Fall of Sir Robert Peel--Lord John's Interview with
Peel--Lord John and the Duke--Lord Clarendon and Lord
Aberdeen--Favourable Position of the new Ministry--Lord
Melbourne's Disappointment--Smooth Water--Generous Conduct
of Lord Aberdeen--Restoration of Magistrates removed from
the Commission as Repealers--The Irish Arms Bill--Distrust
of Lord Palmerston--The Arms Bill given up--The Bishop of
Oxford's Exhortations--Differences with France--An Exchange of
Appointments--Squabble between Lord George Bentinck and Lord
Lyndhurst--Macaulay on Junius--Lord Chesterfield--Bretby and
Woburn--Lord John Russell's Moderation--The Spanish Marriage--Bad
Faith of the French Government--Unanimous Censure of the Spanish
Marriages--Lord Bessborough in Ireland--Correspondence on the
Spanish Marriages--Council of the Duchy--The Annexation of Cracow
to Austria--Action of Lewis Ferrand--Strange Intrigue imputed to
Louis Philippe--Conversation with Count Jarnac on the Spanish
Marriages--The Queen and Sir Robert Peel--M. Guizot's Note on the
Spanish Marriages--Decoration of the Peninsular Soldiers--State of
Ireland.
_London, July 4th, 1846._--The day after I went to the House of
Commons, I was much worse, and an attack of fever and gout came on,
such as I never had in my life before. It was during the worst of
my illness that the divisions took place in both Houses, and Peel's
resignation.[130] I need not fatigue myself with writing details which
are generally known, and will be recorded in a hundred places. A few
of the general impressions either less known or more evanescent, it
will suffice to notice. Peel fell with great _éclat_, and amidst
a sort of halo of popularity; but his speech on the occasion,
and a great occasion it was, if he had made the most of it, gave
inexpressible offence, and was, I think, very generally condemned.
Almost every part of it offended somebody; but his unnecessary
panegyric of Cobden, his allusion to the selfish monopolists, and his
clap-trap about cheap bread in the peroration, exasperated to the last
degree his former friends and adherents, were unpalateable to those he
has kept, were condemned by all parties indiscriminately, and above
all deeply offended the Duke of Wellington. He might have wound up
with something much more becoming, dignified, and conciliatory; but
his taste, or his temper, or his judgement, were completely in fault,
and he marred all the grace and dignity of his final address, and
left a bad, when he might so easily have stamped a good, impression.
With this exception his conduct has been admirable, and has won the
esteem of his successors. Such a transfer of power from one Minister
to another the world never saw before--no rivalry, no mortification,
no disappointment, no triumph, no coldness; all has been civility,
cordiality, and the expression of feelings, not merely amicable, but
cordial.
[Sidenote: LORD ABERDEEN AND LORD CLARENDON.]
Lord John Russell went to Peel and was with him an hour. The Duke of
Bedford told me the conversation was most curious; on Peel's part,
cordial and unreserved, open beyond anything that Lord John could
have expected, telling him everything that it could be useful to
him to know, much more than he need have done; unqualified promises
of support, and, in short, everything that was most handsome and
satisfactory. He said he would tell me more details another day. Not
long after, Lord John called on the Duke of Wellington, who received
him with equal frankness and cordiality, talked over everything that
had passed, said that his own political career was at an end, that
his age and the progress of events would deter him from ever taking
a part any more, that he should speak no more in the House of Lords,
except upon matters relating to his own department, or such questions
as Gough's and Hardinge's pensions; talked of Peel, and said he did
not believe he contemplated ever coming back to office, and did not
think he ever could. This conversation was just as satisfactory as
the other. About the same time Clarendon had a conversation with
Aberdeen similar in spirit and meaning. Aberdeen told him that they
might count upon both his support and Peel's; that though it was
impossible to foresee every political contingency and necessity that
might occur, both he and Peel quitted office with a resolution never
to take it again; that they were no longer young, and the labours and
anxieties of office were so great that they had no desire ever again
to encounter them. He told Clarendon, moreover, that, of all the new
Cabinet, it was to _him_ that the Queen and the Prince looked with
the greatest confidence. They cared little for any of the others, but
had a great opinion of him, and a great reliance on him, and mainly
counted on his judgement and influence to make matters go on smoothly
abroad. He said that Peel entertained the same opinion, and had said
that Clarendon in the Cabinet was the best security for peace. This,
for which Clarendon was not at all prepared, it was very kind of
Aberdeen to tell him, and it is certainly very important, and gives
him a fund of secret strength and influence, which may hereafter be
very valuable and important to him. To me it is all intelligible
enough. The Queen and Prince care more about foreign affairs than
anything else, and have always had more to do with Aberdeen than
any of the Ministers, except Peel. Throughout Aberdeen's foreign
administration, Clarendon has constantly acted in concert with him,
and has made his position in the House of Lords a bed of roses. Never
was there a Minister for Foreign Affairs who had such an easy time
of it. He no doubt talked often of Clarendon to the Queen, praised
his sense and moderation, and acknowledged his constant obligations
to him. This (added probably to a liking for his society) created
a favourable impression. Small as is the direct authority of the
Sovereign, it is by no means inconvenient or unimportant to have her
preference and good will. It is a source of strength, and it may often
turn a balance; in short, it is a very good thing and may possibly
hereafter be turned to great account. In spite of small difficulties,
rival pretensions, dissatisfactions, and disappointments here and
there, the formation of the Government has gone on smoothly. Lord
Grey made no difficulties, but, on the contrary, was conciliatory, and
apologetical. He said everything was changed since last December, and
he owned that he had often been in the wrong when he had disturbed the
harmony of the Cabinet in Lord Melbourne's time.
The Protectionists don't seem to know what to do; they are more
indignant than ever with Peel; they are disgusted at their overtures
not being accepted by the Whig Government; they are provoked
exceedingly at places having been offered to Dalhousie, Sidney
Herbert, and Lincoln, thus marking more strongly the determination of
John Russell to look for support to Peel and his friends, and not to
them. Nevertheless their organ and whipper-in, Major Beresford, told
one of the Whig people (to be told to Lord John) that after having
contributed to drive Peel out, and thereby forced the Government on
Lord John, they should not feel justified in raising any opposition
to his Government, so that, in fact, for the present there is no
Opposition of any sort or kind; everybody seems to be acquiescent, and
the swords are universally sheathed. So curious a change in so short a
time was never seen. A few weeks ago hundreds of people fancied Peel
would never go out, they could not tell why, but they insisted that
the difficulty of forming another Government, and its weakness when
formed, would be insurmountable. If Lord John came in, how was he to
stay in? everybody asked, and the most sanguine Whigs did not pretend
to answer and explain how, and generally professed no wish to turn out
Peel. Well, Lord John comes in, forms a very strong Government with
unparalleled facility, receives every assistance and every assurance
of support from the Ministers he has turned out, finds himself not
only without an organised Opposition in Parliament, but without an
enemy or a malcontent in any quarter. His advent to power is received,
in the country at least, with acquiescence, if not with delight; he
has no difficulties to encounter, no legacy of embarrassments to
perplex him, and as far as all appearances go, his Government is, and
for some time at least promises to be, the strongest the country has
ever seen.[131]
[Footnote 130: [The third reading of the Corn Bill was carried in
the House of Lords on June 25; but on the same night the Ministers
were defeated in the House of Commons on the second reading of the
Irish Coercion Bill by a majority of 292 to 219. Sir Robert Peel
announced to the House on June 29 that he had resigned office, and
that Lord John Russell had undertaken to form a new Administration.
