... As Lord John Russell will have the honour of seeing your Majesty to-morrow, he will be able to explain to your Majesty the present state of the discussions on Reform, and the progress of the Measure.33 Lord Aberdeen feels it to be his duty to inform your Majesty that on Saturday evening he received a visit from Lord Palmerston, who announced his decided objection to the greater part of the proposed plan.34 He did this in such positive terms that Lord Aberdeen should imagine he had made up his mind not to give the Measure his support; but Lord John entertains considerable doubt that such is the case.
Lord Aberdeen thinks it by no means improbable that Lord Palmerston may also desire to separate himself from the Government, in consequence of their pacific policy, and in order to take the lead of the War Party and the Anti-Reformers in the House of Commons, who are essentially the same. Such a combination would undoubtedly be formidable; but Lord Aberdeen trusts that it would not prove dangerous. At all events, it would tend greatly to the improvement of Lord John's Foreign Policy.
Footnote 33: On the 19th of November Lord John had written to the Queen outlining the Reform proposals of the Committee of the Cabinet. The Queen subsequently wrote to make additional suggestions, e.g., for finding a means of bringing into the House official persons or men without local connections, and for dealing with Ministerial re-elections.
Footnote 34: Lord Palmerston wrote to Lord Lansdowne, giving an account of the affair:—
"Carlton Gardens, 8th December 1853.
"My dear Lansdowne,—I have had two conversations with Aberdeen on the subject of John Russell's proposed Reform Bill, and I have said that there are three points in it to which I cannot agree.
"These points are—the extent of disfranchisement, the extent of enfranchisement, and the addition of the Municipal Franchise in Boroughs to the pound;10 Householder Franchise....
"We should by such an arrangement increase the number of bribeable Electors, and overpower intelligence and property by ignorance and poverty.
"I have told Aberdeen that I am persuaded that the Measure as proposed by John Russell and Graham will not pass through the two Houses of Parliament without material modifications, and that I do not choose to be a party to a contest between the two Houses or to an Appeal to the Country for a Measure of which I decidedly disapprove; and that I cannot enter into a career which would lead me to such a position, that, in short, I do not choose to be dragged through the dirt by John Russell. I reminded Aberdeen that on accepting his offer of Office, I had expressed apprehension both to him and to you, that I might find myself differing from my Colleagues on the question of Parliamentary Reform.
"I have thought a good deal on this matter. I should be very sorry to give up my present Office at this moment: I have taken a great interest in it, and I have matters in hand which I should much wish to bring to a conclusion. Moreover, I think that the presence in the Cabinet of a person holding the opinions which I entertain as to the principles on which our Foreign Affairs ought to be conducted, is useful in modifying the contrary system of Policy, which, as I think, injuriously to the interests and dignity of the Country, there is a disposition in other quarters to pursue; but notwithstanding all this. I cannot consent to stand forward as one of the Authors and Supporters of John Russell's sweeping alterations. Yours sincerely,