been treated with indignity will pardon him if their chateaux are saved from an infuriated and brutal peasantry. The President told Normanby last night that the accounts of the cruelties and attacks in parts of the country were very serious, but he hoped they would soon be put down....

M. NORMANBY.[35]

[Footnote 33: Submitted to the Queen by Colonel Phipps.]

[Footnote 34: The tone of Lord Palmerston's private letters to Lord Normanby at this time is best illustrated by the following extract:—

"Your despatches since the event of Tuesday have been all hostile to Louis Napoleon, with very little information as to events. One of them consisted of a dissertation about Kossuth, which would have made a good article in the Times a fortnight ago: and another dwells chiefly on a looking-glass broken in a Club-house; and you are pathetic about a piece of broken plaster brought down from a ceiling by musket-shots during the street fights. Now we know that the Diplomatic Agents of Austria and Russia called on the President immediately after his measure on Tuesday morning, and have been profuse in their expressions of approval of his conduct."]

[Footnote 35: Lady Normanby wrote later:—

"I told you yesterday the President had no faith in him (Palmerston). The Treaty signed with Buenos Ayres, the Greek business, and the reception of Kossuth had long destroyed his confidence in Palmerston, and I believe he hates him and sees through his present adulations...."]



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

OSBORNE, 13th December 1851.

The Queen sends the enclosed despatch from Lord Normanby to Lord John Russell, from which it appears that the French Government pretend to have received the entire approval of the late coup d'etat by the British Government, as conveyed by Lord Palmerston to Count Walewski. The Queen cannot believe in the truth of the assertion, as such an approval given by Lord Palmerston would have been in complete contradiction to the line of strict neutrality and passiveness which the Queen had expressed her desire to see followed with regard to the late convulsion at Paris, and which was approved by the Cabinet, as stated in Lord John Russell's letter of the 6th inst. Does Lord John know anything about the alleged approval, which, if true, would again expose the honesty and dignity of the Queen's Government in the eyes of the world?[36]

[Footnote 36: On the 15th, Lord Normanby wrote to Lord Palmerston that he must now assume M. Walewski's report to be correct, and observed that if the Foreign Secretary held one language in Downing Street and prescribed another course to the British Ambassador, the latter must be awkwardly circumstanced. Lord Palmerston (in a letter not shown to the Queen or the Cabinet) replied that he had said nothing inconsistent with his instructions to Lord Normanby, that the President's action was for the French nation to judge of, but that in his view that action made for the maintenance of social order in France.]



Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

OSBORNE, 13th December 1851.

MY BELOVED UNCLE,—These lines are to express my very warmest wishes for many, many happy returns of your dear birthday, and for every earthly blessing you can desire. How I wish you could spend it here, or we with you! I venture to send you some trifles which will recall the Exhibition in which you took so much interest. The continuation of the work I send you, I shall forward as it comes out.

As I wrote so lately, and shall do so on Tuesday, I will not touch on politics—with one exception—that I think it of high importance that the Orleans should clear themselves of all suspicion of a plot, which some people, I am sure, wish to make it appear they are involved in; and that public contradiction should be given to the foolish report, much credited here, that Joinville has gone to Lille, or to some part of France, to head the Troops. Ever your devoted Niece and Child,

VICTORIA R.

How you will again miss your departed Angel!



[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON'S EXPLANATION]

Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

WOBURN ABBEY, 18th December 1851.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He received from Lord Palmerston yesterday an explanation of his declaration of opinion to Mr Walewski, which Lord John Russell regrets to state was quite unsatisfactory.

He thought himself compelled to write to Lord Palmerston in the most decisive terms.

Lord Palmerston requested that his letter might be returned to be copied.

The whole correspondence shall be submitted to your Majesty.

Your Majesty will find in the box a despatch of Lord Normanby of the 15th, and an answer of Lord Palmerston of the 16th,[37] which has been sent without your Majesty's sanction, or the knowledge of Lord John Russell.

[Footnote 37: The letters are given in full in Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. i. chap. vii., were Lord Palmerston's explanation of the 16th, in answer to the Premier's letter of the 14th, will also be found.]



The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.

LAEKEN, 19th December 1851.

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,—Receive my warmest and best thanks for your truly kind and gracious recollection of my old birthday, and your amiable presents.

Our angelic Louise had quite un culte for that day, and two have already passed since the best and noblest of hearts beats no longer amongst us. When one sees the haste and ardour of earthly pursuits, and how all this is often disposed of, and when one sees that even the greatest success always ends with the grave, one is tempted to wonder that the human race should follow so restlessly bubbles often disappearing just when reached, and always being a source of never-ending anxiety. France gives, these sixty years, the proof of the truth of what I say, always believing itself at the highest point of perfection and changing it a few weeks afterwards.

A military Government in France, if it really gets established, must become dangerous for Europe. I hope that at least at its beginning it will have enough to do in France, and that we may get time to prepare. England will do well not to fall asleep, but to keep up its old energy and courage.... Your truly devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.



[Pageheading: DISMISSAL OF LORD PALMERSTON]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

OSBORNE, 19th December 1851.

The Queen has received several communications from Lord John Russell, but has not answered them, as she expected daily to hear of Lord Palmerston's answer. As Lord John Russell in his letter of yesterday's date promises to send her his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, she refrains from expressing a decided opinion until she has had an opportunity of perusing it; but Lord John will readily conceive what must be her feelings in seeing matters go from bad to worse with respect to Lord Palmerston's conduct!



[Pageheading: LORD GRANVILLE]

Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

WOBURN ABBEY, 19th December 1851.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to submit to your Majesty a correspondence with Viscount Palmerston, which terminates with a letter of this day's date.

Lord John Russell has now to advise your Majesty that Lord Palmerston should be informed that your Majesty is ready to accept the Seals of Office, and to place them in other hands.

Lord John Russell has summoned a Cabinet for Monday.

They may be of opinion that they cannot continue a Government.

But that is not Lord John Russell's opinion; and should they agree with him, he will proceed without delay to recommend a successor to your Majesty.

The Earl Granville appears to him the person best calculated for that post, but the Cabinet may be of opinion that more experience is required.



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 20th December 1851.

The Queen found on her arrival here Lord John Russell's letter, enclosing his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, which she has perused with that care and attention which the importance and gravity of the subject of it demanded. The Queen has now to express to Lord John Russell her readiness to follow his advice, and her acceptance of the resignation of Lord Palmerston. She will be prepared to see Lord John after the Cabinet on Monday, as he proposes.



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 20th December 1851.

With respect to a successor to Lord Palmerston, the Queen must state, that after the sad experience which she has just had of the difficulties, annoyances, and dangers to which the Sovereign may be exposed by the personal character and qualities of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, she must reserve to herself the unfettered right to approve or disapprove the choice of a Minister for this Office.

Lord Granville, whom Lord John Russell designates as the person best calculated for that post, would meet with her entire approval. The possible opinion of the Cabinet that more experience was required does not weigh much with the Queen. From her knowledge of Lord Granville's character, she is inclined to see no such disadvantage in the circumstance that he has not yet had practice in managing Foreign Affairs, as he will be the more ready to lean upon the advice and judgment of the Prime Minister where he may have diffidence in his own, and thereby will add strength to the Cabinet by maintaining unity in thought and action. The Queen hopes Lord John Russell will not omit to let her have copies of his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, as he has promised her.[38]

[Footnote 38: On the same day the Prince wrote to the Premier that the Queen was much relieved. She had contemplated dismissing Lord Palmerston herself, but naturally shrank from using the power of the Crown, as her action would have been criticised without the possibility of making a public defence; in his view the Cabinet was rather strengthened than otherwise by Palmerston's departure, and public sympathy would not be with him. The rest of the letter is published in The Life of the Prince Consort.]



