1858
_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._
WINDSOR CASTLE, _12th January 1858_.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Accept my warmest thanks for your kind and
affectionate letter of the 8th. I hope and trust to hear that your
cold has left you, and that on Monday I shall have the immense
happiness of embracing you.
It is a time of immense bustle and agitation; I _feel_ it is terrible
to give up one's poor child, and _feel_ very nervous for the coming
time, and for the departure. But I am glad to see Vicky is quite well
again and _unberufen_ has got over her cold and is very well. But
she has had ever since January '57 a succession of emotions and
leave-takings--most trying to any one, but particularly to so young
a girl with such _very_ powerful feelings. She is so much improved
in self-control and is so clever (I may say wonderfully so), and so
sensible that we can talk to her of anything--and therefore shall miss
her sadly. But we try _not_ to dwell on or to think of _that_, as I
am sure it is much better _not_ to do so and not get ourselves _emus_
beforehand, or she will break down as well as we, and that never would
do.
To-day arrive (on a visit _here_) _her_ Court--which is a very good
thing, so that she will get acquainted with them....
The affection for her, and the loyalty shown by the country at large
on this occasion is _most_ truly gratifying--and for so young a child
really _very, very_ pleasing to our feelings. The Nation look upon
her, as Cobden said, as "_England's_ daughter," and as if they married
a child of their own, which is _very_ satisfactory, and shows, in
spite of a few newspaper follies and absurdities, how really _sound_
and _monarchical_ everything is in this country. Now, with Albert's
love, ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Pageheading: MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL]
_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _9th February 1858_.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Accept my warmest thanks for your very kind and
affectionate letter of the 4th, with such kind accounts of our dear
child, who was so thankful for your kindness and affection, and of
whose immense and universal success and admirable behaviour--natural
yet dignified--we have the most charming accounts. I send you a letter
from Augusta[1] (Mecklenburg), which will give you an idea of the
impression produced, begging you to let me have it back soon. She is
quite well and _not_ tired. But the separation was _awful_, and the
poor child was _quite_ broken-hearted, particularly at parting from
her dearest beloved papa, whom she _idolises_. _How_ we miss her, I
can't say, and never having been separated from her since thirteen
years above a fortnight, I am in a constant fidget and impatience to
know everything about _every_thing. It is a _great, great_ trial for
a _Mother_ who has watched over her child with such anxiety day after
day, to see her far away--dependent on herself! But I have great
confidence in her good sense, clever head, kind and good heart, in
Fritz's excellent character and devotion to her, and in faithful E.
Stockmar, who possesses her _entire_ confidence.
The blank she has left behind is _very great_ indeed....
To-morrow is the eighteenth anniversary of my blessed marriage, which
has brought such universal blessings on this country and Europe! For
_what_ has not my beloved and perfect Albert done? Raised monarchy to
the _highest_ pinnacle of _respect_, and rendered it _popular_ beyond
what it _ever_ was in this country!
The Bill proposed by the Government to improve the law respecting
conspiracy and assassination will pass, and Lord Derby has been most
useful about it.[2] But people are very indignant here at the conduct
of the French officers, and at the offensive insinuations against this
country.[3]....
Hoping to hear that you are quite well, and begging to thank Leopold
very much for his very kind letter, believe me, your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 1: Elder daughter of Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge,
and now Grand Duchess-Dowager of Mecklenburg-Strelitz.]
[Footnote 2: Lord Derby and his party, however, changed their
attitude in the next few days, and succeeded in putting the
Government in a minority.]
[Footnote 3: On the 14th of January, the assassination of the
French Emperor, which had been planned in England by Felice
Orsini and other refugees, was attempted. On the arrival
of the Imperial carriage at the Opera House in the Rue
Lepelletier, explosive hand-grenades were thrown at it, and
though the Emperor and Empress were unhurt, ten people were
either killed outright or died of their wounds, and over one
hundred and fifty were injured. Notwithstanding the scene of
carnage, their Majesties maintained their composure and sat
through the performance of the Opera. In the addresses of
congratulation to the Emperor on his escape (published, some
of them inadvertently, in the official _Moniteur_), officers
commanding French regiments used language of the most
insulting character to England, and Count Walewski, the French
Foreign Minister, in a despatch, recommended the British
Government to take steps to prevent the right of asylum being
abused.]
