CHAPTER XX
1851
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 25th January 1851.
The Queen approves of the elevation of Mr. Pemberton Leigh1 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 Lushington2 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.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
DIPLOMATIC ARRANGEMENTS
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.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
DIPLOMATIC ARRANGEMENTS
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."
Memorandum by Queen Victoria.
SIR JAMES GRAHAM
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.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT
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's5 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.
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.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
MINISTERIAL CRISIS
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 LANSDOWNE CONSULTED
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.
LORD STANLEY SUMMONED
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.
FISCAL POLICY OUTLINED
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.
PROTECTION
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.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
SIR JAMES GRAHAM
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.
FOREIGN POLICY
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.
Lord John had raised a new difficulty by his declaration upon Reform. He had been thunderstruck when he read the announcement on the part of the chief author of the Reform Bill, who had stood with him (Sir J. Graham) hitherto upon finality, condemning his own work, and promising at a year's distance important alterations, in which interval great agitation would be got up, great expectations raised, and the measure when brought forward would cause disappointment. Sir Robert Peel had always been of opinion that it was most dangerous to touch these questions, but if opened with the consent of the Crown, a measure should at once be brought forward and passed.
After my having replied to these different objections, that the Queen felt herself the importance of Lord Palmerston's removal, and would make it herself a condition with Lord John that he should not be again Foreign Secretary; that the protest to Austria had not gone, and that upon studying the question Sir James would find that the entrance of the whole Austrian Monarchy, while giving France a pretext for war and infringing the Treaties of 1815, would not tend to the strength and unity of Germany, which held to be the true English interest, but quite the reverse; that I did not think the Papal Aggression Bill touched the Bequest Act or militated against toleration; that the Lieutenancy would perhaps be given up, and a measure on the Franchise be considered by the new Government and brought forward at once. I thought it would be better to discuss the matters with Lord John Russell in the Queen's presence, who accordingly joined us.
The discussion which now arose went pretty much over the same ground, Lord John agreeing that Lord Palmerston ought to form no difficulty, that the Papal Aggression Bill would be further modified, that the Lieutenancy Bill might be given up, that he agreed to Sir James's objection to the declaration about reform, but that he had intended to bring forward a measure, if he had been able to get his colleagues to agree to it, that he would be ready to propose a measure at once. This Sir J. Graham thought important as a means of gaining at a General Election, which he foresaw could not be long delayed, whoever formed a Government.
In order to obtain some result from this long debate I summed up what might be considered as agreed upon, viz. That there was tabula rasa, and for the new Coalition a free choice of men and measures, to which they assented, Lord John merely stating that he could not take office without part of his friends, and could not sacrifice his personal declarations. Dinnertime having approached, and Lord Aberdeen having written that he would be with us after nine o'clock, we adjourned the further discussion till then, when they would return.
THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON
Whilst the Queen dressed I had an interview with the Duke of Wellington, who had come to dine here, in which I informed him of the nature of our crisis. He expressed his regret and his dread of a Protectionist Government with a Dissolution, which might lead to civil commotion. He could not forgive, he said, the high Tory Party for their having stayed away the other night on Mr Locke King's Motion, and thus abandoned their own principles; he had no feeling for Lord John Russell's Cabinet, measures, or principles, but he felt that the Crown and the country were only safe in these days by having the Liberals in office, else they would be driven to join the Radical agitation against the institutions of the country.
After dinner we resumed our adjourned debate in my room, at a quarter to ten, with Lord Aberdeen, and were soon joined by Lord John and Sir James Graham. We went over the same ground with him. Lord Stanley's letter was read and discussed. Lord Aberdeen declared his inability to join in a Protectionist Ministry; he did not pretend to understand the question of Free Trade, but it was a point of honour with him not to abandon it, and now, since Sir R. Peel's death, a matter of piety. He thought the danger of a Dissolution on a question of food by the Crown, for the purpose of imposing a tax upon bread, of the utmost danger for the safety of the country. He disapproved the Papal Bill, the abolition of the Lieutenancy, he had no difficulty upon the Franchise, for though he was called a despot, he felt a good deal of the Radical in him sometimes.
Lord John put it to Lord Aberdeen, whether he would not undertake to form a Government, to which Lord Aberdeen gave no distinct reply.
As Sir James Graham raised nothing but difficulties, though professing the greatest readiness to be of use, and as it was getting on towards midnight, we broke up, with the Queen's injunction that one of the three gentlemen must form a Government, to which Lord Aberdeen laughingly replied: "I see your Majesty has come into6 the Président de la République." Lord John was to see Lord Lansdowne to-day at three o'clock, and would report progress to the Queen at five o'clock. On one point we were agreed, viz. that the Government to be formed must not be for the moment, but with a view to strength and stability.
Albert.
Footnote 6: Sic.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
COMPLICATIONS
23d February 1851.
The Queen has seen Lord Aberdeen and Sir J. Graham, but is sorry to say that her doing so was premature, as they had no opportunity of seeing each other after they left Lord John Russell, and therefore had not considered the Memorandum7 which Lord John had handed to them. Lord Aberdeen has in the interval seen Lord Stanley, and declared to him that he must undeceive him as to the possibility of his ever joining a Protection Government. What further resulted from the conversation the Queen would prefer to state to Lord John verbally to-morrow. Perhaps Lord John would come in the forenoon to-morrow, or before he goes to the House; he will be so good as to let her know.
Footnote 7: With a view of uniting with the Peelites, Lord John drew up a Memorandum, printed in Walpole's Lord John Russell, vol. ii. chap, xxii., with the following points:
A Cabinet of not more than eleven Members.
The present commercial policy to be maintained.
The financial measures of the year to be open to revision.
The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill to be persevered in so far as the Preamble and the first clause, but the remaining clauses to be abandoned.
A Reform Bill for the extension of the Franchise.
A Commission of Enquiry into corrupt practices at elections in cities and boroughs.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
Buckingham Palace, 23rd February 1851.
(Sunday.)
Lord John Russell came at half-past five, much fatigued and depressed. On the Queen's asking whether he could report any progress, he said he thought he could; he had met Lord Aberdeen and Sir James Graham, together with Sir George Grey (Lord Lansdowne being ill). That he had informed them that he had received the Queen's commands to form a Government (?) and handed to them a Memorandum which follows here and which they had promised to take into consideration.
We asked him whether he had chalked out a Government. He said he had not thought of it yet; he added, however, that he could not undertake the Foreign Affairs with the lead in the House of Commons and Government (which the Queen had pressed upon him); Lord Palmerston might be leader in the House of Lords; he would not like Lord Aberdeen at the Foreign Office; Lord Clarendon and Lord Granville were equally acceptable to him.
I suggested that it might be well if the Queen were to see Sir James and Lord Aberdeen again, which he approved, but thought it better he should not be present himself, and that the Queen might tell Sir James that he might have any Office he liked; perhaps he would take the Foreign Affairs.
Lord John's relations and private friends evidently are distressed at his resuming office; the Radicals were very much pleased with the idea of Sir James Graham being in office.
Albert.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD ABERDEEN SUMMONED
24th February 1851.
(Monday evening.)
Lord John came at three o'clock before making his statement to the House of Commons. We communicated to him what had passed with Sir James Graham and Lord Aberdeen yesterday evening. He thought his Memorandum had been misunderstood: the nature of the Reform Bill was left open to discussion, and what he had said about filling the Offices only meant that the Offices should not be divided according to number, and each party left to fill up its share, as had been done in former Coalition Ministries. He had seen Lord Palmerston, who was not willing to give up the Foreign Office—spoke of retiring from business at his age, of his success in conducting Foreign Affairs, and of its being a self-condemnation if he accepted another Office. Lord John told him that he did not agree in this view, that the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland was to be maintained, and thought it best to leave it there. He thought Lord Palmerston had given up the idea of leading the House of Commons. We ascertained from him in conversation that he could not agree to Lord Aberdeen taking the Foreign Office nor that he could serve under Lord Aberdeen or Sir James Graham in case any one of these were to form a Government.
At half-past six Lord John returned from the House of Commons, and reported that two very important events had taken place: the one that upon his making his statement to the House that the Government had resigned, that Lord Stanley had been sent for, had declared his inability then to form a Government (words agreed upon between Lord Lansdowne, Lord John, and Sir George Grey), and that he was now charged with the formation of a Government, Mr. Disraeli got up, and denied that Lord Stanley had declined forming a Government, which was received with cheers from the Protectionists. Lord John had merely answered that when Lord Stanley would make his explanations, what he had stated would be found to be correct, relying entirely, not upon what the Queen had communicated, but on Lord Stanley's own letter. The second event was a letter from Lord Aberdeen and Sir James Graham,8 which put an end to all thoughts of a Coalition. It stated that they could agree to no legislation whatever on the Papal Aggressions, and ended with a hint that Sir James Graham was prepared to go farther in reductions than Lord John was likely to consent to.
Lord John had at once answered that although he did not understand the latter objection, the difference on the Papal Bill must put an end to their negotiation. We much lamented the result, and after some discussion agreed that the only thing to be done now was to send for Lord Aberdeen. Lord Stanley could not pretend to be consulted before every other means of forming a Government had been exhausted.
Footnote 8: Published in Walpole's Lord John Russell, vol. ii. chap. xxii.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
LORD ABERDEEN DECLINES
Buckingham Palace, 24th February 1851.
(Half-past ten p.m.)
The Queen returns these papers, as Lord John Russell wished. She has just seen Lord Aberdeen and Sir James Graham, who, though ready to do anything which could be of any use to the Queen and the country, have stated it as their decided opinion that Lord Stanley should be asked to form a Government. Under these circumstances the Queen intends to send to Lord Stanley to-morrow. The Queen did ask Lord Aberdeen if he could undertake to form a Government, but he said that he thought it would not be successful, and that the Papal Aggression would be an insurmountable difficulty for him and Sir James Graham.
The Queen rejoices to hear from them, and from Lord John and Lord Lansdowne, the expression of cordiality of feeling, which it is so essential for the Crown and the country that there should be.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
ABERDEEN AND GRAHAM
Buckingham Palace, 25 February 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Through Van der Weyer, you will have heard what was the state of the long and anxious crisis yesterday evening.
Alas! the hope of forming a strong Coalition Government has failed—for the present. I say for the present, as they are all so entirely agreed on the Commercial Policy that another time they hope there will be no difficulty, when they have fought together. The Papal Aggression has in fact been the only insurmountable difficulty. We sent to Lord Aberdeen last night (both he and Sir James Graham have been most kind to us), and asked if he could not try to form a Government; but with the greatest readiness to serve me, he said he could not, on account of this self-same Papal Aggression. He equally declares that he cannot join Lord Stanley. Accordingly this morning I have seen Lord Stanley, and he means to try if he can form any fit sort of Government, but he has no men of talent, and his difficulties are gigantic. I shall only know to-morrow definitely if he can form an Administration. I am calm and courageous, having such support and advice as my dearest Albert's; but it is an anxious time, and the uncertainty and suspense very trying. More details you will have later on. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD STANLEY TO BE SUMMONED
Buckingham Palace, 26th February 1851.
Lord Aberdeen and Sir James Graham came yesterday evening at nine o'clock; the Queen put it to them whether they could form a Government, to which they replied that they had turned it in their heads a hundred times, that there was nothing they would not do to show their readiness to serve the Queen, but that they did not see a possibility of forming an Administration which could stand a day. They were most likely at that moment the two most unpopular men in England, having declared that nothing should be done in Parliament against the Papal Aggression, which the whole country clamoured for; the Whigs would be very angry with them for their having broken up the new combination; they might find favour with the Radicals, but that was a support upon which no reliance could be placed. There was a growing opinion that Lord Stanley ought to have a chance of bringing forward his measures; that it was perilous, but that it was an evil which must be gone through; that this opinion had been strongly expressed by Lord Lansdowne, whose moderation nobody could doubt; that it was shared by the Duke of Newcastle, Mr Sidney Herbert, and others of Sir James's friends whom he had had time to consult.
Upon the Queen's expression of her great apprehension as to the consequence of such a step on the country, they said there would no doubt spring up a most violent opposition, that there would be attempts to stop the supplies and dissolve the Army, but that Lord John Russell and Sir James Graham together would do their utmost to preach moderation, and would refer the House of Commons to the Queen's example, who had taken strictly the Constitutional course throughout the crisis, whose opinions on Free Trade were well known (as far as subjects could allow themselves to pretend to know their Sovereign's private opinions) from the hearty support she had given to Sir Robert Peel's and Lord John's Governments. That upon the first proposition of a Stanley Government the junction of Parties would be completed, and there would be only one strong opposition. After having fought together, there would be no longer any difficulty about forming a strong Government out of their joint ranks, whilst now it was impossible not to see that every Minister displaced would feel personally aggrieved, that then they stood on a footing of perfect equality. Sir James had seen Lord John since he had tendered his second resignation, and found him quite altered; whilst he was embarrassed and boutonné before, he was open and unreserved now, and they could speak on terms of private friendship. Lord Aberdeen would save his influence in the House of Lords, which he would probably have lost if he had joined the Whigs in office; in future all this would be different.
Lord John Russell's letter with the Memoranda came and interrupted us. From these papers, and what Sir James and Lord Aberdeen said, it is clear that all parties are relieved by the failure of their attempt to form a Coalition Government, but determined to form a positive junction, which will be most salutary to the country. The Queen will therefore send for Lord Stanley.
We discussed further the means Lord Stanley would have to form an Administration, for which the material was certainly sad. Disraeli's last scene in the House of Commons would render the publication of Lord Stanley's letter necessary. Mr Gladstone might possibly join him; at least no pains would be spared to bring him in. Lord Palmerston had often so much secret understanding with Disraeli that he might be tempted with the bait of keeping the Foreign Office, particularly if personally offended.
Whether the Queen should allow or refuse a Dissolution was debated; the latter declared a most heavy responsibility for the Sovereign to undertake, but a subject upon which the decision should only be taken at the time, and on a due consideration of the circumstances.
Albert.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Chesham Place, 25th February 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that having seen the letter which Lord Stanley addressed to your Majesty, and feeling himself precluded from entering into any details, he announced to the House of Commons that Lord Stanley had in reply to your Majesty's offer declared "he was not then prepared to form a Government."
Mr Disraeli disputed the accuracy of this statement.
