 |
[Pageheading: SIR CHARLES NAPIER RESIGNS]
The Duke of Wellington to Queen Victoria.
LONDON, 3rd August 1850.
Field-Marshal the Duke of Wellington presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He regrets to be under the necessity of submitting to your Majesty the enclosed letter from General Sir Charles Napier, G.C.B., in which he tenders his resignation of the office of Commander-in-Chief of your Majesty's Forces in the East Indies.[32]
Upon the receipt of this paper Field-Marshal the Duke of Wellington considered it to be his duty to peruse all the papers submitted by Sir Charles Napier; to survey the transaction which had occasioned the censure of the Governor-General in Council complained of by Sir Charles Napier; to require from the India House all the information which could throw light upon the conduct complained of, as well as upon the motives alleged for it; the reasons given on account of which it was stated to be necessary.
He has stated in a minute, a memorandum of which he submits the copy to your Majesty, his views and opinions upon the whole subject, and the result which he submits to your Majesty is that he considers it his duty humbly to submit to your Majesty that your Majesty should be graciously pleased to accept the resignation of General Sir Charles Napier thus tendered.
Before he should submit this recommendation to your Majesty in relation to an office of such high reputation in so high and important a station, Field-Marshal the Duke of Wellington considered it his duty to submit his views to your Majesty's servants, who have expressed their concurrence in his opinion.
It is probable that the President of the Board of Control will lay before your Majesty the papers transmitted to the Secret Committee of the Court of Directors, by the Governor-General in Council, which are adverted to in the paper drawn up by the Duke, and of which the substance alone is stated.
All of which is humbly submitted to your Majesty by your Majesty's most dutiful Subject and most devoted Servant,
WELLINGTON.
[Footnote 32: This was in consequence of Sir Charles Napier's action in exercising powers belonging to the Supreme Council, on the occasion of a mutiny of a regiment of the Native Army.]
[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S CONDUCT OF AFFAIRS]
[Pageheading: A POSSIBLE RE-ARRANGEMENT]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
OSBORNE, 5th August 1850.
Lord John Russell having lately stated that Lord Clarendon, who had always been most eager to see Lord Palmerston moved, had lately expressed to him his opinion that it would be most dangerous and impolitic to do so under present circumstances, we thought it right to see Lord Clarendon here.... In conversation with me, Lord Clarendon spoke in his old strain of Lord Palmerston, but very strongly also of the danger of turning him out and making him the leader of the Radicals, who were anxiously waiting for that, were much dissatisfied with Lord John Russell, and free from control by the death of Sir Robert Peel. I said that if everything was done with Lord Palmerston's consent there would be no danger, to which Lord Clarendon assented, but doubted that he would consent to giving up what was his hobby. He added, nobody but Lord John could carry on the Foreign Affairs, but he ought not to leave the House of Commons under present circumstances, where he was now the only authority left.
We saw the Duke of Bedford yesterday, whom Lord John had wished us to invite. He is very unhappy about the present state of affairs, frightened about things going on as at present, when Lord John can exercise no control over Lord Palmerston, and the Queen is exposed year after year to the same annoyances and dangers arising from Lord Palmerston's mode of conducting the affairs; but on the other hand, equally frightened at turning him loose. The Duke was aware of all that had passed between us and Lord John, and ready to do anything he could to bring matters to a satisfactory solution, but thought his brother would not like to leave the House of Commons now. He had very much changed his opinion on that head latterly, and the more so as he thought something ought to be done next year with the franchise, which he alone could carry through. On my questioning whether it was impossible to persuade him to take the Foreign Office and stay in the Lower House, with a first-rate under-secretary, at least for a time, the Duke thought he might perhaps temporarily, as he felt he owed to the Queen the solution of the difficulty, but expressed again his fears of Lord Palmerston's opposition. I replied that if Lord John would make up his mind to take the Foreign Office, and to stay in the House of Commons, I saw no danger, as Lord John would be able to maintain himself successfully, and Lord Palmerston would not like to be in opposition to him, whilst he would become most formidable to anybody who was to gain only the leadership in the House; moreover, Lord John, having done so much for Lord Palmerston, could expect and demand a return of sacrifice, and a variety of posts might be offered to him—the Presidency of the Council, the office of Home Secretary, or Secretary for the Colonies, Chancellor of the Exchequer, etc., etc., which places I was sure any member of the Cabinet would vacate for him. The Duke of Bedford added the Lieutenancy of Ireland, as Lord Clarendon had told him he was ready to give it up for the purpose, but only under one condition, viz. that of not having to succeed to Lord Palmerston at the Foreign Office. Observing our surprise at this declaration, the Duke added that Lord Clarendon acted most considerately, that he was ready to have no office at all, and would support the Government independently in the House of Lords if this were to facilitate arrangements. The Queen rejoined that a peerage was of course also at Lord John's disposal for Lord Palmerston. We then agreed that Lord Granville would be the best person to become Lord John's Under-Secretary of State, a man highly popular, pleasing, conciliatory, well versed in Foreign Affairs, and most industrious; trained under Lord John, he could at any time leave him the office altogether, if Lord John should find it too much for himself. Lord Granville had a higher office now, that of Vice-President of the Board of Trade and Paymaster-General, but would be sure to feel the importance of taking a lower office under such circumstances and with such contingencies likely to depend upon it. I have seen a great deal of him latterly, as he is the only working man on the Commission for the Exhibition of 1851, and have found him most able, good-natured, and laborious. The Duke liked the proposal very much, and is going to communicate all that passed between us to Lord John on Tuesday.
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S POSITION]
[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S JUSTIFICATION]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
OSBORNE, 8th August 1850.
Lord John Russell came down here yesterday in order to report to the Queen what had passed between him and Lord Palmerston the day before, on whom he had called in order to have an explanation on the Foreign Affairs.
Lord John reminded him of former communications, but admitted that circumstances were much changed by the recent debates in both Houses of Parliament; still, it was necessary to come to an understanding of the position. The policy pursued with regard to the Foreign Affairs had been right and such as had the approval of Lord John himself, the Cabinet generally, and he believed the greater part of the country. But the manner in which it had been executed had been unfortunate, led to irritation and hostility; although peace had actually been preserved, and England stood in a position requiring no territorial aggrandisement or advantage of any kind, yet all Governments and Powers, not only Russia and Austria, but also France and the liberal states, had become decidedly hostile to us, and our intercourse was not such as was desirable. Lord John could instance many cases in which they had been unnecessarily slighted and provoked by Lord Palmerston, like M. Drouyn de Lhuys in the Greek affair. Lord Palmerston's conduct towards the Queen had been disrespectful and wanting in due attention and deference to her, and had been much complained of.
In consequence of all this Lord John had before proposed to Her Majesty that the Foreign Affairs should be entrusted to Lord Minto, he himself should go to the House of Lords, and Lord Palmerston should have the lead in the House of Commons. The Queen had, however, objected to this arrangement, [thinking] the lead in the Lower House to be more properly given to Sir George Grey, who had as Home Secretary conducted all internal business in the House. Now had come Sir R. Peel's death, which made it impossible for Lord John to leave the House of Commons without endangering the position of Government and of the parties in the House.
Lord Palmerston was much pleased to hear of Lord John's intention to stay in the House of Commons, said all was changed now; there had been a great conspiracy against him, he had been accused in Parliament, put on his trial and acquitted. The acquittal had produced the greatest enthusiasm for him in the country, and he was now supported by a strong party; he owned, however, that his success had been chiefly owing to the handsome manner in which Lord John and his colleagues had supported him in the debate. That he should incur the momentary enmity of those states whose interests and plans he might have to cross was quite natural; he had never intended any disrespect to the Queen, and if he had been guilty of any he was quite unconscious of it and sorry for it.
Lord John reminded him that although the Government had got a majority in the House of Commons in the Foreign debate, it was not to be forgotten that the fate of the Government had been staked upon it, and that many people voted on that account who would not have supported the Foreign policy; that it was remarkable that all those who had the strongest reason to be anxious for the continuance of the Government, but who could not avoid speaking, were obliged to speak and vote against the Government. Sir R. Peel's speech was a most remarkable instance of this.