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 21st December 1851.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of to-day. She is not the least afraid of Lord Granville's not possessing sufficient public confidence for him to undertake the Foreign Affairs. He is very popular with the House of Lords, with the Free Traders, and the Peace party, and all that the Continent knows of him is in his favour; he had great success at Paris last summer, and his never having had an opportunity of damaging his character by having been mixed up in diplomatic intrigues is an immense advantage to him in obtaining the confidence of those with whom he is to negotiate.



[Pageheading: THE QUEEN AND PALMERSTON]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 23rd December 1851.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—I have the greatest pleasure in announcing to you a piece of news which I know will give you as much satisfaction and relief as it does to us, and will do to the whole of the world. Lord Palmerston is no longer Foreign Secretary—and Lord Granville is already named his successor!! He had become of late really quite reckless, and in spite of the serious admonition and caution he received only on the 29th of November, and again at the beginning of December, he tells Walewski that he entirely approves Louis Napoleon's coup d'etat, when he had written to Lord Normanby by my and the Cabinet's desire that he (Lord Normanby) was to continue his diplomatic intercourse with the French Government, but to remain perfectly passive and give no opinion. Walewski wrote Palmerston's opinion (entirely contrary to what the Government had ordered) to M. Turgot, and when Normanby came with his instructions, Turgot told him what Palmerston had said. Upon this Lord John asked Palmerston to give an explanation—which, after the delay of a week, he answered in such an unsatisfactory way that Lord John wrote to him that he could no longer remain Foreign Secretary, for that perpetual misunderstanding and breaches of decorum were taking place which endangered the country. Lord Palmerston answered instantly that he would give up the Seals the moment his successor was named! Certain as we all felt that he could not have continued long in his place, we were quite taken by surprise when we learnt of the denouement.... Lord Granville will, I think, do extremely well, and his extreme honesty and trustworthiness will make him invaluable to us, and to the Government and to Europe.

I send some prints, etc., for the children for Christmas. Ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.



[Pageheading: MEETING OF THE CABINET]

[Pageheading: LORD CLARENDON]

Memorandum by the Prince Albert.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 23rd December 1851.

Lord John Russell arrived here at six o'clock yesterday evening immediately from the Cabinet, and reported that the Cabinet had, without a dissenting voice, condemned Lord Palmerston's conduct, and approved of the steps taken by Lord John Russell, which was a great relief to him. Lord Lansdowne, to whom he had first written on the subject, had frightened him by answering that it was not possible to avoid the rupture with Lord Palmerston, but that he thought the Government would after this not be able to go on. When, however, this question was discussed in Cabinet, and Lord John had stated that he thought the Office could be well filled, they all agreed in the propriety of going on. The Members of the Cabinet were so unable to understand Lord Palmerston's motives for his conduct during these last months, that Mr. Fox Maule started an idea which once occurred to Lord John himself (as he said), viz. that he must have had the design to bring on a rupture! Lord Minto, who was absent from the Cabinet, expressed himself in a letter to Lord John very strongly about Lord Palmerston's reckless conduct, which would yet undo the country.

Lord John, after having received the concurrence of the Cabinet on the question of Lord Palmerston's dismissal, stated that Lord Granville was the person whom he would like best to see fill his office, and he knew this to be the feeling of the Queen also. The Cabinet quite agreed in Lord Granville's fitness, but Sir George Grey stated it as his opinion that it ought first to be offered to Lord Clarendon, who has always been pointed out by the public as the proper person to succeed Lord Palmerston, and that, if he were passed over, the whole matter would have the appearance of a Cabinet intrigue in favour of one colleague against another. The whole of the Cabinet sided with this opinion, and Lord John Russell now proposed to the Queen that an offer should in the first instance be made to Lord Clarendon.

The Queen protested against the Cabinet's taking upon itself the appointment of its own Members, which rested entirely with the Prime Minister and the Sovereign, under whose approval the former constructed his Government.... Lord John replied that he thought Lord Clarendon would not accept the offer, and therefore there would be little danger in satisfying the desires of the Cabinet. He had written to Lord Clarendon a cautioning letter from Woburn, apprising him of some serious crisis, of which he would soon hear, and speaking of his former wish to exchange the Lord-Lieutenancy for some other Office. Lord Clarendon at once perceived the drift of the hint, and wrote to the Duke of Bedford what he said he did not wish to write to his brother John, that, if it was that Palmerston was going, and he were thought of as a successor, nothing would be so disagreeable to him, as the whole change would be put down as an intrigue of his, whom Lord Palmerston had always accused of wishing to supplant him; that if, however, the service of the country required it, he had the courage to face all personal obloquy....

Lord John owned that Sir George Grey's chief desire was to see Lord Clarendon removed from Ireland, having been there so long; the Cabinet would wish to see the Duke of Newcastle join the Government as Lord-Lieutenant, which he might be induced to do. The Queen having mentioned Lord Clarendon as most fit to succeed Lord Lansdowne one day as President of the Council and leader in the House of Lords, Lord John said that Lord Clarendon had particularly begged not to have the position offered him, for which he did not feel fit. Lord John would like him as Ambassador at Paris, and thought Lord Clarendon would like this himself; but it was difficult to know what to do with Lord Normanby.

In the course of the conversation, Lord John congratulated the Queen upon the change having been accomplished without her personal intervention, which might have exposed her to the animosity of Lord Palmerston's admirers, whilst she would have been precluded from making any public defence. I reminded Lord John that, as such was the disadvantage of the regal position, it behoved the Queen doubly to watch, lest she be put into the same dilemma with a new Minister, whose conduct she could not approve of. Lord Clarendon's appointment would be doubly galling to Lord Palmerston, whom Lord John might not wish to irritate further, a consideration which Lord John said he had also pressed upon the Cabinet. Upon a remark from Lord John as to Lord Granville's youth, the Queen replied: "Lord Canning, whom Lord Stanley had intended to make his Foreign Secretary, was not older...."

The conference ended by Lord John's promise to write to Lord Clarendon as the Queen had desired ... but that he did not wish to make the offer to Lord Granville till he had Lord Clarendon's answer. Lord Granville had been told not to attend the last Cabinet; Lord Palmerston had naturally stayed away.

I went up to Town at half-past seven to the Westminster Play, and took Lord John in my train to Richmond. We had some further conversation in the carriage, in which I asked Lord John whether it was true that Lord Palmerston had got us likewise into a quarrel with America by our ships firing at Panama upon an American merchantman; he said neither he nor Sir Francis Baring had received any news, but Sir Francis had been quite relieved by Lord Palmerston's quitting, as he could not be sure a moment that his Fleets were not brought into some scrape!

On my expressing my conviction that Lord Palmerston could not be very formidable to the Government, Lord John said: "I hope it will not come true what Lord Derby (then Lord Stanley) said after the last Ministerial crisis, when Lord John quizzed him at not having been able to get a Foreign Secretary—'Next time I shall have Lord Palmerston.'!"

ALBERT.



