The girlhood of Queen Victoria, vol. 1 (of 2)

by Queen of Great Britain Victoria

INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO CHAPTER IX

The early months of the year 1838 found Lord Melbourne’s Government in considerable difficulties. For legislative purposes the Parliamentary majority was impotent. It was just able to keep the Ministry afloat. “The Queen,” wrote Lord Palmerston, “is as steady to us as ever, and was in the depth of despair when she thought we were in danger of being turned out.”

This was a year of grave trouble in Canada, but, as it turned out, a year full of promise for the subsequent welfare of that great Dominion, and for her connection with the Mother-country. The Queen was undoubtedly attracted by Lord Durham, the Governor-General, who, although impulsive and impatient of restraint, possessed charms of manner and appearance, together with intellectual gifts, which rendered his personality agreeable to those with whom he was brought in contact. The Queen showed great kindness to him and Lady Durham before their departure for Canada. She regretted his return, and was grieved by the quarrel between him and her Ministers.

Although during this year the Queen was in the habit of taking long rides into the country, which were found to be very beneficial to her health, she worked hard, and she laboriously read, under Lord Melbourne’s guidance, masses of despatches and correspondence. At no time during her reign was she more persistent in following the course of public business.

She was now brought a good deal into contact with Lord Palmerston, and was undoubtedly attracted by his great gifts, although at a later period of her reign his administrative methods and high-handed independence occasioned her much anxiety and led to strong remonstrance.

In the month of April, King Leopold was engaged in suggesting to the Queen the possibility of a union between her and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg. He wrote constantly to her upon this topic, laying stress upon the young Prince’s goodness and distinction, and upon his great anxiety to see his intellectual and moral training perfected under the auspices of Baron Stockmar.

In the course of the spring the preparations for the Queen’s Coronation were commenced, and she took keen interest in the detail of that ceremonial. It was a somewhat delicate matter to avoid having to invite her Uncle King Leopold and Queen Louise, but a hint having been dropped to the King of the Belgians, he speedily realised that the custom of not including crowned heads in the invitations to a Coronation was sound and worth preserving. “On mature reflection,” he wrote, “I think that a King and Queen at your dear Coronation might perhaps be a hors d’œuvre.” To this view the Queen graciously assented.

CHAPTER IX
1838

Tuesday, 6th March.—It was Mr. Bulwer’s play of The Lady of Lyons; and we came in very soon after the beginning. I think the play acts well, and I like it. Macready acted well as Claude Melnotte, Bartley[406] was very good as Damas; and Meadows[407] as Glavis. Mr. Elton[408] acted fairly enough as the wicked Beauséant.

Wednesday, 7th March.—Dressed for riding. At a few m. p. 12 I rode out with Lord Conyngham, Lord Uxbridge, dear Lehzen, Miss Cavendish, Col. Cavendish, and Sir G. Quentin and Mr. Fozard. I mounted in the garden just under the terrace in order that nobody should know I was going to ride out. I rode my dear favourite Tartar who went perfectly and most delightfully, never shying, never starting through all the very noisy streets, rattling omnibuses—carts—carriages, &c., &c. I quite love him. We rode out through the garden, through the gate on Constitution Hill; round the park by the water, out at the new gate, by Lord Hill’s former villa, a good way on the Harrow Road, I should say within 4 or 5 miles of Harrow—then down a pretty narrow lane where one could fancy oneself 2 or 300 miles from London, out by Willesden Field (where I had never been), and Kilburn, down the Edgware Road—Connaught Place, through omnibuses, carts, &c., &c., in at Cumberland Gate, galloped up to Hyde Park Corner—and in at the same garden gate at Constitution Hill, and safely to the Palace at 10 m. to 3. It was a lovely day, a beautiful and delicious ride, and I have come home quite charmed and delighted. I rode between Lord Conyngham and Col. Cavendish the whole way. Dearest Lehzen rode Rosa and felt all the better for the ride. Wrote my journal. Signed. Walked about. At ½ p. 4 came my kind and excellent Lord Melbourne and stayed with me till 20 m. p. 5. He spoke to me about my ride; said he had just come from the Cabinet, which was about these Canadian prisoners[409]; viz. what is to be done with them; the revolt being put down they cannot be tried by Martial Law, and there is great difficulty as to what is to be done with them. I said to Lord Melbourne I hoped he was not tired from last night; he said not at all. He said: “I am not quite so sure of to-night; I think we shall carry it, but you must not be surprised if it should be the other way.” I coloured very much at this honest, frank avowal of our fears, from this best and kindest of friends; and tears were nearer than words to me at that moment....

Tuesday, 13th March.—I asked Lord Melbourne what was to take place concerning Slavery to-night.[410] Lord Melbourne then pulled out of his pocket the Bill or Act which is to be read to-night; he read to me the principal Heads of it explaining to me each part in the most clear and agreeable manner possible. I shall not have time or space to explain or name each head here, but before I do any, I must just observe that the necessity of this Act shows how shockingly cruel and cheating the Masters of the Slaves are, attempting to evade in every possible way what they are told to do, and what, as the Laws cannot be enforced on the spot, must be done by an Act of Parliament here.

Wednesday, 14th March.— ... I asked Lord Melbourne how he liked my dress. He said he thought it “very pretty” and that “it did very well.” He is so natural and funny and nice about toilette and has a very good taste I think....

Saturday, 17th March.—Spoke of the Cabinet, which was just over; he said that they had been speaking about the Coronation in the Cabinet; and they all thought that it would be best to have it about the 25th or 26th of June, as it would end the Parliament well and make a good break; that it would be best to have it like William IV.’s, which would be less long. I of course agreed to this....

Wednesday, 21st March.—Heard from Lord Melbourne that “the House sat till ½ past eleven last night. Lord Stanhope made a long declamatory speech, very violent, but having in it nothing defined or specific, and was answered by Lord Brougham in a most able and triumphant defence and maintenance of the late Act for amending the laws for the relief of the Poor. Lord Melbourne was very sorry to be prevented from waiting upon Your Majesty. He is very grateful for Your Majesty’s enquiries and feels very well this morning....” Spoke of Portugal; Lord Melbourne was very much pleased with the good news, and with the Queen’s conduct.[411] I then saw Lord Palmerston, who was in high spirits at the good news from Portugal. The Levée was over at 3. I then went for a moment to the dressing-room to ease my head, as my diadem (which Lord Melbourne thought “very handsome”) hurt me so dreadfully. After this I invested (in the Closet) the Marquis of Breadalbane[412] with the Order of the Thistle; Sir Thomas Bradford[413] with the Grand Cross of the Bath; and Lord Burghersh[414] and General Donald McLeod were made Knights Commanders of the Order of the Bath. My Ladies, my whole Household and all the Ministers were present at this ceremony.