Lord Palmerston saw in Sir Robert's speech nothing but a reluctant effort to defend Lord Aberdeen, whom he was bound to defend. If he (Lord Palmerston) were to leave the Foreign Office, there must be a ground for it, such as his having to take the lead in the House of Commons, which was evidently impossible with the conduct of Foreign Department at the same time. (It had killed Mr Canning, and after that failure nobody ought to attempt it.) But without such a ground it would be loss of character to him, which he could not be expected to submit to. There was not even the excuse of wishing to avoid a difficulty with a foreign country, as all was smooth now. Those who had wished to injure him had been beat, and now it would be giving them a triumph after all. If the Queen or the Cabinet were dissatisfied with his management of the Foreign Affairs, they had a right to demand his resignation, and he would give it, but they could not ask him to lower himself in public estimation. Lord John answered that his resignation would lead to a further split of parties: there were parties already enough in the House, and it was essential that at least the Whig party should be kept together, to which Lord Palmerston assented. He (Lord Palmerston) then repeated his complaints against that plot which had been got up in this country against him, and urged on by foreigners, complained particularly of Lord Clarendon, Mr Greville of the Privy Council, Mr Reeve, ditto, and their attacks upon him in the Times, and of Mr Delane, the Editor of the Times, of Guizot, Princess Lieven, etc., etc., etc. However, they had been convinced that they could not upset him, and Mr Reeve had declared to him that he had been making open and honourable (?!!) war upon him; now he would make a lasting peace. With Russia and France he (Lord Palmerston) had just been signing the Danish Protocol, showing that they were on the best terms together.
Lord John felt he could not press the matter further under these circumstances, but he seemed much provoked at the result of his conversation. We expressed our surprise that he had not made Lord Palmerston any offer of any kind. Lord John replied he had not been sure what he could have offered him....
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: DUTIES OF THE FOREIGN SECRETARY]
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.[33]
OSBORNE, 12th August 1850.
With reference to the conversation about Lord Palmerston which the Queen had with Lord John Russell the other day, and Lord Palmerston's disavowal that he ever intended any disrespect to her by the various neglects of which she has had so long and so often to complain, she thinks it right, in order to prevent any mistake for the future, shortly to explain what it is she expects from her Foreign Secretary. She requires: (1) That he will distinctly state what he proposes in a given case, in order that the Queen may know as distinctly to what she has given her Royal sanction; (2) Having once given her sanction to a measure, that it be not arbitrarily altered or modified by the Minister; such an act she must consider as failing in sincerity towards the Crown, and justly to be visited by the exercise of her Constitutional right of dismissing that Minister. She expects to be kept informed of what passes between him and the Foreign Ministers before important decisions are taken, based upon that intercourse; to receive the Foreign Despatches in good time, and to have the drafts for her approval sent to her in sufficient time to make herself acquainted with their contents before they must be sent off. The Queen thinks it best that Lord John Russell should show this letter to Lord Palmerston.
[Footnote 33: Compare the memorandum suggested by Baron Stockmar, ante, p. 238. This letter was, after much forbearance, written in the hope of bringing Lord Palmerston to a proper understanding of his relation to the Sovereign. Even when the catastrophe came, and its tenor had to be communicated by the Premier to Parliament, the Preamble was generously omitted; but in consequence of its description by Lord Palmerston, in a letter published by Mr Ashley, as an angry memorandum, it was printed in full in The Life of the Prince Consort.]
Viscount Palmerston to Lord John Russell.
FOREIGN OFFICE, 13th August 1850.
MY DEAR JOHN RUSSELL,—I have taken a copy of this memorandum of the Queen and will not fail to attend to the directions which it contains. With regard to the sending of despatches to the Queen, they have sometimes been delayed longer than should have been the case, in consequence of my having been prevented by great pressure of business, and by the many interruptions of interviews, etc., to which I am liable, from reading and sending them back into the Office so soon as I could have wished. But I will give orders that the old practice shall be reverted to, of making copies of all important despatches as soon as they reach the Office, so that there may be no delay in sending the despatches to the Queen; this practice was gradually left off as the business of the Office increased, and if it shall require an additional clerk or two you must be liberal and allow me that assistance.—Yours sincerely,
PALMERSTON.
[Pageheading: DEATH OF LOUIS PHILIPPE]
The Duc de Nemours to Queen Victoria.
CLAREMONT, 26 Aout 1850.
MADAME MA CHERE COUSINE,—La main de Dieu vient de s'appesantir sur nous. Le Roi notre Pere n'est plus.[34] Apres avoir recu hier avec calme et resignation les secours de la religion, il s'est eteint ce matin a huit heures au milieu de nous tous. Vous le connaissiez ma chere Cousine, vous savez tout ce que nous perdons, vous comprendrez donc l'inexprimable douleur dans laquelle nous sommes plonges; vous la partagerez meme je le sais!
La Reine brisee, malgre son courage, ne trouve de soulagement que dans une retraite absolue ou ne voyant personne elle puisse laisser cours a sa douleur.
Veuillez faire part a Albert de notre malheur et recevoir ici, ma chere Cousine, l'hommage des sentiments de respect et d'attachement, de votre bien affectionne Cousin,
LOUIS D'ORLEANS.
[Footnote 34: King Louis Philippe was in his seventy-seventh year when he died: his widow, Queen Marie Amelie, lived till 1866, when she died at the age of eighty-four.]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 26th August 1850.
The Queen wishes Lord Palmerston to give directions for a Court mourning according to those which are usual for an abdicated King. She likewise wishes that every assistance should be given, and every attention shown to the afflicted Royal Family, who have been so severely tried during the last two years, on the melancholy occasion of the poor King of the French's death.
The Queen starts for Scotland to-morrow.
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
LAEKEN, 30 August 1850.
... I have offered to the poor Queen of the French to remain at Claremont and d'en disposer as long as Heaven does not dispose of myself. She, of course, dislikes the place, but will keep the family with her at least for some time.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
TAYMOUTH CASTLE, 5th September 1850.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and was happy to receive your Majesty's gracious letter, which reached him the night before last.
The proofs of attachment to your Majesty, which are everywhere exhibited, are the more gratifying as they are entirely spontaneous.
It is fit and becoming that your Majesty should inhabit the royal Palace of Holyrood, and this circumstance gives great satisfaction throughout Scotland.
Lord John Russell is glad to learn that the family of the late King of the French will continue to reside in England.
The reflection naturally occurs, if Napoleon and Louis Philippe were unable to consolidate a dynasty in France, who will ever be able to do it? The prospect is a succession of fruitless attempts at civil Government till a General assumes the command, and governs by military force.
[Pageheading: THE POET LAUREATE]
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
DUNKELD, 7th September 1850.
... Lord John Russell has had the honour of receiving at Taymouth a letter from the Prince. He agrees that the office of Poet Laureate ought to be filled up. There are three or four authors of nearly equal merit, such as Henry Taylor, Sheridan Knowles, Professor Wilson, and Mr Tennyson, who are qualified for the office.
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
OSTEND, 7th October 1850.
MY DEAREST VICTORIA,—I write a few words only to tell you how our dear patient is.[35] Yesterday was a most perilous, truly dreadful day; our dear angelic Louise was so fainting that Madame d'Hulst, who was with her, felt the greatest alarm. She afterwards was better, and her mother, Clem, Joinville, and Aumale having arrived, she saw them with more composure than could have been expected. Still, she would in fact wish to be left quiet and alone with me, and we try to manage things as much as possible so that their visit does not tire her too much.
Her courage and strength of mind are most heart-breaking when one thinks of the danger in which she is, and her dear and angelic soul seems even to shine more brightly at this moment of such great and imminent danger. I am in a dreadful state when I am with her. She is so contented, so cheerful, that the possibilities of danger appear to me impossible; but the physicians are very much alarmed, without thinking the state absolutely hopeless. That one should write such things about a life so precious, and one in fact still so young, and whose angelic soul is so strong! You will feel with me as you love her so dearly. God bless you and preserve you from heart-breaking sufferings like mine. Ever, my dearest Victoria, your devoted Uncle,
LEOPOLD R.
[Footnote 35: The Queen of the Belgians died on the 11th of October, at the age of thirty-eight.]
[Pageheading: GENERAL HAYNAU]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
BROADLANDS, 8th October 1850.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has had the honour to receive your Majesty's communication of the 4th instant, expressing your Majesty's wish that an alteration should be made in his answer to Baron Koller's[36] note of the 5th of September, on the subject of the attack made upon General Haynau;[37] but Viscount Palmerston begs to state that when Baron Koller was at this place about ten days ago, he expressed so much annoyance at the delay which had already taken place in regard to the answer to his note of the 5th September, and he requested so earnestly that he might immediately have the reply, that Viscount Palmerston could do no otherwise than send him the answer at once, and Baron Koller despatched it the next day to Vienna.
Viscount Palmerston had put the last paragraph into the answer, because he could scarcely have reconciled it to his own feelings and to his sense of public responsibility to have put his name to a note which might be liable to be called for by Parliament, without expressing in it, at least as his own personal opinion, a sense of the want of propriety evinced by General Haynau in coming to England at the present moment.[38]
The state of public feeling in this country about General Haynau and his proceedings in Italy and Hungary was perfectly well known; and his coming here so soon after those events, without necessity or obligation to do so, was liable to be looked upon as a bravado, and as a challenge to an expression of public opinion.