Your Majesty's word cannot be called in question, but Lord John Russell now feels it due to his own honour humbly to ask your Majesty for a copy of Lord Stanley's letter. He does not propose to read the letter to the House of Commons, but to refer to it in the statement he is compelled to make.
Lord John Russell humbly requests that this representation may be shown to Lord Stanley. He will feel what is due to the honour of a public man.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD STANLEY ARRIVES
25th February 1851.
(Tuesday.)
Lord Stanley obeyed the Queen's summons at eleven o'clock, and seemed very much concerned when she informed him that Lord John Russell had given up his task, as differences of opinion, particularly on the Papal Bill, had prevented a junction between him, Lord Aberdeen, and Sir James Graham; that an appeal to Lord Aberdeen had been equally unsuccessful from the same cause, viz. their difficulty in dealing with the Papal Question; that consequently the contingency had arisen under which Lord Stanley had promised to undertake the formation of a Government.
Lord Stanley said his difficulties were immense, and he could not venture to approach them unless he was sure of every support on the part of the Crown; that he would have arrayed against him a formidable opposition of all the talent in the country.
The Queen assured him that he should have every Constitutional support on her part, of which Lord Stanley repeated he had felt sure, although the total change must be very trying to the Queen.
On his question, whether there was any hope of Lord Aberdeen joining him and taking the Foreign Office, we had to tell him that he must quite discard that idea. He replied, with a sigh, that he would still try and see him; he had thought of the Duke of Wellington taking the Foreign Office ad interim, but felt that he could hardly propose that, considering the Duke's age and infirmity; he would make an attempt to see Lord Canning with the Queen's permission, and that failing, could only think of Sir Stratford Canning, now at Constantinople, which the Queen approved.
He still hoped he might get Mr Gladstone to take the lead in the House of Commons, without which assistance he must not conceal that it was almost impossible for him to go on. Mr Gladstone was on his way home from Paris, and he had written to him to see him as soon as he arrived; till then he could not promise that he would succeed to form an Administration, and he only undertook it for the good of his country, but was afraid of ruining his reputation.
To this I rejoined that who tried to do the best by his country need never be afraid for his reputation.
MR DISRAELI
The Queen showed Lord Stanley Lord John Russell's letter respecting Mr Disraeli's denial of the truth of Lord John's statement in the House of Commons yesterday.
Lord Stanley said it had been a very unfortunate misunderstanding, that he had been sorry Lord John and Lord Lansdowne should have felt it necessary to say that "he had not then been prepared to form a Government," as the knowledge of this fact, as long as there was a chance of his being called back, could not but act injuriously to him and dispirit those with whom he acted. He would explain all this on Friday in the House of Lords, and had no objection to sending Lord John a copy of his letter.
We now came to Measures. Lord Stanley hopes to obviate the Papal Question by a Parliamentary declaration and the appointment in both Houses of a Committee to enquire into the position of the Roman Catholic Church in this country; he would diminish the Income Tax by a million, and exempt temporary incomes; he would allow compounding for the Window Tax and levy a moderate duty on corn, which he called a Countervailing Duty, and tried to defend as good political economy, on the authority of Mr M'Culloch's last edition of "Ricardo." (I had some discussion with him, however, on that point.)
Returning to the offices to be filled, Lord Stanley said he should have to propose Mr Disraeli as one of the Secretaries of State. The Queen interrupted him by saying that she had not a very good opinion of Mr Disraeli on account of his conduct to poor Sir R. Peel, and what had just happened did not tend to diminish that feeling; but that she felt so much Lord Stanley's difficulties, that she would not aggravate them by passing a sentence of exclusion on him. She must, however, make Lord Stanley responsible for his conduct, and should she have cause to be displeased with him when in office, she would remind Lord Stanley of what now passed. Lord Stanley promised to be responsible, and excused his friend for his former bitterness by his desire to establish his reputation for cleverness and sharpness; nobody had gained so much by Parliamentary schooling, and he had of late quite changed his tone.
Mr Herries would make a good Chancellor of the Exchequer.
As to Ireland, he had thought of having a more ostensible Lord-Lieutenant, whilst the business should be done by the Secretary for Ireland. He asked the Queen whether the Duke of Cambridge might be offered that post, which she took ad referendum. The Duke of Northumberland, though not of his Party, he should like to offer the Admiralty to.
DISSOLUTION
At the conclusion of the interview he broached the important question of Dissolution, and said that a Dissolution would anyhow become necessary; that, if it was thought that the Queen would withhold from him the privilege of dissolving, he would not have the slightest chance in the House of Commons; he would be opposed and beat, and then his adversaries would come in and dissolve. He avowed that it could not be said that the Queen had refused him the power of dissolving, but he required some assurance.
On the Queen's objecting to giving him a contingent positive promise, but declaring her readiness fairly to discuss the question when the emergency arose, he contented himself with the permission to deny, if necessary, that she would not consent to it, putting entire confidence in the Queen's intention to deal fairly by him.
I tried to convince Lord Stanley, and I hope not without effect, of the advantage, both to the Queen and Lord Stanley himself, that they should not be hampered by a positive engagement on that point, which might become very inconvenient if circumstances arose which made a Dissolution dangerous to the country.
Albert.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Buckingham Palace, 25th February 1851.
The Queen has seen Lord Stanley, who will let Lord John Russell have a copy of the letter. He wishes it not to be known or considered that he has formally undertaken to form a Government till to-morrow, on account of the House of Lords meeting to-day. He feels the difficulty of his position, and is not sure yet that he will be able to complete a Ministry. To-morrow he will give the Queen a positive answer.
Queen Victoria to Lord Stanley.
Buckingham Palace, 25th February 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord Stanley's letter. She had forgotten the Levée, and was just going to write to him to inform him that she wished to see him at eleven o'clock to-morrow.
The Queen cannot but regret that Lord Stanley should think Lord John Russell's explanation led to a wrong inference; for Lord Stanley will himself recollect that he stated his objections to her much more strongly in his first interview than he did in writing, and as Lord Stanley so strongly advised the Queen to try if no other arrangement could first be come to, she hardly knows how this could otherwise have been expressed than by the words used by Lord Lansdowne and Lord John Russell.
Memorandum by Queen Victoria.
26th February 1851.
(Wednesday.)
Lord Stanley came again at eleven. The first part of the audience, which was not long, was occupied by Lord Stanley's trying to explain away Mr Disraeli's contradiction of Lord John Russell, though he termed it "very unfortunate," by saying that he wished Lord John had not mentioned that he (Lord Stanley) "was not then prepared" to form a Government, for that, though true in fact, he had not absolutely refused, but had only advised me to try and make other arrangements first. I said I thought the distinction "a very nice one," which he admitted. What passed between us on the subject the correspondence between Albert and Lord John will best explain.
Lord Stanley then told us that he had seen the Duke of Northumberland, who wished for time to consider; that he was to see Lord Canning again to-day, but had no hopes of his accepting; and that he found so many people out of Town that he must ask for forty-eight hours more before he could give me a positive answer, viz. till Friday. He added he "must not conceal" from me that he was "not very sanguine" of success; almost all depended on Mr Gladstone, who was expected to arrive to-day; but that it might now be said (in answer to a question of Albert's "whether in these days of nice distinctions one might say that he had undertaken to form a Government"), that he had attempted to undertake to form a Government.
Victoria R.
Lord Stanley to Queen Victoria.
LORD STANLEY RESIGNS
St James's Square, 27th February 1851.
(Four o'clock p.m.)
Lord Stanley, with his humble duty, awaits your Majesty's commands at what hour he may be honoured with an audience, to explain the grounds on which, with the deepest regret, he feels himself under the necessity of resigning the important trust with which your Majesty has honoured him.
Queen Victoria to Sir James Graham.
Buckingham Palace, 27th February 1851.
The Queen sanctions Sir James Graham's making any statement to the House of Commons which he thinks necessary, to explain the part which he and Lord Aberdeen took in the late Ministerial negotiations, and indeed hopes that these explanations will be as full as possible on all parts, in order that the country may fully appreciate the difficulties of the crisis.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD STANLEY'S REASONS
Buckingham Palace, 27th February 1851.
Lord Stanley arrived at half-past five o'clock. We were struck by the change of his countenance, which had lost all the expression of care and anxiety which had marked it at the previous interviews.
He assured the Queen that he had been labouring incessantly since he had seen her last, but that he was sorry to say without any success.
THE PAPAL BILL
He had seen Mr Gladstone, who declined joining his Government on account of his previous pledges in Parliament respecting the Commercial Policy of Sir R. Peel, but evidently also on account of his peculiar views with respect to the Papal Aggression, which he did not seem disposed to look upon as in any way objectionable.
Lord Canning had given him some hope at one time, but finally declined in order not to risk his credit for political consistency.
Mr H. Corry, whose opinions on Free Trade were by no means decided, and who had only filled a very subordinate situation in Sir R. Peel's Government, he had offered high office, but was refused, Mr Corry expressing his fears that the Government had no chance of standing against the opposition it would have to meet in the House of Commons.
The Duke of Northumberland was the only person not properly belonging to the Protection Party who had accepted office (First Lord of the Admiralty). At one time Lord Ellenborough had accepted, but having been sent on a mission to Mr Goulburn in order to see whether he could convert him, he came home himself converted, and withdrew his acceptance again.
In this situation Lord Stanley called his friends together, and after some discussion concurred in their opinion that it was not possible for them to form such an Administration as ought to be offered to the Queen. Lord Stanley then qualified this expression again, and said that though he could have offered a very respectable Government if he had had a majority in the House of Commons, or the means of strengthening himself by an immediate Dissolution, he could not form such a one which could have withstood an adverse majority and such a formidable array of talent in the Opposition. He therefore returned the trust which had been committed to him into the Queen's hands, expressing at the same time his deep sense of gratitude for the kindness with which she had treated him, the support and confidence she had given him, sorry only that it should have led to no result. He thought, however, that the prolongation of the crisis had not inconvenienced the public service, as Her Majesty's present Government were constitutionally enabled to carry on all necessary business.
The Queen rejoined that she was very sorry that this attempt had also failed, that she had tried every possible combination, and still was without a Government. Lord Stanley answered as if he considered it natural that Lord John Russell's Government should now quietly proceed; but on the Queen's observation, that it was now necessary that all Parties should join in the support of some measures at least, and particularly the Papal Bill, he stated what he was prepared to support, and would have been prepared to propose had he taken office, viz. a fuller recital in the preamble of the Bill and no penal clause in the body of it. (The present Bill looked pettish and undignified, as if framed in anger as a return for the insult, and not a correction of the state of the law.) He thought the Law very complex and obscure, and never found it acted upon. He would have proposed therefore that Committees of both Houses should enquire into the whole subject; the state of the Convents; whether subjects were detained against their will; whether people were forced to bequeath their property to the Church on the deathbed, etc., etc.; he knew that the Roman Catholic laity felt severely the oppression which the Priests exercised over them, and would be willing to give evidence.
Lord Stanley asked whether it could be of use if he were to state all this in his explanation to-day, which the Queen strongly affirmed. I added that I hoped he would explain what he was prepared to do on all the subjects in dispute—the Commercial and Financial Policy as well. He promised to do so, and entered into his views on the Income Tax, which he called a War Tax, which had been imposed for temporary purposes only in 1842, and ought to be taken off again when practicable in order to keep faith with the public; but if, as often as there was a surplus, this was immediately absorbed by remission of other burdens, this object could never be fulfilled. He would propose that by degrees, as surpluses arose, the Income Tax should be decreased, and so on to its final repeal.
I disputed with him for some time on the advantages of an Income Tax, but without coming to any result.
On his enquiry whether there was anything else the Queen might wish him to state—perhaps the rumour that he had been refused the power of dissolving—we agreed that he should say the question had never been seriously entertained, but that the Queen had been ready to give him the same support and advantages which any other Government might have enjoyed.9
Albert.
Footnote 9: The Prince thereupon, at the Queen's request, communicated with Lord John Russell, and after recounting to him the various successive failures to form a Government, wrote that the Queen must "pause before she again entrusts the commission of forming an Administration to anybody, till she has been able to see the result of to-morrow evening's Debate." He added, "Do you see any Constitutional objection to this course?"
The Prince Albert to the Duke of Wellington.
THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON
Buckingham Palace, 28th February 1851.
My dear Duke,—Lord Stanley has likewise resigned his task, not being able to gain over any of Sir R. Peel's friends, and being incapable of forming a Government out of his Party alone.
So Lord John Russell has declared his inability to carry on the Government. Lord Stanley has then declared his inability to form one until every other combination should have failed. We have tried all possible combinations between Whigs and Peelites, and have not succeeded, and now Lord Stanley throws up the game a second time! The Queen would be happy to consult you and hear your advice in this dilemma. Possibly to-night's Debate may define the position of Parties more clearly, and give a clue to what may be best to be done under the circumstances. Ever yours, etc.
Albert.
Lord John Russell to the Prince Albert.
Chesham Place, 28th February 1851.
Sir,—The former Cabinet meet at eleven, at Lansdowne House.
It appears to me that the Queen might with advantage see Lord Lansdowne. He was in office with Mr Fox and Lord Grenville in 1806; he has been distinguished and respected in political life ever since; he is now desirous of retiring, and has therefore no personal object to gain. If the Queen approves, Lord Lansdowne might wait on Her Majesty soon after twelve o'clock. I have the honour to be, Sir, your Royal Highness's very dutiful Servant,
J. Russell.
Queen Victoria to Lord Lansdowne.
LORD LANSDOWNE
Buckingham Palace, 28th February 1851.
It would be a great satisfaction to the Queen to hear Lord Lansdowne's advice in the present critical state of affairs, and she would be glad if he could come to her at twelve this morning. The Queen has sent to the Duke of Wellington in order to hear his opinion also; but he cannot be here before to-night, being at Strathfieldsaye.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
Friday, 28th February 1851.