[Pageheading: COUNT WALEWSKI]

Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

DOWNING STREET, 23rd December 1851.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He has just seen Count Walewski; he told him that he had an important piece of intelligence to give him; that your Majesty had been pleased to make a change in the Foreign Office, and to direct Lord Palmerston to give up the Seals.

He wished to give this intelligence that he might accompany it with an intimation that the policy towards France would continue to be of the most friendly character, and that there was nothing the Government more desired than to see a stable and settled Government in France; that they had every wish for the stability of the present French Government. Count Walewski said he had received various assurances of opinion from Lord Palmerston, which he supposed were adopted by Lord John Russell, and subsisted in force.

Lord John Russell said: "Not exactly; it is a principle of the English Government not to interfere in any way with the internal affairs of other countries; whether France chooses to be a Republic or a Monarchy, provided it be not a Social Republic, we wish to express no opinion; we are what we call in England a sheet of white paper in this respect; all we desire is the happiness and welfare of France." Count Walewski said it was of importance to the stability of the President that he should have a large majority; he would then give a Constitution.

Lord John Russell said each nation must suit itself in this respect; we have perhaps been in error in thinking our Constitution could be generally adopted; some nations it may suit, others may find it unfitted for them.



[Pageheading: LORD GRANVILLE APPOINTED]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 23rd December 1851.

The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letters, and is much rejoiced that this important affair has been finally so satisfactorily settled.

The Queen returns Lord Clarendon's letter, which she thinks a very good one.[39] The Queen hopes Count Walewski will have been satisfied, which she thinks he ought to be. The Queen will receive Lord Palmerston to deliver up the Seals, and Lord Granville to receive them, on Friday at half-past two.

[Footnote 39: Lord Clarendon, in answer to Lord John Russell, expressed great reluctance to undertake the charge of the Foreign Office, on the ground that Palmerston, always suspicions of him, would insist that he had deliberately undermined his position: while Lord Granville would be popular with the Court and country.]



Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

DOWNING STREET, 24th December 1851.

Lord John Russell submits a private note of Lord Palmerston,[40] which only shows how unconscious he was of all that the rest of the world perceived.

[Footnote 40: In this letter, Lord Palmerston denied the "charge of violations of prudence and decorum," adding, "I have to observe that that charge is refuted by the offer which you made of the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland, because I apprehend that to be an office for the due performance of the duties of which prudence and decorum cannot well be dispensed with."]



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 25th December 1861.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters, and she returns the enclosures.

The articles in the Times are very good; the other papers seem quite puzzled, and unable to comprehend what has caused Lord Palmerston's removal from office. Lord Palmerston's letter is very characteristic; he certainly has the best of the argument, and great care ought to be taken in bestowing any praise on him, as he always takes advantage of it to turn against those who meant it merely to soothe him. The Queen thought that there must be a Council for the swearing in of the new Secretary of State.



[Pageheading: LORD GRANVILLE]

Memorandum by the Prince Albert.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 27th December 1851.

Yesterday the Council was held, at which the change of Seals was to take place. We waited for one hour and a half, but Lord Palmerston did not appear; his Seals had been sent from the Foreign Office to Lord John Russell!

Lord John told us he had written to Lord Palmerston, announcing him the appointment of Lord Granville, and added that in his long political life he had not passed a week which had been so painful to him. Lord Palmerston's answer was couched in these terms: "Of course you will believe that I feel that just indignation at the whole proceeding which it must produce."

Lord Lansdowne seemed anxious particularly on account of the clear symptoms appearing from the papers that both Radicals and Protectionists are bidding for Lord Palmerston.

Lord Granville was very much overcome when he had his audience to thank for his appointment, but seemed full of courage and good-will. He said it would be as easy to him to avoid Lord Palmerston's faults as difficult to imitate his good qualities, promised to endeavour to establish a more decent usage between the Governments in their mutual communications, by setting the good example himself, and insisting upon the same on the part of the others; promised not to have anything to do with the newspapers; to give evening parties, just as Lord Palmerston had done, to which a good deal of his influence was to be attributed. He said a Member of Parliament just returned from the Continent had told him that an Englishman could hardly show himself without becoming aware of the hatred they were held in; the only chance one had to avoid being insulted was to say Civis Romanus non sum.

Lord Granville had been Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs under Lord Palmerston for three years from 1837-40, but, as he expressed himself, rather the sandwich between his principal and the clerks. Lord Palmerston had in these three years hardly once spoken to him upon any of the subjects he had to treat.

ALBERT.



[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S ABSENCE EXPLAINED]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 27th December 1851.

The Queen forgot to remind Lord John Russell yesterday of his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, which he promised to let her have.

The Queen concludes from what Lord John said yesterday that he intended sounding the Duke of Newcastle relative to the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland.

Has Lord John ascertained the cause of Lord Palmerston's absence yesterday? If it was not accidental, she must say she thinks it most disrespectful conduct towards his Sovereign.



Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

PEMBROKE LODGE, 27th December 1851.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and submits a letter of Lord Palmerston, which explains his not going to Windsor. It appears to have arisen from a mistake in the message sent through Lord Stanley, and not from any want of respect to your Majesty.



Viscount Palmerston to Lord John Russell.

CARLTON GARDENS, 27th December 1851.

MY DEAR JOHN RUSSELL,—I am distressed beyond measure by the note from you which I have this moment received on my arrival here from Hampshire. I understood from Stanley that you had desired him to tell me that if it was inconvenient for me to come up yesterday, I might send the Seals to you at Windsor, and that my presence would be dispensed with.[41] Thereupon I sent the Seals up by an early train yesterday morning to Stanley, that he might send them down to you as suggested by you, and I desired that they might be taken by a messenger by the special train.

I shall be very much obliged to you if you will have the goodness to explain this matter to the Queen, and I beg you to assure Her Majesty how deeply grieved I am that what appears to have been a mistake on my part should have led me to be apparently wanting in due respect to Her Majesty, than which nothing could possibly be further from my intention or thoughts. Yours sincerely,

PALMERSTON.

[Footnote 41: There is a fuller account given of Lord Palmerston's version of the whole affair in a letter to his brother, printed in Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. i. p. 315.]



[Pageheading: THE QUEEN ON FOREIGN POLICY]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 28th December 1851.

The Queen thinks the moment of the change in the person of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to afford a fit opportunity to have the principles upon which our Foreign Affairs have been conducted since the beginning of 1848 reconsidered by Lord John Russell and his Cabinet.

The Queen was fully aware that the storm raging at the time on the Continent rendered it impossible for any statesman to foresee with clearness and precision what development and direction its elements would take, and she consequently quite agreed that the line of policy to be followed, as the most conducive to the interests of England, could then only be generally conceived and vaguely expressed.

But although the Queen is still convinced that the general principles laid down by Lord John at that time for the conduct of our Foreign Policy were in themselves right, she has in the progress of the last three years become painfully convinced that the manner in which they have been practically applied has worked out very different results from those which the correctness of the principles themselves had led her to expect. For when the revolutionary movements on the Continent had laid prostrate almost all its Governments, and England alone displayed that order, vigour, and prosperity which it owes to a stable, free, and good Government, the Queen, instead of earning the natural good results of such a glorious position, viz. consideration, goodwill, confidence, and influence abroad, obtained the very reverse, and had the grief to see her Government and herself treated on many occasions with neglect, aversion, distrust, and even contumely.