Baron Koller indeed told Viscount Palmerston that Prince Metternich and Baron Neumann had at Brussels strongly dissuaded General Haynau from coming on to England; and that he (Baron Koller) had after his arrival earnestly entreated him to cut off those long moustachios which rendered him so liable to be identified.
With regard to the transaction itself, there is no justifying a breach of the law, nor an attack by a large number of people upon one or two individuals who cannot resist such superior force; and though in the present case, according to Baron Koller's account, the chief injury sustained by General Haynau consisted in the tearing of his coat, the loss of a cane, and some severe bruises on his left arm, and though four or five policemen proved to be sufficient protection, yet a mob who begin by insult lead each other on to outrage; and there is no saying to what extremes they might have proceeded if they had not been checked.
Such occurrences, however, have taken place before; and to go no further back than the last summer, the attacks on Lord Talbot at the Stafford meeting, and on Mr Bankes, Mr Sturt, and others at the Dorchester meeting, when a man was killed, were still more violent outrages, and originated simply in differences of political opinion; whereas in this case the brewers' men were expressing their feeling at what they considered inhuman conduct on the part of General Haynau.
The people of this country are remarkable for their hospitable reception of foreigners, and for their forgetfulness of past animosities. Napoleon Bonaparte, the greatest enemy that England ever had, was treated while at Plymouth with respect, and with commiseration while at St Helena. Marshal Soult, who had fought in many battles against the English, was received with generous acclamation when he came here as Special Ambassador. The King of the French, Mons. Guizot, and Prince Metternich, though all of them great antagonists of English policy and English interests, were treated in this country with courtesy and kindness. But General Haynau was looked upon as a great moral criminal; and the feeling in regard to him was of the same nature as that which was manifested towards Tawell[39] and the Mannings,[40] with this only difference, that General Haynau's bad deeds were committed upon a far larger scale, and upon a far larger number of victims. But Viscount Palmerston can assure your Majesty that those feelings of just and honourable indignation have not been confined to England, for he had good reason to know that General Haynau's ferocious and unmanly treatment of the unfortunate inhabitants of Brescia and of other towns and places in Italy, his savage proclamations to the people of Pesth, and his barbarous acts in Hungary excited almost as much disgust in Austria as in England, and that the nickname of "General Hyaena" was given to him at Vienna long before it was applied to him in London.
[Footnote 36: The Austrian Ambassador.]
[Footnote 37: General Haynau had earned in the Hungarian War an odious reputation as a flogger of women. When visiting the brewery of Barclay & Perkins, the draymen mobbed and assaulted him; he had to fly from them, and take refuge in a neighbouring house. Lord Palmerston had to send an official letter of apology to the Austrian Government, which, as originally despatched, without waiting for the Queen's approval, contained a paragraph offensive to Austria.]
[Footnote 38: See Lord Palmerston's letter to Sir G. Grey, Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. i. chap. vi.]
[Footnote 39: Executed for the Salt Hill murder.]
[Footnote 40: Marie Manning (an ex-lady's maid, whose career is said to have suggested Hortense in Bleak House to Dickens) was executed with her husband, in 1849, for the murder of a guest. She wore black satin on the scaffold, a material which consequently became unpopular for some time.]
[Pageheading: THE DRAFT DESPATCHED]
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 11th October 1850.
The Queen having written to Lord Palmerston in conformity with Lord John Russell's suggestion respecting the draft to Baron Koller, now encloses Lord Palmerston's answer, which she received at Edinburgh yesterday evening. Lord John will see that Lord Palmerston has not only sent the draft, but passes over in silence her injunction to have a corrected copy given to Baron Koller, and adds a vituperation against General Haynau, which clearly shows that he is not sorry for what has happened, and makes a merit of sympathising with the draymen at the brewery and the Chartist Demonstrations....
The Queen encloses likewise a copy of her letter to Lord Palmerston, and hopes Lord John will write to him.[41]
[Footnote 41: Lord John insisted on the note being withdrawn, and another substituted with the offensive passage omitted. After threatening resignation, Lord Palmerston somewhat tamely consented.
Lord John Russell wrote to the Prince Albert that he would be "somewhat amused, if not surprised, at the sudden and amicable termination of the dispute regarding the letter to Baron Koller. The same course may be adopted with advantage if a despatch is ever again sent which has been objected to, and to which the Queen's sanction has not been given." See the Queen's letter of the 19th of October.]
[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON CENSURED]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 12th October 1850.
The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter respecting the draft to Baron Koller. She cannot suppose that Baron Koller addressed his note to Lord Palmerston in order to receive in answer an expression of his own personal opinion; and if Lord Palmerston could not reconcile it to his own feelings to express the regret of the Queen's Government at the brutal attack and wanton outrage committed by a ferocious mob on a distinguished foreigner of past seventy years of age, who was quietly visiting a private establishment in this metropolis, without adding his censure of the want of propriety evinced by General Haynau in coming to England—he might have done so in a private letter, where his personal feelings could not be mistaken for the opinion of the Queen and her Government. She must repeat her request that Lord Palmerston will rectify this.
The Queen can as little approve of the introduction of Lynch Law in this country as of the violent vituperations with which Lord Palmerston accuses and condemns public men in other countries, acting in most difficult circumstances and under heavy responsibility, without having the means of obtaining correct information or of sifting evidence.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 16th October 1850.
The Queen is glad to hear from Lord Palmerston that he has given no countenance to the French and Russian proposal at the suggestion of Denmark, that England, France, and Russia should, after having signed the Protocol in favour of Denmark, now go further and send their armies to aid her in her contest with Holstein.[42] The Queen does not expect any good result from Lord Palmerston's counter proposal to urge Prussia and Austria to compel the Holsteiners to lay down their arms. The mediating power ought rather to make Denmark feel that it requires more than a cessation of hostilities, a plan of reconciliation, and a solution of the questions in dispute, before she can hope permanently to establish peace. The mediating power itself, however, should strive to arrive at some opinion on the matter in dispute, based, not on its own supposed interests, as the Protocol is, but on an anxious, careful, and impartial investigation of the rights and pretensions of the disputing parties; and if it finds it impossible to arrive at such an opinion, to fix upon some impartial tribunal capable of doing so, to which the dispute could be submitted for decision. Common principles of morality would point out such a course, and what is morally right only can be politically wise.
[Footnote 42: A strenuous attempt was being made by the Danish Government to bring pressure to bear on Austria and Prussia, to put down the nationalist movement in the Duchies, either by active intervention, or by reassembling the Conference which had negotiated the Treaty of Berlin. Lord Palmerston discountenanced both alternatives, but wrote to the Queen that he and the representatives of France, Russia, and Denmark thought that Austria and Prussia should be urged to take all feasible steps to put an end to the hostilities.]
[Pageheading: DEATH OF QUEEN LOUISE]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
OSBORNE, 18th October 1850.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,—This was the day I always and for so many years wrote to her, to our adored Louise, and I now write to you, to thank you for that heart-breaking, touching letter of the 16th, which you so very kindly wrote to me. It is so kind of you to write to us. What a day Tuesday must have been! Welch einen Gang! and yesterday! My grief was so great again yesterday. To talk of her is my greatest consolation!Let us all try to imitate her!My poor dear Uncle, we wish so to be with you, to be of any use to you. You will allow us, in three or four weeks, to go to you for two or three days, quite quietly and alone, to Laeken without any one, without any reception anywhere, to cry with you and to talk with you of Her. It will be a great comfort to us—a silent tribute of respect and love to her—to be able to mingle our tears with yours over her tomb! And the affection of your two devoted children will perhaps be some slight balm. My first impulse was to fly at once to you, but perhaps a few weeks' delay will be better. It will be a great and melancholy satisfaction to us. Daily will you feel more, my poor dear Uncle, the poignancy of your dreadful loss; my heart breaks in thinking of you and the poor dear children. How beautiful it must be to see that your whole country weeps and mourns with you! For this country and for your children you must try to bear up, and feel that in so doing you are doing all SHE wished. If only we could be of use to you! if I could do anything for dear little Charlotte, whom our blessed Louise talked of so often to me.
May I write to you on Fridays when I used to write to her, as well as on Tuesdays? You need not answer me, and whenever it bores you to write to me, or you have no time, let one of the dear children write to me.
May God bless and protect you ever, my beloved Uncle, is our anxious prayer. Embrace the dear children in the name of one who has almost the feelings of a mother for them. Ever your devoted Niece and loving Child,
VICTORIA R.
[Pageheading: THE QUEEN AND PALMERSTON]
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
OSBORNE, 19th October 1850.