Lord Lansdowne, who arrived at twelve o'clock, was asked by the Queen what advice he could offer her in the present complication. His answer was: "I wish indeed I had any good advice to offer to your Majesty." He expressed his delight at the Queen having sent for the Duke of Wellington. We talked generally of the state of affairs; he agreed in a remark of mine, that I thought the Queen should be entirely guided in her choice of the person to construct a Government, by the consideration which Party would now appear to be the strongest in the House of Commons. On my asking, however, whether he knew if, on the failure of Lord Stanley to form a Government, part of his followers would now give up Protection as past hope, and be prepared in future to support the Peelite section of the Conservative Party, Lord Lansdowne said he had heard nothing on the subject, nor could he give us more information on the chance of the Radicals and Irish members now being more willing to support Lord John Russell in future. He liked Lord Stanley's plan of dealing with the Papal Question, of which the Queen communicated to him the outlines, was afraid of Sir J. Graham's excessive leaning towards economy, shook his head at Lord John Russell's letter to the Bishop of Durham10 which had been instrumental in bringing on the present crisis, and confessed that he had been amongst those in the Cabinet who had prevented the bringing forward of a measure of reform in the present Session. He offered to do whatever might be most conducive to the Queen's comfort—stay out of office, or come into office—as might be thought the most useful.
Albert.
Footnote 10: See ante, [p. 273] note 45.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
FURTHER DIFFICULTIES
Buckingham Palace, 1st March 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—I did not write to you yesterday, thinking I could perhaps give you some more positive news to-day, but I cannot. I am still without a Government, and I am still trying to hear and pause before I actually call to Lord John to undertake to form, or rather more to continue, the Government. We have passed an anxious, exciting week, and the difficulties are very peculiar; there are so many conflicting circumstances which render coalition between those who agree in almost everything, and in particular on Free Trade, impossible, but the "Papal Question" is the real and almost insuperable difficulty.
Lord Lansdowne is waiting to see me, and I must go, and with many thanks for your two kind letters, ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL
Buckingham Palace, 2nd March 1851.
(Sunday.)
Lord Lansdowne, who arrived after church, had seen Lord John Russell and discussed with him the Memorandum which we left with him yesterday. He had since drawn up a Memorandum himself which embodied his views, and which he had not yet communicated to any one. He was very apprehensive lest to begin a new Government with an open question would produce the greatest prejudice against it in the public; he was still inclined therefore to recommend the continuance of the present Government avowedly for the purpose of passing the Papal Bill, after which the Coalition might take place, which, however, should be agreed upon and settled at this time. As the Duke of Wellington has not yet sent his promised Memorandum, and Lord Lansdowne was anxious to hear his opinion, the Queen commissioned him to appoint Lord John Russell to come at three o'clock, and to go himself to the Duke of Wellington.
Lord John Russell, who arrived at the appointed time, and had not seen Lord Lansdowne's Memorandum yet, read it over, and expressed great misgivings about the execution of the proposal. He said he saw in fact, like Sir J. Graham, nothing but difficulties. He had ascertained that his Party by no means liked the idea of a fusion, and had been much relieved when the attempt to form a Coalition Ministry had failed. He was afraid that in the interval between their resuming office and giving it up again every possible surmise would be current who were the Ministers to be displaced, and every possible intrigue would spring up for and against particular members of the Cabinet. He would prefer not to make any arrangements for the Coalition now, but merely to engage to resign again after having carried the Papal Bill, when the Queen could try the Coalition, and that failing, could entrust Lord Aberdeen and Sir J. Graham with the carrying on of the Government, whose chief difficulty would then be removed. I objected to this—that his Party might feel justly aggrieved if after their having carried him through the difficulty of the Papal Measure, he were to throw them over and resign, and asked him whether his Cabinet would not repent in the meantime and wish to stay in.
He answered that it would be entirely in his and Lord Lansdowne's hands to carry out the proposed arrangements.
We asked him whether it would strengthen his hands if, instead of his only accepting the task of continuing the Government till the Papal Measure had been passed, the Queen were to make it a condition in giving him the Commission, that it should terminate then. He replied, "Certainly." He begged, however, to be understood not to have given a decided opinion that the plan of "the open Question" proposed in our Memorandum was not preferable, although he saw great objections to that also, particularly as Sir J. Graham had reserved the statement of his principal objections to the Papal Bill for the second reading. He promised to draw up a Memorandum, which he would bring to-morrow at twelve o'clock, after having consulted some of his colleagues, and begged that it might not be considered that he had accepted the Government till then.
One of the difficulties which we likewise discussed was the position of the financial measures which required almost immediate attention, and still ought to be left open for the consideration of the future Government.
We agreed that the pressing on the Papal Measure was the chief point, and that it ought to be altered to meet the objections (as far as they are reasonable) of its opponents, strengthening the declaratory part, however, to please Lord Stanley; and the Queen promised to call upon Lord Stanley to give this so modified Bill the support of himself and his Party, which we thought she could in fairness claim after all that had happened.
The Queen reiterated her objections to Lord Palmerston, and received the renewed promise that her wishes should be attended to.
Albert.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
A COALITION IMPOSSIBLE
Buckingham Palace, 3rd March 1851.
Lord John Russell arrived at the hour appointed (twelve o'clock), and was sorry to inform the Queen that all hope of a Coalition must be given up. He had found that his Party was very much averse to it. On proposing to his former colleagues the plan of keeping Office now, and vacating it after the Aggression Bill had passed, many of them, amongst which were Lord Grey, Sir Charles Wood, Sir Francis Baring, declared they would not be warming-pans (an expression used at the time of the Grey-Grenville Coalition), and would resign at once. The Duke of Wellington, whose opinion the Queen had asked, had recommended the return of the old Cabinet to power. He (Lord John) could therefore only advise that course, although he was conscious that it would be a very weak Government, and one not likely to last any length of time.
He then read the Memorandum which he had drawn up and which follows here.11
The Queen now asked whether Lord John proposed a modification of his own Cabinet, to which Lord John replied, None, except perhaps an exchange of Office between Sir C. Wood and Sir F. Baring, if Sir Charles were to refuse bringing in a different budget from the one he had already propounded; he was for maintaining the Income Tax, whilst Sir Francis was for repealing it by degrees. The Queen then reminded Lord John of her objections to Lord Palmerston, and his promise that Lord Palmerston should not again be thrust upon her as Foreign Secretary. Lord John admitted to the promise, but said he could not think for a moment of resuming office and either expel Lord Palmerston or quarrel with him. He (Lord John) was in fact the weakness and Lord Palmerston the strength of the Government from his popularity with the Radicals.... He said he was very anxious that he and Lord Lansdowne should bear the responsibility of removing Lord Palmerston from the Foreign Office and not the Queen; her refusal now could only go to the country as a personal objection on her part, and the country would be left without a Government in consequence. On the Queen's reiterating that she wanted to keep Lord John and get rid of Lord Palmerston, and that it was too painful to her to be put into the situation of having actually to wish the fall of her own Government, Lord John promised to move Lord Palmerston in the Easter recess, or to resign then himself if he should meet with difficulties; in the meantime he must apprise Lord Palmerston of this intention, which he could explain to him as a wish to make a general modification of his Government. He would offer him the Lieutenancy of Ireland or the Presidency or lead in the House of Lords, which Lord Lansdowne would be ready to resign. He might at that period perhaps get some of the Radicals into office or some Peelites. The Queen finally entrusted Lord John with the Government on these conditions.
Albert.
Footnote 11: See next page.
Memorandum by Lord John Russell.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S ADVICE
3rd March 1851.
Her Majesty having tried in vain the formation of a Government—first, by Lord Stanley; second, by Lord John Russell, Lord Aberdeen, and Sir James Graham; third, by Lord Aberdeen; fourth, by Lord Stanley a second time—had recourse to the advice and opinion of the Duke of Wellington. The Duke, admitting the great qualifications for office of the adherents of the late Sir Robert Peel, yet advises the Queen to restore her former Ministers to office.
But supposing Her Majesty to follow that advice, a further question naturally arises: the late Government having fallen from want of Parliamentary support, can they upon their return be in any way strengthened, and be enabled to carry on the public business with more power and efficiency?
This might be done in three ways: first, by a Coalition sooner or later with the Peel Party; secondly, by admitting to office some of their own Radical supporters; thirdly, by seeking aid from the Party which has followed Lord Stanley.
The first of these courses appears the most natural. The present Ministers are agreed with the adherents of Sir Robert Peel on Free Trade, and on the policy which has regulated our finances of late years. The difference between them is of a temporary nature. But it may be doubted whether any strength would be gained by an immediate junction with that Party.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL
If such junction took place now, the Ministers coming in must oppose their colleagues on the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill—an unseemly spectacle, a source of weakness, and probably the beginning of strife, which would not end with the Bill in question.
If, on the other hand, the junction were delayed till the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill is disposed of, the existing Ministry would be divided into two portions, one of which would have only a temporary tenure of office. Rumours, cabals, and intrigues would have ample room to spread their mischief in such a state of things.
But finally the Whig Party in the House of Commons would not be cordial supporters of the junction; jealousy and discontent would soon break up the Ministry.
Secondly, by admitting to office some of their Radical supporters. This course must lead to concessions on measures as well as men, and those concessions would provoke hostility in other quarters. The great question of the defence of the country is besides one of too great importance to be made a matter of compromise.
Third, by seeking aid from the Party which has followed Lord Stanley. This cannot be done by means of official connection; but something might be effected by adopting measures calculated to convince the Landed Interest that their sufferings were not disregarded.
Upon the whole, if the late Ministers are invited by your Majesty to resume office, the easiest course would be to proceed at once with the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. That question disposed of, it would be seen whether the Ministry had sufficient strength to go on; if they had, they might, as occasion arose, seek assistance from other quarters, looking to those with whom there is the greatest agreement of opinion.
Should the Ministry, on the other hand, not receive Parliamentary support sufficient to enable them to carry on the Government, the Queen would be in a position to form a new Government free from the obstacles which have lately been fatal.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Buckingham Palace, 4th March 1851.
... The Queen was in hopes to have heard from Lord John Russell this morning relative to what passed in the House of Commons last night. She wishes likewise to hear what takes place at the meeting of Lord John's supporters to-day. The Queen must ask Lord John to keep her constantly informed of what is going on, and of the temper of parties in and out of Parliament; for no one can deny that the present state of affairs is most critical; and after all that has happened it is absolutely necessary that the Queen should not be in a state of uncertainty, not to say of ignorance, as to what is passing. She can else not form a just opinion of the position of affairs.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
Buckingham Palace, 4th March 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Pray receive my warmest thanks for two kind letters of the 28th, and my excuses for the terribly incoherent scrawl of last Saturday. The dénouement of ten days of the greatest anxiety and excitement I cannot call satisfactory, for it holds out only the prospect of another crisis in a very short time, and the so much wished-for union of Parties has been again frustrated. I have been speaking very strongly about Lord Palmerston to Lord John, and he has promised that if the Government should still be in at Easter, then to make a change.... Lord Stanley can never succeed until he gives up Protection, which he would do, if the country decides against him;12 he has failed solely from the impossibility of finding one single man capable to take the important Offices. He said last night to Lord John Russell, "I am l'homme impossible; they cannot come to me again." Still it would be very desirable that there should be a strong Conservative Party; nothing but the abandonment of Protection can bring this to pass, and Lord Stanley cannot abandon it with honour till after the next Election. This is the state of Parties, which is greatly erschwert by the Papal Question, which divides the Liberals and Conservatives. In short, there never was such a complicated and difficult state of affairs. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Stockmar has been an immense comfort to us in our trials, and I hope you will tell him so.
Footnote 12: The Queen's judgment was amply confirmed by the events of 1852. See post, [p. 404] note 50.
Memorandum by the Queen.
THE NATIONAL GALLERY
Buckingham Palace, 5th March 1851.
The Queen would give every facility to the selection of a good site for a new National Gallery, and would therefore not object to its being built on to Kensington Palace or anywhere in Kensington Gardens; but does not see why it should exactly be placed upon the site of the present Palace, if not for the purpose of taking from the Crown the last available set of apartments. She is not disposed to trust in the disposition of Parliament or the public to give her an equivalent for these apartments from time to time when emergencies arise. The surrender of Kensington Palace will most likely not be thanked for at the moment, and any new demand in consequence of such surrender would be met with lavish abuse. As to economy in the construction, it will most likely be best consulted by building on a spot perfectly free and unencumbered.
Lord John Russell to the Prince Albert.
Chesham Place, 14th March 1851.
Sir,—I cannot undertake to make any change in the Foreign Office. Our Party is hardly reunited, and any break into sections, following one man or the other, would be fatal to us. I need not say that the Queen would suffer if it were attributed to her desire, and that as I have no difference of opinion on Foreign Policy, that could not fail to be the case.
Upon the whole, the situation of affairs is most perplexing. A Dissolution I fear would not improve it.
I can only say that my Office is at all times at the Queen's disposal.
I have the honour to be, Sir, your Royal Highness's most dutiful Servant,
J. Russell.
Queen Victoria to Sir George Grey.
Buckingham Palace, 30th March 1851.
The Queen approves of the draft of a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury. With respect to the Archbishop's letter and the address, the Queen will receive it in the Closet. It seems strange to propose as a remedy for the present evils in the Church, and for its evident great disunion, 600 more churches to be built! There ought clearly to be some security given to those who are to encourage such a scheme against the extension of those evils.
Lord John Russell to the Prince Albert.
THE GREAT EXHIBITION
Pembroke Lodge, 19th April 1851.
Sir,—Lord Granville came here yesterday to speak to me upon the order for opening the Exhibition at one o'clock on the 1st of May. He is anxious to have the order changed, and the season-ticket bearers admitted at eleven o'clock.
I did not give him any positive opinion on the subject. But the account he gave me of the route which the Queen will follow in going to the Exhibition takes away the main objection which I felt to the admission of visitors before one o'clock. It appears there cannot well be any interruption to Her Majesty's progress to and from the Crystal Palace on the 1st of May.
I conclude that Her Majesty will not go in the State Coach, but in the same manner that Her Majesty goes in state to the theatres....
I feel assured there will be no undue and inconvenient pressure of the crowd in the part of the building in which Her Majesty may be. Colonel Wemyss and Colonel Bouverie might easily be in attendance to request the visitors not to crowd where the Queen is. At the same time, I am ready to abide by the existing order, if Her Majesty wishes it to be enforced.
I have the honour to submit two private letters sent by Lord Palmerston. I have the honour to be, Sir, your Royal Highness's most dutiful Servant,
J. Russell.
The Duchess of Gloucester to Queen Victoria.
THE OPENING CEREMONY
Gloucester House, 2nd May 1851.