Thursday, 22nd March.—Lord Melbourne said he had been to see the Duke of Wellington this morning about asking him to be at the head of a Commission to be appointed to inquire into the promotions in the Army and in the Marines, which were so very slow in the time of peace and about which they were being attacked in the House of Commons. Lord Melbourne said the Duke had consented to it; and that his being at the head of it “will give it authority”; the Duke wished to know who was to be in the Commission; Lord Melbourne named them to him and he was very well satisfied with them. Lord Melbourne told me some of them, which are: Lord Hill, Sir Hussey Vivian, Sir Alexander Dickson,[415] Sir Thomas Hardy,[416] the First Lord of the Admiralty,[417] and the Secretary at War.[418] Lord Melbourne said, with the tears in his eyes (kind, excellent man), that the Duke was in very good humour, and “a very pleasant man to do business with, I think; he is so plain and speaks to the point.” The Duke had been reviewing the Battalions which are going to Canada, and praised them very much, and said “particularly my regiment.” The Duke said that Lord Brougham’s speech on the Poor Laws was the best he ever heard him make. I told Lord Melbourne that Diet was the best physician for him; he said laughing, he drank too much champagne, and I added, mixed too many wines; at which he laughed a good deal. Spoke of the Queen Dowager who he is going to see at ½ p. 1 on Saturday; spoke of my calling her Queen Adelaide and not Queen Dowager, as it was painful to people to receive that name. Spoke of all changes of that kind; of the Queen Dowager’s having signed “Subject” to me the day after the King died.[419]

Friday, 23rd March.—Lord Cowper is very shy and reserved and speaks but little. He really is the image of his mother,[420] and has exactly the same voice and manner of speaking. The cut of the features is so exactly his mother’s—he looks delicate and is very thin; he has a mild and pleasing countenance. Lord Melbourne spoke to me of these Portuguese despatches which he had not yet seen. He said: “I am very glad the Queen has shown courage; it gives confidence....”

Sunday, 25th March.—I said I had heard from Uncle Leopold, who seems a good deal vexed at this recommencement of this Belgian Question; we spoke of this and Lord Melbourne said: “I don’t like it at all; I think we shall get into a quarrel somehow or other, which is a bad thing.” He said Uncle Leopold had written to Lord Palmerston about this and about this Portuguese Affair; Lord Melbourne said that Uncle wrote that people complained and with truth that Ferdinand did not show himself; upon which Dietz[421] wrote that a King should not show himself when his subjects are spilling their blood. Whereupon Uncle observed: that was a very fine German sentiment, but that if Louis Philippe had followed that principle, he would have lost his head like Louis xvi.... Of the late hurricane in Ireland; Lord Melbourne said trees never grew so well in Ireland and were all a little bent from the wind blowing across the Atlantic. He dislikes trees near a house, and he is very fond of thinning trees. Spoke of Claremont and the trees there. We then spoke of names (Xtian names) for a long while, about which Lord Melbourne was very amusing and very funny. He said Lady Ashley was always called Minny. He said: “I think Mary beautiful.” We spoke of Molly; “Molly is beautiful; it’s such a soft word, there are more liquids in it than in almost any word.” Then Bess he thinks “quite beautiful,” as also Jane, and Kate, and Alice; “Jane and Joan,” he said, “are John.” “Louisa,” he says, “is a fastidious name....”

Tuesday, 27th March.—At ½ p. 12 I rode out with Lord Conyngham, Lord Uxbridge, Lord Byron,[422] Lady Mary, dearest Lehzen, Miss Cavendish, Miss Quentin, Sir F. Stovin and Col. Cavendish, and came home at ½ p. 3, having ridden 22 miles!!! We rode very hard and Tartar went most delightfully, never was there such a dear horse. We rode to Richmond, through part of the Richmond Park, out at Robin Hood Gate, and home over Wimbledon Common and Vauxhall Bridge. It was as hot as summer, and going I thought I should have melted; coming over Wimbledon Common there was some delicious air. It was a heavenly day. At 6 m. p. 4 came Lord Melbourne and stayed with me till 20 m. to 5. He seemed well. Spoke a good deal of my ride. The Debate lasted till 11 last night, and he dined and stayed at home. Spoke of the Archbishop’s having made a long speech last night about the Indian Worship; spoke of that. Spoke of the Duke of Sussex and what he told me about the rank a Prime Minister should have, viz. that of Lord High Treasurer; Lord Melbourne said: “I think it had better remain as it is.”[423]

Wednesday, 28th March.—Spoke of my ride; of Mr. Bulwer’s novels, none of which Lord Melbourne has read. Lady Durham said it was very odd that so clever a man should be vain about his personal appearance. Lord Melbourne replied: “I think clever people generally have more of those weaknesses than others.” Lord Melbourne said: “I always predicted he would be a genius when he was a boy; and I was sure he would make a figure; he used to come over to Brocket when he was 17, and show me his poetry.” I asked Lord Melbourne if he was fond of novels; he said “very fond,” but that he had no time to read them now. Spoke of Lady Wilhelmina, who Lord Melbourne says is certainly much grown since last year. I said “Everybody grows but me.” He laughed and said, “I think you are grown....”

Thursday, 29th March.—I showed Lord Melbourne a bracelet with my portrait by Ross in it, which I’m going to give Lady Durham, which he thought very like.

Friday, 30th March.—Got up at 10 m. to 10, and breakfasted at a ¼ to 11. Heard from Lord John before breakfast, that Sir George Strickland[424] brought on this Motion for emancipating the Apprentices this year, last night, and was seconded by Mr. Pease[425] (the Quaker). Sir George Grey[426] made a speech of 2 hours and fifty minutes, and completely exhausted the subject. The speech was a very able one and Lord John thinks will change many Votes.

Sunday, 1st April.—I told him of the Duke of Cambridge and what he had said about his wish of going to the Emperor of Austria’s Coronation; and also that he said he could not dine with me on Tuesday, but invited himself to dine with me another day without the Duchess; Lord Melbourne laughed and said, “That’s very odd; Your Majesty should have said ‘That’s not right.’” Spoke of Little Holland House, which Lord Melbourne says is quite near Holland House and a very nice place, with a very pretty garden; spoke of Miss Fox, Lord Holland’s sister, who is such an amiable person; we were not sure of her age; Lord Melbourne said she was grown up when he was a boy at school; spoke of Lady Holland, who has been very handsome though he always remembers her very large; and she has a vulgar mouth and used always to say, “A vulgar ordinary mouth I have.” Spoke of her and Lady Lilford, who, Lord Melbourne said laughing, “never had the use of her legs.” Lady Holland is about 68, he thinks; she was married in 1786 to her 1st husband, Sir Godfrey Webster, when she was only 16. Spoke of Portugal &c....

Monday, 2nd April.—I said to Lord Melbourne I was so stupid that I must beg him to explain to me about Sir William Follett[427] again; he answered very kindly, “It is not stupid, but I daresay you can’t understand it,” and he explained it to me like a kind father would do to his child; he has something so fatherly, and so affectionate and kind in him, that one must love him.... I rode Lord Uxbridge’s little horse, which I have Christened Uxbridge, and which is the most charming, delightful, quiet horse possible. It has a most beautiful little head, is of a dark chestnut colour, if possible quieter than Tartar, for it never takes notice of anything; full of spirit, and very easy and pleasant in its canter which is faster than Tartar’s. It is delightful to have two such horses as Tartar and Uxbridge. It was a very warm, bright, clear, pleasant day. We rode to Hanwell through Acton; home by Castle Hill, Acton again, and in at the Victoria Gate, and home by the garden gate; we rode about 19 or 20 miles. When we were near Notting Hill, or rather more at Brookgreen, I sent on a groom to inform Lord Melbourne (who told me last night he would come to me at four today), that I should be at home in a few minutes; but when I came home, they said Lord Melbourne had been at the gate a few minutes before, and on hearing I was still out, said “Very well,” and walked his horse away. I waited in my habit till 5, the hour for the House of Lords, when I felt that my good Lord Melbourne could not come, and I wrote to him. It is my own fault....