The Queen is very glad of the result of the conflict with Lord Palmerston, of which Lord John Russell apprised her by his letter of yesterday's date. The correspondence, which the Queen now returns, shows clearly that Lord Palmerston in this transaction, as in every other, remained true to his principles of action.... But it shows also that Lord John has the power of exercising that control over Lord Palmerston, the careful exercise of which he owes to the Queen, his colleagues, and the country, if he will take the necessary pains to remain firm. The Queen does not believe in resignation under almost any circumstances.
The Queen is very anxious about the Holstein question, and sends a copy of her last letter to Lord Palmerston on the subject.
Lord John Russell to the Prince Albert.
PEMBROKE LODGE, 21st October 1850.
SIR,—I have just received this note from Lord Palmerston.[43]
The French Ambassador, who has been here, confirms the news. We must consider the whole affair on Wednesday, and I shall be glad to learn what the Queen thinks can be done.
Mr Tennyson is a fit person to be Poet Laureate.
I have the honour to be, your Royal Highness's most obedient Servant,
J. RUSSELL.
[Footnote 43: The note was in reference to the affairs of Hesse-Cassel, and to the rumours of a Conference to be held in Austria for the settlement of German affairs.]
[Pageheading: THE TRACTARIAN MOVEMENT]
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
BISHOPTHORPE, 25th October 1850.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has read with attention the letter of the Duchess of Norfolk.[44] He has also read the Pope's Bull. It strikes him that the division into twelve territorial dioceses of eight ecclesiastical vicariats is not a matter to be alarmed at. The persons to be affected by this change must be already Roman Catholics before it can touch them.
The matter to create rational alarm is, as your Majesty says, the growth of Roman Catholic doctrines and practices within the bosom of the Church. Dr Arnold said very truly, "I look upon a Roman Catholic as an enemy in his uniform; I look upon a Tractarian as an enemy disguised as a spy."
It would be very wrong to do as the Bishop of Oxford proposed, and confer the patronage of the Crown on any of these Tractarians. But, on the other hand, to treat them with severity would give the whole party vigour and union.
The Dean of Bristol is of opinion that the Tractarians are falling to pieces by dissension. It appears clear that Mr Denison and Mr Palmer have broken off from Dr Pusey.
Sir George Grey will ask the Law Officers whether there is anything illegal in Dr Wiseman's assuming the title of Archbishop of Westminster. An English Cardinal is not a novelty.[45]
[Footnote 44: Two important events in the history of the English Church had just occurred. The Bishop of Exeter had refused to institute Mr Gorham to a Crown living in his diocese, on the ground that his teaching on baptism was at variance with the formularies of the Church. This decision, though upheld in the Court of Arches, was reversed (though not unanimously) by the Privy Council. High Church feeling was much aroused by the judgment.
In September, Pius IX. (now re-established in the Vatican) promulgated a papal brief, restoring the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England, and dividing it territorially into twelve sees, and in October Cardinal Wiseman, as Archbishop of Westminster, issued his Pastoral, claiming that Catholic England had been restored to its orbit in the ecclesiastical firmament. The Duchess of Norfolk, writing from Arundel, had criticised the proselytising action of certain Roman Catholic clergy. See the Queen's reply, post, p. 277.]
[Footnote 45: Lord John wrote on the 4th of November to Dr Maltby, Bishop of Durham, denouncing the assumption of spiritual superiority over England, in the documents issued from Rome. But what alarmed him more (he said) was the action of clergymen within the Church leading their flocks dangerously near the brink, and recommending for adoption the honour paid to saints, the claim of infallibility for the Church, the superstitious use of the sign of the cross, the muttering of the liturgy so as to disguise the language in which it was said, with the recommendation of auricular confession and the administration of Penance and absolution.
Lord John was pictorially satirised in Punch as the boy who chalked up "No popery" on the door and ran away.]
[Pageheading: UNREST IN EUROPE]
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
ARDENNE, 10th November 1850.
MY DEAREST VICTORIA,—I write already to-day that it may not miss to-morrow's messenger. I came here yesterday by a mild sunshine, and the valley of the Meuse was very pretty. I love my solitude here, and though the house is small and not what it ought to have been, still I always liked it. There seems in most countries danger of agitation and convulsions arising. I don't know how it will end in Germany. In France it is difficult that things should not break up some way or other. I trust you may be spared religious agitation. These sorts of things begin with one pretext, and sometimes continue with others. I don't think Europe was ever in more danger, il y a tant d'anarchie dans les esprits. I don't think that can be cured a l'eau de rose; the human race is not naturally good, very much the contrary; it requires a strong hand, and is, in fact, even pleased to be led in that way; the memory of all the sort of Cesars and Napoleons, from whom they chiefly got blows, is much dearer to them than the benefactors of mankind, whom they crucify when they can have their own way. Give my best love to Albert; and I also am very anxious to be recalled to the recollection of the children, who were so very friendly at Ostende. How far we were then to guess what has since happened.... My dearest Victoria, your devoted Uncle,
LEOPOLD R.
Queen Victoria to the Countess of Gainsborough.[46]
Thursday morning [November ...] 1850.
DEAREST FANNY,—This is a case of positive necessity, and as none of the ladies are forthcoming I fear I must call upon you to attend me to-night. You did so once in state before, and as it is not a matter of pleasure, but of duty, I am sure you will at once feel that you can have no scruple.
Whenever the Mistress of the Robes does not attend, I always have three ladies, as they must take turns in standing behind me. Ever yours affectionately,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 46: Frances, Countess of Gainsborough, daughter of the third Earl of Roden, a Lady of the Bedchamber, and known till 1841 as Lady Barham.]
[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND GERMANY]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 18th November 1850.
The Queen is exceedingly sorry to hear that Lord Westmorland[47] is gone, as she was particularly anxious to have seen him before his return to Berlin, and to have talked to him on the present critical events in Germany; but she quite forgot the day of his departure. What is the object of his seeing the President at Paris? and what are his instructions with regard to Germany?[48]
Having invariably encouraged Constitutional development in other countries,... and having at the beginning of the great movement in 1847, which led to all the catastrophes of the following years, sent a Cabinet Minister to Italy to declare to all Italian states that England would protect them from Austria if she should attempt by threats and violence to debar them from the attainment of their Constitutional development, consistency would require that we should now, when that great struggle is at its end and despotism is to be re-imposed by Austrian arms upon Germany, throw our weight into the scale of Constitutional Prussia and Germany.... The Queen is afraid, however, that all our Ministers abroad,—at Berlin, Dresden, Munich, Stuttgart, Hanover, etc. (with the exception of Lord Cowley at Frankfort)—are warm partisans of the despotic league against Prussia and a German Constitution and for the maintenance of the old Diet under Austrian and Russian influence. Ought not Lord Palmerston to make his agents understand that their sentiments are at variance with those of the English Government? and that they are doing serious mischief if they express them at Courts which have already every inclination to follow their desperate course?
Lord Palmerston is of course aware that the old Diet once reconstituted and recognised, one of the main laws of it is that "no organic change can be made without unanimity of voices," which was the cause of the nullity of that body from 1820 to 1848, and will now enable Austria, should Prussia and her confederates recognise the Diet, to condemn Germany to a further life of stagnation or new revolution.
[Footnote 47: Minister at Berlin.]
[Footnote 48: Lord Palmerston may have had this letter of the Queen's in mind when he wrote on the 22nd of November to Lord Cowley: "Her (i.e. Prussia's) partisans try to make out that the contest between her and Austria is a struggle between constitutional and arbitrary Government, but it is no such thing." Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. 1. chap. vi.]
[Pageheading: CONSTITUTIONALISM IN GERMANY]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
FOREIGN OFFICE, 18th November 1850.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty. With respect to the maintenance of Constitutional Government in Germany, Viscount Palmerston entirely subscribes to your Majesty's opinion, that a regard for consistency, as well as a sense of right and justice, ought to lead your Majesty's Government to give to the Constitutional principle in Germany the same moral support which they endeavoured to afford it in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and elsewhere; but though he is conscious that he may be deceived and may think better of the Austrian Government in this respect than it deserves, yet he cannot persuade himself that rational and sound Constitutional Government is at present in danger in Germany, or that the Austrian Government, whatever may be their inclination and wishes, can think it possible in the present day to re-establish despotic government in a nation so enlightened, and so attached to free institutions as the German people now is. The danger for Germany seems to lie rather in the opposite direction, arising from the rash and weak precipitation with which in 1848 and 1849 those Governments which before had refused everything resolved in a moment of alarm to grant everything, and, passing from one extreme to the other, threw universal suffrage among people who had been, some wholly and others very much, unaccustomed to the working of representative Government. The French have found universal suffrage incompatible with good order even in a Republic; what must it be for a Monarchy?