It was on this occasion that Sir Robert Peel delivered his
celebrated eulogy of Richard Cobden. The concluding words of his
speech on that night were afterwards inscribed on the base of one
of the numerous statues raised in honour of this great Minister.]]
[Footnote 131: [Lord John Russell's Administration, which lasted
from June 1846 till February 1852, was composed as follows:
First Lord of the Treasury Lord John Russell.
Lord Chancellor Lord Cottenham.
Lord President of the Council Marquis of Lansdowne.
Lord Privy Seal Earl of Minto.
Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir Charles Wood.
Home Secretary Sir George Grey.
Foreign Secretary Viscount Palmerston.
Colonial Secretary Earl Grey.
Secretary at War Right Hon. Fox Maule.
Board of Control Sir John Hobhouse.
Board of Trade Earl of Clarendon.
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Lord Campbell.
Postmaster-General Marquis of Clanricarde.
First Lord of the Admiralty Lord Auckland.
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Earl of Bessborough.
Chief Secretary for Ireland Mr. Labouchere (who afterwards
succeeded Lord Dalhousie as
Vice-President of the Board
of Trade).]]
[Sidenote: LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S ADMINISTRATION.]
_July 9th._--The Duke of Bedford comes here most days and tells me
what is going on, but the only thing worth recording is what he told
me about Melbourne, which is curious. It seems he was mortified at
not having a place offered him in the new Cabinet! It came out thus.
The Duke was with George Anson, when the latter showed him a letter
he had received from Melbourne, in which he said that nothing had
been offered to him; and though he could not have taken a very active
employment (such as Secretary of State, for instance), that there were
places he might have held, and of which he should have liked at least
to have had the offer. The Duke told Lord John, and Lord John took an
opportunity, without appearing to know anything of this letter, to
write to Melbourne and tell him the arrangements he had made, and then
added that he had not proposed to him to take any office, because he
knew that it was essential to his health that he should abstain from
taking any active part in politics, and this alone had deterred him
from proposing to him to be Privy Seal. This pacified him; but how
extraordinary his thinking of office, and, after having been Prime
Minister, to wish to join his old colleagues in a subordinate capacity
and under another head!
_July 14th._--All things have apparently gone very smoothly with
the new Government. They have been everywhere re-elected without
difficulty, and there seems universal contentment in the country. Lord
John Russell was extraordinarily well received in the City the other
day at a great dinner given to Ibrahim Pasha, and they have concluded
an alliance with the leviathan of the press--the 'Times'--which
gives them a temperate, judicious, but very useful support. The
'Morning Chronicle' is furious at seeing the position of the 'Times'
_vis-à-vis_ of the Government, and the editor went to John Russell
to remonstrate, but he got no satisfaction. He merely replied he did
not wish to have any _Government_ paper, but could not repudiate the
support of the 'Times.' He remembers that the 'Morning Chronicle' was
the paper of Palmerston, devoted exclusively to him, and not that of
the Government. Aberdeen has behaved beautifully to Palmerston. He
desired to have an interview with him, when he said, 'When I came
into office five years ago, you wanted to come back again and turn me
out, and you accordingly attacked me in every way you could, as you
had a perfect right to do. Circumstances are very different now. I do
not want to turn you out, and I never mean to come into office again,
and I am therefore come to tell you that I am ready to give you every
information that may be of use to you, and every assistance I can. I
have been so long in office that there are many matters of interest,
on which it may be of great use to you to receive information from me;
and if you will ask me any questions, I will tell you all I can that
you may desire to know, and everything that occurs to me as desirable
you should know.' Palmerston was exceedingly touched at this frank
and generous behaviour, and they had a conversation of two hours.
Nothing can be more honourable and more patriotic than this. One feels
a pride and satisfaction in such examples among our public men. It is
peculiarly generous in Aberdeen, because Palmerston has incessantly
assailed him with great bitterness, and (though he failed) endeavoured
to bring his administration of Foreign Affairs into discredit and
contempt.
[Sidenote: THE REPEAL MAGISTRATES RESTORED.]
_Brighton, July 18th._--The Government have begun very well; they got
a large majority on Gough's and Hardinge's annuities in the House of
Lords; the Duke of Wellington very friendly and speaking very well. In
the House of Commons, in reply to interpellations of Tom Duncombe's
and Denison's, Lord John made a very clever and judicious speech,
declaratory of his principles and intentions. However, there is a
question now in agitation, which, I think, will be very injurious
to the Government; it is that of restoring the Repeal magistrates
removed by the late Government. They propose to restore the Orangemen
also, but there are only four of the latter and sixty of the former.
It was to be discussed in the Cabinet yesterday, and, I fear, would
be decided in the affirmative, for all the Irish Government and a
majority of the English seem to be for it. I can conceive nothing so
calculated to excite and knit together the Tories in opposition, and
I believe it would have a very bad effect here; besides, it would
make it impossible for them to dismiss any man again, no matter how
violent his language or conduct. It will infallibly be represented as
an indication of the intention of the Government to administer Irish
affairs through and in conjunction with Conciliation Hall; and it is
impossible it should not give encouragement to Repeal, when it is
found that the profession of Repeal principles is no longer considered
as a disqualification, but is, to say the least of it, tolerated
by the Government. The Protectionists, while professing amicable
sentiments towards the new Government, disclaiming all desire to turn
them out, and talking of a fair trial, are all the time very busy in
rallying and remodelling the party, and desire nothing better than a
good and popular ground of opposition. I do not know any that could be
offered to them more plausible and available than this.