Wednesday, 4th April.—Spoke of the Coronation, and the fuss the Princesses were in about their robes; I told Lord Melbourne that the Duchess of Gloucester had offered to hold the tip of my train when I was being crowned, as the Duchess of Brunswick had done for Queen Charlotte, and that I thought this very kind of the Duchess; which quite touched my good friend. Spoke of Hanwell, and rail-roads; I said I feared there were so many rail-roads that they could not all answer; Lord Melbourne said he feared they would not, but that he was sorry for it, as he was engaged in one. “I was fool enough to engage in one and to take 50 shares; I have already paid £1,000, and have lately had a call for £500 more,” he added. This rail-road is in Nottingham and he engaged in it about 4 years ago. I asked him if he liked rail-roads in general; he replied, “I don’t care about them,” which made me laugh; and he added that they were bad for the country as they brought such a shocking set of people “who commit every horror.” “They are picked men, who mind neither Lord nor laws, and commit every species of violence; nothing is safe,” he added; and “it’s more like a country in time of war” than peace. He spoke of Dorsetshire to Lady Portman, and she said it was so poor; he replied, “That’s because you don’t give enough wages.”

Thursday, 5th April.—Spoke of Lady Burghersh[428]; Lord Melbourne said, “She is of a great deal of use to us, in a quiet way”; for if he wished to communicate with the Duke of Wellington, he did it through her; he, of course, does not wish me to mention this; but I hope I am discreet and tell but little of what he tells to me. Lady Burghersh is a sensible, clever woman, and has great influence over the Duke.

Friday, 6th April.—Spoke of my ride; rail-roads; that the Steam-Carriage could not be stopped under 150 yards’ distance of an object; I observed that these Steam-Carriages are very dangerous; Lord Melbourne said, “Oh! none of these modern inventions consider human life.” Spoke of Col. Cavendish and Sir George Quentin; of horses; Lord Melbourne said his mare would not be well enough to come down to Windsor, but that he could get a horse from me there, to ride. I observed that Mr. Cowper complained he (Ld. M.) never rode the horses he should ride; “I don’t know, he never got me a horse I liked; I don’t think he is a very good hand at horses.” Lord Melbourne said Mr. Fred Byng[429] got him his present black mare; he hears a horse-dealer has got a horse which he thinks will do for him; the price is 160 guineas, which he says is nothing if the horse is a good one; but a good deal if it is a bad one.... Spoke of Byron, who Lord Melbourne said would not be 50 if he were alive[430]; he said he was extremely handsome; had dark hair, was very lame and limped very much; I asked if the expression of his countenance was agreeable; he said not; “he had a sarcastic, sardonic expression; a contemptuous expression.” I asked if he was not agreeable; he said “He could be excessively so”; “he had a pretty smile”; “treacherous beyond conception; I believe he was fond of treachery.” Lord Melbourne added, “he dazzled everybody,” and deceived them; “for he could tell his story very well....” Lord Melbourne said, “The old King (George III.) had that hurried manner; but he was a shrewd, acute man, and most scrupulously civil.” He added that the King was rather tall, red in the face, large though not a corpulent man; prejudiced and obstinate beyond conception; spoke of the old Duke of Gloucester who, he said, was not a clever man but a good-natured man, though very proud; of the Duchess of Gloucester his wife; Lord Melbourne said that Horace Walpole tells that one day he (I think) gave the Duke of Gloucester a fête at Strawberry Hill; and the Duchess came over before to see that all was right; and when she came there she saw that the host had put up her arms with the Duke’s; she said, “God bless me! this will never do; you must take this down directly, this will never do; the Duke would be extremely angry were he to see this.” The Duchess was a Walpole by birth[431]; she was first married to Lord Waldegrave; her children by that marriage were beautiful; they were Elizabeth, Lady Waldegrave,[432] Lady Euston,[433] and Lady Hugh Seymour, who was mother to Sir Horace Seymour.[434] “People were very fond of her,” Lord Melbourne said....

Sunday, 8th April.—Lord Melbourne looked over one of the Volumes (the sixth) of a Work called “Lodge’s Portraits”; there are portraits of all sorts of famous people in it, with short Memoirs of them annexed to them. Lord Melbourne looked carefully over each, reading the accounts of the people and admiring the prints. I wish I had time to write down all the clever observations he made about all. It is quite a delight for me to hear him speak about all these things; he has such stores of knowledge; such a wonderful memory; he knows about everybody and everything; who they were, and what they did; and he imparts all his knowledge in such a kind and agreeable manner; it does me a world of good; and his conversations always improve one greatly. I shall just name a few of the people he observed upon:—Raleigh, which he thought a very handsome head; Hobbes, who was “an infidel philosopher”; he had been tutor to one of the Earls of Devonshire,[435] he said; Knox—Lord Melbourne observed that those Scotch Reformers were very violent people; but that Knox denied having been so harsh to Mary of Scots as she said he had been; Lord Mansfield, who, he said, “was great-uncle” to the present Lord; Melanchthon, whose name means Black Earth in Greek, and whose head he admired; Pitt, whose print Lord Melbourne said was very like; “he died in 1806 when I came into Parliament.” He (Ld. M.) came in for Leominster. Wesley; Lord Melbourne said the greatest number of Dissenters were Wesleyans; he read from the book that there were (at his death) 135,000 of his followers; Porson,—Lord Melbourne said, “I knew him; he was a great Greek scholar,” and looking at the print, “it’s very like him.” Leibnitz, a great German philosopher, and a correspondent of Queen Caroline, wife to George II.; spoke of her being so learned and her whole court too; “the Tories laughed at it very much”; and Swift ridiculing the Maids of Honour wrote, “Since they talk to Dr. Clark, They now venture in the Dark.” Addison; Lord Melbourne admires his “Spectator,” his “Cato” he also admires, but says it’s not like a Roman tragedy; “there is so much love in it.” Addison died at Holland House; he disagreed very much with his wife, Lady Warwick. Holland House was built, he said, by Rich, Lord Holland, in the reign of Charles 1st.[436] Madame de Staël, whose print he thought very like; “she had good eyes, she was very vain of her arms.” She was over here in ’15, and died in ’17, aged 51; she disliked dying very much; Lord Melbourne also knew her daughter the Duchesse de Broglie; he said, “Louis Philippe dislikes her as much as Napoleon did her Mother.” Lord Melbourne saw Madame de Broglie for a moment when he was at Paris for the last time in 1825. He read from the book, with great emphasis, the following passage, what Napoleon said of Madame de Staël: “They pretend that she neither talks politics nor mentions me; but I know not how it happens that people seem to like me less after visiting her.” Queen Elizabeth; spoke of her, and that her Mother must have been very handsome. Lady Holland, he told me, has the greatest fear of dying; spoke of pictures; Lord Melbourne does not admire Murillo much, nor Rubens; he so greatly prefers the Italian Masters to any others; spoke of subjects for painting; of the Holy Family being constantly painted; “After all,” he said, “a woman and child is the most beautiful subject one can have.” He is going down alone to Brocket; I told him his sister thought Brocket so cold, and that she wanted him to put up stoves, which he said would “burn down the house.” “I reduced the grates,” he continued, “because I thought they gave heat enough; and so they do, if they make large fires; but they don’t know how to make fires.” He can’t bear Brocket in winter. He was going home and did not feel tired any more. He spoke of my riding very kindly. Stayed up till a ¼ p. 11. It was a most delightful evening.