Viscount Palmerston would, moreover, beg to submit that the conflict between Austria and Prussia can scarcely be said to have turned upon principles of Government so much as upon a struggle for political ascendency in Germany. At Berlin, at Dresden, and in Baden the Prussian Government has very properly no doubt employed military force to reestablish order; and in regard to the affairs of Hesse, the ground taken by Prussia was not so much a constitutional as a military one, and the objection which she made to the entrance of the troops of the Diet was that those troops might become hostile, and that they ought not, therefore, to occupy a central position in the line of military defence of Prussia.
The remark which your Majesty makes as to unanimity being required for certain purposes by the Diet regulations is no doubt very just, and that circumstance certainly shows that the free Conference which is about to be held is a better constructed body for planning a new arrangement of a central organ.[49]
[Footnote 49: War was staved off by the Conference; but the relative predominance of Prussia and Austria in Germany was left undecided for some years to come.]
[Pageheading: STATE OF THE CONTINENT]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 22nd November 1850.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,—Accept my best thanks for your kind letter of the 17th, and the dear little English one from dear little Charlotte, which is so nicely written, and shows such an amiable disposition. I send her to-day a little heart for the hair of our blessed Angel, which I hope she will often wear. Our girls have all got one. I have written to the dear child. You should have the dear children as much with you as possible; I am sure it would be so good and useful for you and them. Children ought to have great confidence in their parents, in order for them to have any influence over them.
Yesterday Vicky was ten years old. It seems a dream. If she lives, in eight years more she may be married! She is a very clever child, and I must say very much improved.
The state of the Continent is deplorable; the folly of Austria and the giving way of Prussia are lamentable. Our influence on the Continent is null.... Add to this, we are between two fires in this country: a furious Protestant feeling and an enraged Catholic feeling in Ireland. I believe that Austria fans the flame at Rome, and that the whole movement on the Continent is anti-Constitutional, anti-Protestant, and anti-English; and this is so complicated, and we have (thanks to Lord Palmerston) contrived to quarrel so happily, separately with each, that I do not know how we are to stand against it all!
I must now conclude. Trusting soon to hear from you again. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
My longing for dearest Louise seems only to increase as time goes on.
Queen Victoria to the Duchess of Norfolk.
Windsor Castle, 22nd November 1850.
MY DEAR DUCHESS,—It is very remiss in me not to have sooner answered your letter with the enclosure, but I received it at a moment of great grief, and since then I have been much occupied.
I fully understand your anxiety relative to the proceedings of the Roman Catholic Clergy, but I trust that there is no real danger to be apprehended from that quarter, the more so as I believe they see that they have been misled and misinformed as to the feeling of this country by some of the new converts to their religion. The real danger to be apprehended, and what I am certain has led to these proceedings on the part of the Pope, lies in our own divisions, and in the extraordinary conduct of the Puseyites. I trust that the eyes of many may now be opened. One would, however, much regret to see any acts of intolerance towards the many innocent people who I believe entirely disapprove the injudicious conduct of their Clergy.
Hoping that you are all well, believe me, always, yours, affectionately,
VICTORIA R.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 29th November 1850.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,—I have no dear letter to answer, but write to keep to the dear day, rendered so peculiarly dear to me by the recollection of our dearly beloved Louise.
We are well, but much troubled with numberless things. Our religious troubles are great, and I must just say that Cardinal Wiseman himself admits that Austria not only approves the conduct of the Pope but is urging on the Propaganda. I know this to be so. Our great difficulty must be, and will be, to steer clear of both parties—the violent Protestants and the Roman Catholics. We wish in no way to infringe the rights of the Roman Catholics, while we must protect and uphold our own religion.
We have seen General Radowitz,[50] with whom we have been much interested; his accounts are very clear and very able, and I must say, very fair and strictly constitutional. You know him, I suppose? Might I again ask, dearest Uncle, if you would like to have a copy of Ross's picture of our angel Louise or of Winterhalter's?
Lady Lyttelton, who is returned, is very anxious in her enquiries after you.
I must now conclude, my dearest Uncle. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 50: General Radowitz, who had been Minister for Foreign Affairs in Prussia, had just arrived in England on a special mission from the King of Prussia.]
[Pageheading: STATE OF GERMANY]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 3rd December 1850.
MY BELOVED UNCLE,—Two of your dear letters are before me, of the 29th November and of yesterday. In the former you give me a promise, which I consider most valuable, and which I shall remind you of if you get desponding, viz. "I will to please you labour on, and do all the good I can." It is so pleasing to feel that one does good and does one's duty. It sweetens so many bitter trials.
The state of Germany is indeed a very anxious one. It is a mistake to think the supremacy of Prussia is what is wished for. General Radowitz himself says that what is necessary for Germany [is] that she should take the lead, and should redeem the pledges given in '48. Unless this be done in a moderate and determined way, a fearful reaction will take place, which will overturn Thrones; to use Radowitz's own words: "und nicht vor dem Thron stehen bleiben." Prussia is the only large and powerful really German Power there is, and therefore she must take the lead; but her constant vacillation—one day doing one thing and another day another—has caused her to be entirely distrusted. You are quite right in saying things should be done d'un commun accord, and I think that the other great Powers ought to be consulted. Unfortunately, Lord Palmerston has contrived to make us so hated by all parties abroad, that we have lost our position and our influence, which, considering the flourishing and satisfactory state of this country during all the European convulsions, ought to have been immense. This it is which pains and grieves me so deeply, and which I have so plainly been speaking to Lord John Russell about. What a noble position we might have had, and how wantonly has it been thrown away!
Good Stockmar is well, and always of the greatest comfort and use to us. His judgment is so sound, so unbiassed, and so dispassionate. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND ROME]
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 8th December 1850.
The Queen received Lord John Russell's letter and the draft yesterday. He must be a better judge of what the effect of Mr Sheil's[51] presence in Rome may be than she can; but for her own part, she thinks it entirely against her notions of what is becoming to ask the Pope for a favour (for it is tantamount to that) at a moment when his name is being vilified and abused in every possible manner in this country. It strikes the Queen as an undignified course for this Government to pursue.
The Queen is glad to hear of what passed between the Archbishop and Lord John.[52] She trusts that something may be done, as the desire for it seems to be so great. On the other hand, the Queen deeply regrets the great abuse of the Roman Catholic religion which takes place at all these meetings, etc. She thinks it unchristian and unwise, and trusts that it will soon cease....
[Footnote 51: Minister at the Court of Tuscany.]
[Footnote 52: The Government were preparing for the introduction of their Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.]
[Pageheading: LADY PEEL]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 10th December 1850.
MY BELOVED UNCLE,—My letter must, I fear, be a somewhat hurried and short one, for my morning has been taken up in receiving in state Addresses from the City and Universities about this unfortunate "Papal Aggression" business, which is still keeping people in a feverish state of wild excitement.[53] One good effect it has had, viz. that of directing people's serious attention to the very alarming tendency of the Tractarians, which was doing immense harm....
Many, many thanks for your two dear and kind letters of the 6th and of yesterday. All you say about Louise, and about the disappearance for ever of all that she loved and was proud of, is so true, so dreadful. One fancies (foolishly and wrongly, but still one does) that the lost one has been hardly used in no longer enjoying these earthly blessings, and one's grief seems to break out afresh in bitter agony upon small and comparatively trifling occasions. Poor Lady Peel (whom I saw for the first time yesterday at Buckingham Palace, whither I had gone for an hour) expressed this strongly. Hers is indeed a broken heart; she is so truly crushed by the agony of her grief; it was very touching to see and to hear her. Poor thing! she never can be happy again!
What you say about me is far too kind. I am very often sadly dissatisfied with myself and with the little self-control I have.
Your long letter interested us much. I fear the German affairs are very bad.... That everlasting "backwards and forwards," as you say, of my poor friend the King of Prussia is calamitous; it causes all parties to distrust him, and gives real strength only to the Republicans. Since '48 that has been his conduct, and the misfortune for Germany. A steady course, whatever it may be, is always the best.
What you say about poor Helene[54] and France is true and sad. I really wish you would caution Helene as to her language; she is much attached to you. I pity her very much; her position is very trying, and her religion renders it more difficult even.
I must now end my letter. I grieve to hear of your going alone to Ardenne; it is BAD for you to be alone, and your poor children also ought not to be alone. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 53: These Addresses were presented at Windsor, Prince Albert and the Duke of Wellington representing the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford.]
[Footnote 54: The Duchess of Orleans.]
[Pageheading: THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH]
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
DOWNING STREET, 11th December 1850.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that the Cabinet to-day considered at great length the question of the steps to be taken in respect to the Papal Aggression.