[Pageheading: DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT]
_Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria._
PICCADILLY, _19th February 1858_.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and is
sorry to have to inform your Majesty that the Government were beat
this evening on Mr Milner Gibson's[4] Amendment by a majority of
19,[5] the numbers being for his Amendment, 234, and against it 215.
Mr Milner Gibson began the Debate by moving his Amendment in a speech
of considerable ability, but abounding in misrepresentation, which
nevertheless produced a marked effect upon the House. Mr Baines
followed, but only argued the Bill without replying to Mr Gibson's
speech. This was remarked upon by Mr Walpole, who followed him, and
who said that though he approved of the Bill he could not vote for
reading it a second time until Count Walewski's despatch had been
answered. Mr MacMahon supported the Amendment, as did Mr Byng. Sir
George Grey, who followed Mr Walpole, defended the Bill and the course
pursued by the Government in not having answered Count Walewski's
despatch until after the House of Commons should have affirmed the
Bill by a Second Reading. Mr Spooner remained steady to his purpose,
and would vote against the Amendment, though in doing so he should
differ from his friends. Lord Harry Vane opposed the Amendment, as
interfering with the passing of the Bill, and Mr Bentinck took the
same line, and replied to some of the arguments of Mr Milner Gibson.
Mr Henley said he should vote for the Amendment. The Lord Advocate
made a good speech against it. Mr Gladstone spoke with his
usual talent in favour of the Amendment, and was answered by the
Attorney-General in a speech which would have convinced men who had
not taken a previous determination. He was followed by Mr Disraeli,
who seemed confident of success, and he was replied to by Viscount
Palmerston, and the House then divided.
It seems that Lord Derby had caught at an opportunity of putting the
Government in a minority. He saw that there were ninety-nine Members
who were chiefly of the Liberal Party, who had voted against the Bill
when it was first proposed, and who were determined to oppose it in
all its stages. He calculated that if his own followers were to join
those ninety-nine, the Government might be run hard, or perhaps be
beaten, and he desired all his friends[6] to support Mr Milner Gibson;
on the other hand, many of the supporters of the Government, relying
upon the majority of 200, by which the leave to bring the Bill in had
been carried, and upon the majority of 145 of last night, had gone out
of town for a few days, not anticipating any danger to the Government
from Mr Gibson's Motion, and thus an adverse division was obtained.
Moreover, Count Walewski's despatch, the tone and tenor of which had
been much misrepresented, had produced a very unfavourable effect on
the mind of members in general, and there was a prevailing feeling
very difficult to overcome, that the proposed Bill was somehow or
other a concession to the demand of a Foreign Government. The Cabinet
will have to consider at its meeting at three o'clock to-morrow what
course the Government will have to pursue.
[Footnote 4: Mr Milner Gibson had found a seat at
Ashton-under-Lyne.]
[Footnote 5: The Conspiracy Bill aimed at making conspiracy
to murder a felony, instead of, as it had previously been, a
misdemeanour, and leave had been given by a large majority to
introduce it; but when Count Walewski's despatch to Count de
Persigny came to be published, the feeling gained ground that
the Government had shown undue subservience in meeting the
representations of the French Ambassador. The despatch had
not actually been answered, although verbal communications had
taken place. The opposition to the Bill was concerted by Lord
John Russell and Sir James Graham; see Parker's _Sir James
Graham_, vol. ii. p. 236, and the observation of the Prince,
_post_, 21st February, 1858. The purport of the Amendment was
to postpone any reform in the criminal law till the French
despatch had been replied to.]
[Footnote 6: See Ashley's _Life of Lord Palmerston_, vol. ii.
p. 146.]
[Pageheading: RESIGNATION OF THE GOVERNMENT]
[Pageheading: LORD DERBY SUMMONED]
[Pageheading: OFFER TO LORD DERBY]
_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _21st February 1858_.
Lord Palmerston came at five o'clock from the Cabinet, and tendered
his resignation in his own name, and that of his Colleagues. The
Cabinet had well considered their position and found that, as the vote
passed by the House, although the result of an accidental combination
of parties, was virtually a vote of censure upon their conduct, they
could not with honour or with any advantage to the public service
carry on the Government.