Monday, 9th April.—I showed him letters of thanks from Lords Fitzwilliam and Dundas and Captain Sykes, relative to my having repaid to the two first-named the debt incurred by my poor father and owing to their late fathers; and to the latter the debt owing to himself, accompanied by gifts. Lord Melbourne observed my sleeves (which were very long) with astonishment, and said “Amazing sleeves!...”

Monday, 16th April.—Lord Melbourne told me that there were very strange accounts of Lord Brougham and all he was saying and doing at Paris; his having gone to see Louis Philippe at 11 o’clock at night, when the Swiss Guard were (as they always are) asleep on the staircase; they stopped him (Brougham), saying the King was gone to bed; upon which Brougham observed that their King had “very rustic habits.” Spoke of him, his visiting Lady Fitzharris[437]; Lord Melbourne spoke of Brougham and his oddities; of this Review which he (B.) has written and which Lord Melbourne thinks “well done.” He thinks Queen Charlotte and George III. very harshly handled in it, and Queen Caroline amazingly puffed up; the Duke of York’s character he thinks the best done; he says there is a great deal which Brougham seems not to know; spoke of George IV.’s character, not being understood; of Sir William Knighton’s Memoirs which are just published, and which Lord Melbourne thinks it very wrong in Lady Knighton[438] to have published; of George IV. being so completely in the hands of Knighton, &c., &c. I felt very unhappy at dinner, in spite of my being gay when I spoke, and I could have cried almost at every moment; so much so, that when I got into bed, my nerves (which had been more shaken by the loss of dearest Louis,[439] than I can express, and by the struggle when in company to overcome grief which I felt so acutely) could resist no longer, and more than half an hour elapsed, in tears, before I fell asleep. And before I was asleep I saw her, in my imagination, before me, dressed in her neat white morning gown, sitting at her breakfast in her room at Claremont; again, standing in my room of an evening, dressed in her best, holding herself so erect, as she always did, and making the low dignified curtsey so peculiar to herself; and lastly on her death-bed, pale and emaciated, but the expression the same, and the mind vigorous and firm as ever! These were the images I beheld as I lay in bed! Yet, mingled with my grief were feelings of thankfulness that her end was so peaceful—so happy!...

Saturday, 21st April.—I showed Lord Melbourne the plans for changing the Slopes and making a new walk, and we looked over them for some time together. We then spoke of what might have happened when the Duke of York married; for who could foretell, Lord Melbourne observed, that the Duchess of York would have no children?—and that the late King should lose the two he had? This led us to speak of the whole Royal Family, their characters, of the Princesses marrying so late; of George III.’s dislike to their marrying, which Lord Melbourne did not know; of their beauty; he always thought Princess Sophia (when young) very pretty, though very like a Gipsy; spoke of the singular instance of both George III.’s and Queen Charlotte’s being very plain and all their children very handsome; spoke of all the Princes and Princesses, of the two little Princes, Octavius and Alfred, who died; Lord Melbourne said, George III. said when he felt he was to be unwell (which he always forefelt) he dreamt and thought of Octavius. Lord Melbourne said Queen Charlotte had fine hands and feet, a good bust, and a pretty figure.

Sunday, 22nd April.—I spoke to him of what I was to write to Uncle relative to Soult’s nomination[440]; Soult, he told me, is a large, tall man; looks more “like the Purser of a ship” than an officer; a very distinguished officer risen from the ranks, and a man of great abilities besides. Lord Melbourne knew him when he was in Paris. I asked Lord Melbourne when he was first at Paris; in 1815 he said, which was the first time he was ever on the Continent. “We went,” he said (which “we” implies himself and Lady Caroline, his wife) “to Brussels immediately after the Battle of Waterloo, to see Fred. Ponsonby[441] who was desperately wounded.” This was in June 1815, and he went to Paris in August, and stayed there September and October and came back in November. He saw Uncle Leopold there then, and said he was extremely handsome.

Monday, 23rd April.—Lord Melbourne looked into the newspapers and said there was nothing in them; he read (in the papers) a denial from Lady Charlotte Bury[442] of her having written the book called Diary of the Reign (I think) of George IV.; Lord Melbourne spoke of Lady Hertford, though he of course could not remember her in her great beauty; he said, “My nurse nursed Lord Hertford,[443] so that I used to hear a great deal about her.” The present Lord Hertford’s wife, he said, was a natural daughter of the Duke of Queensberry, called Mmé. Fagniani[444]; she is still alive at Paris, but Lord Hertford has long been separated from her; Lord Yarmouth, he said, is very clever, but always lives abroad....[445]

Wednesday, 25th April.—In speaking before of Mrs. Baring,[446] who, I said, from having been the most affectionate of mothers, latterly never asked after her children,—Lord Melbourne said with the tears in his eyes, “That’s a sure sign that all is over; when people intermit what they have been in the habit of doing.” He mentioned that when William III. was dying they brought him some good news from abroad, but he took no notice of it whatever, and said, “Je tire à ma fin....”

Friday, 27th April.—I showed Lord Melbourne two pictures of Lord Durham’s children; spoke of the beautiful boy Lord Durham lost, who would now be 20. Lord Melbourne said, that boy’s death was the cause of a dreadful scene between Durham and Lord Grey in one of the Cabinets. Spoke of this Flahaut[447] business, and of the wish at Paris to throw the blame of the whole on Uncle Leopold; spoke of Flahaut; Lord Melbourne said he (Flahaut) was first noticed by Napoleon, in the Russian Retreat, when in all that cold and misery he heard a young officer singing, and appearing quite gay; that was Flahaut; Napoleon said, “That is a fine young fellow,” and placed him on his Staff.... Spoke of Lady Campbell[448] (Pamela Fitzgerald) who Lord Melbourne has not seen again, but from whom he has had a long letter....

Saturday, 28th April.—Lord Melbourne continued, that those who were about the Prince of Wales[449] were not liked at Court “and vice versa.” And he said his family quite belonged to Carlton House; still, he added, the King and Queen were very civil to him. Speaking of George IV. he said, “He expected those he was fond of to go quite with him; to dislike those he disliked, and to like those he liked, and to turn with him.” He then mentioned what he told me before, that his (Ld. M.’s) father and mother got into disgrace, for I think 3 years, when Mrs. Fitzherbert was banished, and they continued seeing her; and when George IV. came back to Mrs. Fitzherbert he came to dine with them (Lord Melbourne was there the first day he came) as if nothing had happened, and as if he had been there the day before. Lord Melbourne said, before all this, that “the only thing one learns at a public school” is punctuality, and the value of time; that he never had a clock in his room, and always called to somebody to tell him what o’clock it was, which he owned was bad, as it put you in the power of the man to make you late. He “never carried a watch about him” in his life, and yet he thinks he generally knows what o’clock it is....