_August 13th._--I had no inclination to write while I was at Brighton
and Goodwood, and have had little or nothing to say since I came to
town. At Goodwood, Lord Stanley was laid up with the gout; the Duke
of Richmond was as violent and talkative as usual, and incessantly
clamouring against Peel, the renegades, and the Bill, and arranging
'Cabinets' to be held in Stanley's bedroom, with his Protectionist
friends--George Bentinck, Beaufort, Stradbroke, and Eglinton,
Stanley's new friends! The Government got a much better division in
the House of Commons on the sugar duties than they expected, but the
Lords were very near playing them a very shabby trick. Lord Stanley
and his party had a meeting, at which they resolved not to divide in
the Lords. This resolution Stanley imparted to Bessborough, and begged
him to arrange matters in such a manner as to enable him to get away
to Scotland as soon as possible. This Bessborough did, and he got the
House of Commons to sit on Saturday (very unusual), in order to send
the Bill up to the Lords on Monday, and then to take the debate (also
unusual) on the _first_ reading. Meanwhile, Brougham, who had gone
to Westmoreland, returned, intending to speak and to divide on the
Bill. The debate came on with a general understanding there should
be no division. Stanley made a speech, and so did Brougham, and, at
the end of the night, Stanley said that though he had no intention of
dividing the House, if anybody else did, he should vote with them.
The Government was in a minority in the House, and in a great fright
they sent emissaries all over the town to bring Peers down. The Duke
of Devonshire was brought from the Opera, and Granville from his bed,
and they got enough to make it not worth while for the Opposition to
divide.
This matter is settled, but there is another still pending, much
more serious, and which has occasioned great discontent among the
friends of Government, great perplexity to the Government itself, and
done much mischief. This is the Irish Arms Bill, which Labouchere
has proposed to renew for nine months. The resolution to do this
was hastily taken, without much consideration on the part of the
Government, without consulting their friends, and in consequence of
the unanimous opinion of the Irish Government, law officers and all,
that it is necessary. When this opinion was notified to John Russell,
he at once assented to the renewal, though not liking it. It was very
ill-received by his adherents, and has thrown the Government into
great embarrassment. They are now trying to make it palateable by
cancelling some of the strongest clauses, the effect of which is to
exasperate Bessborough[132] (who talks of not going unless they are
retained) without much conciliating others. It is not yet settled how
it is to end, but everybody connected with the Government feels that
it has been a very unfortunate and damaging occurrence.
[Sidenote: INCIPIENT DISPUTES WITH FRANCE.]
X---- has been here this morning to talk of this and many other things.
He says that already many disagreeable things are occurring, and
there are elements of disunion and causes of danger in operation. The
first of these originates with Palmerston. The French complain that
Palmerston has already begun to disturb the harmony which subsisted
in Aberdeen's time, and to alter the amicable relations which the
latter had established. They complain of his tone and manner, and of
what he was saying and doing at Madrid in reference to Louis Philippe,
who was in a state of violent excitement on the subject, so much so
that he had suddenly sent for Guizot, who was one hundred miles off,
and ordered Jarnac[133] to repair to Paris. Jarnac asked if he might
see Lord John and speak to him on the subject. He said he knew how
jealous Palmerston was of any diplomatic communications with anybody
but himself. Lord John, however, consented to receive him; but Jarnac
being meanwhile ordered off to Paris, did not see Lord John till his
return. He then told him several things, I know not what, which it
seems Lord John was not previously aware of, and he promised to speak
to Palmerston on the subject. X---- said Lord John was well disposed
to interfere in foreign affairs, and indeed as a Prime Minister
ought in every department; but what he feared was that he would not
find time, and that he would be overwhelmed with the multifarious
functions that were heaped upon him, the endless correspondence, the
innumerable deputations, and the attendance in the House of Commons,
where, for example, he was kept yesterday from twelve in the morning
to twelve at night. All this he thinks will be too much for his
health and strength, and above all will baffle his good intention of
overlooking and controlling the other departments. It appears that
he has got on very good terms with the Queen, whose displeasure has
subsided. The Ministers, however, find the Prince in a very different
situation from that in which they left him, more prominent, more
important, with increased authority. This was the result of Peel's
and Aberdeen's administration, and their continual care and attention
to all his wishes and the Queen's. They must take things as they
find them. These details show that even in so short a time, under
all the apparent smoothness on the surface, there are jealousies and
suspicions rankling, and difficulties preparing, which may at any time
break out and shake the Government to pieces. If this catastrophe
happens, Palmerston will be the cause of it; he is evidently
dissatisfied and suspicious, and his colleagues are suspicious of him.
The Protectionists are dying to entice him on their side; his family
desire no better, and would like of all things to see the Whig Cabinet
fall to pieces, and a Protectionist Cabinet formed, with Palmerston
its leader in the House of Commons. Such a combination is by no means
impossible, hardly improbable.
[Footnote 132: [Lord Bessborough had just been declared
Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Not long before he had declared that
Ireland could not be governed without restrictive measures; but it
was on the Irish Coercion Bill that the Whigs had turned out the
late Government.]]
[Footnote 133: [Philippe de Rohan Chabot, Comte de Jarnac, was at
this time First Secretary of the French Embassy in London.]]
_August 18th._--Last night John Russell gave up the Arms Bill
altogether. It was the best course he had left; but it has been an
unlucky affair altogether. Very bad accounts of potatoes all over the
country, nearly total destruction, in Ireland, and now the disease is
ravaging Scotland and England.
[Sidenote: BISHOP WILBERFORCE.]
Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford, made a very brilliant speech a few
nights ago on the Sugar Bill. As his father's son he thought it
necessary to make an Anti-Slavery oration; it was very able and
eloquent, and in tone and manner so well regulated as to show that
he has profited by the criticisms which were made on his former
speeches. He is certainly a remarkable man, full of cleverness and
vivacity, very unlike a Churchman in society and in Parliament, and
yet he must be deficient in that worldly tact which it might be
thought he would most surely have acquired. I judge of this from what
has passed between him and myself, which is certainly extraordinary.
I met him for the first time the year before last at the Grange,
where I spent a couple of days with him, and afterwards I dined once
or twice in his company, but never had much conversation with him.
One morning I met him at breakfast at Macaulay's (this year), and
shortly afterwards he asked me to breakfast with him, which I did.
This is all the intercourse I ever had with him, never amounting to
anything like intimacy. Just as I was recovering from my illness, Lord
Lansdowne sent me a letter from the Bishop about the Eton College
case,[134] which was pending before the Privy Council, entreating
an early decision of it. I put the matter in train, and a few days
after I went to Brighton. Just before I went the Bishop called at my
house, but I was out, and after I got to Brighton I heard that he had
called again, and expressed some disappointment at not having seen me.
Meanwhile I learnt that a day was fixed for the hearing of his case.