Frequently, when our Foreign Policy was called in question, it has been said by Lord John and his colleagues that the principles on which it was conducted were the right ones, and having been approved of by them, received their support, and that it was only the personal manner of Lord Palmerston in conducting the affairs which could be blamed in tracing the causes which led to the disastrous results the Queen complains of.

The Queen is certainly not disposed to defend the personal manner in which Lord Palmerston has conducted Foreign Affairs, but she cannot admit that the errors he committed were merely faults in form and method, that they were no more than acts of "inconsideration, indiscretion, or bad taste." The Queen considers that she has also to complain of what appeared to her deviations from the principles laid down by the Cabinet for his conduct, nay, she sees distinctly in their practical application a personal and arbitrary perversion of the very nature and essence of those principles. She has only to refer here to Italy, Spain, Greece, Holstein, France, etc., etc., which afford ample illustrations of this charge.

It was one thing for Lord Palmerston to have attempted such substantial deviations; it will be another for the Cabinet to consider whether they had not the power to check him in these attempts.

The Queen, however, considering times to have now changed, thinks that there is no reason why we should any longer confine ourselves to the mere assertion of abstract principles, such as "non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries," "moral support to liberal institutions," "protection to British subjects," etc., etc. The moving powers which were put in operation by the French Revolution of 1848, and the events consequent on it, are no longer so obscure; they have assumed distinct and tangible forms in almost all the countries affected by them (in France, in Italy, Germany, etc.), and upon the state of things now existing, and the experience gained, the Queen would hope that our Foreign Policy may be more specifically defined, and that it may be considered how the general principles are to be practically adapted to our peculiar relations with each Continental State.

The Queen wishes therefore that a regular programme embracing these different relations should be submitted to her, and would suggest whether it would not be the best mode if Lord John were to ask Lord Granville to prepare such a paper and to lay it before her after having revised it.

This would then serve as a safe guide for Lord Granville, and enable the Queen as well as the Cabinet to see that the Policy, as in future to be conducted, will be in conformity with the principles laid down and approved.



Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

PEMBROKE LODGE, 29th December 1851.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has received your Majesty's communication of yesterday, and will transmit it to Lord Granville.

It is to be observed, however, that the traditionary policy of this country is not to bind the Crown and country by engagements, unless upon special cause shown, arising out of the circumstances of the day.

For instance, the Treaty of Quadruple Alliance between England, France, Spain, and Portugal was contrary to the general principle of non-intervention; so was the interference in Portugal in 1847, but were both justified by circumstances.

Thus it is very difficult to lay down any principles from which deviations may not frequently be made.

The grand rule of doing to others as we wish that they should do unto us is more applicable than any system of political science. The honour of England does not consist in defending every English officer or English subject, right or wrong, but in taking care that she does not infringe the rules of justice, and that they are not infringed against her.[42]

[Footnote 42: A summary of Lord Granville's Memorandum in reply (which was couched in very general terms) will be found in Lord Fitzmaurice's Life of Earl Granville, vol. ii. p. 49.]



[Pageheading: AFFAIRS IN FRANCE]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 30th December 1851.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—Most warmly do I thank you for your kind and affectionate and interesting letter of the 26th, which I received on Sunday. All that you say about Lord Palmerston is but too true.... He brouilled us and the country with every one; and his very first act precipitated the unfortunate Spanish marriages which was le commencement de la fin. It is too grievous to think how much misery and mischief might have been avoided. However, now he has done with the Foreign Office for ever, and "the veteran statesman," as the newspapers, to our great amusement and I am sure to his infinite annoyance, call him, must rest upon his laurels.... I fear much lest they should be imprudent at Claremont; the poor Queen hinted to Mamma that she hoped you would not become a friend to the President; no doubt you can have no sympathies for him, but just because you are related to the poor Orleanses, you feel that you must be doubly cautious to do nothing which could provoke the enmity of Louis Napoleon. I fear that poor Joinville had some mad idea of going to France, which, fortunately, his illness prevented. It would have been the height of folly. Their only safe policy is to remain entirely passive et de se faire oublier, which was Nemours' expression to me two years ago; nothing could be wiser or more prudent than he was then—but I don't think they were wise since. La Candidature of Joinville was in every way unwise, and led Louis Napoleon to take so desperate a course. Nemours told me also last year that they were not at all against a fusion, but that they could not disposer de la France, unless called upon to do so by the nation. I wish you would caution them to be very circumspect and silent—for all the mistakes made by others is in their favour; in fact, no good for them could come till Paris is old enough to be his own master—unless indeed they all returned under Henri V., but a Regency for Paris would be an impossibility....

We spent a very happy Christmas, and now wish you a very happy New Year—for many succeeding years. Also to the children, who I hope were pleased with the prints, etc.

We have got young Prince Nicholas of Nassau here, a pretty, clever boy of nineteen, with a good deal of knowledge, and a great wish to learn and hear, which is a rare thing for the young Princes, of our day in particular. I must stop now, as I fear I have already let my pen run on for too long, and must beg to be excused for this voluminous letter.

With Albert's love ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.



[Pageheading: THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 30th December 1851.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters of yesterday. She quite agrees with him and his colleagues in thinking it of importance to strengthen the Government, and she is pleased with his proposal to communicate with the Duke of Newcastle as to what assistance he and his friends can give to the Government.

The Queen expects better results from such a negotiation, with an ostensible head of a Party, than from attempts to detach single individuals from it, which from a sense of honour they always felt scruples in agreeing to.



[Pageheading: THE TE DEUM IN PARIS]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 31st December 1851.

The Queen sees in the papers that there is to be a Te Deum at Paris on the 2nd for the success of the coup d'etat, and that the Corps Diplomatique is to be present. She hopes that Lord Normanby will be told not to attend. Besides the impropriety of his taking part in such a ceremony, his doing so would entirely destroy the position of Lord John Russell opposite Lord Palmerston, who might with justice say that he merely expressed his personal approval of the coup d'etat before, but since, the Queen's Ambassador had been ordered publicly to thank God for its success.



INTRODUCTORY NOTE

TO CHAPTER XXI

Early in 1852, the Whig Government, impaired in public credit by the removal of Lord Palmerston, attempted once more a coalition with the Peelites, office being offered to Sir James Graham; the overtures failed, and soon, after the meeting of Parliament, the ex-Foreign Secretary, whose version of the cause of his dismissal failed to satisfy the House of Commons, succeeded in defeating the Government on their Militia Bill, affairs in France having caused anxiety as to the national defences. The Government Bill was for the creation of a local Militia, Lord Palmerston preferring the consolidation of the regular Militia. A Ministry was formed by Lord Derby (formerly Lord Stanley) from the Protectionist Party, but no definite statement could be elicited as to their intention, or the reverse, to re-impose a duty on foreign corn. Mr Disraeli, who became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was the mainspring of the Government policy, showed great dexterity in his management of the House of Commons without a majority, and carried a Militia Bill in the teeth of Lord John Russell; but a plan of partial redistribution failed. The elections held in the summer did not materially improve the Ministerial position, and, on the meeting of Parliament in the autumn, the Fiscal Question had to be squarely faced. After much wrangling, Protection was finally abandoned, and the Government saved for the moment, but on their House-tax proposals they were defeated, after an impassioned debate, by a coalition of Whigs, Peelites, and Radicals, from whom Lord Lansdowne and Lord Aberdeen (and finally the latter alone) were called upon to construct a strong representative Government. The Duke of Wellington had died in September, and his funeral was the signal for an outburst of national feeling. During the year the Houses of Parliament designed by Sir Charles Barry, though not absolutely completed, were formally opened by the Queen; the new House of Lords had already been in use.