My dearest Victoria,—It is impossible to tell you how warmly I do participate in all you must have felt yesterday, as well as dear Albert, at everything having gone off so beautifully. After so much anxiety and the trouble he has had, the joy must be the greater.13
The sight from my window was the gayest and the most gratifying to witness, and to me who loves you so dearly as I do, made it the more delightful. The good humour of all around, the fineness of the day, the manner you were received in both going and coming from the Exhibition, was quite perfect. Therefore what must it have been in the inside of the building!
Mary and George came away in perfect enchantment, and every soul I have seen describes it as the fairest sight that ever was seen and the best-conducted fête! Why, G. Bathurst told me it far surpassed the Coronation as to magnificence, and we all agreed in rejoicing that the Foreigners should have witnessed the affection of the People to you and your Family, and how the English people do love and respect the Crown. As to Mary, she was in perfect enchantment, and full of how pretty your dear little Victoria looked, and how nicely she was dressed, and so grateful to your Mother for all her kindness to her. I should have written to you last night, but I thought I would not plague you with a letter until to-day, as I think you must have been tired last night with the excitement of the day. I shall ever lament the having missed such a sight, but I comfort myself in feeling sure I could not have followed you (as I ought) when you walked round. Therefore I was better out of the way. We drank your health at dinner and congratulation on the complete success of Albert's plans and arrangements, and also dear little Arthur's health. Many thanks for kind note received last night. Love to Albert. Yours,
Mary.
Footnote 13: The Great Exhibition in Hyde Park was opened with brilliant ceremony on the 1st of May.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
THE GREAT EXHIBITION
Buckingham Palace, 3rd May 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—... I wish you could have witnessed the 1st May 1851, the greatest day in our history, the most beautiful and imposing and touching spectacle ever seen, and the triumph of my beloved Albert. Truly it was astonishing, a fairy scene. Many cried, and all felt touched and impressed with devotional feelings. It was the happiest, proudest day in my life, and I can think of nothing else. Albert's dearest name is immortalised with this great conception, his own, and my own dear country showed she was worthy of it. The triumph is immense, for up to the last hour the difficulties, the opposition, and the ill-natured attempts to annoy and frighten, of a certain set of fashionables and Protectionists, were immense; but Albert's temper, patience, firmness, and energy surmounted all, and the feeling is universal. You will be astounded at this great work when you see it!—the beauty of the building and the vastness of it all. I can never thank God enough. I feel so happy, so proud. Our dear guests were much pleased and impressed. You are right to like the dear Princess, for she is a noble-minded, warm-hearted, distinguished person, much attached to you, and who revered dearest Louise. Oh! how I thought of her on that great day, how kindly she would have rejoiced in our success! Now good-bye, dearest Uncle. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to the Emperor of Austria.14
Palais de Buckingham, 5 Mai 1851.
Sire et mon bon Frère,—C'est avec un vif empressement que je viens remercier votre Majesté Impériale des superbes objets de l'industrie et des arts de votre Empire, que vous avez eu l'extrême bonté de m'envoyer et qui me seront bien précieux à plus d'un titre d'abord comme venant de votre Majesté, et puis à cause de leur grande beauté et comme un souvenir à une époque où il a plu au Tout-Puissant de permettre une réunion pacifique de tous les peuples du monde et de leurs produits.
La cérémonie de l'inauguration de l'Exposition a fait une profonde impression sur mon cœur et je regrette d'avoir été le seul Souverain qui ait pu jouir de cette scène à la fois imposante et parlant au cœur. Nous avons déjà fait plusieurs visites au département Autrichien et le Prince et moi avons eu occasion d'admirer beaucoup les produits qui nous sont venus de vos États. Puisse leur exposition contribuer à la prospérité du commerce de l'Empire Autrichien.
Agréez l'expression de ma sincère amitié, qui j'espère pourra un jour être cimentée par la connaissance personnelle de votre Majesté, et croyez-moi toujours, Sire, de votre Majesté Impériale, la bonne Sœur,
Victoria R.
Footnote 14: Francis Joseph, who became Emperor in December 1848.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
DEATH OF MR SHEIL
Buckingham Palace, 2nd June 1851.
The Queen will see the Judge Advocate on Saturday at three.
The place of the late Mr Mill is already filled up.
Mr Sheil's death is very sudden, and must be a great shock to his family....
We go to Windsor this afternoon to stay till Friday. We hope that Lord John Russell's little girl is going on quite well.
The Queen has had good accounts from the dear Princess of Prussia from Coblentz. Her letter is full of England, her great happiness here, and her great sorrow at having left it. The Princes have expressed the same, so this dangerous journey has gone off without one single unpleasant circumstance, which is very gratifying.
The Prince and Prince Frederic are gone to Berlin, where the statue of Frederic the Great was to be inaugurated yesterday.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Buckingham Palace, 18th June 1851.
The Queen returns the papers signed. We are both much pleased at what Lord John Russell says about the Prince's speech yesterday.15 It was on so ticklish a subject that one could not feel sure beforehand how it might be taken; at the same time the Queen felt sure that the Prince would say the right thing, from her entire confidence in his great tact and judgment.
The Queen, at the risk of not appearing sufficiently modest (and yet, why should a wife ever be modest about her husband's merits?), must say that she thinks Lord John Russell will admit now that the Prince is possessed of very extraordinary powers of mind and heart. She feels so proud at being his wife that she cannot refrain from herself paying a tribute to his noble character.
Footnote 15: The Prince presided at the meeting commemorative of the one hundred and fifty years' existence of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. His speech was warmly praised by the Premier.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Buckingham Palace, 10th July 1851.
The Queen hastens to tell Lord John Russell how amiably everything went off last [night], and how enthusiastically we were received by an almost fearful mass of people in the streets;16 the greatest order prevailed, and the greatest and most gratifying enthusiasm.
Not being aware whether Sir George Grey is equal to any business, the Queen writes to Lord John to direct that a proper letter be written without delay to the Lord Mayor, expressing not only the Queen's and Prince's thanks for the splendid entertainment at the Guildhall, but also our high gratification at the hearty, kind, and enthusiastic reception we met with during our progress through the City, both going and returning. Our only anxiety is lest any accident should have occurred from the great pressure of the dense crowds.
The Queen would likewise wish to know what distinction should be conferred in honour of the occasion on the Lord Mayor.
Footnote 16: A ball in commemoration of the Exhibition took place at the Guildhall on the 9th of July.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Buckingham Palace, 15th July 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter. She has no objection on this particular occasion to knight the two Sheriffs, this year being so memorable a one.
But the Queen would wish it clearly to be understood that they have no right or claim to be knighted whenever the Queen goes into the City.
On the occasion of the opening of the Royal Exchange the Sheriffs were not knighted....
We regret to hear of Lord John's continued indisposition.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE DANISH SUCCESSION
Osborne, 25th August 1851.
The Queen wishes to draw Lord John Russell's attention to the enclosed draft, which she does not think can go in its present shape. We argued in innumerable despatches that the choice of the successor to the Danish Crown was entirely an internal question for Denmark, in which foreign Powers could not interfere. Here, however, it is laid down that the German Diet has no right to treat the succession in Holstein (a German State) as an internal question, as it ought to be decided on—not according to the German law of succession, but according to the interests of Europe. Nor is it true, as stated in the despatch, that the Duke of Augustenburg has no claim to the Danish Crown. His mother was the daughter of Christian VII. and of Queen Matilda.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
THE QUEEN IN SCOTLAND
Balmoral Castle, 16th September 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Accept my best thanks for your kind and dear letter of the 8th. It is a good thing for Leo to begin to follow in your footsteps, but (if I may speak out plainly), I think that anything like fonctions and représentation is agreeable and not difficult to Leo. It is the common contact with his fellow-creatures, the being put on a par with him, the being brought to feel that he is as much one of them as any other, in spite of his birth, which I think of such great importance for him, and I therefore hope you will send him to Bonn.
My letter is terribly décousu, for it has been twice interrupted. I was out the whole day with Albert, in the forest in a perfectly tropical heat. Since we went to Allt-na-Giuthasach, our little bothy near Loch Muich on the 12th, the heat of the sun has been daily increasing, and has reached a pitch which makes it almost sickening to be out in it, though it is beautiful to behold. The sky these last two evenings has been like an Italian one, and for the last few days—at least the last four—without the slightest particle of cloud, and the sun blazing. With this, not a breath of air. The mountains look quite crimson and lilac, and everything glows with the setting sun. The evenings are quite a relief. Really one cannot undertake expeditions, the heat is so great. We thought of you, and wished you could be here; you would fancy yourself in Italy.
Albert got a splendid stag to-day. I must hastily conclude, hoping to hear from you that you will come. Our moonlights have been magnificent also. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
Balmoral Castle, 22nd September 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—I write to you on purpose on this large paper in order that you may see and admire it. Landseer did it also on purpose, and I think it is even finer than the other. It is so truly the character of the noble animal.
That abuse of the poor Orleans family in our papers is abominable, and Lord John is equally shocked at it, but won't interfere. Don't you think Joinville should not have left it open for him to accept it, for it is impossible for him to be President of the French Republic? Still, I feel convinced that he and they all do what they think best for France.
I must conclude. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHS
Shiel of Allt-na-Giuthasach, 30th September 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—I write to you from our little bothy in the hills, which is quite a wilderness—where we arrived yesterday evening after a long hill expedition to the Lake of Loch Nagar, which is one of the wildest spots imaginable. It was very cold. To-day it pours so that I hardly know if we shall be able to get out, or home even. We are not snowed, but rained up. Our little Shiel is very snug and comfortable, and we have got a little piano in it. Lady Douro is with us.
Many thanks for your kind letter of the 22nd. Our warm, fine weather left us on the 25th, and we have had storm and snow in the mountains ever since then.
The position of Princes is no doubt difficult in these times, but it would be much less so if they would behave honourably and straightforwardly, giving the people gradually those privileges which would satisfy all the reasonable and well-intentioned, and would weaken the power of the Red Republicans; instead of that, reaction and a return to all the tyranny and oppression is the cry and the principle—and all papers and books are being seized and prohibited, as in the days of Metternich!...
Vicky was kicked off her pony—a quiet beast—but not the least hurt; this is more than three weeks ago. Alfred (whom you will recollect I told you was so terribly heedless and entirely indifferent to all punishment, etc.) tumbled downstairs last week. He was not seriously hurt at all, and quite well the next morning, only with a terribly black, green, and yellow face and very much swelled. He might have been killed; he is always bent upon self-destruction, and one hardly knows what to do, for he don't mind being hurt or scolded or punished; and the very next morning he tried to go down the stairs leaning over the banisters just as he had done when he fell.
Alas! this will be my last letter but one from the dear Highlands. We start on the 7th, visiting Liverpool and Manchester on our way back, and expect to be at Windsor on the 11th.
I must now conclude. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
THE HIGHLANDS
Balmoral Castle, 6th October 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Only two words can I write to you, as we are to start to-morrow morning. My heart is bien gros at going from here.
I love my peaceful, wild Highlands, the glorious scenery, the dear good people who are much attached to us, and who feel their Einsamkeit sadly, very much. One of our Gillies, a young Highlander who generally went out with me, said, in answer to my observation that they must be very dull here when we left: "It's just like death come all at once." In addition to my sorrow at leaving this dear place, I am in great sorrow at the loss of a dear and faithful, excellent friend, whom you will sincerely lament—our good Lord Liverpool. He was well and in the highest spirits with us only six weeks ago, and in three days he was carried away. I cannot tell you how it has upset me; I have known him so long, and he was such an intimate friend of ours. We received the news yesterday.
Many thanks for your kind letter of the 29th. I am glad all went off so well, but it must have been dreadful to miss dearest Louise. This time reminds me so much of all our sorrow last year on her dear account.
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to Lord Palmerston.
Windsor Castle, 13th October 1851.
The Queen returns Lord Howden's letter, and thinks that the best answer to the Queen of Spain's request will be that the Statutes do not allow the Garter to be bestowed upon a lady; that the Queen herself possesses no order of knighthood from any country.17
With reference to the claim for the King arising out of the Prince having received the Fleece, it may be well to say that the offer of the Fleece had in the first instance been declined for fear of establishing a ground for the necessity of giving the Garter in return, and was at its second offer accepted by the Prince, together with the first orders of almost every country, on the understanding that no return would be expected. It would have been impossible to give the Garter to every Sovereign, and very difficult to make a selection. The Queen of Spain ought to be made aware of the fact that among the reigning Sovereigns, the Emperors of Austria and Brazil, and the Kings of Sweden, Denmark, Bavaria, Holland, Sardinia, Naples, Greece, etc., etc., have not got the Garter, although many of them have expressed a wish for it, and that amongst the Kings Consort, the King of Portugal, the Queen's first cousin, has not received it yet, although the Queen has long been anxious to give it to him.
Anything short of these explanations might offend, or leave the claim open to be repeated from time to time.
Footnote 17: The Queen of Spain had expressed a desire through Lord Howden to receive the Order of the Garter.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
EXTENSION OF THE FRANCHISE
Downing Street, 14th October 1851.
Lord Carlisle, Lord Minto, and Sir Charles Wood are appointed a Committee to consider of the extension of the Suffrage. They meet to-morrow. Lord John Russell expects to see Mr Peel to-morrow. It is proposed that Parliament should meet on the 3rd or 5th of February....
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 14th October 1851.
The Queen does not consider the Committee appointed to consider the extension of the Franchise a very strong one. Will Lord Carlisle be up to the peculiar business?
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.18
KOSSUTH IN ENGLAND
Windsor Castle, 29th October 1851.
The Queen concludes Lord John Russell has read the accounts of Kossuth's arrival in to-day's papers.
She wishes Lord John could still try to prevent Lord Palmerston from receiving him. The effect it will have abroad will do us immense harm. At all events, Lord John should take care to have it understood that the Government have not sanctioned it, and that it is a private act of Lord Palmerston's.
The Queen will else have again to submit to insults and affronts, which are the result of Lord Palmerston's conduct.
Footnote 18: Substance of the note to Lord John Russell, written down from recollection.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Windsor Castle, 24th October 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and is sorry to say he can interfere no further with respect to Lord Palmerston's reception of Kossuth.
With respect to the manner of the reception, however, he will write to Lord Palmerston to desire him to take care that nothing is said which goes beyond the strict expression of thanks for the efforts made by the British Government to procure first the safety, and next the liberty, of Kossuth.
As for the reception, it is to be considered that Kossuth is considered the representative of English institutions against despotism.
If this were so the public feeling would be laudable.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Pembroke Lodge, 31st October 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has the honour to submit to your Majesty a correspondence19 which has taken place between Lord Palmerston and himself.