Never imagining that he had called on me for any other purpose than
to urge this matter, by no means giving him credit for any especial
interest in my health, but wishing to be very civil to him, I wrote
him a letter from Brighton, saying that I concluded he had called on
me about the Eton College case, and that I therefore wished to inform
him that a day was fixed for the argument. I received a letter from
him by return of post, in which he told me that that was not his
object in calling on me; that he had heard I had been dangerously ill,
and that he had called to tender his spiritual advice and aid, and
(in a rather commonplace style of writing) he urged me to listen to
his religious exhortations. In the whole course of my life I never
was so astonished, for he was about the last clergyman from whom I
should have expected such an overture, and my acquaintance with him
was so slight, that I could not conceive why he had selected me as
the subject of a spiritual experiment. I was not a little puzzled
how to reply to him. I determined, however, to take his letter in
excellent part, to give him credit for the best motive, to express
much gratitude, but to decline entering with him into any religious
discussion; and to give him to understand, though with great civility,
that his proposal was extraordinary and uncalled for. I think I
succeeded tolerably well; but he never took any notice of my answer,
so I do not know what he felt upon it, and I have not seen him since.
[Footnote 134: [Eton College was a peculiar of the diocese of Ely.
A scheme had been prepared by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to
transfer it to the diocese of Oxford, which Bishop Wilberforce was
very anxious to promote. Ely objected, and the case was argued
before the Privy Council.]]
_August 19th._--I asked Clarendon yesterday what it is they complain
of in Palmerston. He said 'Something about Spain, that we do not put
an absolute veto on a Coburg.'[135] He said the King had a monomania
on this subject, and that Guizot rather encouraged him than not, in
order that by humouring him on this point he might have his own way
on all others. As to matters going on just as they did with Aberdeen,
that is impossible, nor is it desirable, for Aberdeen transacted the
business of the two countries by private letters between himself and
Guizot, not employing his own agents at all, and consequently there is
no record whatever of this correspondence in the Foreign Office.
[Sidenote: AN EXCHANGE OF PATRONAGE.]
There was a curious occurrence in the House of Commons yesterday
morning and the evening before. George Bentinck, who employs what
is left of the Session in collecting matter for assailing the late
Government, and has brought forward divers cases of jobs or blunders
against them, made a furious attack upon the appointment to an Indian
judgeship, &c., which was a job of Lyndhurst's and Brougham's, and,
in a smaller way, of Ripon's, though after all not a very flagitious
one.[136] He fired, however, into the Treasury Bench, not caring
whom he hit provided his shot told on some of them; but Disraeli,
who has his own reasons for courting Lyndhurst, was determined to
throw a shield over him, so he got up, and (though there could be no
doubt that the real jobber, for whose pleasure it was all done, was
Lyndhurst)[137] pronounced a flaming panegyric on the ex-Chancellor,
and said there could be no doubt he would come quite clear out of the
affair. This was ridiculous enough, but in the course of the night
George Bentinck found out, as he thought, that he had made a mistake,
and that the living which he accused Ripon of having got from the
Chancellor was not in the Chancellor's gift, but in the gift of one
of Ripon's relations. Down he went to the House of Commons in a great
hurry, and begged the Speaker to call on him as soon as he took the
Chair. He got up, and retracted what he had said with all sorts of
expressions of regret, for which he got mighty credit and praise. But
he had hardly sat down when a letter was brought him with information
that he had been quite right in his original statement, that the
'Clergy List' was wrong, and the living was in the gift of the
Chancellor, and that there was nothing for him to retract.
[Footnote 135: [Lord Palmerston had not been many days in office
before the disputes, which culminated in the great and fatal
quarrel about the Queen of Spain's marriage, began. The French were
informed, and believed, that Sir Henry Bulwer, our Minister at
Madrid, was intriguing to bring about the Queen's marriage with a
Coburg Prince, which was a departure from the understanding entered
into at the Château d'Eu; and the language of Lord Palmerston
led them to believe also that the British Secretary of State was
supporting Bulwer.]]
[Footnote 136: [Lord Lyndhurst was accused of having made an
exchange with Lord Ripon of an Indian judgeship for a living on
Lord Ripon's estate; but both appointments were in themselves open
to no sort of objection.]]
[Footnote 137: The living was in Lord Ripon's own park, and close
to his house. It was no more a job than when Lord Lyndhurst gave
the living of Kenilworth to Lord Clarendon's brother, because it
was on his own property also.]
_August 20th._--Last night Lyndhurst came down to the House of Lords,
and in a towering passion delivered a tremendous philippic against
George Bentinck for his attack on him. It was extraordinarily powerful
and eloquent, but language so bitter was hardly ever heard in the
House of Lords. The matter when sifted and explained does not after
all appear to have been much of a job, if at all. The most that can
be said is that there was something wrong in the mode of appointment;
but this appears to have been an error sanctioned by usage, and common
to all Governments.
_August 23rd._--George Bentinck, who has a sort of bulldog resolution
that nothing daunts or silences, made a reply to Lyndhurst's terrific
attack on him the previous night. He reiterated the charges and
attempted to make them out, just as he did in Peel's case, but not
very successfully. The most curious part of his speech was a strange
story he told of Lyndhurst having sent his secretary and an eminent
merchant to him on the morning of the 10th of July, with a proposition
to join Lyndhurst and certain of his colleagues in the formation of a
Government. As the speech is reported it does not appear very clearly
how, or by whom, or with what object this Government was to be formed.
This revelation, however, adds to the interest of the squabble, and
will probably elicit something more from Lyndhurst or somebody.
Disraeli, who must look and feel very foolish between his old and his
new friend, said not a word.
Yesterday morning I had a visit from Jarnac, who brought me a letter
addressed by the King to Guizot, in answer to one I had sent to Madame
de Lieven--avowedly in answer, for he says, 'I return you the letter,'
and then proceeds to comment on it. His Majesty defends himself from
the charge (which he considers as conveyed in my letter) of having
originated the article upon Clarendon, complains of his having been
misrepresented, boasts of his having refused to allow either of his
sons to marry the Queen of Spain, though it was the wish of both
Queens and of the country (I think he added of the country, but am
not quite certain), and gave many assurances of his good opinion of
Clarendon. This letter was sent over to be shown to Clarendon and to
me, and Jarnac had been with him already. Such an elaborate answer,
which the King himself took the trouble to write, shows how keenly
he felt the charge. I had a long conversation with Jarnac about this
matter, about Palmerston, the relations of the two countries and the
press, touching which he laboured to convince me that the 'Journal
des Débats' was not in the confidence of the French Government, and
that though Guizot did occasionally cause an article to be inserted
in it, the connexion of the Government with the paper was by no means
so close as I supposed. He expressed himself well satisfied with
Palmerston, and admitted that matters could not go on exactly as they
had done with Aberdeen, but might, nevertheless, be conducted very
amicably.
[Sidenote: LORD LYNDHURST AND LORD GEORGE BENTINCK.]
_August 25th._--On Saturday morning Lyndhurst replied to George
Bentinck's speech, and explained the circumstances of his message,
a very clear statement, and telling a story entirely at variance
with that of George Bentinck. He produced the evidence of his
messenger (which he said he had written down from his dictation) in
corroboration of his own statement. Up to this time George Bentinck
has made no rejoinder to this. Yesterday Lyndhurst read a letter
he had received from Peel on this matter, which, though ostensibly
written to correct a misrepresentation in the 'Standard,' seems really
to have been for the purpose of making known to the world that he
refused to be any party to an attempt to reconcile the quarrel and
reconstruct the Tory party.
