INDIGNATION AT THE SPANISH MARRIAGES.

London, November 4th.—The last month has as usual been spent in and about Newmarket, and left neither time nor inclination for anything but racing occupations. I have not much to say about politics. The last month or two have been occupied with the Spanish marriages, Irish distresses and disturbances, and the question of the opening of the ports and the meeting of Parliament. In respect to the first, the King and Guizot, having accomplished their end, are now anxious to make it up with us, but they find this not so easy. All sorts of conciliatory attempts have been made through Jarnac, Madame de Lieven, myself, and others, which have been very coldly met. Jarnac sent to John Russell a letter of Guizot's, in which he spoke slightingly of Palmerston. Lord John wrote an answer expressing his own entire concurrence with Palmerston, and his view of the conduct of the French Government, an excellent letter, I am told. Madame de Lieven wrote to me, begging me to go to Paris, where I might do a great deal of good. I wrote her a long letter telling her all I thought, and how unanimous all parties and public men were here, and showed my letter to the Palmerstons, who were very well pleased with it.

In Ireland Bessborough has done admirably well, with a mixture of wisdom and firmness which has gained him great applause. Even Lord Roden says he is the best Lord-Lieutenant they ever had. The state of Ireland meanwhile is most deplorable, not so much from the magnitude of the prevailing calamity as from the utter corruption and demoralisation of the whole people from top to bottom; obstinacy, ignorance, cupidity, and idleness overspread the land. Nobody thinks of anything but how they can turn the evil of the times to their own advantage. The upper classes are intent on jobbery, and the lower on being provided with everything and doing nothing. It sickens and disgusts me, and it is necessary to bear constantly in mind how much we have to reproach ourselves for letting Ireland become so degraded and corrupt to endure the spectacle with any sort of patience.

November 20th.—Some days ago Lady Palmerston got from Palmerston the correspondence between him and Guizot, which was printed for the Cabinet, and gave it me to read. There were three notes: Palmerston's first against the marriage before it took place; Guizot's case for himself and against us; and Palmerston's elaborate reply to the latter, which is certainly very able and conclusive, and exposes with great force the shuffling, tricking, and unfair conduct of the French Cabinet. I presume when Parliament meets these papers will appear, when the world may judge of them. The point on which I think Palmerston fails to make a case, and which he was imprudent in putting forward, was that of the Treaty of Utrecht. I think he has there no locus standi, and such is Aberdeen's opinion. It is the more to be regretted that he brought this forward, because it was of great importance that he and Aberdeen should be of one mind throughout the matter, besides which I have very little doubt that when Parliament meets, and the question is discussed, Brougham will come down to the House of Lords and make a very powerful speech against the Government on this point of the case. If he does, there is nobody to answer him, and Clarendon takes the same view of it that I do. Brougham has written a long, rambling, absurd letter to Clarendon, the object of which is to complain of Normanby's conduct in not going to the reception, and generally of the impolicy of quarrelling with the French Government, of course written for Louis Philippe and Guizot. Clarendon wrote him a very good answer.

COUNCIL OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER.

A great uproar has been made here by the appointment of a council for the Duchy of Lancaster, Graham and Lincoln being on it. Both Whigs and Protectionists were very angry, and fancied it was a political move and a sign of coalition. It has been misunderstood, but it is a pity the thing was done at all, and there is an awkwardness about it. It seems very absurd that Graham should be selected to be a sort of land steward to the Duchy of Lancaster. The simple truth, however, is that it was a fancy of the Queen's, or rather of the Prince's, and nothing more. They found that a council had worked well in the Duchy of Cornwall, and that the revenue was improved, and they thought similar machinery might produce similar effects in the other duchy; and next they took it into their heads that nobody would do their business so well as Graham, so John Russell, willing to please them, made no objection. Graham, however, when appealed to, refused, and was only induced to accept the office by very pressing entreaties from George Anson, and its being made a matter of personal favour to the Queen and Prince. The Duke of Bedford was the man they wanted to appoint, but he declined, because the management of his own affairs left him no time to attend to any others.