After Lord Palmerston's answer, Lord John Russell can have but little hope that Lord Palmerston will not see M. Kossuth. Lord John Russell cannot separate the private from the public man in this instance; the reception of Kossuth, if it takes place, will be a reception by your Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Whether that reception is to take place in Downing Street or Carlton Terrace does not appear to him material.
Lord John Russell would, as a last resource, humbly advise your Majesty to command Lord Palmerston not to receive M. Kossuth.
It appears to him that your Majesty owes this mark of respect to your Majesty's ally, and generally to all States at peace with this country.
Lord John Russell has no other copy of this letter to Lord Palmerston.
Footnote 19: Lord Palmerston wished to receive Kossuth at the Foreign Office. In the correspondence here referred to, which will be found in Russell's Life, the Premier "positively requested" Lord Palmerston to decline to receive Kossuth. The rejoinder, written while the messenger waited, was: "There are limits to all things. I do not choose to be dictated to as to who I may or may not receive in my own house.... I shall use my own discretion.... You will, of course, use yours as to the composition of your Government."
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
KOSSUTH AND PALMERSTON
Windsor Castle, 31st October 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter, and returns the enclosures. She likewise sends him her letter to Lord Palmerston, which she begs him to send on, merely changing the label. She must tell Lord John, however, that although he may go on with a colleague, even after having received an answer like the one Lord Palmerston has returned to the many entreaties not to compromise the Government by his personal act, the Queen cannot expose herself to having her positive commands disobeyed by one of her public servants, and that should Lord Palmerston persist in his intention he cannot continue as her Minister. She refrains from any expression upon Lord Palmerston's conduct in this matter, as Lord John is well aware of her feelings.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.20
Windsor Castle, 31st October 1851.
The Queen mentioned to Lord Palmerston when he was last here at Windsor Castle that she thought it would not be advisable that he should receive M. Kossuth upon his arrival in England, as being wholly unnecessary, and likely to be misconstrued abroad. Since M. Kossuth's arrival in this country, and his violent denunciations of two Sovereigns with whom we are at peace, the Queen thinks that she owes it as a mark of respect to her Allies, and generally to all States at peace with this country, not to allow that a person endeavouring to excite a political agitation in this country against her Allies should be received by her Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Whether such a reception should take place at his official or private residence can make no difference as to the public nature of the act. The Queen must therefore demand that the reception of M. Kossuth by Lord Palmerston should not take place.
Footnote 20: Draft sent to Lord John Russell.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Pembroke Lodge, 31st October 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. Since writing to your Majesty this morning it has occurred to him that it will be best that your Majesty should not give any commands to Lord Palmerston on his sole advice.
With this view he has summoned the Cabinet for Monday, and he humbly proposes that your Majesty should await their advice.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
PALMERSTON AND THE QUEEN
Windsor Castle, 31st October 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letter. She thinks it natural that Lord John should wish to bring a matter which may cause a rupture in the Government before the Cabinet, but thinks his having summoned the Cabinet only for Monday will leave Lord Palmerston at liberty in the intermediate time to have his reception of Kossuth, and then rest on his fait accompli. Unless, therefore, Lord John Russell can bind him over to good conduct, all the mischief which is apprehended from this step of his will result; and he will have, moreover, the triumph of having carried his point, and having set the Prime Minister at defiance....
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Pembroke Lodge, 1st November 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he is deeply sensible of your Majesty's kindness and indulgence. He feels that he is at times overwhelmed by the importance and variety of the questions of which the principal weight lies upon him.
He now lays before your Majesty a copy of the letter he has written to Lord Palmerston.21 With a grateful sense of your Majesty's confidence, he is now of opinion that the Cabinet should decide, and that no part of the burden should be placed upon your Majesty.
He therefore returns the letter to Lord Palmerston.
He summoned the Cabinet for Monday, as so many members of it are at a distance. He does not think Lord Palmerston will come to town before Monday.
Footnote 21: The letter is printed in Lord Palmerston's Life. The Premier stated that the question, being one of grave public importance, must be decided by argument, not passion, and would be considered by the Cabinet on the following Monday. See Walpole's Russell, chap. xxii.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 1st November 1851.
The Queen has to acknowledge Lord John Russell's letter of this day, and returns the copy of his to Lord Palmerston. She feels that she has the right and the duty to demand that one of her Ministers should not by his private acts, compromise her and the country, and therefore omitted in her letter to Lord Palmerston all reference to Lord John Russell's opinion; but she of course much prefers that she should be protected from the wilful indiscretions of Lord Palmerston by the attention of the Cabinet being drawn to his proceedings without her personal intervention.22
Footnote 22: The Cabinet met, and having listened to the statement of the Premier, which is printed in his Life, unanimously supported him. Lord Palmerston accordingly gave way for the time being. Lord John informed the Queen of the result.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE QUEEN AND PALMERSTON
Windsor Castle, 3rd November 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letter. She is very glad to hear that this matter has been amicably arranged, and she trusts that Lord Palmerston will act according to his promises.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 11th November 1851.
The Queen sends this draft to Lord John Russell, as she thinks the tone in which it is written so very ironical, and not altogether becoming for a public despatch from the English Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to be given to the Minister of another State. The substance is quite right, and a dignified explanation of the absurdity of the conduct of the Parma officials would very likely produce its effect, but some expressions in this draft could only tend to irritate, and therefore prevent that readiness to comply with our demand, which is to be produced.23
Footnote 23: Before ten days had elapsed, Lord Palmerston had resumed his high-handed methods.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE QUEEN AND PALMERSTON
Windsor Castle, 20th November 1851.
The Queen must write to-day to Lord John Russell on a subject which causes her much anxiety. Her feelings have again been deeply wounded by the official conduct of her Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs since the arrival of M. Kossuth in this country. The Queen feels the best interests of her people, the honour and dignity of her Crown, her public and personal obligations towards those Sovereigns with whom she professes to be on terms of peace and amity, most unjustifiably exposed. The Queen has unfortunately very often had to call upon Lord John to check his colleague in the dangerous and unbecoming course which at various times he has so wilfully persevered in pursuing. But Lord John Russell, although agreeing on most of these occasions with the view taken by the Queen, has invariably met her remonstrances with the plea that to push his interference with Lord Palmerston beyond what he had done would lead to a rupture with him, and thus necessarily to a breaking up of the Cabinet. The Queen, considering a change of her Government under present political circumstances dangerous to the true interests of the nation, had only to choose between two evils, without possessing sufficient confidence in her own judgment to decide which in its political consequences would turn out the least. But if in such a contingency the Queen chooses rather not to insist upon what is due to her, she thinks it indispensable at the same time to express to her Cabinet that she does so on their account, leaving it to them to reconcile the injuries done to her with that sound policy and conduct which the maintenance of peace and the welfare of the country require. These remarks seem to be especially called for after the report of the official interview between Lord Palmerston and the deputation from Finsbury,24 and the Queen requests Lord John Russell to bring them under the notice of the Cabinet.
Footnote 24: After Kossuth's departure, addresses of thanks to Lord Palmerston, for his courteous attentions to Kossuth, were voted by ultra-Radical meetings in Finsbury and Islington, and he allowed a deputation to present the addresses to him at the Foreign Office, the Emperors of Austria and Russia being stigmatised therein as "odious and detestable assassins" and "merciless tyrants and despots." Palmerston, who expressed himself as "extremely flattered and highly gratified" by the references to himself, did not in terms reprehend the language used of the two Sovereigns, and added, in a phrase immortalised by Leech's cartoon, that "a good deal of judicious bottle-holding was obliged to be brought into play."
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
PALMERSTON'S FOREIGN POLICY
Pembroke Lodge, 21st November 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He had the honour of receiving last night your Majesty's communication respecting Lord Palmerston.
Lord John Russell presumes that it is the substance of this communication which your Majesty wishes to be laid before the Cabinet.
But before doing so he cannot refrain from mentioning some circumstances which appear to him to weigh materially in the consideration of Lord Palmerston's conduct.
In many instances Lord Palmerston has yielded to the remonstrances of Lord John Russell, supported as they have been by your Majesty.
He did so on the question of furnishing guns to the Sicilians.
He did so in respect to the letter to Baron Koller on the affair of Count Haynau.
He gave way likewise in this last instance, when, after assuring Lord Dudley Stuart that he would see Kossuth whenever he chose to call upon him, he consented to intimate privately to Lord Dudley that he requested him not to call.
This last concession must have been mortifying to Lord Palmerston, and he has consoled himself in a manner not very dignified by giving importance to the inflated addresses from some meetings in the suburbs of London.
But it appears to Lord John Russell that every Minister must have a certain latitude allowed him which he may use, perhaps with indiscretion, perhaps with bad taste, but with no consequence of sufficient importance to deserve notice.
Lord John Russell must, however, call your Majesty's attention to an article in the Morning Post, which denies the accuracy of the report of Lord Palmerston's answer to what is there called "the froth and folly of an address to Downing Street."
Lord John Russell, in admitting that he has more than once represented to your Majesty that the expulsion of Lord Palmerston would break up the Government, begs to explain that he has always done so upon one of two grounds:
First, if Lord Palmerston should be called upon by your Majesty to resign on account of a line of Foreign Policy of which his colleagues had approved, and for which they were, with him, responsible.
Second, in case no difference of opinion had arisen, and the transaction should bear the character of an intrigue, to get rid of an inconvenient colleague.
It must be remembered that Lord Palmerston was recommended to the late King by Lord Grey as Foreign Secretary, and remained in that Office from 1830 to 1834; that he was afterwards replaced in the same Office by Lord Melbourne, and remained from 1835 to 1841.
He has thus represented the Foreign Policy of the Whig Party fifteen years, and has been approved not only by them but by a large portion of the country. In the advice which Lord John Russell has humbly tendered to your Majesty, he has always had in view the importance of maintaining the popular confidence which your Majesty's name everywhere inspires. Somewhat of the good opinion of the Emperor of Russia and other foreign Sovereigns may be lost, but the good will and affection of the people of England are retained, a great security in these times.
Lord John Russell has made out a note of his address to the Cabinet for your Majesty's information. He prays to have it returned.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 21st November 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter and returns the note on his former communication to the Cabinet. If Lord John felt on the 3rd of November that "above all, it behoves us to be particularly cautious and not to afford just ground of complaint to any Party, and that we cannot be too vigilant or weigh our proceedings too scrupulously"—the Queen cannot suppose that Lord John considers the official reception by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of addresses, in which allied Sovereigns are called Despots and Assassins, as within that "latitude" which he claims for every minister, "which he may use perhaps with indiscretion, perhaps with bad taste, but with no consequence of sufficient importance to deserve notice."
The Queen leaves it to Lord John Russell whether he will lay her letter, or only the substance of it, before the Cabinet;25 but she hopes that they will make that careful enquiry into the justice of her complaint which she was sorry to miss altogether in Lord John Russell's answer. It is no question with the Queen whether she pleases the Emperor of Austria or not, but whether she gives him a just ground of complaint or not. And if she does so, she can never believe that this will add to her popularity with her own people. Lord John's letter must accordingly have disappointed her as containing a mere attempt at a defence of Lord Palmerston. Lord John sees one cause of excuse in Lord Palmerston's natural desire to console himself for the mortification of having had to decline seeing M. Kossuth; the Queen has every reason to believe that he has seen him after all.
Footnote 25: On the 4th of December the matter came before the Cabinet. No formal resolution was adopted, but regret was expressed at Palmerston's want of caution in not ascertaining in advance the tenor of the addresses, and in admitting unreliable reporters.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
DEATH OF KING OF HANOVER
Windsor Castle, 21st November 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord Palmerston's letter with the Memorandum relative to the mourning of her Uncle, the late King of Hanover,26 and she has to say in reply that she thinks the mourning ought not to be for a Foreign Sovereign but for a Prince of the Blood Royal, which was the nearest relation in which he stood to the Throne.
Footnote 26: King Ernest died on the 18th of November, aged eighty, and was succeeded by his son, King George V., who reigned till 1866, and died in 1878.
Queen Victoria to the King of Hanover.
Windsor Castle, 21st November 1851.
My dear George,—Your kind letter of the 18th, announcing to me the melancholy news of the death of your Father, was given to me yesterday by Mr Somerset, and I hasten to express to you in both our names our sincere and heartfelt condolence, and beg you to do so in our names to our dear Cousin Mary.27
It must be a consolation to you that the end of the King was peaceful and so free from pain and suffering. Most truly do I enter into your feelings as to the responsible position into which you are now placed, and my best wishes for your welfare and happiness as well as that of Hanover will ever accompany you. I am happy to hear from Mr Somerset that you were well, as well as your dear Mary and dear children.
Albert desires me to say everything kind from him to you as well as to our cousins, and with every possible good wish for your health and prosperity, believe me always, my dear George, your very affectionate Cousin,
Victoria R.
Footnote 27: Princess Mary of Saxe-Altenburg (1818-1907), wife of King George V. of Hanover.
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
Carlton Gardens, 22nd November 1851.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty and has taken the proper steps according to your Majesty's commands, about the mourning for the late King of Hanover; and he would wish to know whether it is your Majesty's desire that he should have letters prepared for your Majesty's signature, announcing to Foreign Sovereigns the decease of the late King.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
Osborne, 22nd November 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord Palmerston's letter.
The Queen does not think it necessary for her to announce the King of Hanover's death to other Sovereigns, as there is a head of that branch of her Family who would have to do so. She declared the present King's marriage in Council, but she does not think that she announced it. This Lord Palmerston would perhaps be able to ascertain at the Office.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE REFORM QUESTION
Osborne, 3rd December 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of the 30th ult., and has carefully considered his Memorandum on the report of the Committee of the Cabinet; she now returns Sir Charles Wood's Memorandum.
Considering the question of Reform under its two bearings—on the Franchise and on the Suffrage—the Queen thinks the proposal of merely adding neighbouring towns to the small boroughs an improvement on the original plan, which contemplated the taking away of members from some boroughs, and giving them to others. Thus the animosity may be hoped to be avoided which an attack upon vested interests could not have failed to have produced. Much will depend, however, upon the completeness, fairness, and impartiality with which the selection of the towns will be made which are to be admitted into the electoral district of others. Sir Charles Wood's Memorandum being only a sketch, the Queen hopes to see a more complete list, stating the principle also upon which the selection is made.