_The Grove, September 7th._--Went to Panshanger on Monday to meet
Rogers, Milnes, Morpeth, W. Cowper, Lady Sandwich, and some others,
pleasant enough.
There was an _Alliance_[138] meeting at Hertford on Tuesday with some
French and German orators, who harangued in English. I did not go.
I came here on Friday; half the Cabinet are here. John Russell, the
Woods, the Greys, Macaulay, very agreeable; capital talk, Macaulay
in great force. If it were possible to recollect all the stories,
anecdotes, jests, and scraps of poetry and prose he has given us, it
would all be well worth writing down. Nothing is so rare as to find
something he does not know; but he was not aware that there had
been a contest for ecclesiastical supremacy between the Archbishops
of Canterbury and York. He told me this morning that when he was in
the War Office he found what he considers a piece of corroborative
evidence to prove that Francis was Junius, or rather he found a
difficulty done away with. In one of his letters to Draper he asks him
if he did not swear that he received no other pension before he could
take his other appointments. Draper replied he took no such oath. As
Francis was a chief clerk in the War Office he must have had official
knowledge of the practice, and it seemed strange he should charge
Draper with what he must (or might) know to be untrue. But it turned
out that Draper received his pension from the Irish establishment,
where no oath was required. Francis might very well suppose that the
custom was the same in Ireland, and knowing very well what it was in
England, he would naturally think that he had caught Sir W. Draper
tripping. Macaulay said he had not a shadow of doubt that Francis was
Junius. We have been doing our best to persuade John Russell to induce
the Queen to go to Ireland, but he is very obstinate and will not hear
of it; he gives the worst reasons in the world, but there is no moving
him.
[Footnote 138: 'Alliance' of all Christian sects.]
_Woburn Abbey, September 16th._--To London last Monday week, on
Wednesday to Bretby, on Monday to this place. It makes me sad to see
Bretby and the mode of life there: idleness, folly, waste, and a
constant progress to ruin; a princely fortune dilapidated by sheer
indolence, because the obstinate spoiled owner will neither look
into his affairs, nor let anybody else look into them. He lies in
bed half the day, and rises to run after pleasure in whatever shape
he can pursue it; abhors business, and has no sense of duty; suffers
himself to be cheated and governed by an agent, and thus drifts away
to destruction. Such is the heir of the famous Lord Chesterfield,
and the destiny of his great estate. Here we have a very different
prospect. This great and magnificent place, which is like a kingdom,
is regulated with an order and an economy, without parsimony, which
is worthy and pleasant to behold. When the details are looked into,
the whole thing is truly vast and grand. Such magnificence in house,
park, and gardens, such buildings all over the estate, farmhouses
fit for gentlemen and intended for men of education and knowledge,
vast workshops where everything is done that is required for the
property, carpenters, ironmongers, painters and glaziers, three
hundred artificers in the employment of the Duke, and paid every
Saturday night. All this presents a striking contrast to the other
establishment, and the consequence is that the Duke of Bedford is
every day making his colossal fortune greater and greater.
[Sidenote: BRETBY AND WOBURN.]
Lord John went away the day I came. He is in high spirits, on good
terms with the Queen, and well satisfied with the political aspect of
his affairs. He seems very honourably and wisely disposed, meaning
well and conscientiously, with no rash designs and extravagant
projects, but, on the contrary, desirous of doing nothing but what
public opinion and public necessity really demand, and determined
to avoid all extremes, such as might rouse any great interest to
a furious opposition against him. He resists a dissolution, which
is strenuously urged upon him by Ellice and others. He seems to be
wonderfully free from any spirit of jobbing and favouritism in his
appointments of all sorts, and, without losing sight of party and
political ties and obligations, to be resolved to do what is right and
just and good for the public service. It is curious to see what good
terms he is on with the Duke of Wellington, who is much more cordial
and communicative with him than he was with his former colleagues. But
Lord John is very civil and deferential to him, and he has no reason
to find fault with the Whig Minister who always has been a Whig; he
could not forgive his old friends for their new Whiggism, which was
odious to him, and in which he found himself involved against his
inclination.
They are all very much annoyed at the Montpensier marriage, and the
way in which Louis Philippe has carried his point. They say that he
has effected it by a long course of duplicity and intrigue, but that
Aberdeen had suffered the marriage question to go so far, that they
had not time or power to stop it. But Clarendon, who told me this,
had just before told me that a proposition had come from France for
some joint action about the Queen's marriage, and that Palmerston
left this unanswered for above a month. At last Clarendon received
a letter from William Hervey,[139] complaining of this, and saying
how mischievous it was, which letter he took to John Russell, and
resolved to urge him to press Palmerston to send an answer. Lord John
pulled out of his pocket one he had received from Normanby to the same
effect. He did speak to Palmerston after (or, indeed, it may have
been before) Palmerston wrote a despatch to Bulwer, which Clarendon
said was quite admirable; but long before this reached Madrid the
mischief was done. Now I find there is a difference between Palmerston
and Jarnac about some matter of fact, and on the whole matter our
Government considers that they have been deceived and ill-used, and
that the independence of Spain, in which we have an interest, is about
to be completely sacrificed. It is, however, now too late for us to
take any energetic steps to prevent this marriage, and Palmerston,
however angry, seems to take a very dispassionate and prudent view of
the situation. But there is and must be an end of the intimacy between
the two Governments, and probably between the two Courts, for the
Queen and Prince Albert partake of the indignation and resentment of
her Ministers. I confess I can feel none of the apprehensions that my
friends do. I don't believe the influence of France will be increased
in Spain by the marriage; more likely the reverse; and if it were,
I do not see how it ever can be exercised in a manner injurious to
us. There never can be a renewal of the family compact. Spain has no
colonies except Cuba and no navy, nor will have any for many years
to come; the old dangers that excited the alarm and indignation of
Chatham have long ceased to exist or to be possible. I believe that
it will be attended with no greater evil (but that is a great one)
than the revival of jealous, semi-hostile feelings between France
and England, and the termination of that state of cordiality and
confidence which have been, and would be, instrumental in maintaining
the peace of the world.
[Footnote 139: [Lord William Hervey was then First Secretary of the
Embassy in Paris.]]
[Sidenote: THE SPANISH MARRIAGES.]
