[1] [Lord Raglan died in the Crimea on June 28.]
Paris, July 6th.—I went yesterday to the Exhibition in the morning; then to Notre Dame and the Luxembourg Gardens and drove about Paris; dined en trio with Madame de Lieven and Guizot, when there was of course nothing but political talk. Guizot thinks there has been not only a series of diplomatic blunders, but a wonderful want of invention, not to strike out some means of adjusting this quarrel, in which I agree with him. This morning Labouchere and I went to Versailles. Fould had given me a letter to the Director of the Museum there, M. Souli?, whom we found very intelligent, well informed, and obliging. We told him our object was to avoid the giro regolare of the endless rooms fitted up with bad pictures by Louis Philippe, and to see the apartments full of historical associations from the time of Louis XIV. down to the Revolution. We were completely gratified, and he took us over everything we wished to see, being admirably qualified as a cicerone by his familiarity with the localities and the history belonging to them. We saw all the apartments in which Louis XIV. lived, and what remains of those of Madame de Maintenon. The Palace has been so tumbled about at different times, and such alterations made in it, that it is not always easy to ascertain correctly where the rooms of certain personages were, but our guide proved to our complete satisfaction that certain rooms he showed us were those which really did belong to Madame de Maintenon. We saw too in minute detail the apartments of Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette, and the passages through which she fled to escape from the irruption of the mob on the 5th of October. The whole thing was as interesting as possible.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S RETURN.
Paris, July 9th.—I meant to have left Paris last night, but, an invitation arriving to dine with the Emperor at St. Cloud today, I put off going till tomorrow. I went yesterday to Versailles to see the grandes eaux and was disappointed, and dined there with the Ashburtons. This morning telegraphic news came of a Russian sortie last night; no details of course. Yesterday we were thrown into consternation by the intelligence from London of the revelations of John Russell in the House of Commons and the discussion thereupon. Le Marchant wrote to Labouchere and told him the effect was as bad as possible, and the whole case very deplorable. My own opinion is that nobody could have acted more indiscreetly and unjustifiably than John Russell has done, and he has sacrificed his character and authority in a way which he will find it difficult to get over. But I am disposed to agree with him that the terms proposed by Austria, if they could have been brought to maturity and carried out, were quite sufficient to make peace upon, and that the negotiations ought to have continued in order to endeavour to bring about this result. The effect of this public announcement to the whole world, that the English Minister at the Congress as well as the French one was willing to accept the terms proposed by Austria, will not fail to make a great sensation, and produce a considerable effect both in Germany and in France. In England it is doubtful whether it will have any other result than to damage John Russell himself, and increase the vulgar prejudice against public men. My own idea is that it will render the war still more unpopular in France, and the English alliance likewise, because it will encourage the prevailing notion that the war is carried on for English interests and in deference to the wishes of England. Though John Russell declared that the resolution of the Emperor to part with Drouyn de Lhuys and reject the Austrian proposal had been made before the intention of the English Cabinet was known, this will not be believed, or at all events everybody will be convinced that he knew what the sentiments of England were, and that he really acted in conformity with them, as was beyond all doubt the case.
A DINNER AT VILLENEUVE L'?TANG.