In France, the first result of the coup d'etat was Louis Bonaparte's election as President for ten years by an immense majority; late in the year he assumed the Imperial title as Napoleon III., and the Empire was formally recognised by the majority of the Powers; the Emperor designed to add to his prestige by contracting a matrimonial alliance with Princess Adelaide of Hohenlohe. In the East of Europe a dispute had commenced between France and Russia about the Holy Places in Palestine. Simultaneously with the death of the Duke of Wellington, the era of European peace was destined to come to an end, and Nicholas, encouraged by the advent to power of Aberdeen (whom he had met in 1844, and with whom he had frankly discussed European politics), was hoping for the consummation of his scheme for the partition of Turkey.

To Great Britain the year was a memorable one, in consequence of the granting of a Constitution to New Zealand.



CHAPTER XXI

1852

[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND DENMARK]

Queen Victoria to the King of Denmark.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 4th January 1852.

SIR, MY BROTHER,—I received the letter which your Majesty addressed to me on the 24th of August last, and in which, after referring to the necessity for establishing some definite arrangement with regard to the eventual succession to the Crown of Denmark, your Majesty is pleased to acquaint me that, in your opinion, such an arrangement might advantageously be made in favour of your Majesty's cousin, His Highness the Prince Christian of Gluecksburg,[1] and the issue of his marriage with the Princess Louisa of Hesse, in favour of whom the nearer claimants have renounced their rights and titles.

I trust I need not assure your Majesty of the sincere friendship which I entertain for you, and of the deep interest which I feel in the welfare of the Danish Monarchy. It was in accordance with those sentiments that I accepted the office of mediator between your Majesty and the States of the German Confederation, and it afforded me the sincerest pleasure to have been thus instrumental in re-establishing the relations of peace between your Majesty and those States.

With regard to the question of the eventual succession to both the Danish and Ducal Crowns, I have to state to your Majesty that although I declined to take any part in the settlement of that combination, it will be a source of great satisfaction to me to learn that an arrangement has been definitely determined upon equally satisfactory to your Majesty and to the Germanic Confederation; and whenever it shall have been notified to me that such an arrangement has been arrived at, I shall then be ready, in accordance with what was stated in the Protocol of the 2nd of August 1850, to consider, in concert with my Allies, the expediency of giving the sanction of an European acknowledgment to the arrangement which may thus have been made.

I avail myself with great pleasure of this opportunity to renew to your Majesty the expression of the invariable attachment and high esteem with which I am, Sir, my Brother, your Majesty's good Sister,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 1: Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Gluecksburg was named successor to Frederick VII., King of Denmark by a Treaty signed in London on the 8th of May 1852; and by the Danish law of succession (of the 31st of July 1853), he ascended the throne under the style of Christian IX., on the 15th of November, 1863. He was the father of His Majesty Frederick VIII., the present King of Denmark, and of Her Majesty Queen Alexandra of England; King Christian died in 1906, Queen Louise having predeceased him in 1898.]



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 15th January 1852.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter last night, and wishes now shortly to repeat what she desired through the Prince, Sir Charles Wood to explain to Lord John.[2]

The Queen hopes that the Cabinet will fully consider what their object is before the proposed negotiation with Sir James Graham be opened.

Is it to strengthen their case in Parliament by proving that no means have been left untried to strengthen the Government? or really to effect a junction with the Peelites?

If the first is aimed at, the Cabinet will hardly reap any of the desired advantages from the negotiation, for, shrewd as Sir James Graham is, he will immediately see that the negotiation has been begun without a desire that it should succeed, and this will soon become generally known.

If the latter, the Queen must observe that there are two kinds of junctions—one, a fusion of Parties; the other, the absorption of one Party by the other. For a fusion, the Queen thinks the Peelites to be quite ready; then, however, they must be treated as a political Party, and no exclusion should be pronounced against particular members of it, nor should it be insisted upon that the new Government and Party is still emphatically the Whig party.

An absorption of the most liberal talents amongst the Peelites into the Whig Government, the Queen considers unlikely to succeed, and she can fully understand that reasons of honour and public and private engagement must make it difficult to members of a political Party to go over to another in order to receive office.

Having stated thus much, the Queen gives Lord John full permission to negotiate with Sir James Graham.

[Footnote 2: Lord John Russell having vainly attempted to secure the co-operation of the Duke of Newcastle, announced the wish of the Cabinet to make overtures to Sir J. Graham.]



[Pageheading: LOUIS NAPOLEON]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 20th January 1852.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—Your kind letter of the 16th I received on the 17th, with the newspaper, for which I return my best thanks. The papers which Stockmar communicated to us are most interesting, and do the writer the greatest credit. Watchful we certainly shall and must be. We shall try and keep on the best of terms with the President, who is extremely sensitive and susceptible, but for whom, I must say, I have never had any personal hostility; on the contrary, I thought that during 1849 and 1850 we owed him all a good deal, as he certainly raised the French Government de la boue. But I grieve over the tyranny and oppression practised since the coup d'etat, and it makes everything very uncertain, for though I believe it in every way his wish and his policy not to go to war, still, il peut y etre entraine.

Your position is a peculiarly delicate one, but still, as I again repeat, I think there is no reason to be alarmed; particularly, I would never show it.

The poor Nemours were here from Saturday till yesterday evening with their dear nice boys, and I think it always does them good. They feel again as if they were in their own position, and they are diverted from the melancholy reality and the great sameness of their existence at Claremont. I found him very quiet and really not bitter, and disposed to be very prudent,—but seriously alarmed at the possibility of losing their property, which would be too dreadful and monstrous. I fear that the candidature and poor Helene's imprudence in talking are the cause of this cruel persecution. The poor Orleans have really (and you should write them that) no truer and more faithful friends than we are—and it is for this reason that I urge and entreat them to be entirely passive; for their day will come, I feel convinced!

Now good-bye, my dearest, kindest Uncle. Ever your truly devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.



Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 27th January 1852.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of yesterday with the draft of Bills, and likewise that of to-day enclosing a Memorandum on the probable effects of the proposed Measure.[3] She has perused these papers with great attention, but feels that any opinion upon the future results of the Measure must rest on surmises; she has that confidence, however, in Lord John's experience and judgment in these matters, and so strong a conviction that he will have spared no pains in forming as correct an opinion as may be formed on so problematical a matter, that she is prepared to come to the decision of approving the Measure on the strength of Lord John's opinion. She only hopes that the future may bear it out, and that the character of the House of Commons may not be impaired. Should this prove the case, the extension of the privilege of voting for Members will strengthen our Institutions. The Queen is glad that the clause abolishing the necessity for every Member of the Government to vacate his seat upon his appointment[4] should have been maintained. She hopes that the schedules showing which towns are to be added to existing boroughs will be drawn up with the greatest care and impartiality, and will soon be submitted to her. The Queen would be glad if the plan once proposed of giving to the Queen's University in Ireland the vacant seat for Sudbury were still carried out, as she feels sure that not only would it be a great thing for the University and the Colleges, but a most useful and influential Irish Member would be gained for the House.

The Queen takes it for granted that the Bill as approved by her will be stood by in Parliament, and that Lord John will not allow himself to be drawn on to further concessions to Democracy in the course of the debate, and that the introduction of the ballot will be vigorously opposed by the Government.