Monday, 30th April.—I then showed him a little book relating to the Coronations of various of my Ancestors, and amongst others Queen Anne; he looked over parts of it, and glanced at one part which states that Queen Anne said in her first speech to Parliament that “her heart was entirely English.” Upon which Lord Melbourne told me that when she concluded the Peace of Utrecht, which was supposed to be rather favourable to the French, a Sir Samuel Garth[450] wrote a poem in which he said of Queen Anne: “The Queen this year has lost a part, Of her entirely English heart,”—which is very funny; Lord Melbourne did not remember what followed. Speaking of Prince George of Denmark, who Lord Melbourne said “was a very stupid fellow,” he added that he (G. of Denmark) was always saying, “Est-il possible?” to everything, and was always saying so whenever he was told of another Lord having left James II. So when James heard that George of Denmark had left him, he said, “So Est-il possible is gone at last!” I spoke of the Duchess of Ancaster[451] having been Queen Charlotte’s first Mistress of the Robes; the title of Duke of Ancaster became extinct, Lord Melbourne told me, and the Dowager Lady Cholmondeley[452] and Lord Willoughby’s mother[453] were her co-heiresses. I asked him who was now Lord Fauconberg; he said the title was extinct[454]; he was a descendant of Oliver Cromwell’s by Cromwell’s daughter Lady Fauconberg; Lady Charlotte Bellasyse married a person called Thomas Wynne, a Welshman.[455] Sir Ed. Desborow, Lord Melbourne told me, is also a descendant of Cromwell’s by one of his daughters. I told Lord Melbourne what the Duke of Sussex had told me, viz. that none of his family “could hold their tongue,” which is very true; which made Lord Melbourne laugh, and still more so when I told him that the Duke, in speaking of the King of Hanover, called him “that other man.” After dinner I sat on the sofa with Lady Isabella and Lady Augusta, Lord Melbourne sitting near me the whole evening, and some of the other ladies being seated round the table. Spoke of Lady Isabella; Henry Fox,[456] of the Apartments at Hampton Court &c.; of this Review of Brougham’s of Lady C. Bury’s book. Lord Melbourne said again, what he told me the other day, that there was much which Brougham seemed to know nothing about; he (B.) states that Mrs. Fitzherbert did not know when she married the King that a marriage with a Catholic could not be valid; Lord Melbourne says she must have known that, and that, by what he has heard, she was against the marriage; he said Lord Holland knows a good deal about it, and that it is known where the marriage took place and by whom it was celebrated. Lord Melbourne thinks it took place in 1784 or 5[457]; the King left her in 1795, when Lady Jersey got into favour, whom he put about the Princess of Wales; he came back to Mrs. Fitzherbert in 1802, then left her for Lady Hertford, quarrelled with her, and then Lady Conyngham followed; the last-named, I observed, was very good-natured; Lord Melbourne said, “She was the most good-natured, but the most rapacious; she got the most money from him.” Spoke of Lady Augusta Fox; Lord Melbourne said her mother, Lady Coventry, was Lady Mary Beauclerc, daughter of a Duke of St. Albans (uncle to the present Duke). Her (Lady Coventry’s) mother was a Miss Moses, a Jewess. Lady Holland, Lord Melbourne says, does not like Lady Augusta Fox. Lord Melbourne told me that the Irish Poor Law Bill would come up to the House of Lords next day, and that there would be probably a good deal next week, in the Committee about it; a great deal of difference of opinion; but he thinks they’ll pass it....

Friday, 4th May.—Lord Melbourne told me on Wednesday evening that Landseer said of McLise[458]: “He is beating us all; his imagination, grouping, and drawing is wonderful; he must soften his colouring perhaps a little.” Two very clever ones of Grant; a portrait of Lord Cowper by Lucas which is excessively like; Lord Melbourne, by Hayter, and my dogs by Landseer looked very well. The latter is too beautiful. There were also two very clever pictures by Landseer’s brother; there was also a very good picture by Sir Martin Shee of the late King; it is the likest I’ve seen; it’s so like his figure.

Saturday, 5th May.—We then spoke of my sitting one day to Sir Martin Shee; of Lord Melbourne’s having seen an Academician this morning who said the reason why Hayter was not elected one of their Members was because his character was not good; Lord Melbourne asked me about it; I said I did not know much about it, but that I believed he had quarrelled with his wife and had separated from her. “And did he get another?” said Lord M. I laughed and said I was not sure of that....

Monday, 7th May.—We (that is Lord Melbourne, Lord Holland and I) spoke about the Exhibition, Landseer’s picture of my dogs, the origin of the dog in the Arms of the Seal of the Duchy of Lancaster, which Lord Holland said came originally from John of Gaunt, was adopted by Henry VII., abolished by James I., and restored by William IV.; spoke of Macaws, and he offered me one which belongs to Lady Holland. Spoke of Nightingales; Lord Melbourne said he could not distinguish its song from that of another bird’s; that it could be mistaken for a wood-lark’s, which Lord Holland denied, and they went on discussing the different songs of birds; we then spoke of various birds; of nightingales migrating; of how wonderful the migration of birds was; Lord Melbourne did not think it so incredible; they first went to France, he said, and “then they slide along the country....”

Wednesday, 9th May.—Lord Melbourne said he was kept in the House of Lords till 8, the night before; that Lord Shrewsbury[459] made rather a good speech, but that his (Ld. M.’s) fear was that some of the Roman Catholic Peers might refuse to take the Oath on account of all this; and then “we should have all this question” (the Roman Catholic) “over again.”

Thursday, 10th May.—At ½ p. 10 the doors were opened and I went through the Saloon into the other Ball-room next the Dining-room in which was Strauss’s band. I felt a little shy in going in, but soon got over it and went and talked to the people. The rooms I must say looked beautiful, were so well lit up, and everything so well done; and all done in one day. There was no crowd at all; indeed, there might have been more people. The dining-room looked also very handsome as the supper-room. The Throne-room was arranged for the tea-room. I danced (a Quadrille of course, as I only dance quadrilles) first (in the large ball-room) with George[460]; and 2ndly with Prince Nicholas Esterhazy; there was a valse between each quadrille; I never heard anything so beautiful in my life as Strauss’s band. We then went into the other ball-room where I danced two other quadrilles with Lord Jocelyn[461] and Lord Fitzalan[462]; the first named is very merry and funny. When I did not dance (which was only the case when valzing went on) I sat with Mamma and my Aunts, on a seat raised one step above the floor. Lady Fanny Cowper was my vis-à-vis when I danced with Lord Jocelyn. At 1 (after my quadrille with Lord Fitzalan) we went into the Supper-room. After supper we went into the large Ball-room where we remained till the last quadrille which I danced in Weippert’s room. I danced with Lord Cowper (who was much less shy and very agreeable); Lord Uxbridge (who dances remarkably well); Lord Douro; Lord Folkestone[463] (a great ally of mine); Lord Suffield[464]; and lastly with Lord Morpeth. There was a great deal of beauty there, amongst which were Lady Ashley, Lady Fanny Cowper, Lady Wilhelmina Stanhope, Lady Seymour,[465] Lady Clanricarde,[466] Lady Mary Vyner,[467] Lady Norreys,[468] Lady Emma Herbert,[469] Lady Clanwilliam,[470] Lady Mary Grimston,[471] Lady Powerscourt,[472] Miss Maude,[473] Miss Elphinstone.[474] Lady Fanny was twice my vis-à-vis, as was also Lady Adelaide Paget.[475] I did not leave the ball-room till 10 m. to four!! and was in bed by ½ p. 4,—the sun shining. It was a lovely ball, so gay, so nice,—and I felt so happy and so merry; I had not danced for so long and was so glad to do so again! One only regret I had,—and that was, that my excellent, kind, good friend, Lord Melbourne was not there. I missed him much at this my first ball; he would have been pleased I think!