With regard to the Suffrage, the proposals of the Committee appear to the Queen to be framed with a due regard to the importance of not giving an undue proportion of weight to the Democracy. In the Queen's opinion, the chief question to consider will be whether the strengthening of the Democratic principle will upset the balance of Constitution, and further weaken the Executive, which is by no means too strong at present. The Queen is well aware of the difficulty of forming a correct estimate beforehand of the moral effect which such extensive changes may produce, but thinks that they cannot even be guessed at before the numerical results are accurately ascertained; she hopes therefore that the statistics will be soon in a state to be laid before her.
The Queen regrets that the idea of reviving the Guilds had to be abandoned, but can quite understand the difficulty which would have been added to the measure by its being clogged with such an additional innovation.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
Osborne, 2nd December 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Accept my best thanks for your kind letter of the 28th. I am truly grieved to hear that you have got so bad a cold; nothing is more trying and annoying than those heavy colds, which render all occupation irksome and trying in the highest degree. I hope that it will soon be past.
It is a great pity that you do not venture to come to us, as I am sure you might do it easily. I do not think that there will be any outburst yet awhile in France....
I am rather unhappy about dear Uncle Mensdorff, who, I hear, has arrived at Vienna with gout in his head. I hope, however, soon to hear of his being much better....
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
THE COUP D'ÉTAT
Osborne, 4th December 1851.
Dearest Uncle,—I must write a line to ask what you say to the wonderful proceedings at Paris, which really seem like a story in a book or a play! What is to be the result of it all?28
I feel ashamed to have written so positively a few hours before that nothing would happen.
We are anxiously waiting for to-day's news—though I should hope that the Troops were to be depended upon, and order for the present would prevail. I hope that none of the Orleans Family will move a limb or say a word, but remain perfectly passive.
I must now conclude. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Footnote 28: On the 2nd of December, Louis Napoleon seized the Government of France, arrested his chief opponents, put an end to the National Assembly and Council of State, and declared Paris in a state of siege.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Osborne, 4th December 1851.
The Queen has learnt with surprise and concern the events which have taken place at Paris.29 She thinks it is of great importance that Lord Normanby should be instructed to remain entirely passive, and to take no part whatever in what is passing. Any word from him might be misconstrued at such a moment.
Footnote 29: On the 3rd the tidings of the coup d'état reached London. Count Walewski announced it to Lord Palmerston, who expressed his approval of it, and wrote to Lord Normanby the letter printed in his Life, disavowing surprise that the President had struck the blow when he did, "for it is now well known here that the Duchess of Orleans was preparing to be called to Paris this week with her younger son to commence a new period of Orleans dynasty."
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Downing Street, 4th December 1851.
(6 p.m.)
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. Your Majesty's directions respecting the state of affairs in Paris shall be followed. Lord Normanby30 has asked whether he should suspend his diplomatic functions; but the Cabinet were unanimously of opinion that he should not do so.
The result is very uncertain; at present the power is likely to rest in the Army, to whose memory of victories and defeats the President has so strongly appealed.
Footnote 30: Lord Normanby, having applied for instructions as to his future conduct, was desired to make no change in his relations with the French Government, and to abstain from even the appearance of interference in her internal affairs. Having made a communication to this effect to M. Turgot, the latter replied that M. Walewski had notified to him that Lord Palmerston had already expressed to him his "entire approbation of the act of the President," and his "conviction that he could not have acted otherwise."
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
LOUIS NAPOLEON
Laeken, 5th December 1851.
My dearest Victoria,—Receive my best thanks for your dear gracious letter of the 2nd, the date of the battle of Austerlitz, and the coup d'état at Paris. What do you say to it?
As yet one cannot form an opinion, but I am inclined to think that Louis Bonaparte will succeed. The country is tired and wish quiet, and if they get it by this coup d'état they will have no objection, and let le Gouvernement Parlementaire et Constitutionnel go to sleep for a while.
I suspect that the great Continental powers will see a military Government at Paris with pleasure; they go rather far in their hatred of everything Parliamentary. The President takes a little of Napoleon already. I understand that he expressed himself displeased, as if I had too much supported the Orleans Family. I render perfect justice to the President, that hitherto he has not plagued us; but we have also abstained from all interference. I think that Hélène has been imprudent; besides, it is difficult for the poor Family to avoid to speak on these subjects or to express themselves with mildness.
If something like an Empire establishes itself, perhaps we shall for a time have much to suffer, as the gloire française invariably looks to the old frontiers. My hope is that they will necessarily have much to do at home, for a time, as parties will run high.... Your devoted Uncle,
Leopold R.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Osborne, 6th December 1851.
The Queen has to acknowledge Lord John Russell's letter of yesterday. She is glad to hear that the Cabinet occupy themselves assiduously with the Reform Question, but hopes that they will not come to a final decision without having first ascertained how the proposed plan will operate when practically applied to the present state of the Franchise and Suffrage. The Queen is very anxious to arrive at a definite opinion on this subject herself.
The Queen sees from the Manchester Speeches that the Ballot is to be made the stalking-horse of the Radicals.
The Marchioness of Normanby to Colonel Phipps.
LORD PALMERSTON'S LETTERS
Paris, 7th December 1851.
My dear Charles,—I have an opportunity of writing to you not through the Foreign Office, which I shall take advantage of, as at present the Post is not to be trusted, and I am afraid I do not think the Office is either.
Palmerston has taken lately to writing in the most extraordinary manner to Normanby.[31] I think he wants to fix a quarrel with him, which you may be sure Normanby will avoid at present, as it would have the worst possible effect; but I do not understand it at all, and I wish you could in any way explain what it means. Palmerston seems very angry because Normanby does not unqualifyingly approve of this step here, and the results; the whole thing is so completely a coup d'état, and all the proceedings are so contrary to and devoid of law and justice and security, that even the most violent Tory would be staggered by them. (For instance, to-day all the English papers, even Normanby's, are stopped and prohibited; they will of course allow Normanby's to come, but it is to be under an envelope), and yet Palmerston, who quarrels with all Europe about a political adventurer like Kossuth, because he was defending the liberties and constitution of his country, now tries to quarrel with Normanby, and really writes in the most impertinent manner, because Normanby's despatches are not sufficiently in praise of Louis Napoleon and his coup d'état. There must be some dessous des cartes that we are not aware of. Normanby has always said, having been undertaken, the only thing now is to hope and pray it may be successful; but that is another thing to approving the way it was begun, or the way it has been carried out. The bloodshed has been dreadful and indiscriminate, no quarter was shown, and when an insurgent took refuge in a house, the soldiers killed every one in the house, whether engaged in the émeute or not.... It is very doubtful whether Normanby will be able to go on with [Palmerston] if this sort of thing continues, for he talks of "I hear this" and "I am told that," with reference to Normanby's conduct here, which no man in his position can stand, as, if Palmerston takes the on-dits of others, and not Normanby's own accounts, there is an end of confidence; but I must say his last letter appears to me a sort of exuberance of anger, which spends itself on many subjects rather than the one which first caused it, and therefore I suspect he has received some rap on the knuckles at home, which he resents here, or on the first person who is not of the same opinion as himself; but it is a curious anomaly that he should quarrel with Normanby in support of arbitrary and absolute Government. All is quiet here now, and will, I hope, continue so till the Elections, when I suppose we may have some more émeutes....
They have been told at the Clubs that they may meet, but they are not to talk politics. In short, I do not suppose that despotism ever reached such a pitch.... You may suppose what the French feel; it serves them all quite right, but that does not prevent one's feeling indignant at it. And this is what Palmerston is now supporting without restriction. We are entirely without any other news from England from any one. Would you not send me or Normanby a letter through Rothschild? I am rather anxious to know whether this is a general feeling in England; it could not be, if they know all that had happened here. Mind, I can quite understand the policy of keeping well with Louis Napoleon, and Normanby is so, and has never expressed to any one a hostile opinion except in his despatches and private letters to Palmerston.... I shall send this by a private hand, not to run the risk of its being read. Ever yours affectionately,
M. Normanby.
[Footnote 31:] On the 6th, Lord Palmerston wrote to Lord Normanby the strange letter printed by Mr Evelyn Ashley in the Life, censuring Lord Normanby's supposed hostility to the French President; Lord Normanby in reply defended his attitude, and asked for an explicit statement as to the Foreign Secretary's approval or otherwise of the conduct and policy of the President.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
AFFAIRS IN FRANCE
Osborne, 9th December 1851.
Dearest Uncle,—Your kind letter of the 5th reached me on Sunday morning. Much blood has been shed since you wrote....
What you say about arbitrary and military Government in France is very true, and I daresay will do for a time; but I do not know how Louis Napoleon is to proceed, or how he will get over the anger and enmity of those he imprisoned. Still, I see that the Legitimists have all given in their adhesion. Every one in France and elsewhere must wish order, and many therefore rally round the President.
A most extraordinary report was mentioned to me yesterday, which, however, I never could believe, and which is besides physically impossible, from the illness of the one and the absence of the other, viz. that Joinville and Aumale had gone or were going to Lille to put themselves at the head of the troops,32 which would be a terrible and a very unwise thing. It would be very awkward for you too.
I must now conclude, hoping soon to hear from you. You should urge the poor Orleans family to be very prudent in what they say about passing events, as I believe Louis Napoleon is very sore on the subject, and matters might get still worse. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Footnote 32: Mr Borthwick, of the Morning Post, had so stated to Lord Palmerston on the authority of General de Rumigny; seven years later Palmerston wrote the Memorandum on the subject printed in his Life.
The Marchioness of Normanby to Colonel Phipps.[33]
PALMERSTON AND NORMANBY
Paris, 9th December 1851.
My dearest Charles,—I had written a long letter to the Queen, and upon second thoughts I have burnt it, because events have now become so serious between Normanby and Palmerston that I do not think that I should be the person to inform Her Majesty of it, in case anything was to be said upon the subject in Parliament. And yet as the affront has been given in Palmerston's private letters, I feel sure she does not know it. You have all probably seen Normanby's public despatches, in which, though as an Englishman he deprecates and deplores the means employed and the pledges broken—in short, the unconstitutional illegality of the whole coup d'état—yet he always says, seeing now no other refuge from Rouge ascendency, he hopes it may succeed. One would have supposed, from the whole tenor of his policy, from his Radical tendencies, and all that he has been doing lately, that Palmerston would have been the last person to approve of this coup d'état. Not a bit! He turns upon Normanby in the most flippant manner; almost accuses him of a concealed knowledge of an Orleanist plot—never whispered here, nor I believe, even imagined by the Government of Paris, who would have been too glad to seize upon it as an excuse; says he compromises the relations of the country by his evident disapproval of Louis Napoleon—in short, it is a letter that Morny might have written, and that it is quite impossible for Normanby to bear. The curious thing is that it is a letter or rather letters that would completely ruin Palmerston with his Party. He treats all the acts of the wholesale cruelties of the troops as a joke—in short, it is the letter of a man half mad, I think, for to quarrel with Normanby on this subject is cutting his own throat.... He has written also to Lord John. Louis Napoleon knows perfectly well that Normanby cannot approve the means he has taken; he talks to him confidentially, and treats him as an honest, upright man, and he never showed him more attention, or friendship even than last night when we were at the Elysée, though Normanby said not one word in approval....
LORD PALMERSTON'S INSTRUCTIONS
There is another question upon which Normanby has a right to complain, which is, that two days before Palmerston sent his instructions here, he expressed to Walewski his complete approval of the step taken by Louis Napoleon, which was transmitted by Walewski in a despatch to Turgot, and read by him to many members of the Corps Diplomatique a day before Normanby heard a word from Palmerston. You will perhaps think that there is not enough in all this to authorise the grave step Normanby has taken, but the whole tone of his letters shows such a want of confidence, is so impertinent—talk of "we hear this," and "we are told that,"—bringing a sort of anonymous gossip against a man of Normanby's character and standing, that respect for himself obliges Normanby to take it up seriously.... In the meantime our Press in England is, as usual, too violent against Louis Napoleon. We have no friends or true allies left, thanks to the policy of Lord Palmerston; as soon as the peace of the country is restored the Army must be employed; it is the course of a Military Government; as much as an absolute Government is destroyed by the people, and the democracy again, when fallen into anarchy, is followed by Military Government. Louis Napoleon must maintain his position by acts: they will find out that Belgium should belong to France, or Alsace, or Antwerp, or something or other that England will not be able to allow, and then how are we prepared for the consequences?...
LORD PALMERSTON'S APPROVAL
The more I think of Palmerston's letters, the less I can understand them; every sentence is in direct contradiction to his acts and words. He ridicules the idea of the Constitution; turns to scorn the idea of anything being due to the Members of the Assembly; laughs and jokes at the Club being fired into, though the English people in it were within an ace of being murdered by the soldiers; says that Normanby is pathetic over a broken looking-glass,34 forgetting that the same bullet grazed the hand of an Englishman, "a Roman citizen!" who was between the window and the glass—in short, as I said before, he is quite incomprehensible, except, as I cannot help thinking, he read the private letter Normanby wrote to the Duke of Bedford upon the Kossuth business, wishing to take his advice a little upon a grave question, but which did not actually interfere with his position here. This would account for his extreme irritation....
All at present is quiet in Paris. There are Socialist risings in many parts of the country, but all these will do the President good, and strengthen his hands, for even the people who have been treated with indignity will pardon him if their châteaux are saved from an infuriated and brutal peasantry. The President told Normanby last night that the accounts of the cruelties and attacks in parts of the country were very serious, but he hoped they would soon be put down....
M. Normanby.35
[Footnote 33:] Submitted to the Queen by Colonel Phipps.
Footnote 34: The tone of Lord Palmerston's private letters to Lord Normanby at this time is best illustrated by the following extract:—
"Your despatches since the event of Tuesday have been all hostile to Louis Napoleon, with very little information as to events. One of them consisted of a dissertation about Kossuth, which would have made a good article in the Times a fortnight ago: and another dwells chiefly on a looking-glass broken in a Club-house; and you are pathetic about a piece of broken plaster brought down from a ceiling by musket-shots during the street fights. Now we know that the Diplomatic Agents of Austria and Russia called on the President immediately after his measure on Tuesday morning, and have been profuse in their expressions of approval of his conduct."