_September 24th._--Went to Broadlands on Friday last. Palmerston
was so engaged, messengers arriving all day long, that there was
no possibility of conversing with him for some time; but on Sunday
morning, after breakfast, he gave me a very clear and succinct account
of the Spanish marriage question. He is very much disconcerted, and
very indignant at all that has taken place, and he thinks that the
consequences will be, sooner or later, very mischievous. It seems that
the question of the Montpensier marriage had been touched upon some
time ago, but Guizot gave assurances to Aberdeen, and Louis Philippe
did the same to the Queen, that there should be no question of it
till the Queen of Spain was married and had got children (in the
plural[140]). It was therefore impossible not to rely on an engagement
so positive as this. Meanwhile the different actors in this drama seem
to have been pulling different ways, and all sorts of intrigues were
going on both at Paris and Madrid. Christina wanted the Queen to marry
the Coburg Prince, and urged us to support this marriage. We refused.
Louis Philippe was violently against this match, which he affected
to consider as an English object, besides that he is not a Bourbon.
The French Government instructed Jarnac to go on offering to settle
the matter in concert with us, but at the same time, and without any
instruction to us, they were concerting the scene that was acted at
Madrid, and preparing for the simultaneous announcement of the two
marriages. Palmerston told Jarnac that we would have no concern with
the Coburg candidate as Christina wished. If we had chosen to consent
to this, and to connive at his being sent at once to Madrid and the
match concluded, Palmerston says we could have made a bargain with
Christina, and got her to prevent the Montpensier marriage, but this
would have savoured of intrigue on our part, and have been false
and underhand, the same sort of conduct that we now reproach France
for having been guilty of. Palmerston therefore said to Jarnac, 'Why
don't you at once take one of the Spanish princes, Don Francisco's
sons? Of the two, Don Enrique seems the least objectionable, and would
be preferred by Queen Isabella to his brother, whom she dislikes.
We are quite ready to concur with you in this settlement and to
communicate with the Spanish Government accordingly.' Jarnac appeared
to acquiesce, but Palmerston says that it is quite clear that this did
not suit Louis Philippe, and that he thought Enrique so much _better
a man_, better endowed morally and physically, than his brother, that
as soon as he found we were ready to join in settling such a marriage,
he sent off orders to Madrid at once to clinch the affair with the
Duke of Cadiz. All this was done without any intimation to us of his
designs; on the contrary, Jarnac was deceiving Palmerston here, at
the very time all this intrigue was working at Madrid. The nocturnal
Council was held, and the young Queen compelled, much against her
inclination, to accept as her husband a miserable creature, whom
she dislikes and despises. They told her if she did not take him
she should not be married at all. He is known to be imbecile, and
supposed to be impotent; but it is possible in this latter respect
the world may be mistaken, and that he may be the means, after all,
of continuing a race of imbeciles, of which the Royal family of Spain
has generally consisted. As to the other child, though policy would
forbid the banns, she is well enough off. The Duc de Montpensier is
probably a far better husband in all ways than she would have found
elsewhere, and to be transplanted to Paris and made a member of such a
family as that of Louis Philippe, people who have brains and hearts,
is a blessed lot for her in comparison with that of her elder sister.
But without any question the manner in which all this has been done
is odious and offensive to the last degree, and of necessity puts an
end to all the intimacy which has existed between the two Governments
and the two Courts. It has been a great damper to the Queen's
_engouement_ for the House of Orleans, for she fully enters into the
feelings and sentiments of her Ministers upon the whole question. She
wrote to the Queen of the French a letter, in which (though I suppose
in very measured terms) she made known her thoughts. We have done all
we can do with propriety and dignity in such a case. The long and
short of it is that we have been tricked and deceived, but we cannot
quarrel outright about it. We have remonstrated and given our opinion
upon it, but the matter has now proceeded too far to be stopped, and
Louis Philippe would not be such a fool as not to clutch the prize,
when he has subjected himself to all the odium, nor could he now
retract if he would.
[Sidenote: SPANISH INTRIGUES.]
At Madrid and in Spain the French alliance is very unpopular, but the
Government is sold to Christina; the Cabinet is nothing but a knot
of her satellites; Munoz, Isturitz, Mon, and Pidal are all leagued
together with Bresson, the French Ambassador; the Cortes is packed,
the Press is gagged; the people cannot make themselves heard. The
elements of disorder are, however, scattered about. In the midst of
a chaos of intrigue and anger and dissatisfaction, the Pretender
has escaped from France, and Narvaez has been recalled to Madrid.
He goes with the privity of the King, and the two worthies have an
understanding together; but while the wily King thinks to make the
brutal Spaniard his tool, the Spaniard, not less wily, quite as
unscrupulous, more passionate and vindictive, and swelling with an
ambition of his own, is gone back with a resolution to play a very
different part from what is expected of him--to throw over Louis
Philippe and Christina, rouse the sentiment of national independence
and hatred of France, and deliver his country from the yoke of French
domination or influence.
I saw Clarendon for a few minutes on Tuesday, who showed me a very
curious and by no means ill-written letter from Narvaez, setting forth
these designs, but saying that he must proceed with great caution
in order to ensure success. This letter was written in Spanish to
Madame Marliani at Paris (from whom and her husband he seems to
have no secrets), and she translated it into French and sent it to
Clarendon. It will be exceedingly curious to watch the progress of
these complicated affairs. Louis Philippe, while accomplishing his
darling scheme, may find that he has over-reached himself and plunged
into a sea of troubles. Both Palmerston and Clarendon attach far
greater political importance to the Montpensier marriage than I am
disposed to do; they think it will rivet French influence on Spain.
I think (though it _may_ do so) that it is more likely to arouse and
keep alive the jealousy of French influence. There can be no doubt
that it is the interest of Louis Philippe to prevent the triumph of
constitutional principles in Spain, and to make the Government as
arbitrary as he can; while it is ours to promote their ascendency,
because the more free the nation becomes, the less will they endure
the domination of France. He has seen this all along, and I have not
much doubt that what Palmerston told me about the Quadruple Alliance
is true. He said that when he proposed it to Talleyrand, the latter
jumped at it. He said, 'This is the very thing we most desire. What I
want is to sign something, no matter what, with you, that our names
should appear together in some public act demonstrative of our union.'
Accordingly the Quadruple treaty was signed. It answered the end. The
other Governments took alarm at the union between France and England,
and began to make advances to France. Then Louis Philippe, having got
all the good he expected out of this treaty, turned his thoughts to
the object of improving his relations with the other Powers who had
hitherto treated him so coldly. Pozzo went to him and remonstrated
with him on the Quadruple treaty, and he replied (so Palmerston says),
'Mon cher, je vous donne ma parole d'honneur que je n'ai signé le
traité que pour ne pas l'exécuter.' It seems hardly credible that
he should have so broadly announced his intentions, but whether he
said it or no, he acted in exact conformity with the speech that is
attributed to him, for it was nothing but the connivance of the French
Government in the transport of stores from France to the Carlists
which kept the war alive so long, and as soon as that connivance
ceased the war was brought to an end. Jarnac tells people here that
Palmerston wanted the Coburg alliance, which is certainly false, and
he must know it to be so. He went down to Broadlands the other day
with M. Dumont, and on that occasion Palmerston is said to have told
him that 'it was the first time a King of France had broken his word,'
but it is hardly possible he should have said this, though it may be
true.[141]
[Sidenote: THE QUEEN'S INTEREST IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS.]