Friday, 11th May.—Got up at 20 m. p. 10 and breakfasted at ½ p. 11. Heard from my good Lord Melbourne that he was “extremely concerned” at not having been able to come to the Ball, but that “he felt so unwell and so disturbed” that he was afraid to venture; which was right of him, though I regret it so much. Heard from Lord John that “Sir Thomas Acland[476] gave notice yesterday that he should move on Monday to rescind the resolution of 1835 respecting the Church of Ireland. The Debate on this Question must lead to one of the most severe struggles of the session both in discussion and in the Division. Both parties have nearly all their strength in London. But a majority for Ministers, though a small one, is tolerably certain.” This gave me a pang which somewhat damped my very light and high spirits. We spoke for a long time about my Ball—who I danced with, the beauties, and the different persons there; I said to Lord Melbourne the moment I saw him, how very sorry I was that he had not come last night. We spoke of all this for some time, and he was so kind about it all, and seemed to take quite an interest in it all. He then said, “They are going to make another attack upon us on Monday; Sir Thomas Acland has given notice that he means to make a motion to rescind the Resolutions about the Irish Church passed in 1835, upon which we came in.” I then added that Lord John seemed certain about a majority, though a small one; Lord Melbourne said Sir Thomas Acland was a conscientious and not very violent man, and consequently well chosen in that respect to make a good effect. There is to be a Cabinet upon it tomorrow at 1; and Lord John is going to have a Meeting of the Members at 4. All this distresses me much; would to God! none of these Motions, which are so useless, were brought on. I fervently trust however that all will do well. Spoke of my ball, and the different people, the rooms; he asked if I was not tired; I said not the least, for though I had danced a great deal I did not valze, as I did not think it would do for me to valze. Lord Melbourne said eagerly, “I think you are quite right; that’s quite right.” Lord Melbourne dines with me tonight, I’m happy to say. I showed him the letter I meant to write to the King of Hanover, which he quite approved of. Spoke of several people at the Ball and several other things concerning it; of Lord Duncannon who is rather better but still very poorly; Lord Melbourne does not like his being so long ill, and suffering with so many different things; there is a disease in the sockets of his teeth which become quite loose, the teeth themselves being quite sound. Lord Melbourne said the Ponsonbys were generally strong, and lived to a great age; that the present Lord Bessborough’s father lived to a very great age; Lord Melbourne said he was the man of whom the following anecdote is told:—he (that Lord Bessborough) was playing at cards, at Picquet, Lord Melbourne thinks, when his partner dropped down dead; and he said to the Waiter, “Remember, if the gentleman recovers, that I’ve got such and such a thing in my hand....” Spoke to him of the Coronation, and of the different people who were to bear the Swords (which he had already spoken to me of, in the morning; for he showed me then a letter from the Duke of Grafton declining to take any part in it, as he only meant to attend as a Peer). He (Ld. Melbourne) will carry the Sword of State; the Duke of Hamilton[477] he thinks of proposing to carry the Crown; the Duke of Somerset[478] the Orb; the Dukes of Devonshire and Sutherland the other swords; and the Duke of Roxburgh,[479] something else. But nothing is as yet settled with respect to all this. Spoke of my reading the Despatches, of which there were so many.

Saturday, 12th May.—At a ¼ p. 1 came Lord Melbourne and stayed with me till 10 m. to 2. He said he was, and seemed, much better. He first read me a Petition from the Society of British Artists, wishing me to go to their Exhibition, which however he said was quite unnecessary. He then said they were going to have a Cabinet upon this motion,[480] which is to take place on Monday, and to see what can be done upon it. Lord Melbourne then explained to me in the clearest manner possible all about it. He told me that:—In 1835, Sir Robert Peel found himself several times in minorities about various things which I forget; but he said he would not resign until he was beat upon a Question relative to the Irish Church; when he brought in his Bill for Irish Tithes, the resolution, to appropriate the surplus for the benefit of Moral Education, was carried against him by 37,—and he resigned; well, the present Government came in, and Lord Melbourne said, found this resolution an awkward one, and that there was less surplus than they had imagined; they however brought forward several Acts, and also awkward ones, Lord Melbourne said, which were each year rejected by the House of Lords. Well, this year the following Bill was brought in (which Lord Melbourne thinks a very good one, as do I, but which he hears will meet with a great deal of opposition), which is, leaving out the Appropriation Clause, and doing away with the surplus, but proposing to pay the Irish Church out of the funds of the Empire, which is separating the Irish Church from the Land, and keeping it up, not for the people, as they are almost all Catholics, but for the Protestant feeling in the country. Now, Lord Melbourne says, the Church don’t like it, as they think it’s making the Church Stipendiary and is separating it too much from the Land, and the violent democrats dislike it as they think it is giving the Church too much support. Lord Melbourne observes that the opposition will be so considerable from these two Parties that he thinks it will hardly be possible for us to carry this measure. Now, it is upon this measure being proposed on Monday that this Motion or amendment is to be made: “to rescind the resolution of ’35”; “that is,” as Lord Melbourne said, “to do away with it, to scratch it out of the Journals.” Lord Melbourne said that if this should be carried against us, it will be almost fatal to the Government; he added that it is one of those awkward sort of questions in Politics, which it is very difficult to get over, and at the same time hardly possible to resign upon; “it is not good ground to resign upon,” he said, “it would not be understood by the people, they would not sympathise with you.” He continued—but that Lord John might consider his honour at stake, and might resign upon it, which Lord Melbourne said he almost thought he would, but that he would hear that at the Cabinet today. He added, “If we have a Majority, why then it’s all well.” I observed that Lord John seemed to think that likely. Lord Melbourne said he certainly thought we should; but from the nature of the House it made it “ticklish” and “nervous”; which, God knows! it does. He says the Irish Poor Law Bill will not meet with much opposition in the House of Lords, except from the Irish Peers; Lord Londonderry[481] means to oppose it very violently. Sir Robert Peel has a great dinner today, given to him by his followers. Lord Melbourne said he would let me know what took place at the Cabinet; and if there was anything very particular he would come himself. He dines at the Speaker’s tonight. I cannot say (though I feel confident of our success) how low, how sad I feel, when I think of the possibility of this excellent and truly kind man (Lord Melbourne) not remaining my Minister! Yet I trust fervently that He who has so wonderfully protected me through such manifold difficulties will not now desert me! I should have liked to have expressed to Lord Melbourne my anxiety, but the tears were nearer than words throughout the time I saw him, and I felt I should have choked, had I attempted to say anything.