November 23rd.—The Cracow affair[144] has made a great sensation in France, and puzzled Guizot not a little. He now feels the embarrassment of having quarrelled with us, and is obliged to make overtures to us, which is rather mortifying to him, and in which our Government find great matter for exultation. It was suspected here that Guizot, in order to conciliate the Northern Courts, would give in to their violation of the Treaty of Vienna, but it turns out quite otherwise. Probably he does not dare; but be this as it may, Jarnac came down to the Foreign Office on Saturday when the Cabinet was sitting, and sent in a note stating that the matter was sufficiently urgent to induce him to 'poursuivre Palmerston même dans le sein du Conseil,' and stating that he was ordered by Guizot to go forthwith to him, and beg to know his sentiments on the transaction, and to convey to him those of the French Government; in short, to invite confidential intercourse with a view to joint action. The Cabinet were mightily pleased at Guizot's being reduced to the necessity of thus appealing to us. They resolved, however, to take a somewhat dry and stately, though civil tone. Palmerston had received an intimation from Metternich of what the three Northern Courts had resolved to do, in rather a peremptory style, and he had already written an answer and submitted it to the Cabinet. It was to the effect that he was bound to protest against this violation of the treaty, and that 'jusqu'à présent' he had not seen any evidence of the facts on the strength of which they had grounded the necessity for what they had done. The answer was as strong as it is advisable to make any document, which there is no intention of following up by any action. This note was to be submitted to the Queen, and on its return from her to be sent off to Vienna. The answer to Jarnac was to be that we entirely disapproved of what had been done, and he was to be furnished with a copy of Palmerston's note, informing him that it had been already despatched to Vienna, thus concurring in opinion with Guizot, but acting independently. There seemed to me to be too much disposition to exhibit marked coldness, and to repulse any attempt at reconciliation; and I told Clarendon that as we must make it up sooner or later, I thought it much better to deal with the Cracow question in such a manner as to enable its being made the means of a rapprochement. The fear is that Palmerston will say or write twitting and irritating notes, and so keep alive the feud.

THE ANNEXATION OF CRACOW.

November 27th.—On Tuesday I passed the day in the Court of Queen's Bench to hear the case of Lewis v. Ferrand,[145] and had the pleasure of hearing Ferrand get a severe drubbing. Thesiger made a capital speech for Lewis, and the Court refused to hear his junior, and gave judgement directly, condemning Ferrand very strongly and absolving Lewis completely. It was particularly satisfactory, because I was the instigator of the motion for a criminal information, and but for me Lewis would not have done it. He was afraid to move, and his friends and relations were afraid for him. I alone put pluck into him and 'brought him to the scratch.'

November 28th.—Yesterday I heard a great deal about foreign politics. Clarendon brought me a letter from Howden, who writes to him constantly from Paris. There is an idea now taken up by the French papers that the King has been all along cognisant of the intentions of the three Courts about Cracow, and has himself conducted an underhand intrigue with Flahault about it; that Flahault got leave of absence in order not to be placed in the false position of not objecting, the King having secretly instructed him to laisser faire, and give them to understand that he must talk big, but that they were not to mind that, and to count on his doing nothing. This Howden does not believe, but Clarendon does. He saw yesterday a M. Grimblot, a violent partisan of Thiers, who hates the King and Guizot, and who told him he believed this story to be true; and, moreover, that if Guizot lost his place in the scramble that is likely to take place, and Thiers and Co. come in, there was nothing they would not do and no sacrifice they would not make to renew the English alliance, that all France wished for it, and that the estrangement had frightened them: 'nous avons peur' he said. This Clarendon swallowed down, though it seems to me so base and despicable an avowal that it must be false. It is an attempt at cajolery, coarse and overdone, to ingratiate the Thiers party with our Government. Clarendon thinks, however, that the above story of the King is true, and he rests his belief on the fragment of an intercepted letter from Princess Metternich; but it requires more confirmation than this. Delane arrived with a long letter he had received from Aberdeen, very just, sound, and sensible, very moderate towards Palmerston, and urging Delane to support him. He declared his belief in the sincerity of the convictions on which Guizot had acted, was satisfied that if he (Aberdeen) had remained in office the marriage would not have taken place, or at least not in the manner it did. He repudiated the construction put on the Treaty of Utrecht, and regretted its having been brought forward.