The combination was the whole of the Conservative Party (Lord Derby's
followers), Lord John Russell, the Peelites, with Mr Gladstone and
the whole of the Radicals; but the Liberal Party generally is just now
very angry with Lord Palmerston personally, chiefly on account of his
apparent submission to French dictation, and the late appointment of
Lord Clanricarde as Privy Seal, who is looked upon as a reprobate.[7]
Lord Clanricarde's presence in the House of Commons during the Debate,
and in a conspicuous place, enraged many supporters of Lord Palmerston
to that degree that they voted at once with the Opposition.
[Footnote 7: Since his triumph at the polls in 1857, Lord
Palmerston had been somewhat arbitrary in his demeanour, and
had defied public opinion by taking Lord Clanricarde into the
Government, after some unpleasant disclosures in the Irish
Courts. While walking home on the 18th, after obtaining an
immense majority on the India Bill, he was told by Sir Joseph
Bethell that he ought, like the Roman Consuls in a triumph,
to have some one to remind him that he was, as a minister, not
immortal. Next day he was defeated.]
The Queen wrote to Lord Derby the letter here following;[8] he came a
little after six o'clock. He stated that nobody was more surprised
in his life than he had been at the result of the Debate, after the
Government had only a few days before had a majority of more than 100
on the introduction of their Bill. He did not know how it came about,
but thought it was the work of Lord John Russell and Sir James Graham
in the interest of the Radicals; Mr Gladstone's junction must have
been accidental. As to his own people, they had, owing to his
own personal exertions, as the Queen was aware, though many very
unwillingly, supported the Bill; but the amendment of Mr Milner Gibson
was so skilfully worded, that it was difficult for them not to vote
for it; he had to admit this when they came to him to ask what they
should do, merely warning them to save the Measure itself, which the
Amendment did. He then blamed the Government very much for leaving
Count Walewski's despatch unanswered before coming before Parliament,
which he could hardly understand.
[Footnote 8: Summoning him to advise her.]
On the Queen telling him that the Government had resigned, and that
she commissioned him to form a new Administration, he begged that
this offer might not be made to him without further consideration, and
would state clearly his own position. After what had happened in 1851
and 1855, if the Queen made the offer he _must_ accept it, for if he
refused, the Conservative Party would be broken up for ever. Yet
he would find a majority of two to one against him in the House of
Commons, would have difficulty in well filling the important offices,
found the external and internal relations of the country in a
most delicate and complicated position, war in India and in China,
difficulties with France, the Indian Bill introduced and a Reform
Bill promised; nothing but the forbearance and support of some of his
opponents would make it possible for him to carry on any Government.
The person who was asked first by the Sovereign had always a great
disadvantage; perhaps other combinations were possible, which, if
found not to answer, would make him more readily accepted by the
country. The position of Lord Palmerston was a most curious one,
the House of Commons had been returned chiefly for the purpose of
supporting him _personally_, and he had obtained a working majority
of 100 (unheard of since the Reform Bill), yet his supporters had no
principles in common and they generally suspected him; the question of
the Reform Bill had made him and Lord John run a race for popularity
which might lead to disastrous consequences. Lord Derby did not at all
know what support he would be able to obtain in Parliament.
The Queen agreed to deferring her offer, and to take further time for
consideration on the understanding that if she made it it would at
once be accepted. Lord Derby expressed, however, his fear that the
resignation of the Palmerston Cabinet might only be for the purpose of
going through a crisis in order to come back again with new strength,
for there existed different kinds of resignations, some for this
purpose, others really for abandoning office.
A conversation which I had with Lord Clarendon after dinner, convinced
me that the Cabinet had sent in their resignations from the real
conviction of the impossibility to go on with honour and success; all
offers of the friends of the Government to pass a vote of confidence,
etc., etc., had been rejected. Lord Derby was the only man who could
form a Government; Mr Gladstone would probably join him. The whole
move had been planned, and most dexterously, by Sir James Graham.
ALBERT.
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _21st February 1858_.
The Queen has reconsidered the question of the formation of a new
Government as she had settled with Lord Derby yesterday, and now
writes to him to tell him that further reflection has only confirmed
her in her former resolution to offer the task to Lord Derby. The
resignation of the present Government is the result of a conscientious
conviction on their part, that, damaged by the censure passed upon
them in the House of Commons, they cannot with honour to themselves,
or usefulness to the country, carry on public affairs, and Lord
Derby is at the head of the only Party which affords the materials
of forming a new Government, is sufficiently organised to secure a
certain support, and which the country would accept as an alternative
for that hitherto in power. Before actually offering any specific
office to anybody, Lord Derby would perhaps have another interview
with the Queen; but it would be right that he should have satisfied
himself a little as to his chances of strengthening his hands before
she sees him. With regard to the position of the India Bill, the Queen
must also have a further conversation with him.