Between this Spanish question and the increasing destitution in
Ireland, the Government are very uneasy, and Lord John particularly
is very nervous and alarmed. They are now discussing the question of
calling Parliament together in order to ask for money, for the Irish
are clamorous for money, and Lord John is indisposed to make any
considerable advances without the sanction of Parliament, but it would
be very unpopular and very impolitic to assemble Parliament, and for
such a purpose.
[Footnote 140: They say 'had issue,' which means _a_ child.]
[Footnote 141: It was true.]
_October 7th._--At the Grove the last two days, with Lord
and Lady Lansdowne, Panizzi, and a Spaniard with a name like
this--Buschenthal,[142] really an Alsatian, I believe, and the
Hollands. Clarendon told me some things I had not heard before
relating to the Spanish and other questions; among others about the
Queen and Palmerston, which is remarkable, because it proves two
things: one, that the Queen takes a more serious and prominent part
in business than I was aware of; and the other, that Palmerston's
independent action in the Foreign Office has received a complete and
final check. It is pretty clear that although John Russell is so
different from Melbourne, Palmerston had resolved to make an attempt
to go on in his old way. It was about the end of August that he
wrote a despatch to Bulwer of a very important character, both with
regard to the sentiments of England on the marriage question and the
relations which he wished Bulwer to establish with the Progressista
party. This despatch he sent to John Russell, requesting it might
be immediately returned that he might send it off. It reached John
Russell on a Sunday morning as he was going to church. He was not at
all pleased at the hour and the day on which it was sent to him, and
he kept it till the next day. He then returned it to Palmerston with
an intimation that such a despatch could by no means go without being
previously submitted to the Queen. He sent it to the Queen, who kept
it two days and then returned it with her own comments and objections.
Her letter was remarkably well written, and all the objections
concisely but ably put, and it exhibited a very correct knowledge of
the state of parties in Spain. The consequence of the Queen's letter
was that John Russell assembled Palmerston, Lord Lansdowne, and
Clarendon at his house, where they discussed the matter for two hours,
and finally agreed on a letter to be written in place of that which
Palmerston had first composed. It was divided into two parts and into
two separate despatches. Though they did not separate till past twelve
at night, Palmerston re-wrote these despatches before he went to bed,
and the next morning they were again sent to the Queen, who returned
them with her approbation. But on my expressing my surprise at this,
Clarendon told me that the Baroness Lehzen had told him long ago that
the Queen kept a journal in which she entered everything remarkable
that came under her notice, with her own observations and thoughts
thereupon, and that after every important debate she consulted all
the newspapers, and taking what appeared to her the best reports of
the most remarkable speeches, she made a _précis_ from them of the
whole. Nothing, it appears, can exceed her indignation and that of
the Prince at the conduct of the King of the French, and she spoke of
it to Clarendon in the most unmeasured terms. The _entente cordiale_
is at an end, and can hardly be revived. 'He did not write to me
himself,' she said, 'but made the Queen write. I don't think they will
be much pleased with my answer.' I heard also a miserable subterfuge
of Guizot's, for which I feel quite sorry and ashamed. He gave
(either to Normanby or to William Hervey) a positive assurance that
there was no design of making the marriages simultaneous, of marrying
the Infanta at the same time as the Queen. When he was subsequently
called to account for this fresh piece of falsehood and deceit, he was
not ashamed to descend to so paltry a subterfuge as to say that he
never intended anything but that they were not to be married by _one
ceremony_, that they were not to stand at the altar _together_![143]
He had much better have brazened it out, and said that it had not been
originally intended, but that they had changed their minds. Peel met
John Russell at Windsor. He came one day and Lord John went away the
next, which was a judicious way of managing their invitations. He told
Palmerston that he and Aberdeen and Graham were as indignant at what
had passed and at the conduct of the King and Guizot, as any of the
Ministers could be, and I saw a letter from Graham to George Lewis in
the same strain.
[Footnote 142: [More probably Bergenroth, who was employed in
deciphering his collection of Spanish State Papers.]]
[Footnote 143: I have very little doubt that this is not true.]
[Sidenote: 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.
[Sidenote: 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.
[Footnote 144: [The independence of the city of Cracow was the
subject of a special Convention between the Northern Courts at
Vienna in 1815, and it was incorporated in the General Treaty of
Vienna. Some political disturbances having occurred there, the
Northern Powers took the opportunity to annihilate the independence
of Cracow, the last vestige of Polish nationality, by handing it
over to Austria, and this was done without consulting France and
England. This was the first direct and open violation of the Treaty
of Vienna, accomplished by some of the Powers in defiance of the
others. It therefore gave rise to serious protests. Lord Palmerston
declared that the interests and good faith of Europe were as much
concerned in the maintenance of small States as of large ones; and
Prince Albert, who took a strong interest in the question, caused
his views to be expressed in an article in the 'Edinburgh Review'
on the Fate of Cracow.]]
[Sidenote: 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_.'
[Footnote 145: [Mr. George Cornewall Lewis, then a Poor Law
Commissioner, filed a criminal information against Mr. Ferrand for
a libel charging him with conspiracy and falsehood in connexion
with the Keightley Union enquiry in 1842.]]
_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.
[Sidenote: CONVERSATIONS WITH M. DE JARNAC.]