The inclination of the majority was not to prosecute, but to bring a Bill into Parliament to make the assumption of any titles of archbishop, etc., of any place in the United Kingdom illegal, and to make any gift of property conveyed under such title null and void.
[Pageheading: RITUALISM]
Queen Victoria to the Duchess of Gloucester.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 12th December 1850.
MY DEAR AUNT,—Many thanks for your kind letter; you are quite right not to distress the Duchess of Cambridge by mentioning to her what I wrote to you about the Bishop of London.[55] I am glad that you are pleased with my answers to the Addresses; I thought them very proper.[56]
I would never have consented to say anything which breathed a spirit of intolerance. Sincerely Protestant as I always have been and always shall be, and indignant as I am at those who call themselves Protestants, while they in fact are quite the contrary, I much regret the unchristian and intolerant spirit exhibited by many people at the public meetings. I cannot bear to hear the violent abuse of the Catholic religion, which is so painful and cruel towards the many good and innocent Roman Catholics. However, we must hope and trust this excitement will soon cease, and that the wholesome effect of it on our own Church will be the lasting result of it. Ever yours ...
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 55: The Bishop of London had taken the same view as Lord John Russell of the Papal action, though they had disagreed over the Gorham controversy.]
[Footnote 56: See ante, p. 279.]
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 14th December 1850.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of yesterday. She sanctions the introduction into Parliament of a Bill framed on the principles agreed upon at yesterday's Cabinet, presuming that it will extend to the whole United Kingdom. What is to be done, however, with respect to the Colonies where the Roman Catholic bishoprics are recognised by the Government under territorial titles? and what is to be done with Dr Cullen, who has assumed the title of Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of all Ireland, which is punishable under the Emancipation Act? If this is left unnoticed, the Government will be left with the "lame" argument in Parliament of which we conversed here. Could the Government not be helped out of this difficulty by the Primate himself prosecuting the obtruder? The Queen hopes that the meeting of the archdeacons with Dr Lushington may do some good; she cannot say that she is pleased with the Archbishop's answer to the laity published in to-day's Times, which leaves them without a remedy if the clergymen persist in Puseyite Rituals! The Queen will return Lord Minto's letter with the next messenger.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 22nd December 1850.
The Queen now returns Lord Seymour's letter respecting the New Forest, and sanctions the proposed arrangement. Considering, however, that she gives up the deer, and all patronage and authority over the Forest, she wishes the shooting, as the only remaining Royalty, not to be withdrawn from her authority also. It will be quite right to give Deputations[57] to shoot over the various divisions and walks of the Forest to gentlemen of the neighbourhood or others; but in order that this may establish no right on their part, and may leave the Sovereign a voice in the matter, she wishes that a list be prepared every year of the persons recommended by the Office of Woods to receive Deputations and submitted for her approval.
[Footnote 57: A deputation, i.e., a deputed right to take game.]
INTRODUCTORY NOTE
TO CHAPTER XX
The Ministry were in difficulties at the very beginning of the session (1851), being nearly defeated on a motion made in the interest of the agricultural party; and though the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was allowed to be brought in, they were beaten in a thin House chiefly by their own friends, on the question of the County Franchise. A crisis ensued, and a coalition of Whigs and Peelites was attempted, but proved impracticable. Lord Stanley having then failed to form a Protectionist Ministry, the Whigs, much weakened, had to resume office.
The Exhibition, which was opened in Hyde Park on the 1st of May, was a complete success, a brilliant triumph indeed, for the Prince, over six million people visiting it; it remained open till the Autumn, and the building, some time after its removal, was re-erected at Sydenham, at the Crystal Palace.
The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, much modified, was proceeded with, and, though opposed by the ablest Peelites and Radicals, became law, though its effect, while in operation, was virtually nil. It was in after-years repealed.
Kossuth, the champion of Hungarian independence, visited England in October, and Lord Palmerston had to be peremptorily restrained from receiving him publicly at the Foreign Office. A little later, Kossuth's ultra-liberal sympathisers in London addressed the Foreign Secretary in language violently denunciatory of the Emperors of Austria and Russia, for which Lord Palmerston failed to rebuke them. The cup was filled to the brim by his recognition of the President's coup d'etat in France. Louis Napoleon, after arresting M. Thiers and many others, proclaimed the dissolution of the Council of State and the National Assembly, decreed a state of siege, and re-established universal suffrage, with a Chief Magistrate elected for ten years, and a Ministry depending on the executive alone. Palmerston thereupon, though professing an intention of non-interference, conveyed to the French Ambassador in London his full approbation of the proceeding, and his conviction that the President could not have acted otherwise. Even after this indiscreet action, the Premier found some difficulty in bringing him to book; but before the end of the year he was dismissed from office, with the offer, which he declined, of the Irish Lord-Lieutenancy and a British Peerage. Greatly to the Queen's satisfaction, Lord Granville became Foreign Secretary.
At the Cape, Sir Harry Smith was engaged in operations against the Kaffirs, which were not brought to a successful termination till the following year, when General Cathcart had superseded him.
CHAPTER XX
1851
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 25th January 1851.
The Queen approves of the elevation of Mr. Pemberton Leigh[1] to the Peerage, which she considers a very useful measure, and not likely to lead to any permanent increase of the Peerage, as he is not likely to marry at his present age, and considering that he has only a life interest in his large property.
With regard to the creation of Dr Lushington[2] as a Peer, without remainder, the Queen has again thoroughly considered the question, and is of opinion that the establishment of the principle of creation for life—in cases where public advantage may be derived from the grant of a Peerage, but where there may be no fortune to support the dignity in the family—is most desirable. The mode in which the public will take the introduction of it will however chiefly depend upon the merits of the first case brought forward. Dr Lushington appears to the Queen so unobjectionable in this respect that she cannot but approve of the experiment being tried with him.
It would be well, however, that it should be done quietly; that it should not be talked about beforehand or get into the papers, which so frequently happens on occasions of this kind, and generally does harm.
[Footnote 1: Member of Parliament for Rye 1881-1832, and Ripon 1835-1843, afterwards a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council: he became a Peer (Lord Kingsdown) in 1858, having declined a peerage on the present and other occasions.]
[Footnote 2: Dr Lushington was judge of the Admiralty Court: he had been counsel for, and an executor of, Queen Caroline. He declined the offer now suggested, and the subsequent debates on the Wensleydale Peerage show that the proposed grant would have been ineffectual for its purpose.]
[Pageheading: DIPLOMATIC ARRANGEMENTS]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 31st January 1851.
The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter of the 29th, in which he proposes a change in those diplomatic arrangements which she had already sanctioned on his recommendation, and must remark that the reasons which Lord Palmerston adduces in support of his present proposition are in direct contradiction to those by which he supported his former recommendation.[3]
The principle which the Queen would wish to see acted upon in her diplomatic appointments in general, is, that the good of the service should precede every other consideration, and that the selection of an agent should depend more on his personal qualifications for the particular post for which he is to be selected than on the mere pleasure and convenience of the person to be employed, or of the Minister recommending him.
According to Lord Palmerston's first proposal, Sir H. Seymour was to have gone to St Petersburg, Lord Bloomfield to Berlin, and Sir Richard Pakenham to Lisbon; now Lord Palmerston wishes to send Lord Cowley to St Petersburg.
The Queen has the highest opinion of Lord Cowley's abilities, and agrees with Lord Palmerston in thinking that Russia will, for some time at least, exercise a predominating influence over all European affairs. She would accordingly not object to see that Agent accredited there in whom she herself places the greatest confidence. But according to the same principle, she must insist that the posts of Berlin and Frankfort, which in her opinion are of nearly equal importance, should be filled by men capable of dealing with the complicated and dangerous political questions now in agitation there, and the just appreciation and judicious treatment of which are of the highest importance to the peace of Europe, and therefore to the welfare of England.
Before the Queen therefore decides upon Lord Palmerston's new proposals, she wishes to know whom he could recommend for the post of Frankfort in the event of Lord Cowley leaving it, and thinks it but right to premise that in giving her sanction to the proposals Lord Palmerston may have to submit, she will be guided entirely by the principle set forth above.
[Footnote 3: Lord Palmerston had altered his mind as to certain proposed diplomatic changes, and suggested the appointment of Sir Hamilton Seymour to Berlin, Lord Bloomfield to Lisbon, Lord Cowley to Petersburg, Mr Jerningham, Sir Henry Ellis, or Sir Richard Pakenham to Frankfort.]
[Pageheading: DIPLOMATIC ARRANGEMENTS]
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
CHESHAM PLACE, 12th January 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that Mr Disraeli brought forward his Motion yesterday.[4] His speech was long and elaborate, but not that of a man who was persuaded he was undertaking a good cause.
He proposed nothing specific, but said nothing offensive.