[Pageheading: LORD DERBY'S VIEW]
_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._
ST JAMES'S SQUARE, _21st February 1858_.
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, begs your Majesty to accept his
grateful acknowledgment of the signal mark of your Majesty's favour,
with which he has this morning been honoured. Encouraged by your
Majesty's gracious confidence, he does not hesitate to submit himself
to your Majesty's pleasure, and will address himself at once to the
difficult task which your Majesty has been pleased to entrust to him.
He fears that he can hardly hope, in the formation of a Government,
for much extrinsic aid; as almost all the men of eminence in either
House of Parliament are more or less associated with other parties,
whose co-operation it would be impossible to obtain. Lord Derby will
not, however, hesitate to make the attempt in any quarters, in which
he may think he has any chance of success. With regard to the filling
up of particular offices, Lord Derby would humbly beg your Majesty to
bear in mind that, although among his own personal friends there will
be every desire to make individual convenience subservient to the
public interest, yet among those who are not now politically connected
with him, there may be some, whose co-operation or refusal might
be greatly influenced by the office which it was proposed that they
should hold; and, in such cases, Lord Derby must venture to bespeak
your Majesty's indulgence should he make a definite offer, subject, of
course, to your Majesty's ultimate approval.
As soon as Lord Derby has made any progress in his proposed
arrangements, he will avail himself of your Majesty's gracious
permission to solicit another Audience.
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _21st February 1858_.
The Queen has just received Lord Derby's letter, and would wish under
all circumstances to see him at six this evening, in order to hear
what progress he has made in his plans. The two offices the Queen is
most anxious should not be prejudged in any way, before the Queen has
seen Lord Derby again, are the Foreign and the War Departments.
[Pageheading: MR GLADSTONE AND LORD GREY]
_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._
ST JAMES'S SQUARE, _21st February 1858_.
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty the two
letters which he has this evening received from Lord Grey and Mr
Gladstone.[9] The reasons contained in the latter do not appear to
Lord Derby to be very conclusive; but he fears the result must be that
he cannot look, in the attempt to form a Cabinet, to much extraneous
assistance. With deep regret Lord Derby is compelled to add that he
finds he cannot rely with certainty on the support of his son as a
member of his proposed Cabinet.[10] Still, having undertaken the task
he has in obedience to your Majesty's commands, Lord Derby will not
relax in his efforts to frame such a Government as may be honoured
with your Majesty's gracious approval, and prove itself equal to the
emergency which calls it together.
While in the very act of putting up this letter, Lord Derby has
received one, which he also presumes to enclose to your Majesty,
from Lord St Leonards, alleging his advanced age as a reason for not
accepting the Great Seal which he formerly held. This reply has been
wholly unexpected; and it is yet possible that Lord St Leonards may be
induced, at least temporarily, to withdraw his resignation. Should it,
however, prove otherwise, and Lord Derby should succeed in making his
other arrangements, he would humbly ask your Majesty's permission to
endeavour to persuade Mr Pemberton Leigh to accept that high office,
of course accompanied by the honour of the Peerage, which he is aware
has been already on more than one occasion offered to him. Lord Derby
begs to add that he has not had the slightest communication with
Mr Pemberton Leigh on the subject, nor has the least idea as to his
feelings upon it.
[Footnote 9: Lord Grey wrote--"I am much obliged to you for
the manner in which you have asked my assistance in performing
the task confided to you by Her Majesty.
"I am not insensible to the danger of the present crisis, or
to the duty it imposes on public men, of giving any aid
in their power towards forming an Administration which may
command respect. I am also aware that the settlement of the
important political questions, on which we have differed,
has removed many of the obstacles which would formerly have
rendered my acting with you impracticable. Upon the other
hand, upon carefully considering the present state of affairs
and the materials at your disposal (especially in the House
of Commons) for forming an Administration, and that all the
political friends with whom I have been connected, would
probably be opposed to it, I do not think it would be either
useful to you or honourable to myself that I should singly
join your Government."
Mr Gladstone wrote--"I am very sensible of the importance of
the vote taken on Friday, and I should deeply lament to see
the House of Commons trampled on in consequence of that vote.
