_Lettre de lord Palmerston à M. Bulwer communiquée à M. Guizot_ (texte
anglais).
Carlton Terrace, 17 August 1841.
My dear Bulwer,
I am very sorry to find, from your letter of last week, that you
observed, in your conversation with M. Guizot, that there is an
impression in his mind that, upon certain occasions which you mention,
I appear not to have felt sufficient consideration for his ministerial
position; and you would much oblige me, if you should have an
opportunity of doing so, by endeavouring to assure him that nothing has
been farther from my intention then so to act. I have a great regard and
esteem for M. Guizot; I admire his talents and I respect his character,
and I have found him one of the most agreeable men in public affairs,
because he takes large and philosophical views of things, discusses
questions with clearness, and sifts them to the bottom, and seems always
anxious to arrive at the truth. It is very unlikely that I should have
intentionally done any thing that could be personally disagreeable to
him.
You say he mentioned three circumstances with regard to which he seemed
to think I had taken a course unnecessarily embarrassing to him, and I
will try to explain to you my course upon each occasion.
First he adverted to my note of the 2nd November last in reply to M.
Thiers's note of the 8th. of the preceding October. I certainly wish
that I had been able to answer M. Thiers's note sooner, so that the
reply would have been given to him instead of his successor; but I could
not; I was overwhelmed with business of every sort and kind, and had no
command of my time; I did not think however that the fact of M. Thiers
having gone out of office was a reason for withholding my reply; the
note of October contained important doctrines of public law which it was
impossible for the British government to acquiesce in; and silence
would have been construed as acquiescence. I considered it to be my
indispensable duty, as minister of the crown, to place my answer upon
record; and I will fairly own that, though I felt that M. Thiers might
complain of my delay, and might have said that, by postponing my answer
till he was out of office, I prevented him from making a reply, it did
not occur to me at the time that M. Guizot would feel at all embarrassed
by receiving my answer to his predecessor.
When M. Guizot, as ambassador here, read me Thiers's note of the 8
october, he said, if I mistake not, that he was not going to discuss
with me the arguments or the doctrines contained in it, and that he was
not responsible for them. In fact I clearly perceived that M. Guizot
saw through the numerous fallacies and false doctrines which that note
contained. It appeared to me therefore that, as M. Guizot could not
intend to adopt the paradoxes of his predecessor, it would rather assist
than embarass him, in establishing his own position, to have those
paradoxes refuted, and that it was better that this would be done by me
than that the ungracious task of refuting his predecessor should, by my
neglect, devolve upon him.
Secondly M. Guizot mentioned my reply to a question in the house of
commons about the war between Buenos-Ayres and Montevideo. I understood
the question which was put to me to be whether any agreement had been
made between England and France to interpose by force to put an end to
that war; and I said that no formal agreement of any kind had been made
between the two governments; and certainly none of that kind had taken
place, but that a formal application had been made some time before,
by the government of Montevideo, for our mediation, and that we
had instructed M. Mandeville to offer it to the other party, the
Buenos-Ayres government; I ought perhaps also to have mentioned the
conversation which I had had with baron Bourqueney, and in which he
proposed, on the part of his government, that our representatives at
Buenos-Ayres should communicate and assist each other in this matter;
but in the hurry of reply, it did not occur to me that that conversation
came within the reach of the question.
With regard to what I said at Tiverton about the proceedings of the
French troops in Africa, I may have judged wrong; but I chose that
opportunity on purpose, thinking that it was the least objectionable way
of endeavouring to promote the interests of humanity and, if possible,
to put a check to proceedings which have long excited the regret of
all those who attended to them; and it certainly did not occur to me to
consider whether what I said might or might not be agreeable. That every
thing which I said of those proceedings is true, is proved by the French
newspapers, and even by the general orders of French generals. I felt
that the English government could not with property say any thing on the
subject to the government of France; for a like reason I could not,
in my place in parlement, advert to it; but I thought that, when I was
standing as an individual on the hustings before my constituents, I
might use the liberty of speech belonging to the occasion, in order to
draw public attention to proceedings which I think it would be for the
honour of France to put an end to; and if the public discussion which
my speech produced shall have the effect of putting an end to a thousand
part of the human misery which I dwelt upon, I am sure M. Guizot will
forgive me for saying that I should not think that result too dearly
purchased by giving offence to the oldest and dearest friend I may
have in the world. But I am quite sure that M. Guizot regrets these
proceedings as much as I can do; though I well know that, from the
mechanism of government, a minister cannot always control departements
over which he does not himself preside.
We are now about to retire, and in ten days' time our successors will be
in office. I sincerely hope that the French government may find them as
anxious as we have been to maintain the closest possible union between
France and England; more anxious, whatever may have been said or thought
to the contrary, I am quite sure they cannot be.
Yours sincerely.