July 10th.—I dined at Villeneuve l'?tang. We went to the Palace of St. Cloud in Cowley's carriage, where we found an equerry and one of the Emperor's carriages, which took us to Villeneuve. A small house, pretty and comfortable enough, and a small party, all English—Duke and Duchess of Hamilton, Lord Hertford, Lord and Lady Ashburton, General Torrens and his aide de camp, Cowley and myself, the Duc de Bassano, Comte de Montebello, the aide de camp de service, and M. Valabr?gue, ?cuyer, that was the whole party. The Emperor sat between the two ladies, taking the Duchess in to dinner. It lasted about three quarters of an hour, and as soon as it was over His Majesty took us all out to walk about the place, see the dairy and a beautiful Bretonne cow he ordered to be brought out, and then to scull on the lake, or ?tang, which gives its name to the place. There were a number of little boats for one person to scull and one to sit, and one larger for two each; the Emperor got into one with the Duchess, and all the rest of the people as they liked, and we passed about half an hour on the water. On landing, ices, etc., were brought, and the carriages came to the door at nine o'clock, a char ? banc with four percherons and postillions exactly like the old French postboy, and several other open carriages and pair. The two ladies got into the centre of the char ? banc, Cowley, Hertford, and I were invited to get up before, and the Emperor himself got up behind with somebody else, I did not see who. We then set off and drove for some time through the woods and drives of Villeneuve and St. Cloud, and at last, at about ten o'clock, we were set down at the Palace. There we all alighted, and, after walking about a little, the Emperor showing us the part which Marie Antoinette had built and telling some anecdotes connected with Louis XVIII. and Louis Philippe, and the Ch?teau, he shook hands with all of us very cordially and dismissed us. His Majesty got into the char ? banc and returned to Villeneuve, and we drove back to Paris. When we were walking about the court of the Ch?teau (it was quite dark) the sentinel challenged us—'Qui va l??' when the Emperor called out in a loud voice, 'L'Empereur.'
Of course, in this company there was nothing but general conversation, and I had no opportunity of having any with His Majesty; but he was extremely civil, offering me his cigars, which I declined, and expressing anxiety that I should not catch cold. He made the same impression on me as before as to his extreme simplicity and the easiness of his intercourse; but I was struck with his appearance being so very mesquin, more than I thought at first.
Lady Ashburton told me she had received a letter from Ellice, telling her that the affair in the House of Commons had produced the most serious effect, and that it would probably end in the retirement of John Russell, and eventually to a change of Government. He had got a story, which I utterly disbelieve, that Milner Gibson had been instigated by John Russell himself to give him this opportunity of saying what he did, which was certainly more than he need have said.[1] Lord John seems for some time past to have been bereft of his senses, and to commit nothing but blunders one after another. What has been passing in his mind, and what his real objects are or have been, it would puzzle anybody to say. If he had personal views and wanted to regain the station and power which he had lost, never did any man take such false steps and pursue so erroneous a course to obtain his ends. He had in some measure retrieved the character and consideration which he forfeited by his conduct at the beginning of this year; but I do not see how he is ever to get over this, nor how his followers can any longer have any confidence in him, and I do not believe the country at large ever will. As to his opinion on the terms of peace, I agree with it, and think it would have been wiser to close with Buol's proposal, and to continue to negotiate; but this makes no difference as to his conduct in the affair, for which there is no excuse. He never ought to have committed himself at Vienna; his instructions were clear and precise and quite inconsistent with Buol's proposition. He might have engaged to bring it before his Government, but should, especially as he was a Cabinet Minister, have abstained from expressing any opinion of his own upon it. He appears at Vienna to have been easily talked over, and to have been exceedingly wanting in diplomatic finesse and penetration; but all I have picked up here in conversation proves to me that there have been errors innumerable and the greatest mistakes in the conduct of these affairs throughout, and the exigencies of the alliance and the necessity of concerting everything to the most minute particular with both Cabinets have produced results not less unfortunate in diplomacy than in war. The affair before Sebastopol the night before last turns out to have been of no importance, only a demonstration against the English lines.
[1] [On July 6, Lord John Russell declared in the House of Commons, in answer to a question put by Mr. Milner Gibson, that he was personally convinced that the terms proposed at Vienna by the Austrian Government gave a fair prospect of the termination of hostilities, but that on his return to England the Government declined to accept them. M. Drouyn de Lhuys, the French envoy, had also been in favour of these terms. This declaration appeared to be wholly inconsistent with the warlike speech which Lord John had made, on his return, on May 24. Sir E. B. Lytton then gave notice of a motion condemning the conduct of the Ministers charged with negotiating at Vienna; but Lord John Russell anticipated the inevitable vote of censure by resigning office, and he was succeeded in the Colonial Department by Sir William Molesworth. This transaction was held to reflect deep discredit on Lord John Russell's conduct, and justifies the severe language applied to him in the text, but this was somewhat mitigated by Mr. Greville in a subsequent passage.]
LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S EXPLANATION.