The doubts about the division increase. Mr Hayter reckoned yesterday on a majority of three! Sir James Graham is of opinion Lord Stanley will not undertake anything desperate. He will speak in favour of Government to-morrow, when the division will probably take place.
[Footnote 4: On agricultural distress; the Motion was lost by fourteen only in a large House.]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 15th February 1851.
The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter of yesterday, and has to state in answer her decision in favour of the original plan of appointments, viz. of Sir H. Seymour to Petersburg, Lord Bloomfield to Berlin, and Sir R. Pakenham to Lisbon. The Queen quite agrees with Lord Palmerston in the opinion that the post at Petersburg is more important than that of Frankfort, and had Lord Palmerston been able to propose a good successor to Lord Cowley she would have approved his going to Petersburg; Sir R. Pakenham, however, would not take Frankfort if offered to him, as it appears, and the two other persons proposed would not do for it, in the Queen's opinion. It must not be forgotten that at a place for action like Petersburg, the Minister will chiefly have to look to his instructions from home, while at a place of observation, as Lord Palmerston justly calls Frankfort, everything depends upon the acuteness and impartiality of the observer, and upon the confidence with which he may be able to inspire those from whom alone accurate information can be obtained. Lord Cowley possesses eminently these qualities, and Sir H. Seymour has at all times shown himself equal to acting under most difficult circumstances. The desire of the Emperor to see Lord Cowley at Petersburg may possibly resolve itself in the desire of Baron Brunnow to see him removed from Germany.... The Queen had always understood that Sir H. Seymour would be very acceptable to the Emperor, and that Count Nesselrode called him a diplomatist "de la bonne vieille roche."
[Pageheading: SIR JAMES GRAHAM]
Memorandum by Queen Victoria.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE. 17th February 1851.
Lord John Russell came at half-past three. He had had a long conversation with Sir James Graham, had stated to him that from the tone of his speech (which Lord John explained to us yesterday was of so very friendly a character and pointed directly to supporting the Government)—its friendliness, and the manner in which he advocated the union of those who opposed a return to Protection, that he proposed to him to join the Government; that Sir G. Grey had offered to resign his office in order that Sir J. Graham might have it. Before I go farther I ought to say that Lord John yesterday explained the importance of obtaining support like Sir J. Graham's in the Cabinet, and that he thought of proposing the Board of Control to him, which Sir J. Hobhouse was ready to give up—receiving a Peerage, and retaining a seat in the Cabinet or the Admiralty, which Sir F. Baring was equally ready to give up.
Well, Sir J. Graham said that before he answered he wished to show Lord John a correspondence which had passed between him and Lord Londonderry. In the course of conversation in the country, Sir James had said to Lord Londonderry that parties never could go on as they were, and that they must ultimately lapse into two; this, Lord Londonderry reported to Mr Disraeli, who told it to Lord Stanley; and Mr Disraeli wrote to Lord Londonderry, stating that if certain advantages and reliefs were given to the landed interests, he should not cling to Protection; in short, much what he said in his speech—and that he was quite prepared to give up the lead in the House of Commons to Sir J. Graham. Sir James answered that he never meant anything by what he had said, and that he had no wish whatever to join Lord Stanley; that if he had, he was so intimate with Lord Stanley that he would have communicated direct with him.
Sir James said that as soon as he heard from Lord John, he thought what he wished to see him for, and that he had been thinking over it, and had been talking to Lord Hardinge and Mr Cardwell. That he did wish to support the Government, but that he thought he could be of more use if he did not join the Government, and was able to give them an independent support; that he had not attempted to lead Sir Robert Peel's followers; that many who had followed Sir Robert would not follow him; that he thought the Government in great danger; that the Protectionists, Radicals, and Irish Members would try to take an opportunity to overset them (the Government); that should the Government be turned out, he would find no difficulty in joining them; or should they go on, that by-and-by it might be easier to do so; but that at this moment he should be injuring himself without doing the Government any real service; besides which, there were so many measures decided on which he was ignorant of, and should have to support. Lord John told him that were he in the Cabinet, he would have the means of stating and enforcing his opinions, and that at whatever time he joined them, there would always be the same difficulty about measures which had already been decided on. He (Sir James) is not quite satisfied with the Papal Aggression Bill, which he thinks will exasperate the Irish; he also adverted to the report of our having protested against Austria bringing her Italian Provinces, etc., into the German Confederation. Lord John told him that this had not been done, but that we meant to ask for explanations.
In short, Lord John said it was evident that Sir James thought the Government in great danger, and "did not wish to embark in a boat which was going to sink." Still, he was friendly, and repeated that it would be very easy when in opposition to unite, and then to come in together.
VICTORIA R.
[Pageheading: DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT]
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
CHESHAM PLACE, 21st February 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that on a motion of Mr Locke King's[5] yesterday the Government was defeated by a hundred to fifty-two.
This is another circumstance which makes it probable the Ministry cannot endure long. The Tories purposely stayed away.
[Footnote 5: For equalising the County and the Borough franchise.]
[Pageheading: MINISTERIAL CRISIS]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 21st February 1851.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,—I have only time just to write a few hasty lines to you from Stockmar's room, where I came up to speak to Albert and him, to tell you that we have got a Ministerial crisis; the Ministers were in a great minority last night, and though it was not a question vital to the Government, Lord John feels the support he has received so meagre, and the opposition of so many parties so great, that he must resign! This is very bad, because there is no chance of any other good Government, poor Peel being no longer alive, and not one man of talent except Lord Stanley in the Party;... but Lord John is right not to go on when he is so ill supported, and it will raise him as a political man, and will strengthen his position for the future.
Whether Lord Stanley (to whom I must send to-morrow after the Government have resigned) will be able to form a Government or not, I cannot tell. Altogether, it is very vexatious, and will give us trouble. It is the more provoking, as this country is so very prosperous.
On Tuesday I hope to be able to say more....
With Albert's love, ever your truly devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Pageheading: LORD LANSDOWNE CONSULTED]
[Pageheading: LORD STANLEY SUMMONED]
[Pageheading: FISCAL POLICY OUTLINED]
[Pageheading: PROTECTION]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 22nd February 1851.
Lord John Russell having been for a few minutes with the Queen, in order to prepare her for the possibility of the Government's resignation (yesterday, at two o'clock), went to Downing Street to meet the Cabinet, and promised to return at four in order to communicate the decision the Cabinet might have arrived at. On his return he explained that after the vote at the beginning of the Session on the Orders of the Day, which went directly against the Government, after the small majority (only fourteen) which they had on the motion of Mr Disraeli on the landed interest, and now the defeat on the Franchise, it was clear that the Government did not possess the confidence of the House of Commons. He complained of the Protectionists staying away in a body on Mr King's motion, and he (Lord John) himself being left without a supporter even amongst his colleagues in the debate, but most of all of the conduct of the Radicals; for when Mr King, hearing Lord John's promise to bring in a measure next Session, wanted to withdraw his Motion, as he ought to have done on such a declaration by the head of the Government, Mr Hume insisted upon his going on, "else Lord John would withdraw his promise again in a fortnight"; and when the result of the vote was made known the shouting and triumph of the hundred was immense.
Lord John had declared to the Cabinet that he could not go on, that the Income Tax would have to be voted the next day, and a defeat was probable; it were much better therefore not to hesitate, and to resign at once. The Cabinet agreed, although some Members thought with Lord Palmerston that the occasion was hardly sufficient. Lord John begged to be allowed till to-day, in order to see Lord Lansdowne, whom he had sent for from the country, and to be able to tender then his resignation; he would go down to the House to adjourn it, promising explanations on Monday.
We agreed with Lord John that he owed to his station personally, and as the Queen's Minister, not to put up with ignominious treatment, praised his speech on the Suffrage, which is admirable, and regretted that his colleagues had prevented him from bringing in a measure this year. We talked of the difficulty of forming any Government, but agreed that Lord Stanley and the Protection Party ought to be appealed to; they longed for office, and would not rest quiet till they had had it if for ever so short a time only.
We further went over the ground of a possible demand for a Dissolution, which might bring on a general commotion in the country. Lord John agreed in this, but thought the responsibility to be very great for the Crown to refuse an appeal to the country to the new Government; he thought a decision on that point ought to depend on the peculiar circumstances of the case.
Lord Lansdowne, who had come from Bowood by the express train, arrived at twelve o'clock, and came at once to meet Lord John Russell here at the Palace.
In the audience which the Queen gave him he expressed his entire concurrence with the decision the Cabinet had come to, as the resignation could at any rate only have been delayed. It was clear that the Cabinet had lost the confidence of the House of Commons; what had happened the other night was only the last drop which made the cup flow over, and that it was much more dignified not to let the Government die a lingering and ignominious death; he [thought] that Lord Stanley would have great difficulties, but would be able to form a Government; at least the Protectionist Party gave out that they had a Cabinet prepared.