[Footnote 3: The Ministerial Reform Bill.]

[Footnote 4: The Act of Settlement excluded (as from the accession of the House of Hanover) the Ministers of State from the House of Commons; but the 6 Anne, c. 7, modified this, and made them re-eligible on appointment.]



[Pageheading: DRAFT OF THE SPEECH]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 1st February 1852.

The Queen has received the draft of the Speech. The passage referring to the proposed Reform Measure varies so materially from the one which was first submitted to her that she feels that she ought not to sanction it without having received some explanation of the grounds which have led the Cabinet to recommend it in its altered shape. The Queen will not object to the mode of filling the Offices still vacant which Lord John Russell proposes.



[Pageheading: WOMEN AND POLITICS]

Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 3rd February 1852.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—My warmest thanks for your kind little letter of the 30th. Matters are very critical and all Van de Weyer has told us n'est pas rassurant. With such an extraordinary man as Louis Napoleon, one can never be for one instant safe. It makes me very melancholy; I love peace and quiet—in fact, I hate politics and turmoil, and I grieve to think that a spark may plunge us into the midst of war. Still I think that may be avoided. Any attempt on Belgium would be casus belli for us; that you may rely upon. Invasion I am not afraid of, but the spirit of the people here is very great—they are full of defending themselves—and the spirit of the olden times is in no way quenched.

In two hours' time Parliament will be opened, and to-night the explanations between Lord John and Lord Palmerston will take place. I am very curious how they will go off. The curiosity and anxiety to hear it is very great.

I never saw Stockmar better, or more active and more sagacious, or more kind. To me he is really like a father—only too partial, I always think.

Albert grows daily fonder and fonder of politics and business, and is so wonderfully fit for both—such perspicacity and such courage—and I grow daily to dislike them both more and more. We women are not made for governing—and if we are good women, we must dislike these masculine occupations; but there are times which force one to take interest in them mal gre bon gre, and I do, of course, intensely.

I must now conclude, to dress for the opening of Parliament ... Ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.



Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

CHESHAM PLACE, 4th February 1852.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that the Address was agreed to last night without a division.

The explanations between Lord Palmerston and himself were made. Lord Palmerston made no case, and was not supported by any considerable party in the House. His approbation of the President's conduct seemed to confound the Liberal Party, and he did not attempt to excuse his delay in answering Lord John Russell's letter of the 14th.[5]

The rest of the debate was desultory and heavy. Mr Disraeli made a long speech for the sake of making a speech. Mr Roebuck was bitter without much effect.

Generally speaking, the appearance of the House was favourable. Sir James Graham says the next fortnight will clear up matters very much.

The tone of the House was decidedly pacific.

[Footnote 5: See ante, p. 341.]



[Pageheading: THE NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT]

Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 4th February 1852.

We have learned with much satisfaction that everything went off so well in the House of Commons last night. Lord John Russell's speech is a most useful one, and he has given a most lucid definition of the constitutional position of the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary opposite to the Crown. Lord Palmerston's speech is a very weak one, and he in no way makes out a case for himself. This seems to [be] the general impression.

The Houses of Lords and Commons being now almost completed, and the Queen having entered the House of Lords by the Grand Entrance (which is magnificent), the Queen thinks this will be the right moment for bestowing on Mr Barry the knighthood, as a mark of the Queen's approbation of his great work.



[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S DISCOMFITURE]

The Marquis of Normanby to Colonel Phipps.[6]

ST GEORGE'S HOTEL, 5th February 1852.

MY DEAR CHARLES,—Yesterday morning I got a note from John Russell, saying that all had gone off so well the night before, and Palmerston had been so flat that he thought it better I should not revive the subject in the other House, as he had said nothing about me which in the least required that I should do so. I yielded, of course, to such an appeal, though there are several points in his speech on which I could have exposed inaccuracies. The fact is, John has never shown any consideration for me in the whole of these affairs; but I do not mean in any way to complain, and am very grateful to him for the very successful way in which he executed his task on Tuesday. Nothing can be more universal than the feeling of the utter discomfiture of Palmerston.[7] I am convinced that what floored him at starting was that letter of the Queen's,[8] because every one felt that such a letter would never have been written unless every point in it could have been proved like a bill of indictment; and then came the question, how could any man, even feeling he deserved it, go on under such a marked want of confidence?...[9]

Aberdeen, whom I saw at Granville's last night, told me that Cardwell had said to him, that often as he had felt indignant at the arrogance of "that man," he really pitied him, so complete was his overthrow. Disraeli said that he had watched him during Johnny's speech, and doubted whether the hanging of the head, etc., was merely acting; but before he had spoken two sentences he saw he was a beaten fox. Many said that the extreme flippancy and insolence of his manner was more remarkable than ever, from their being evidently assumed with difficulty. I have always thought Palmerston very much overrated as a speaker; his great power arose from his not only knowing his subject better than any one else, but being the only man who knew anything about it, and using that exclusive knowledge unscrupulously for the purposes of misrepresentation.

Thiers was at Lady Granville's last night, and was enchanted with the spectacle of the Opening. He said that he had been endeavouring for thirty years to support the cause of Constitutional Monarchy, as the best Government in the world, and there he saw it in perfection, not only in its intrinsic attributes, but in the universal respect and adhesion with which it was received. He said, though he did not understand a word of English, he could have cried at the Queen's voice in reading the Speech. He is very "impressionable," and I am convinced at the time he was quite sincere in his appreciation.

I am vexed at not having been able to say anything publicly about all this, as I believe I could have dispelled many misrepresentations; but it cannot be helped. I have endeavoured throughout not to be selfish, and I may as well keep up that feeling to the last. Ever, etc.

NORMANBY.

I told John Russell last night I regretted that he had vouched for the intentions of Louis Napoleon. He said he had not done that, but owned that he had said more than he ought. "The fact is, I did not know what to say next. I stopped as one sometimes does, so I said that; I had better have said something else!" Candid and characteristic!

[Footnote 6: Submitted to the Queen by Colonel Phipps.]

[Footnote 7: It appears from a Memorandum made about this time by Prince Albert that when Lord Palmerston's retirement became known, the Radical constituency of Marylebone wished to present him with an Address of sympathy, and to invite him to stand at the next Election, promising him to bring him in. Sir Benjamin Hall (one of the Members) told them that they had better wait till the explanation in Parliament had taken place, for at present they knew nothing about the merits of the case. This the Committee which had been organised consented to do. After the Debate on the 4th of February, Sir Benjamin called upon the Chairman of the Committee to ask him whether they would still carry out their intention. "No," said the Chairman; "we have considered the matter: a man who does not answer the Queen's letters can receive no Address from us."]

[Footnote 8: See ante, p. 264.]

[Footnote 9: Cf. Greville's account in his Journal, 5th February 1852. See also p. 368.]



Queen Victoria to Earl Granville.

WINDSOR CASTLE, 10th February 1852.

The Queen returns the enclosed papers. She will not object to the proposed step[10] should Lord Granville and Lord John Russell have reason to expect that the Pope will receive Sir H. Bulwer; should he refuse, it will be doubly awkward. The Queen finds it difficult to give a decided opinion on the subject, as, first, she does not know how far the reception of Sir Henry at Rome will overcome the objections raised to his reception as Resident at Florence. Secondly, as she has never been able to understand what is to be obtained by a mission to Rome, a step liable to much misrepresentation here....