Sunday, 13th May.—In speaking of the singing of birds, which Lord Melbourne said he never could make out one from another, he said, “I never can admire the singing of birds; there’s no melody in it; it’s so shrill; that’s all humbug; it’s mere Poetry; it is not pretty.” This made us laugh; he likes the Blackbird’s singing best. He said that people say there is no difference between the song of a ground-lark and the nightingale. I observed that Lord Holland said there was. “Oh!” he said, “I don’t think Lord Holland knows anything about it.” “It’s very odd,” he continued, “Mr. Fox, and Lord Holland the same, like the singing of birds, and can’t bear music, nor the Human Voice....”

Tuesday, 15th May.— ... Heard from Lord John “that he yesterday brought forward the question of Irish Tithes in a speech of two hours, in which he endeavoured to review the whole subject. Sir Thomas Acland then moved to rescind the resolution of 1835. He spoke temperately and well. Lord Stanley made a short speech professing a desire to settle the Question; Lord Morpeth finished the debate for the night with a very vigorous and very effective speech. The division will probably take place tonight, and may be rather early.” Lord Melbourne told me yesterday that he thought Sir Robert Peel’s speech at the dinner on Saturday very moderate; but that the whole thing seemed to have been “rather flat....” Lord Melbourne said he did not know what the Council (today) was to be about; I said neither did I know, but that it was Lord Glenelg who wished for it. “They always run everything so very late in that Colonial Office,” he said; that they never thought when they would want a Council, and when they did, they said they wanted it immediately, and always upon the most inconvenient days; that to-day was a most inconvenient day for the Members of the House of Commons.... Lord Melbourne said that Lord Munster had been to see him this morning, about their (the Fitzclarences’) Pensions, on the Civil List, which there was some fear the Committee might make some difficulty about, which Lord Melbourne said would be very hard; Lord Munster came to show Lord Melbourne the letter he meant to write (to Mr. Rice, I think) about it. This pension was granted them by George IV. Lord Munster told Lord Melbourne that the late King always imagined that Lord Egremont[482] would leave Lord Munster a great deal; and whenever he gave Lord Munster anything, he used to write to Lord Egremont to tell him he had done so, which Lord Egremont did not at all like and said, “This is a scheme from the beginning,” meaning that the King promoted the match on account of the money. Lord Melbourne said, “Lord Egremont was a very good man but rather suspicious”; from always having had a very large fortune he fancied people wanted to get it from him. He gave Lord Munster £5,000 about a fortnight before he died. Spoke of this new Election Committee Bill which Sir Robert Peel asked for leave to bring in. He proposes that at the beginning of each session the Speaker should name 6 or 4 Members who should then choose the Committees to try the Elections. Formerly, as Lord Melbourne told me once before, the Elections used to be tried by the whole House, and it was considered such a mark of want of confidence in the Ministers if their Member was unseated, that Sir Robert Walpole resigned when the Member for Chippenham was unseated. When this became “too flagrant” Lord Melbourne said, George Grenville, great-grandfather to the present Duke of Buckingham, made what is called “the Grenville Act,” which is as they are tried now; viz. the Speaker draws 40 names from glasses, with which Lists the different parties retire and strike off names from each list until they get it down to 15; and that’s the Committee. Now this, Lord Melbourne said, is found to be partial,[483] and a new mode must be devised.

Don Fernando Prince of Portugal
from recollection
P.V. del. Ken. Palace. April, 1836.

H.S.H. PRINCE FERDINAND OF SAXE-COBURG,
AFTERWARDS KING CONSORT OF PORTUGAL.
From a sketch by Princess Victoria.

Lord Melbourne said Lord Redesdale[484] brought him the Duke of Wellington’s letter yesterday. Lord Melbourne had seen Lord John this morning, who thinks we shall only have a majority of 11 to-night, and that Mr. Hobhouse said we should have more in order to delude us into security.

Wednesday, 16th May.—Got up at 10 and heard from Lord John that on a Division we had a majority of 19, which he said was more than he expected. How thankful I am and feel! Lord Melbourne said he heard that Ferdinand was annoyed at our pressing the Portuguese Government about the Slave Trade; and that it would be well, if I were to state to Ferdinand that the feeling was so strong in this country about Slavery, and we were so pressed about it, that it was impossible for us to do otherwise. I spoke to Lord Melbourne of these Resolutions relative to the Irish Tithe Bill, which I thought excellent, but which he said a very great number of people were against. I observed that Lord John had told me at Windsor that he thought we should not carry it, but that it might be compromised. Lord Melbourne then again repeated that the Established Church was generally kept up for the Poor, as the rich could afford that themselves; whereas in Ireland, 700,000 are Roman Catholics, and the Established Church is only kept up for the Protestant feeling in the United Kingdom, and not for the Poor who are almost all Roman Catholics. I then asked about who should stand Sponsor in my place at the Christening of Col. and Lady Catharine Buckley’s[485] little boy, who is to be christened down in the New Forest where they lived. I said the child was to be called Victor, which I thought an ugly name; he did not, and said laughing that “Sir Victor Buckley” would sound very well....

Friday, 18th May.—We spoke of various things; I asked him if he liked my headdress which was done in plaits round my ears,[486] for I know in general he only likes the hair in front crêpé in 2 puffs. He said, looking at me and making one of his funny faces, “It’s pretty; isn’t it rather curious—something new?”

Saturday, 19th May.—At a little after 2 I rode out with Mamma, Lord Uxbridge, Lord Torrington, Lady Forbes, dearest Lehzen, Lord Alfred, Miss Dillon, Mr. Murray, Lord Headfort, Lady Flora, Miss Quentin, and Col. Cavendish, and came home at 6 m. to 5. I rode dear little Uxbridge who went perfectly. We met Lord Melbourne in going out, who was riding his pony. We rode out by the Harrow Road and home by the Uxbridge Road and Park. Heard from Lord John that “he yesterday stated to the House of Commons the course respecting the Irish Bills, which he had the honour to explain to Your Majesty yesterday. Sir Robert Peel asked for a delay till Friday, and appeared much agitated; but what afterwards fell from him gives every reason to suppose that the Municipal Corporations Bill will not be opposed. Nor is it probable that the Irish Tithe Bill will meet with resistance from the Radical party in the House of Commons. The Chancellor of the Exchequer made a very clear financial statement, and the deficiency of the Revenue being before known, no disappointment was caused by the announcement. Should matters proceed smoothly another fortnight will end the chief party questions in the House of Commons.” This was delightful news.... “Very nice party” (my Concert), Lord M. said, “and everybody very much pleased.” I smiled and said I feared I had done it very ill; that I was quite angry with myself and thought I had done it so ill; and was not civil enough. He said most kindly, “Oh! no, quite the contrary, for I should have told you if it had been otherwise.” I then said I had felt so nervous and shy. “That wasn’t at all observed,” he said. I said that I often stood before a person not knowing what to say; and Lord Melbourne said that the longer one stood thinking the worse it was; and he really thought the best thing to do was to say anything commonplace and foolish, better than to say nothing.