Footnote 35: Lady Normanby wrote later:—
"I told you yesterday the President had no faith in him (Palmerston). The Treaty signed with Buenos Ayres, the Greek business, and the reception of Kossuth had long destroyed his confidence in Palmerston, and I believe he hates him and sees through his present adulations...."
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Osborne, 13th December 1851.
The Queen sends the enclosed despatch from Lord Normanby to Lord John Russell, from which it appears that the French Government pretend to have received the entire approval of the late coup d'état by the British Government, as conveyed by Lord Palmerston to Count Walewski. The Queen cannot believe in the truth of the assertion, as such an approval given by Lord Palmerston would have been in complete contradiction to the line of strict neutrality and passiveness which the Queen had expressed her desire to see followed with regard to the late convulsion at Paris, and which was approved by the Cabinet, as stated in Lord John Russell's letter of the 6th inst. Does Lord John know anything about the alleged approval, which, if true, would again expose the honesty and dignity of the Queen's Government in the eyes of the world?36
Footnote 36: On the 15th, Lord Normanby wrote to Lord Palmerston that he must now assume M. Walewski's report to be correct, and observed that if the Foreign Secretary held one language in Downing Street and prescribed another course to the British Ambassador, the latter must be awkwardly circumstanced. Lord Palmerston (in a letter not shown to the Queen or the Cabinet) replied that he had said nothing inconsistent with his instructions to Lord Normanby, that the President's action was for the French nation to judge of, but that in his view that action made for the maintenance of social order in France.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
Osborne, 13th December 1851.
My beloved Uncle,—These lines are to express my very warmest wishes for many, many happy returns of your dear birthday, and for every earthly blessing you can desire. How I wish you could spend it here, or we with you! I venture to send you some trifles which will recall the Exhibition in which you took so much interest. The continuation of the work I send you, I shall forward as it comes out.
As I wrote so lately, and shall do so on Tuesday, I will not touch on politics—with one exception—that I think it of high importance that the Orleans should clear themselves of all suspicion of a plot, which some people, I am sure, wish to make it appear they are involved in; and that public contradiction should be given to the foolish report, much credited here, that Joinville has gone to Lille, or to some part of France, to head the Troops. Ever your devoted Niece and Child,
Victoria R.
How you will again miss your departed Angel!
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
LORD PALMERSTON'S EXPLANATION
Woburn Abbey, 18th December 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He received from Lord Palmerston yesterday an explanation of his declaration of opinion to Mr Walewski, which Lord John Russell regrets to state was quite unsatisfactory.
He thought himself compelled to write to Lord Palmerston in the most decisive terms.
Lord Palmerston requested that his letter might be returned to be copied.
The whole correspondence shall be submitted to your Majesty.
Your Majesty will find in the box a despatch of Lord Normanby of the 15th, and an answer of Lord Palmerston of the 16th,37 which has been sent without your Majesty's sanction, or the knowledge of Lord John Russell.
Footnote 37: The letters are given in full in Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. i. chap. vii., were Lord Palmerston's explanation of the 16th, in answer to the Premier's letter of the 14th, will also be found.
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
Laeken, 19th December 1851.
My dearest Victoria,—Receive my warmest and best thanks for your truly kind and gracious recollection of my old birthday, and your amiable presents.
Our angelic Louise had quite un culte for that day, and two have already passed since the best and noblest of hearts beats no longer amongst us. When one sees the haste and ardour of earthly pursuits, and how all this is often disposed of, and when one sees that even the greatest success always ends with the grave, one is tempted to wonder that the human race should follow so restlessly bubbles often disappearing just when reached, and always being a source of never-ending anxiety. France gives, these sixty years, the proof of the truth of what I say, always believing itself at the highest point of perfection and changing it a few weeks afterwards.
A military Government in France, if it really gets established, must become dangerous for Europe. I hope that at least at its beginning it will have enough to do in France, and that we may get time to prepare. England will do well not to fall asleep, but to keep up its old energy and courage....
Your truly devoted Uncle,
Leopold R.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
DISMISSAL OF LORD PALMERSTON
Osborne, 19th December 1851.
The Queen has received several communications from Lord John Russell, but has not answered them, as she expected daily to hear of Lord Palmerston's answer. As Lord John Russell in his letter of yesterday's date promises to send her his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, she refrains from expressing a decided opinion until she has had an opportunity of perusing it; but Lord John will readily conceive what must be her feelings in seeing matters go from bad to worse with respect to Lord Palmerston's conduct!
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
LORD GRANVILLE
Woburn Abbey, 19th December 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to submit to your Majesty a correspondence with Viscount Palmerston, which terminates with a letter of this day's date.
Lord John Russell has now to advise your Majesty that Lord Palmerston should be informed that your Majesty is ready to accept the Seals of Office, and to place them in other hands.
Lord John Russell has summoned a Cabinet for Monday.
They may be of opinion that they cannot continue a Government.
But that is not Lord John Russell's opinion; and should they agree with him, he will proceed without delay to recommend a successor to your Majesty.
The Earl Granville appears to him the person best calculated for that post, but the Cabinet may be of opinion that more experience is required.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 20th December 1851.
The Queen found on her arrival here Lord John Russell's letter, enclosing his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, which she has perused with that care and attention which the importance and gravity of the subject of it demanded. The Queen has now to express to Lord John Russell her readiness to follow his advice, and her acceptance of the resignation of Lord Palmerston. She will be prepared to see Lord John after the Cabinet on Monday, as he proposes.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 20th December 1851.
With respect to a successor to Lord Palmerston, the Queen must state, that after the sad experience which she has just had of the difficulties, annoyances, and dangers to which the Sovereign may be exposed by the personal character and qualities of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, she must reserve to herself the unfettered right to approve or disapprove the choice of a Minister for this Office.
Lord Granville, whom Lord John Russell designates as the person best calculated for that post, would meet with her entire approval. The possible opinion of the Cabinet that more experience was required does not weigh much with the Queen. From her knowledge of Lord Granville's character, she is inclined to see no such disadvantage in the circumstance that he has not yet had practice in managing Foreign Affairs, as he will be the more ready to lean upon the advice and judgment of the Prime Minister where he may have diffidence in his own, and thereby will add strength to the Cabinet by maintaining unity in thought and action. The Queen hopes Lord John Russell will not omit to let her have copies of his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, as he has promised her.38
Footnote 38: On the same day the Prince wrote to the Premier that the Queen was much relieved. She had contemplated dismissing Lord Palmerston herself, but naturally shrank from using the power of the Crown, as her action would have been criticised without the possibility of making a public defence; in his view the Cabinet was rather strengthened than otherwise by Palmerston's departure, and public sympathy would not be with him. The rest of the letter is published in The Life of the Prince Consort.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 21st December 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of to-day. She is not the least afraid of Lord Granville's not possessing sufficient public confidence for him to undertake the Foreign Affairs. He is very popular with the House of Lords, with the Free Traders, and the Peace party, and all that the Continent knows of him is in his favour; he had great success at Paris last summer, and his never having had an opportunity of damaging his character by having been mixed up in diplomatic intrigues is an immense advantage to him in obtaining the confidence of those with whom he is to negotiate.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
THE QUEEN AND PALMERSTON
Windsor Castle, 23rd December 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—I have the greatest pleasure in announcing to you a piece of news which I know will give you as much satisfaction and relief as it does to us, and will do to the whole of the world. Lord Palmerston is no longer Foreign Secretary—and Lord Granville is already named his successor!! He had become of late really quite reckless, and in spite of the serious admonition and caution he received only on the 29th of November, and again at the beginning of December, he tells Walewski that he entirely approves Louis Napoleon's coup d'état, when he had written to Lord Normanby by my and the Cabinet's desire that he (Lord Normanby) was to continue his diplomatic intercourse with the French Government, but to remain perfectly passive and give no opinion. Walewski wrote Palmerston's opinion (entirely contrary to what the Government had ordered) to M. Turgot, and when Normanby came with his instructions, Turgot told him what Palmerston had said. Upon this Lord John asked Palmerston to give an explanation—which, after the delay of a week, he answered in such an unsatisfactory way that Lord John wrote to him that he could no longer remain Foreign Secretary, for that perpetual misunderstanding and breaches of decorum were taking place which endangered the country. Lord Palmerston answered instantly that he would give up the Seals the moment his successor was named! Certain as we all felt that he could not have continued long in his place, we were quite taken by surprise when we learnt of the dénouement.... Lord Granville will, I think, do extremely well, and his extreme honesty and trustworthiness will make him invaluable to us, and to the Government and to Europe.
I send some prints, etc., for the children for Christmas. Ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
MEETING OF THE CABINET
Windsor Castle, 23rd December 1851.
Lord John Russell arrived here at six o'clock yesterday evening immediately from the Cabinet, and reported that the Cabinet had, without a dissenting voice, condemned Lord Palmerston's conduct, and approved of the steps taken by Lord John Russell, which was a great relief to him. Lord Lansdowne, to whom he had first written on the subject, had frightened him by answering that it was not possible to avoid the rupture with Lord Palmerston, but that he thought the Government would after this not be able to go on. When, however, this question was discussed in Cabinet, and Lord John had stated that he thought the Office could be well filled, they all agreed in the propriety of going on. The Members of the Cabinet were so unable to understand Lord Palmerston's motives for his conduct during these last months, that Mr. Fox Maule started an idea which once occurred to Lord John himself (as he said), viz. that he must have had the design to bring on a rupture! Lord Minto, who was absent from the Cabinet, expressed himself in a letter to Lord John very strongly about Lord Palmerston's reckless conduct, which would yet undo the country.
LORD CLARENDON
Lord John, after having received the concurrence of the Cabinet on the question of Lord Palmerston's dismissal, stated that Lord Granville was the person whom he would like best to see fill his office, and he knew this to be the feeling of the Queen also. The Cabinet quite agreed in Lord Granville's fitness, but Sir George Grey stated it as his opinion that it ought first to be offered to Lord Clarendon, who has always been pointed out by the public as the proper person to succeed Lord Palmerston, and that, if he were passed over, the whole matter would have the appearance of a Cabinet intrigue in favour of one colleague against another. The whole of the Cabinet sided with this opinion, and Lord John Russell now proposed to the Queen that an offer should in the first instance be made to Lord Clarendon.
The Queen protested against the Cabinet's taking upon itself the appointment of its own Members, which rested entirely with the Prime Minister and the Sovereign, under whose approval the former constructed his Government.... Lord John replied that he thought Lord Clarendon would not accept the offer, and therefore there would be little danger in satisfying the desires of the Cabinet. He had written to Lord Clarendon a cautioning letter from Woburn, apprising him of some serious crisis, of which he would soon hear, and speaking of his former wish to exchange the Lord-Lieutenancy for some other Office. Lord Clarendon at once perceived the drift of the hint, and wrote to the Duke of Bedford what he said he did not wish to write to his brother John, that, if it was that Palmerston was going, and he were thought of as a successor, nothing would be so disagreeable to him, as the whole change would be put down as an intrigue of his, whom Lord Palmerston had always accused of wishing to supplant him; that if, however, the service of the country required it, he had the courage to face all personal obloquy....
Lord John owned that Sir George Grey's chief desire was to see Lord Clarendon removed from Ireland, having been there so long; the Cabinet would wish to see the Duke of Newcastle join the Government as Lord-Lieutenant, which he might be induced to do. The Queen having mentioned Lord Clarendon as most fit to succeed Lord Lansdowne one day as President of the Council and leader in the House of Lords, Lord John said that Lord Clarendon had particularly begged not to have the position offered him, for which he did not feel fit. Lord John would like him as Ambassador at Paris, and thought Lord Clarendon would like this himself; but it was difficult to know what to do with Lord Normanby.
In the course of the conversation, Lord John congratulated the Queen upon the change having been accomplished without her personal intervention, which might have exposed her to the animosity of Lord Palmerston's admirers, whilst she would have been precluded from making any public defence. I reminded Lord John that, as such was the disadvantage of the regal position, it behoved the Queen doubly to watch, lest she be put into the same dilemma with a new Minister, whose conduct she could not approve of. Lord Clarendon's appointment would be doubly galling to Lord Palmerston, whom Lord John might not wish to irritate further, a consideration which Lord John said he had also pressed upon the Cabinet. Upon a remark from Lord John as to Lord Granville's youth, the Queen replied: "Lord Canning, whom Lord Stanley had intended to make his Foreign Secretary, was not older...."
The conference ended by Lord John's promise to write to Lord Clarendon as the Queen had desired ... but that he did not wish to make the offer to Lord Granville till he had Lord Clarendon's answer. Lord Granville had been told not to attend the last Cabinet; Lord Palmerston had naturally stayed away.
I went up to Town at half-past seven to the Westminster Play, and took Lord John in my train to Richmond. We had some further conversation in the carriage, in which I asked Lord John whether it was true that Lord Palmerston had got us likewise into a quarrel with America by our ships firing at Panama upon an American merchantman; he said neither he nor Sir Francis Baring had received any news, but Sir Francis had been quite relieved by Lord Palmerston's quitting, as he could not be sure a moment that his Fleets were not brought into some scrape!
On my expressing my conviction that Lord Palmerston could not be very formidable to the Government, Lord John said: "I hope it will not come true what Lord Derby (then Lord Stanley) said after the last Ministerial crisis, when Lord John quizzed him at not having been able to get a Foreign Secretary—'Next time I shall have Lord Palmerston.'!"
Albert.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
COUNT WALEWSKI
Downing Street, 23rd December 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He has just seen Count Walewski; he told him that he had an important piece of intelligence to give him; that your Majesty had been pleased to make a change in the Foreign Office, and to direct Lord Palmerston to give up the Seals.
He wished to give this intelligence that he might accompany it with an intimation that the policy towards France would continue to be of the most friendly character, and that there was nothing the Government more desired than to see a stable and settled Government in France; that they had every wish for the stability of the present French Government. Count Walewski said he had received various assurances of opinion from Lord Palmerston, which he supposed were adopted by Lord John Russell, and subsisted in force.
Lord John Russell said: "Not exactly; it is a principle of the English Government not to interfere in any way with the internal affairs of other countries; whether France chooses to be a Republic or a Monarchy, provided it be not a Social Republic, we wish to express no opinion; we are what we call in England a sheet of white paper in this respect; all we desire is the happiness and welfare of France." Count Walewski said it was of importance to the stability of the President that he should have a large majority; he would then give a Constitution.