We then saw Lord John Russell, who formally tendered his resignation, and was very much moved on taking leave; he said that, considering Lord Stanley's principles, it would not be possible for him to hold out any hope of support to that Government, except on the estimates for which he felt responsible, but he would at all times be ready vigorously to defend the Crown, which was in need of every support in these days.
At three o'clock came Lord Stanley, whom the Queen had summoned.
The Queen informed him of the resignation of the Government, in consequence of the late vote, which had been the result of the Protectionists staying away, of the small majority which the Government had had upon Mr Disraeli's Motion, and of the many symptoms of want of confidence exhibited towards the Government in the House of Commons. The Queen had accepted their resignation, and had sent for him as the head of that Party, which was now the most numerous in Opposition, in order to ask him whether he could undertake to form a Government.
Lord Stanley expressed great surprise. The impression had been that the Government had not been in earnest in their opposition to Mr L. King's Motion; in the minority had voted only twenty-seven members of the Government side, the rest had been of his Party. He asked if the whole Cabinet had resigned, or whether there had been dissension in the Cabinet upon it? The Queen replied that the resignation had been unanimously agreed upon in the Cabinet, and that Lord Lansdowne, who had only come up from Bowood this morning, had given his entire approval to it. Lord Stanley then asked whether anybody else had been consulted or applied to, to which the Queen replied that she had written to him a few minutes after Lord John's resignation, and had communicated with no one else. Lord Stanley then said that he hoped the Queen's acceptance had only been a conditional one; that he felt very much honoured by the Queen's confidence; that he hoped he might be able to tender advice which might contribute to the Queen's comfort, and might relieve the present embarrassment.
In order to be able to do so he must enter most freely and openly into his own position and that of his Party. It was quite true that they formed the most numerous in Parliament after the supporters of what he hoped he might still call the present Government, but that there were no men contained in it who combined great ability with experience in public business. There was one certainly of great ability and talent—Mr Disraeli—but who had never held office before, and perhaps Mr Herries, who possessed great experience, but who did not command great authority in the House of Commons; that he should have great difficulties in presenting to the Queen a Government fit to be accepted, unless he could join with some of the late Sir R. Peel's followers; that he considered, for instance, the appointment of a good person for Foreign Affairs indispensable, and there was scarcely any one fit for it except Lord Palmerston and Lord Aberdeen. Lord Aberdeen had told him that he had no peculiar views upon Free Trade, and that he did not pretend to understand the question, but that he had felt it his duty to stand by Sir R. Peel; this might now be different, but it ought first to be ascertained whether a combination of those who agreed in principle, and had only been kept asunder hitherto by personal considerations, could not be formed; that Sir James Graham had in his last speech declared it as his opinion that the ranks of those who agreed ought to be closed; when such a combination had taken place, those of Sir R. Peel's followers who could not agree to it might not be unwilling to join him (Lord Stanley). As to his principles, he would frankly state that he thought that the landed interest was much depressed by the low state of prices; that an import duty on corn would be absolutely necessary, which, however, would be low, and only a revenue duty; such a duty, he thought, the country would be prepared for; and if they were allowed to state their honest opinion, he felt sure the greatest part of the present Government would be heartily glad of. He would require Duties upon sugar for revenue, but he could not conceal that if the revenue after a diminution in the direct taxation, which he would propose, should considerably fall off, he might be driven to raise the Import duties on other articles. He thought the present House of Commons could hardly be expected to reverse its decision upon the financial and commercial policy of the country, and that accordingly a Dissolution of Parliament would become necessary. Such a Dissolution, however, could not be undertaken at this moment for the sake of public business. The Mutiny Bill had not been voted nor the Supplies, and it would require more than eight weeks before the new Parliament could be assembled, and consequently the Crown would be left without Army or money. A Dissolution could accordingly not take place before Easter. He felt, however, that if he were to take office now, he would between this and Easter be exposed to such harassing attacks that he should not be able to withstand them; moreover, it would subject the members of his Government to two elections in two months. He hoped therefore that the Queen would try to obtain a Government by a coalition of the Whigs and Peelites, but that this failing, if the Queen should send again for him, and it was clear no other Government could be formed, he would feel it his duty as a loyal subject to risk everything, except his principles and his honour, to carry on the Government; and he hoped that in such a case the Queen would look leniently on the composition of the Cabinet which he could offer, and that the country would, from the consideration of the circumstances, give it a fair trial. He begged, however, that he might not be called upon to take office except as a dernier ressort, a necessity.
I interrupted him when he spoke of his financial measures, and begged him further to explain, when it appeared that a duty of about six shillings on corn was the least he could impose to bring up the price to forty-five shillings, which Sir R. Peel had stated to the House of Commons was in his opinion the lowest price wheat would fall to after the abolition of the Corn Laws.
We expressed our doubts as to the country agreeing to such a measure, and our apprehension of the violent spirit which would be roused in the working classes by a Dissolution for that purpose, which Lord Stanley, however, did not seem to apprehend; on the contrary, he thought the distress of the farmers would lead to the destruction of the landed interest, which was the only support to the Throne.
I told him that the Queen and certainly myself had been under a delusion, and that I was sure the country was equally so, as to his intention to return to Protection. Sometimes it was stated that Protection would be adhered to, sometimes that it was given up, and that it was compensation to the landed interest which the Protectionists looked to. His last speeches and the Motion of Mr Disraeli led to that belief, but that it was of the highest importance that the country should know exactly what was intended; the Queen would then have an opportunity of judging how the nation looked upon the proposal. I hoped therefore that the declaration of his opinions which Lord Stanley had now laid before the Queen would be clearly enunciated by him in Parliament when the Ministerial explanations should take place, which would naturally follow this crisis.
Lord Stanley merely answered that he hoped that no explanations would take place before a Government was formed. He said he should wish the word "Protection" to be merged, to which I rejoined that though he might wish this, I doubted whether the country would let him.
Before taking leave, he repeated over and over again his advice that the Coalition Ministry should be tried.
ALBERT.
Queen Victoria to Lord Stanley.
22nd February 1851.
In order to be able to be perfectly accurate in stating Lord Stanley's opinions, which the Queen feels some delicacy in doing, she would be very thankful if he would write down for her what he just stated to her—as his advice in the present difficulty. Of course she would not let such a paper go out of her hands.
[Pageheading: SIR JAMES GRAHAM]
[Pageheading: FOREIGN POLICY]
[Pageheading: THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 23rd February 1851.
Sir James Graham, who had been out of Town, came at six o'clock, having received my letter on his return. Lord John Russell had been here before that time.
After having stated to him (Lord John) what had passed with Lord Stanley, we told him that Sir James Graham was here; Lord John seemed much surprised at Lord Stanley's refusal to form an Administration, declared himself ready to do what he could towards the formation of a new Government on an extended basis, but thought that Sir James Graham and Lord Aberdeen should have the first offer.
I went accordingly over to my room, where Sir James was waiting. He was entirely taken by surprise by the announcement of the resignation of the Government, and begged to be able to state to me how he was situated before he saw the Queen and Lord John.
I then communicated to him what had passed with Lord Stanley, upon which we had a conversation of more than an hour, of which the chief features were:
1. Apprehension on the part of Sir James Graham lest the attempt on the part of Lord Stanley to re-impose Protective duties should produce universal commotion in the country, which would be increased by the Dissolution, without which Lord Stanley would not be able to proceed.
2. His disbelief that Lord Aberdeen would be able to join in any Government abandoning Sir R. Peel's principles, as he had been consulted before and after Sir James's late speech in which he expressed his entire concurrence.
3. His own utter weakness, calling himself the weakest man in England, who had lost his only friend in Sir R. Peel, and had for the last fifteen years not exercised an independent judgment, but rested entirely on his friend.
4. His disagreement with some of his late colleagues—the Duke of Newcastle, Mr Gladstone, and Mr Sidney Herbert—in religious opinions.
5. His disagreement with Lord John's Government upon some most important points.
He could not take office with Lord Palmerston as Foreign Secretary, whose policy and mode of conducting business he disapproved, who was now protesting against the admission of Austria into the German Confederation; he disapproved the Papal Aggression Bill, finding it militating against the line which he had taken as Secretary of State with regard to the Roman Catholic Bishops in Ireland, and particularly the Bequest Act, and considering that after Lord John's letter the Bill would fall short of the high expectations formed in the minds of the English public.
He disapproved of the abolition of the Irish Lord-Lieutenancy, and the making a fourth Secretary of State had been considered by Sir Robert Peel and himself as introducing into England all the Irish malpractices, while Ireland was still kept wholly separate from England. |
|