Sunday, 20th May.—Lord Melbourne was in delightful spirits and so talkative and so kind and so very agreeable throughout the evening. I almost fear therefore (in consequence of our having talked so much) that I may have forgotten some of the things we talked about. I asked him if he had dined at Lord Shrewsbury’s the night before; he said no, that it was all a mistake; he went there, was shown upstairs, where he found Lord Shrewsbury alone with his books and papers, who said that all his family were gone to the Opera; Lord Melbourne said, “I came to dine here”; upon which Lord S. told him that it was next Saturday; Lord Melbourne said it was very stupid of himself to forget it, as Lord Shrewsbury had put off the dinner on account of him. He walked home, found his people at home, got his dinner in ½ an hour, and went to his sister’s. Spoke of the Preachers being so badly appointed at the Chapel Royal, which Lord Melbourne said was a great pity, as it would have been such “an instrument of good” if it had been the contrary. We looked at some prints, and amongst others there was a very clever one of Capt. Macheath with Polly and Lucy in The Beggar’s Opera; Lord Melbourne said that The Beggar’s Opera was written by Gay, and was used by the Tory Party in order to show up Lord Townshend[487] and Sir Robert Walpole; was very clever, and had an immense run; but is coarse beyond conception; it was likewise performed with great success when Lord Sandwich brought forward an indictment against Mr. Wilkes for immorality. Of Lord Teynham[488] wanting to have a Private Audience of me, which Lord Melbourne stopped; he said Peers are only allowed to have these Private Audiences to speak on Public Affairs, and not on Private concerns; that when the Regent wanted to prevent Lady Jersey going so often to see Princess Charlotte, Lord Jersey asked for a Private audience; and the Regent said to him, “Of course you come to speak of Public matters, for if you come to speak about your wife, I cannot speak to you,” and he spoke to him upon ordinary matters and dismissed him. Talleyrand is dead—at last!

Monday, 21st May.—Spoke of Talleyrand’s death, which Lord Melbourne said he heard was quite like that of the former French Ministers—like Mazarin—the house full of people to see him die. He (Ld. Melbourne) said he had heard that Louis Philippe and Mme. Adelaide had been to see Talleyrand. Spoke of his fear of dying, which Lord Melbourne said people always said of persons whose feelings on religion were rather loose. Lord Melbourne said he heard that Talleyrand had signed a sort of recantation to the Pope, for something he had done, at the time of the Revolution—for having performed Mass upon some occasion or other....[489]

Thursday, 24th May.—I this day enter my 20th year, which I think very old! In looking back on the past year, I feel more grateful than I can express for all the very great blessings I have received since my last birthday. I have only one very dear affectionate friend less—dearest Louis! Oh! if she could but be still with us!! Though I have lost a dear friend, I can never be thankful enough for the true, faithful, honest, kind one I’ve gained since last year, which is my excellent Lord Melbourne, who is so kind and good to me!!... At 25 m. p. 10 I went with the whole Royal Family into the other Ball-room through the Saloon which was full of people; after speaking to a good many I went to my seat (without sitting down) and then opened the Ball in a Quadrille with George.[490] There were about the same number of people there as at the 1st Ball, and a great number of Foreigners there. My good Lord Melbourne came up to me after my 1st Quadrille, but only stopped one minute, and though I saw him looking on at 3 of the Quadrilles I danced afterwards, he never came near me again, which I was very sorry for; and when I sent for him after supper, he was gone.... After supper I danced 4 Quadrilles in Strauss’s room; he was playing most beautifully. I danced with Lord George Paget,[491] Lord Cantelupe,[492] Lord Milton,[493] and Lord Leveson. Count Eugene Zichy (cousin to Countess Zichy’s husband) wore a most beautiful uniform all covered with splendid turquoises; he is a handsome man, with a very good-natured expression, as he is too, very unaffected and good-humoured, and a beautiful valzer. We then went into the other room, and danced a regular old English Country Dance of 72 couple, which lasted 1 hour, from 3 till 4! I danced with Lord Uxbridge, Lord Cantelupe and Lady Cowper being next, and the Duke of Devonshire and Lady Lothian[494] on the other side. It was the merriest, most delightful thing possible. I left the Ball room at 10 m. p. 4, and was in bed at 5—broad daylight. It was a delightful Ball, and the pleasantest birthday I’ve spent for many years!...

Monday, 28th May.—Spoke of writing to George of Hanover,[495] which he said I should do; and also to the King of Hanover for his birthday; spoke of the report of poor George’s marrying a Russian Princess. He then continued saying it would raise a curious question, “his marrying a Greek” (of the Greek religion it is); for he believed that only marrying Roman Catholics was forbidden by law here (George being in the succession here). I said I thought it was said, all who were not of the Reformed Religion, without naming specifically (Greek, he says, he supposes is included under Roman Catholics) Roman Catholic. Lord Melbourne said I might be right, for that he had not looked at the Act for some time. He said he believed also that George could not marry without my leave.[496]

Tuesday, 29th May.—I told him that Lord Glenelg had made me a present of a Black Swan; Lord Melbourne said that a Black Swan was not a Swan; “It’s a Goose.” Lady Mulgrave said the Ancients had Black Swans, and to prove it began quoting the lines from the Latin Grammar, which Lord Melbourne then repeated, and which I used to learn: “Rara avis in terris, nigroque simillima cygno.” Lord Melbourne said, that meant to describe something very rare, and which did not exist. I said to Lord Melbourne I was very glad to hear that he would come down to Windsor for the Eton Montem. He said, “It’s quite right to go, but I don’t think it’s a very pleasant thing, the Montem; rather foolish”; and we spoke of the Regatta on the 4th of June, to which I’m not going. “The Regatta as you call it,” he said to Lady Mulgrave; “The Boats” it used always to be called. That is in fact done without the consent of the Masters, and all the boys were generally flogged next day. Lord Melbourne has not been to a Montem since 1809. In speaking of the head Colleger who generally is made the Captain, he said he was usually a big boy about 19; “More foolish than a boy,” Lord Melbourne said laughing; and that the expenses were generally so great, and the boy so extravagant for some time before, that he seldom cleared anything. I said the Montem generally ended in the boys’ being sick and drunk; Lord Melbourne said in his funny manner, he thought in these days of education, no boys ever got drunk or sick—which I fear is not the case. He said all this eating and drinking, “all the chocolate and tea and coffee” for breakfast, had got up since his time; that when he was at Eton, they used to cut a roll in half and put a pat of butter inside it and give it to you, and that you then might drink a glass of milk and water (for breakfast); “I never could take milk, and therefore I always took water,” he said, “and we did very well”; much better he thinks than they do now. He said that he remembered people always gave children what they disliked most; he used (before he went to school) to have every day boiled mutton and rice pudding, which he hated; “Children’s stomachs are rather squeamish,” he said; and boiled mutton is particularly nauseous to a child, he observed; and he hated rice pudding. “Somehow or other,” he said, “they found out you disliked it, and there it was every day”; this, he thinks (and everybody else almost, I think, ought to do so), a bad system. He added, “Children’s stomachs are rather delicate and queasy”; which made us all laugh.

Thursday, 31st May.—He said that Lord Mulgrave was very anxious about being made a Marquis at the Coronation, and that he supposed it must be done, but that it would offend other Earls; he added that there was great difficulty about making these Peers,—but that he must soon lay the list before me. “I shall advise Your Majesty to make as few as possible,” he added. It would not do, he said, to make any Members of the House of Commons Peers, on account of vacating their seats. Lord Dundas wishes to be made an Earl, he says, which he supposes should be granted; and Lord Barham wishes to be made Earl of Gainsborough.[497] William IV. made 16 Peers and 24 Baronets at his Coronation; and George IV. 15 Peers; “he was so clogged with promises,” Lord Melbourne said, “he had made such heaps of promises.”