Lord John Russell said each nation must suit itself in this respect; we have perhaps been in error in thinking our Constitution could be generally adopted; some nations it may suit, others may find it unfitted for them.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
LORD GRANVILLE APPOINTED
Windsor Castle, 23rd December 1851.
The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letters, and is much rejoiced that this important affair has been finally so satisfactorily settled.
The Queen returns Lord Clarendon's letter, which she thinks a very good one.39 The Queen hopes Count Walewski will have been satisfied, which she thinks he ought to be. The Queen will receive Lord Palmerston to deliver up the Seals, and Lord Granville to receive them, on Friday at half-past two.
Footnote 39: Lord Clarendon, in answer to Lord John Russell, expressed great reluctance to undertake the charge of the Foreign Office, on the ground that Palmerston, always suspicions of him, would insist that he had deliberately undermined his position: while Lord Granville would be popular with the Court and country.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Downing Street, 24th December 1851.
Lord John Russell submits a private note of Lord Palmerston,40 which only shows how unconscious he was of all that the rest of the world perceived.
Footnote 40: In this letter, Lord Palmerston denied the "charge of violations of prudence and decorum," adding, "I have to observe that that charge is refuted by the offer which you made of the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland, because I apprehend that to be an office for the due performance of the duties of which prudence and decorum cannot well be dispensed with."
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
Windsor Castle, 25th December 1861.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters, and she returns the enclosures.
The articles in the Times are very good; the other papers seem quite puzzled, and unable to comprehend what has caused Lord Palmerston's removal from office. Lord Palmerston's letter is very characteristic; he certainly has the best of the argument, and great care ought to be taken in bestowing any praise on him, as he always takes advantage of it to turn against those who meant it merely to soothe him. The Queen thought that there must be a Council for the swearing in of the new Secretary of State.
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
LORD GRANVILLE
Windsor Castle, 27th December 1851.
Yesterday the Council was held, at which the change of Seals was to take place. We waited for one hour and a half, but Lord Palmerston did not appear; his Seals had been sent from the Foreign Office to Lord John Russell!
Lord John told us he had written to Lord Palmerston, announcing him the appointment of Lord Granville, and added that in his long political life he had not passed a week which had been so painful to him. Lord Palmerston's answer was couched in these terms: "Of course you will believe that I feel that just indignation at the whole proceeding which it must produce."
Lord Lansdowne seemed anxious particularly on account of the clear symptoms appearing from the papers that both Radicals and Protectionists are bidding for Lord Palmerston.
Lord Granville was very much overcome when he had his audience to thank for his appointment, but seemed full of courage and good-will. He said it would be as easy to him to avoid Lord Palmerston's faults as difficult to imitate his good qualities, promised to endeavour to establish a more decent usage between the Governments in their mutual communications, by setting the good example himself, and insisting upon the same on the part of the others; promised not to have anything to do with the newspapers; to give evening parties, just as Lord Palmerston had done, to which a good deal of his influence was to be attributed. He said a Member of Parliament just returned from the Continent had told him that an Englishman could hardly show himself without becoming aware of the hatred they were held in; the only chance one had to avoid being insulted was to say Civis Romanus non sum.
Lord Granville had been Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs under Lord Palmerston for three years from 1837-40, but, as he expressed himself, rather the sandwich between his principal and the clerks. Lord Palmerston had in these three years hardly once spoken to him upon any of the subjects he had to treat.
Albert.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
PALMERSTON'S ABSENCE EXPLAINED
Windsor Castle, 27th December 1851.
The Queen forgot to remind Lord John Russell yesterday of his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, which he promised to let her have.
The Queen concludes from what Lord John said yesterday that he intended sounding the Duke of Newcastle relative to the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland.
Has Lord John ascertained the cause of Lord Palmerston's absence yesterday? If it was not accidental, she must say she thinks it most disrespectful conduct towards his Sovereign.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Pembroke Lodge, 27th December 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and submits a letter of Lord Palmerston, which explains his not going to Windsor. It appears to have arisen from a mistake in the message sent through Lord Stanley, and not from any want of respect to your Majesty.
Viscount Palmerston to Lord John Russell.
Carlton Gardens, 27th December 1851.
My dear John Russell,—I am distressed beyond measure by the note from you which I have this moment received on my arrival here from Hampshire. I understood from Stanley that you had desired him to tell me that if it was inconvenient for me to come up yesterday, I might send the Seals to you at Windsor, and that my presence would be dispensed with.41 Thereupon I sent the Seals up by an early train yesterday morning to Stanley, that he might send them down to you as suggested by you, and I desired that they might be taken by a messenger by the special train.
I shall be very much obliged to you if you will have the goodness to explain this matter to the Queen, and I beg you to assure Her Majesty how deeply grieved I am that what appears to have been a mistake on my part should have led me to be apparently wanting in due respect to Her Majesty, than which nothing could possibly be further from my intention or thoughts. Yours sincerely,
Palmerston.
Footnote 41: There is a fuller account given of Lord Palmerston's version of the whole affair in a letter to his brother, printed in Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. i. p. 315.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE QUEEN ON FOREIGN POLICY
Windsor Castle, 28th December 1851.
The Queen thinks the moment of the change in the person of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to afford a fit opportunity to have the principles upon which our Foreign Affairs have been conducted since the beginning of 1848 reconsidered by Lord John Russell and his Cabinet.
The Queen was fully aware that the storm raging at the time on the Continent rendered it impossible for any statesman to foresee with clearness and precision what development and direction its elements would take, and she consequently quite agreed that the line of policy to be followed, as the most conducive to the interests of England, could then only be generally conceived and vaguely expressed.
But although the Queen is still convinced that the general principles laid down by Lord John at that time for the conduct of our Foreign Policy were in themselves right, she has in the progress of the last three years become painfully convinced that the manner in which they have been practically applied has worked out very different results from those which the correctness of the principles themselves had led her to expect. For when the revolutionary movements on the Continent had laid prostrate almost all its Governments, and England alone displayed that order, vigour, and prosperity which it owes to a stable, free, and good Government, the Queen, instead of earning the natural good results of such a glorious position, viz. consideration, goodwill, confidence, and influence abroad, obtained the very reverse, and had the grief to see her Government and herself treated on many occasions with neglect, aversion, distrust, and even contumely.
Frequently, when our Foreign Policy was called in question, it has been said by Lord John and his colleagues that the principles on which it was conducted were the right ones, and having been approved of by them, received their support, and that it was only the personal manner of Lord Palmerston in conducting the affairs which could be blamed in tracing the causes which led to the disastrous results the Queen complains of.
The Queen is certainly not disposed to defend the personal manner in which Lord Palmerston has conducted Foreign Affairs, but she cannot admit that the errors he committed were merely faults in form and method, that they were no more than acts of "inconsideration, indiscretion, or bad taste." The Queen considers that she has also to complain of what appeared to her deviations from the principles laid down by the Cabinet for his conduct, nay, she sees distinctly in their practical application a personal and arbitrary perversion of the very nature and essence of those principles. She has only to refer here to Italy, Spain, Greece, Holstein, France, etc., etc., which afford ample illustrations of this charge.
It was one thing for Lord Palmerston to have attempted such substantial deviations; it will be another for the Cabinet to consider whether they had not the power to check him in these attempts.
The Queen, however, considering times to have now changed, thinks that there is no reason why we should any longer confine ourselves to the mere assertion of abstract principles, such as "non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries," "moral support to liberal institutions," "protection to British subjects," etc., etc. The moving powers which were put in operation by the French Revolution of 1848, and the events consequent on it, are no longer so obscure; they have assumed distinct and tangible forms in almost all the countries affected by them (in France, in Italy, Germany, etc.), and upon the state of things now existing, and the experience gained, the Queen would hope that our Foreign Policy may be more specifically defined, and that it may be considered how the general principles are to be practically adapted to our peculiar relations with each Continental State.
The Queen wishes therefore that a regular programme embracing these different relations should be submitted to her, and would suggest whether it would not be the best mode if Lord John were to ask Lord Granville to prepare such a paper and to lay it before her after having revised it.
This would then serve as a safe guide for Lord Granville, and enable the Queen as well as the Cabinet to see that the Policy, as in future to be conducted, will be in conformity with the principles laid down and approved.
Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria.
Pembroke Lodge, 29th December 1851.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has received your Majesty's communication of yesterday, and will transmit it to Lord Granville.
It is to be observed, however, that the traditionary policy of this country is not to bind the Crown and country by engagements, unless upon special cause shown, arising out of the circumstances of the day.
For instance, the Treaty of Quadruple Alliance between England, France, Spain, and Portugal was contrary to the general principle of non-intervention; so was the interference in Portugal in 1847, but were both justified by circumstances.
Thus it is very difficult to lay down any principles from which deviations may not frequently be made.
The grand rule of doing to others as we wish that they should do unto us is more applicable than any system of political science. The honour of England does not consist in defending every English officer or English subject, right or wrong, but in taking care that she does not infringe the rules of justice, and that they are not infringed against her.42
Footnote 42: A summary of Lord Granville's Memorandum in reply (which was couched in very general terms) will be found in Lord Fitzmaurice's Life of Earl Granville, vol. ii. p. 49.
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
AFFAIRS IN FRANCE
Windsor Castle, 30th December 1851.
My dearest Uncle,—Most warmly do I thank you for your kind and affectionate and interesting letter of the 26th, which I received on Sunday. All that you say about Lord Palmerston is but too true.... He brouilléd us and the country with every one; and his very first act precipitated the unfortunate Spanish marriages which was le commencement de la fin. It is too grievous to think how much misery and mischief might have been avoided. However, now he has done with the Foreign Office for ever, and "the veteran statesman," as the newspapers, to our great amusement and I am sure to his infinite annoyance, call him, must rest upon his laurels.... I fear much lest they should be imprudent at Claremont; the poor Queen hinted to Mamma that she hoped you would not become a friend to the President; no doubt you can have no sympathies for him, but just because you are related to the poor Orleanses, you feel that you must be doubly cautious to do nothing which could provoke the enmity of Louis Napoleon. I fear that poor Joinville had some mad idea of going to France, which, fortunately, his illness prevented. It would have been the height of folly. Their only safe policy is to remain entirely passive et de se faire oublier, which was Nemours' expression to me two years ago; nothing could be wiser or more prudent than he was then—but I don't think they were wise since. La Candidature of Joinville was in every way unwise, and led Louis Napoleon to take so desperate a course. Nemours told me also last year that they were not at all against a fusion, but that they could not disposer de la France, unless called upon to do so by the nation. I wish you would caution them to be very circumspect and silent—for all the mistakes made by others is in their favour; in fact, no good for them could come till Paris is old enough to be his own master—unless indeed they all returned under Henri V., but a Regency for Paris would be an impossibility....
We spent a very happy Christmas, and now wish you a very happy New Year—for many succeeding years. Also to the children, who I hope were pleased with the prints, etc.
We have got young Prince Nicholas of Nassau here, a pretty, clever boy of nineteen, with a good deal of knowledge, and a great wish to learn and hear, which is a rare thing for the young Princes, of our day in particular. I must stop now, as I fear I have already let my pen run on for too long, and must beg to be excused for this voluminous letter.
With Albert's love ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE
Windsor Castle, 30th December 1851.
The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters of yesterday. She quite agrees with him and his colleagues in thinking it of importance to strengthen the Government, and she is pleased with his proposal to communicate with the Duke of Newcastle as to what assistance he and his friends can give to the Government.
The Queen expects better results from such a negotiation, with an ostensible head of a Party, than from attempts to detach single individuals from it, which from a sense of honour they always felt scruples in agreeing to.
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
THE TE DEUM IN PARIS
Windsor Castle, 31st December 1851.
The Queen sees in the papers that there is to be a Te Deum at Paris on the 2nd for the success of the coup d'état, and that the Corps Diplomatique is to be present. She hopes that Lord Normanby will be told not to attend. Besides the impropriety of his taking part in such a ceremony, his doing so would entirely destroy the position of Lord John Russell opposite Lord Palmerston, who might with justice say that he merely expressed his personal approval of the coup d'état before, but since, the Queen's Ambassador had been ordered publicly to thank God for its success.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE
TO CHAPTER XXI
Early in 1852, the Whig Government, impaired in public credit by the removal of Lord Palmerston, attempted once more a coalition with the Peelites, office being offered to Sir James Graham; the overtures failed, and soon, after the meeting of Parliament, the ex-Foreign Secretary, whose version of the cause of his dismissal failed to satisfy the House of Commons, succeeded in defeating the Government on their Militia Bill, affairs in France having caused anxiety as to the national defences. The Government Bill was for the creation of a local Militia, Lord Palmerston preferring the consolidation of the regular Militia. A Ministry was formed by Lord Derby (formerly Lord Stanley) from the Protectionist Party, but no definite statement could be elicited as to their intention, or the reverse, to re-impose a duty on foreign corn. Mr Disraeli, who became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was the mainspring of the Government policy, showed great dexterity in his management of the House of Commons without a majority, and carried a Militia Bill in the teeth of Lord John Russell; but a plan of partial redistribution failed. The elections held in the summer did not materially improve the Ministerial position, and, on the meeting of Parliament in the autumn, the Fiscal Question had to be squarely faced. After much wrangling, Protection was finally abandoned, and the Government saved for the moment, but on their House-tax proposals they were defeated, after an impassioned debate, by a coalition of Whigs, Peelites, and Radicals, from whom Lord Lansdowne and Lord Aberdeen (and finally the latter alone) were called upon to construct a strong representative Government. The Duke of Wellington had died in September, and his funeral was the signal for an outburst of national feeling. During the year the Houses of Parliament designed by Sir Charles Barry, though not absolutely completed, were formally opened by the Queen; the new House of Lords had already been in use.
In France, the first result of the coup d'état was Louis Bonaparte's election as President for ten years by an immense majority; late in the year he assumed the Imperial title as Napoleon III., and the Empire was formally recognised by the majority of the Powers; the Emperor designed to add to his prestige by contracting a matrimonial alliance with Princess Adelaide of Hohenlohe. In the East of Europe a dispute had commenced between France and Russia about the Holy Places in Palestine. Simultaneously with the death of the Duke of Wellington, the era of European peace was destined to come to an end, and Nicholas, encouraged by the advent to power of Aberdeen (whom he had met in 1844, and with whom he had frankly discussed European politics), was hoping for the consummation of his scheme for the partition of Turkey.
To Great Britain the year was a memorable one, in consequence of the granting of a Constitution to New Zealand.