[Footnote 10: The Tuscan Government declined to receive Sir H. Bulwer, and it was then proposed to send him to Rome instead.]



[Pageheading: THE PRINCE AND THE ARMY]

Lord John Russell to the Prince Albert.

CHESHAM PLACE, 16th February 1852.

SIR,—I have seen the Duke of Wellington this morning, and have given him the Depot plan.

It may be useful if your Royal Highness will see him from time to time in relation to the Army. On the one hand, your Royal Highness's authority may overcome the indisposition to change which he naturally entertains; and on the other, his vast experience may be of great use to your Royal Highness in regard to the future. I have the honour to be, Sir, your Royal Highness's most dutiful Servant,

JOHN RUSSELL.



[Pageheading: THE SLAVE TRADE]

Sir Francis Baring to Queen Victoria.

ADMIRALTY, 15th February 1852.

Sir Francis Baring presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to state to your Majesty that despatches have this evening arrived from Commander Bruce in command of the African Squadron. Commander Bruce gives an account of an attack on Lagos[11] which was completely successful. The town of Lagos was captured and in great part burnt. The resistance appears to have been obstinate and directed with much skill. Your Majesty's naval Service behaved with their accustomed gallantry and coolness, but the loss amounted to fourteen killed and sixty-four wounded. Sir Francis Baring will forward to your Majesty copies of the despatches to-morrow, with his humble duty.

F. BARING.

[Footnote 11: Notorious as a centre of the Slave Trade. The native king was deposed.]



Queen Victoria to Sir Francis Baring.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 16th February 1852.

The Queen has received both Sir Francis Baring's letters of the 15th. The news of the capture and destruction of the town of Lagos has given us the greatest satisfaction, as it will give a most serious blow to the iniquitous traffic in slaves. The Rev. Mr Crowther, whom the Queen saw about two months ago (and whom she believes Sir Francis Baring has also seen), told us that the slave trade on that part of the African coast would be at an end if Lagos, the stronghold of its greatest supporters, was destroyed. The Queen must express to Sir Francis Baring her sense of the services rendered by Commodore Bruce and the Officers under him.



Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 17th February 1852.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,—Your dear letter of the 13th reached me on Saturday here, where we are since Friday afternoon. I am glad that you are satisfied with Lord Granville's answer. The question shall certainly be borne in mind, and you may rely on our doing whatever can be effected to bring about the desired end. I think Louis Napoleon will find his decrees very difficult to carry out. I am very glad to hear that you quietly are preparing to strengthen yourself against the possibility of any attack from France. This will, I think, put Louis Napoleon on his good behaviour....

The extension of the Suffrage[12] was almost unavoidable, and it was better to do it quietly, and not to wait till there was a cry for it—to which one would have to yield. The deal there is to do, and the importance of everything going on at home and abroad, is unexampled in my recollection and very trying; Albert becomes really a terrible man of business; I think it takes a little off from the gentleness of his character, and makes him so preoccupied. I grieve over all this, as I cannot enjoy these things, much as I interest myself in general European politics; but I am every day more convinced that we women, if we are to be good women, feminine and amiable and domestic, are not fitted to reign; at least it is contre gre that they drive themselves to the work which it entails.

However, this cannot now be helped, and it is the duty of every one to fulfil all that they are called upon to do, in whatever situation they may be!

Mme. van de Weyer thinks your children so grown and improved, and Charlotte as lovely as ever. With Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 12: See ante, pp. 294, 324.]



[Pageheading: THE MILITIA BILL]

Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.

CHESHAM PLACE, 20th February 1852. (9.15 P.M.)

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that Lord Palmerston has just carried his Motion for leaving out the word "Local" in the title of the Bill for the Militia.[13]

Lord John Russell then declared that he could no longer take charge of the Bill. Lord Palmerston said he was astonished at the Government for giving up the Bill for so slight a cause.

Lord John Russell then said that he considered the vote as tantamount to a resolution of want of confidence, which remark was loudly cheered on the other side.

Sir Benjamin Hall said he wondered the Government did not resign, on which Lord John again explained that when confidence was withdrawn, the consequence was obvious.

[Footnote 13: Events in France had revived anxiety as to the national defences, and the Government brought in a Bill for raising a local Militia. To this scheme the Duke of Wellington had been unfavourable, and Lord Palmerston, by a majority of eleven, carried an Amendment in favour of re-organising the "regular" instead of raising a "local" Militia.]



[Pageheading: THE MINISTRY DEFEATED]

[Pageheading: RESIGNATION OF THE MINISTRY]

Memorandum by the Prince Albert.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 21st February 1852.

Lord John Russell came this morning at twelve o'clock to explain that after the vote of yesterday[14] it was impossible for him to go on any longer with the Government. He considered it a vote of censure, and an entirely unprecedented case not to allow a Minister of the Crown even to lay his measure on the Table of the House; that he had expected to the last that the respectable part of the House would see all this, but there seemed to have been a pre-arranged determination between Lord Palmerston and the Protectionists to defeat the Government; that the Peelites also had agreed to vote against them. Sir James Graham and Mr Cardwell had stayed away, but Mr Gladstone and Mr S. Herbert had voted against them, the latter even misrepresenting what Lord John had said. No Government could stand against incessant motions of censure upon every imaginable department of the Executive Government. The Prime Minister would either have to take the management of all the departments into his own hands, and to be prepared to defend every item, for which he (Lord John) did not feel the moral and physical power, or he must succumb on those different points which the Opposition with divided labour could single out. Lord Palmerston's conduct was the more reprehensible as he had asked him the day before about his objections to the Bill, and had (he thought) satisfied him that the four points upon which he had insisted were provided for in the Bill.

[Footnote 14: On the Militia Bill.]

He thought he could not (in answer to the Queen's enquiry) dissolve Parliament, and that Lord Palmerston had no Party. But he supposed Lord Derby was prepared to form a Protection Government. This Government would pass the estimates and the Mutiny Bill, and would then have to proceed to a Dissolution. Lord John had merely seen Lord Lansdowne, who had approved of the course he meant to pursue, though afraid of the imputation that the Government had run away from the Caffre debate. He had summoned the Cabinet, and would report their resolution. Speaking of Lord Palmerston, Lord John said he had heard that Lord Palmerston had said that there was one thing between them which he could not forgive, and that was his reading the Queen's Minute to the House of Commons.

At a quarter past four Lord John came back from the Cabinet, and formally tendered the resignations of himself and colleagues. The Cabinet had been unanimous that there was no other course to pursue, and that it would not be advisable to make use of the Queen's permission to advise a Dissolution. Lord Granville had ascertained through Dr Quin from Lord Lyndhurst that Lord Derby was prepared with an Administration, having obtained Mr Thomas Baring's consent to act as Leader of the House of Commons.

Sir Stratford Canning at Constantinople was supposed to be intended for the Foreign Office. Lord Lyndhurst said, though the materials were there, they were very bad ones, and it was a question whether they would stand long. He himself would keep out of place.

We advised Lord John to keep his Party well under discipline in Opposition, so that whilst there it did not commit errors which would become new difficulties for the future Government. He seemed disinclined for great exertions after the fatigues he had undergone these last years. He said he thought he would not go on with the Reform Bill out of office, as that was a measure which ought to be carried by a Government. If he had again to propose it, he would very likely alter it a little, reverting to his original plan of taking away one Member of the two returned by small boroughs, and giving their seats to some large towns, counties, and corporations like the Universities, etc.

