The Grove, November 19th.—I have only a minute for writing, as we have had Princess Alice here all day, and I, of course, could do nothing but the very easy task of entertaining her.
I was very glad to get your letter, as I thought you were still abroad, and I only hope you are as glad to find yourself at home again as I am, though I am not sorry to have been to Berlin. I rather envy you being at Paris during the late crisis, and getting the first impressions upon it…. I have no doubt the deficit is about what Senex [Footnote: Reeve was at this time writing occasional letters in the Times under the signature of 'Senex.' Lord Clarendon seems to have known this. Other correspondents did not; notably Lord Kingsdown, some of whose letters innocently comment on the opinions expressed by Senex.] puts it at. I read your admirable letter with great pleasure, and thought it must be yours, though I did not understand whence it was written.
I should very much like to have a talk with you. If you are not engaged, why shouldn't you and Mrs. and Miss Reeve come here on Saturday? We have asked Granville and C. C. G.; and I believe Lewis is coming. Miladi would write to propose this to Mrs. Reeve, but thinks she will consider two letters unnecessary.
From Lord Brougham
Cannes, December 8th. There is a new complication of the American case, and I fear, though I don't join in what I find the universal feeling in England, that the Government of Washington will hold out. But even if they give in, this hesitation, and their manifest fear of the mob, is the most complete confirmation of all I have been so long and so often preaching, of the extreme mischief of mob-government. They are in the hands of the mob—and one of the worst mobs in the world. You see they even are under this dominion as to their military operations; for their disaster at Bull's Run was owing to the clamour forcing their comrades to advance and do something; and now no one can have the least doubt that, if Lincoln and Seward were left to themselves, a war with England would be the thing they most dreaded; yet it is very possible they may feel unable to resist the mob-clamour, and may bring on that calamity. The mob of Paris threw France into all the horrors of the reign of terror (1793-4), which have left such indelible disgrace on the French, and which stopped all improvement both in France and in Europe for a quarter of a century, and which even now create such a force in favour of despotism—as they did in the first Napoleon's time. But I don't think the evils of mob-government—that is, of the supreme power being in persons not individually responsible—can be more clearly manifested, though they may not lead to such atrocious crimes, than in the States of America—and the southern as well as the northern—for the mob governs in both. My opinion will be the same, even if, contrary to probability, the Washington men are stout enough to resist the mob; for this hesitation and this struggle against the insanity of war could only be occasioned by the mob tyranny.
Prince Albert died on December 14th. It was impossible to allow an event so important in the political as well as in the social history of the reign to pass without a notice in the 'Edinburgh Review,' and that on the earliest occasion; though, in the middle of December, some special arrangement had to be made for it. It was, in fact, brought into the concluding pages of the article on 'May's Constitutional History of England.' But the subject was one which called for exceeding care and delicacy in the handling. The services of Prince Albert to the Crown had been many and great; but by the country at large they were still looked on with jealousy and suspicion. A profound sympathy was everywhere felt for the death of the Queen's husband; the death of a man regarded by an ignorant prejudice as the embodiment of German influence in the Cabinet might easily be considered as no great loss. Reeve seems to have consulted Lord Clarendon as to how much or how little it was prudent to say; in answer to which Lord Clarendon wrote:—
The Grove, December 31st.—I feel, as you do, that the events of the last month are too vast in themselves and in their consequences for discussion by letter, though I should much like to have a day's talk over them with you.
I am very glad that you mean to undertake the task—a labour of love—of doing honour to the Prince, as I am sure it will be admirably performed; but I would suggest to you not to be too precise as to the manner in which he exercised his political influence…. There is a vague belief that his influence was great and useful; but there is a very dim perception of the modus operandi…. Peel certainly took the Prince into council much more than Melbourne, who had his own established position with the Queen before the Prince came to this country; but I cannot tell you whether it was Peel who first gave him a cabinet key. My impression is that Lord Duncannon, during the short time he was Home Secretary, sent the Prince a key when the Queen was confined, and the contents of the boxes had to be read or signed by her.
The concluding sentence in the next letter from Lord Clarendon refers to the feeling which had been roused in Canada by the threat of war between England and the United States. The Canadians showed an exemplary loyalty; and great numbers of Irish—many of whom (like O'Reilly) had been known at home as turbulent characters—now not only pressed forward to be enrolled in the militia, but formed themselves into special regiments.
The Grove, January 21st.—I cannot help telling you how excellent I think your article on the Prince. You have said the right thing in the right way, and have so hit the happy medium between justice to him and no flattery or exaggeration, that I am sure the article will be read with pleasure by everybody, because it exactly reflects the public feeling.