Last night, at the Duchess of Gloucester's ball, I met Jarnac and had
at least an hour's conversation with him. He was in low spirits at the
state of affairs, much disappointed at the rejection of his overture
for a joint action about Cracow, complained of the inconvenience and
the impolicy of it, that it was more our interest than theirs, that
they were proposing to us to assist in tying up their own hands, and
that such articles as had recently appeared in the 'Chronicle,' taken
in conjunction with this _rebuff_, as it must be considered (this was
not his word), would make a great sensation in France, be regarded as
indicative of a hostile feeling, and seriously widen the breach. He
admitted that Palmerston's personal communication with him had been
very civil. Palmerston had asked him if he had any remark to make on
our despatch to Lord Ponsonby, and seemed to expect some, but he said
he had none. We discussed all the questions at issue, and in a great
deal that he said I was quite disposed to agree with him. He dwelt on
the difficulty of getting over the deliberate and repeated demands
for renunciation made both to France and Spain, where it must be well
known that a compliance with such demands was utterly impossible and
not to be expected. However, even in this point the French Court is
trying to amuse us, for Clarendon received a letter from Billing
(an _âme damnée_ of Louis Philippe and Guizot) suggesting that we
should open a negotiation with Spain for a renunciation there, and
confirmation by the Cortes of a resignation of the eventual rights
of the Infanta and her family, an absurdity too gross to impose on
anybody. I told Jarnac that if the French Court had gone about their
designs with something more of boldness and frankness, and in a more
direct and straightforward manner, they would have accomplished all
their ends without any risk or difficulty, and have averted the
consequences that have followed. If the King had acted in _bonâ fide_
concert with us about the marriage of the Queen, and from the first
declared his intention to marry his son to her sister, making no
engagements and conditions, but merely acting openly and honourably,
all would have gone well, and everything he desired would have been
accomplished, for so little did people here care about or object to
the Montpensier marriage that it would have been impossible to get
up the steam of public opinion, or to goad the nation into a quarrel
on the marriage itself. Jarnac said, with an affected _naïveté_,
'You mean if the Queen had been married to Prince Leopold?' I said,
'I mean no such thing; why, you know perfectly well that we never
had any such design or wish, that not even the Court wished it. The
Queen and the Prince did not wish for it, and the Government have all
along discouraged and repudiated it. Your case, in fact, involves of
necessity a charge against us, which we say is unfounded, and you
attempt to defend your own good faith by impugning ours. You admitted
the obligation you contracted, but affirm that it was conditional;
that we bound ourselves by a reciprocal obligation, which we broke,
and that this breach of ours released you from yours. You are half
an Englishman yourself, and you know enough of the state of opinion
in England and of the morality of public men to be aware that any
underhand proceeding or intrigue, any conduct different from that
which is avowed, is absolutely impossible here. The publicity which is
given to everything, and the responsibility of public men to public
opinion, render such conduct out of the question; therefore when we
told you, as we have done all along, that we did not encourage this
marriage, you knew it to be true.' I then recapitulated all that
had passed, to which he could only reply that he could tell me a
great deal more, but that was not the place and the moment, for Lady
Palmerston was then sitting very near us. I told him, however, that
though under existing circumstances we could not consent to a joint
action, we did not want to _bouder_; that he must not regard the
'Morning Chronicle' as the exponent of the sentiments of the Cabinet,
still less of the country; that the articles were much disapproved of,
and that if they would have patience the cogent interests of the two
nations to be on good terms would infallibly bring the Governments
together likewise, though the same sort of intimacy could never exist
again.
[Sidenote: PEEL'S RESOLUTION NOT TO TAKE OFFICE.]
_Bowood, December 12th._--Came here on Tuesday; on Monday saw the Duke
of Bedford, who told me a scrap or two of information not very new,
but which he imparts in this way when he thinks of it. He was just
come from Arundel; the Queen and Prince Albert have got on vastly good
terms with Lord John. He had lately met Lord Hardwicke, who told him
that in September he had called on Peel in his way from Longshawe,
and had a great deal of conversation with him, in the course of which
Peel told him that when he went to the Queen to take leave of her on
quitting office, he said he had a request to make to her which she
must beforehand promise him to grant, that he must not be denied.
She said she should be glad to comply with any request of his if
she could. He then said that the request he had to make to her was
that she would never again at any time or under any circumstances
ask him to enter her service. He did not say what Her Majesty's
answer was. That Peel meant this as he said it I have no doubt, but
his remaining in the House of Commons is rather inconsistent if
such is his determination, and the best thing he could have done
would have been to go to the House of Peers; that would have been a
dignified retirement from political power. The Duke of Wellington is
on excellent terms with these Ministers, and better satisfied with
them than with his old colleagues in respect to the defences of the
country. It seems that not very long ago such angry communications
took place between the Duke and Peel on that subject, that the
Government was very near being broken up, and would have been if
Arbuthnot had not interfered and set it right. So at least Arbuthnot
told the Duke of Bedford.
Since I came here I have read Guizot's last note in reply to
Palmerston's long one. It is a very poor performance, and a shuffling
as well as insufficient answer. Clarendon says that this note is
very different from the one which Guizot wrote and submitted to his
Cabinet; that his note was so mutilated and altered that Guizot was
excessively angry, and disposed to refuse to send it, but that he was
induced to let it go by the extravagant eulogiums that were passed
upon it by the King and the rest, and by their assurances that it
was a masterpiece of diplomatic reasoning. Madame de Lieven had told
my brother that she understood all who had seen it thought it most
convincing and triumphant. Prince Albert told this story to John
Russell, who supposes that he got it from Leopold.
Lord John also told Clarendon how cleverly he had managed to get the
Duke of Wellington to do a gracious and popular act, which he has
hitherto always roughly refused, the bestowal of decorations on the
Peninsular soldiers. He advised the Queen to write to the Duke and
express her own wish that it should be done. He replied with great
alacrity, and expressed his readiness to carry her commands into
execution. She then wrote again, and said she wished his name to be
connected with the decoration in some way or other. He replied again
in a very good letter that he Carnarvonites hoped to be allowed to
decline this distinction, that he had already been honoured and
rewarded far beyond his deserts, and that he was only too happy to
have been deemed to have rendered any service to his sovereigns
and his country. Lord John, however, is resolved that his name and
exploits shall in some way be introduced into the inscription,
whatever it may be.
But the subject that has most occupied everybody here is Ireland.
Charles Wood brought down all his papers, and has been constantly
doing business with his two colleagues. He showed me a very good paper
he had drawn up for the Cabinet, setting forth all that had been done,
the present state of things, and the remedies he proposes to adopt,
the legislative measures to be submitted to Parliament. His views
are very sound, and I expect his measures will be well received. But
the state of Ireland is to the last degree deplorable, and enough to
induce despair: such general disorganisation and demoralisation, a
people with rare exceptions besotted with obstinacy and indolence,
reckless and savage--all from high to low intent on doing as little
and getting as much as they can, unwilling to rouse and exert
themselves, looking to this country for succour, and snarling at the
succour which they get; the masses brutal, deceitful, and idle, the
whole state of things contradictory and paradoxical. While menaced
with the continuance of famine next year, they will not cultivate
the ground, and it lies unsown and untilled. There is no doubt that
the people never were so well off on the whole as they have been
this year of famine. Nobody will pay rent, and the savings banks are
overflowing. With the money they get from our relief funds they buy
arms instead of food, and then shoot the officers who are sent over
to regulate the distribution of relief. While they crowd to the
overseers with demands for employment, the landowners cannot procure
hands, and sturdy beggars calling themselves destitute are apprehended
with large sums in their pockets. We are here all of opinion that some
tremendous catastrophe is inevitable. The evil is not in course of
diminution, and what will happen, and when it will happen, God only
knows; but there must and will be some tremendous convulsion, and that
before very long.
[Sidenote: STATE OF IRELAND.]
* * * * *
THE END OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
* * * * *
PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
LONDON
[Transcriber's Note:
Spelling regularized.
Punctuation normalized.]