Lord John defers taking his formal leave till a new Administration is formed.

ALBERT.



[Pageheading: LORD DERBY SUMMONED]

Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 21st February 1852.

The Queen would wish to see Lord Derby at half-past two to-morrow should he be in Town; if not, on Monday at twelve o'clock.



Memorandum by the Prince Albert.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 22nd February 1852.

... Lord Derby said that he could not command a majority in the House of Lords, that he was in a decided minority in the House of Commons, and thought that in the critical circumstances in which the country was placed both at home and abroad, he ought not to ask for a Dissolution. He must then try to strengthen himself particularly in the House of Commons by any means he could. There was one person whom he could not venture to propose for the Foreign Office on account of what had lately passed, and what he might be allowed to call the "well-known personal feelings of the Queen"; but Lord Palmerston was one of the ablest debaters, and might well be offered the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The Queen ... would not, by refusing her consent, throw additional difficulties in Lord Derby's way; she warned him, however, of the dangerous qualities of [Lord Palmerston].

Lord Derby rejoined that he knew them, and thought them pernicious for the conduct of the Foreign Affairs, but at the Exchequer they would have less play; he himself would undertake to control him. His greatest indiscretion—that in the Kossuth affair—must have been with a view to form a Party; that if left excluded from office, he would become more dangerous, and might in fact force himself back at the head of a Party with a claim to the Foreign Office, whilst if he had ever accepted another Office, his pretensions might be considered as waived; he (Lord Derby) did not know in the least whether Lord Palmerston would accept, but in case he did not, the offer would propitiate him, and render the Government in the House of Commons more possible, as it would have anyhow all the talent of the late Government, Peelites and Radicals, to withstand.

To my question whether Lord Derby fancied he would remain Prime Minister any length of time, when once Lord Palmerston had got the lead of the House of Commons, he replied he was not afraid of him; he felt sure he could control him, although he would not have been able to admit him to the Foreign Office on account of the very strong strictures he had passed upon his Foreign Policy at different times—even if the Queen had allowed it.



The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria.

ST JAMES'S SQUARE, 22nd February 1852. (Half-past eight.)

Lord Derby, with his humble duty, deems it incumbent upon him to submit to your Majesty without delay that having had an interview this evening with Lord Palmerston, the latter has, although in the most friendly terms, declined accepting the Office, upon the ground of difference of opinion, not on the principle, but on the expediency of the imposition of any duty, under any circumstances, upon foreign corn. This was a point which Lord Derby was willing to have left undecided until the result of a General Election should be known.

Although this refusal may add materially to Lord Derby's difficulties, he cannot regret that the offer has been made, as the proposal must have tended to diminish any feelings of hostility which might have been productive of future embarrassment to your Majesty's service, to whatever hands it may be entrusted....

The above is humbly submitted by your Majesty's most dutiful Servant and Subject,

DERBY.



[Pageheading: LORD DERBY'S CABINET]

Memorandum by the Prince Albert.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 23rd February 1852.

Lord Derby reported progress at half-past two, and submitted a list of the principal Officers of the Government which follows, and which the Queen approved.

The Queen allowed Lord Lyndhurst (who has declined office—has been Lord Chancellor three times, and now entered upon his eightieth year) to be offered an Earldom—which he very much desired for the position of his daughters, having no son.

After he had kissed hands upon his entering upon his office, Lord Derby had a further conversation with me on Household appointments. I told him he must now, as Prime Minister, consider himself to a certain degree in the position of the Confessor; that formerly the Lord Chancellor was Keeper of the King's Conscience, the office might be considered to have descended on the Prime Minister. The Queen must then be able to confer with him on personal matters, or I, on her behalf, with the most entire confidence, and that she must be sure that nothing was divulged which passed between them on these matters, and he might repose the same confidence in us. As to the formation of the Household, the Queen made two conditions, viz. that the persons to compose her Court should not be on the verge of bankruptcy, and that their moral character should bear investigation. On the Queen's accession Lord Melbourne had been very careless in his appointments, and great harm had resulted to the Court therefrom. Since her marriage I had insisted upon a closer line being drawn, and though Lord Melbourne had declared "that that damned morality would undo us all," we had found great advantage in it and were determined to adhere to it....

ALBERT.



Queen Victoria to the Duchess of Sutherland.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 23rd February 1852.

MY DEAREST DUCHESS,—I cannot say how deeply grieved I am to think that the event which has just occurred, and which Lord Derby's acceptance of office has to-day confirmed, will entail your leaving, for a time, my service. It has been ever a real pleasure to me to have you with me; my affection and esteem for you, my dearest Duchess, are great, and we both know what a kind and true friend we have in you.

I think that I may rely on your returning to me on a future occasion whenever that may be, and that I shall frequently have the pleasure of seeing you, even when you are no longer attached to my person.

I shall hope to see you soon. The Levee remains fixed for Thursday, and the transfer of the Officers of the new Government does not take place till Friday.

With the Prince's kindest remembrance, and ours to the Duke and Constance. Believe me always, yours affectionately,

VICTORIA R.



Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 24th February 1852.

DEAREST UNCLE,—Great and not very pleasant events have happened since I wrote last to you. I know that Van de Weyer has informed you of everything, of the really (till the last day) unexpected defeat, and of Lord Derby's assumption of office, with a very sorry Cabinet. I believe, however, that it is quite necessary they should have a trial, and then have done with it. Provided the country remains quiet, and they are prudent in their Foreign Policy, I shall take the trial as patiently as I can....

Alas! your confidence in our excellent Lord Granville is no longer of any avail, though I hope ere long he will be at the Foreign Office again,[15] and I cannot say that his successor,[16] who has never been in office (as indeed is the case with almost all the new Ministers), inspires me with confidence. I see that Louis Napoleon has again seized one of the adherents, or rathermore one of the men of business, of the poor Orleans....

There are some terrible stories from Madrid of people having told the poor Queen that the King had arranged this attack on her person, and that she was anxious to abdicate.[17] If you should hear anything of this kind, be kind enough to tell me of it. With Albert's love (he is well fagged with business), ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 15: Lord Granville held the Foreign Secretaryship in 1870-1874, and again in 1880-1885.]

[Footnote 16: Lord Malmesbury.]

[Footnote 17: The Queen was stabbed by a priest when returning from church.]



[Pageheading: LORD MALMESBURY]

Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 24th February 1852.

The Queen thinks that it would be of the highest importance that not only Lord Malmesbury (as is always usual) should receive the necessary information from Lord Granville, but that Lord Derby should see him and hear from him the state of all the critical questions now pending on Foreign Affairs. Lord Granville has made himself master in a very short time of all the very intricate subjects with which his Office has to deal, and she must here bear testimony to the extreme discretion, good sense, and calmness with which he has conducted the very responsible and difficult post of Foreign Secretary.



[Pageheading: NEW APPOINTMENTS]

The Earl of Derby to the Prince Albert.

ST JAMES'S SQUARE, 25th February 1852. (5 P.M.)

SIR,—I have delayed longer than I could have wished acknowledging the letter which I had the honour to receive from your Royal Highness last night, in hopes that by this time I should have been enabled to solve the difficulties connected with the Household Appointments; but I regret to say they are rather increased than otherwise. I will not trouble your Royal Highness now with any details; but if I might be honoured with an audience at any hour after the Levee to-morrow, I shall perhaps be able to make a more satisfactory report, and at all events to explain the state of affairs more fully.