The honour of the House is materially involved in giving it
full effect. It would therefore be my first wish to aid, if
possible, in such a task; and remembering the years when
we were colleagues, I may be permitted to say that there is
nothing in the fact of your being the Head of a Ministry,
which would avail to deter me from forming part of it.
"Among the first questions I have had to put to myself in
consequence of the offer, which you have conveyed to me in
such friendly and flattering terms, has been the question,
whether it would be in my power by accepting it, either alone,
or in concert with others, to render you material service.
"After the long years, during which we have been separated,
there would be various matters of public interest requiring to
be noticed between us; but the question I have mentioned is a
needful preliminary.
"Upon the best consideration which the moment allows, I think
it plain that alone, as I must be, I could not render you
service worth your having.
"The dissolution of last year excluded from Parliament men
with whom I had sympathies, and it in some degree affected the
position of those political friends with whom I have now for
many years been united, through evil and (much more rarely)
good report.
"Those who lament the rupture of old traditions may well
desire the reconstruction of a Party; but the reconstitution
of a Party can only be effected, if at all, by the return of
the old influences to their places, and not by the junction of
one isolated person.
"The difficulty is now enhanced in my case by the fact that in
your party, reduced as it is at the present moment in numbers,
there is a small but active and not unimportant section, who
avowedly regard me as the representative of the most dangerous
ideas. I should thus, unfortunately, be to you a source of
weakness in the heart of your own adherents, while I should
bring you no Party or group of friends to make up for their
defection or discontent.
"For the reasons which I have thus stated or glanced at, my
reply to your letter must be in the negative.
"I must, however, add that a Government formed by you at this
time will in my opinion have strong claims upon me, and upon
any one situated as I am, for favourable presumptions, and
in the absence of conscientious difference on important
questions, for support.
"I have had an opportunity of seeing Lord Aberdeen and Sidney
Herbert, and they fully concur in the sentiment I have just
expressed."]
[Footnote 10: See _ante_, 31st October, 1855, note 87.]
[Pageheading: THE CHANCELLORSHIP]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _22nd February 1858_.
The Queen acknowledges Lord Derby's letter of yesterday, and returns
him these three letters. She much regrets that he cannot reckon on the
support and assistance in the Government, which he is about to form,
of such able men. The Queen authorises Lord Derby to offer the office
of Lord Chancellor with a Peerage to Mr Pemberton Leigh; but she fears
from what passed on previous occasions that he is not likely to accept
it.[11]
[Footnote 11: He declined the office, and the Great Seal was
offered to and accepted by Sir Frederick Thesiger, who was
created Lord Chelmsford.]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _22nd February 1858_.
The Queen has had a long conversation with the Duke of Newcastle,
which however ended, as Lord Derby will have expected from what the
Duke must have told him, in his declaring his conviction that he could
be of no use to the new Government by joining it, or in persuading his
friends to change their minds as to joining. The Duke was evidently
much pleased by the offer, but from all he said of his position, the
Queen could gather that it was in vain to press him further.
[Pageheading: THE NEW CABINET]
_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._
ST JAMES'S SQUARE, _25th February 1858_.
Lord Derby presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and fears that
after your Majesty's most gracious acceptance of the propositions
which he has made, he may appear to your Majesty very vacillating, in
having at the last moment to submit to your Majesty another change....
But he finds that Lord John Manners, though he consented to take the
Colonial Department, would infinitely prefer resuming his seat at the
Board of Works; and on the urgent representation of his Colleagues
that the Government would be strengthened by such a step, Lord Stanley
has consented to accept office; and the arrangement which he would now
venture humbly to submit to your Majesty would be the appointment of
Lord Stanley to the Colonial Secretaryship, and Lord John Manners to
the Board of Works....
The Ministry as it The Ministry as formed
stood on the 1st of by the Earl of Derby
January 1858. in February 1858.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON _First Lord of the_ EARL OF DERBY.
_Treasury_
MARQUIS OF LANSDOWNE (_Without Office_).
LORD CRANWORTH _Lord Chancellor_ LORD CHELMSFORD.
EARL GRANVILLE _President of the_ MARQUIS OF SALISBURY.
_Council_
MARQUIS OF CLANRICARDE _Lord Privy Seal_ EARL OF HARDWICKE.
Sir GEORGE GREY _Home Secretary_ Mr WALPOLE.
EARL OF CLARENDON _Foreign Secretary_ EARL OF MALMESBURY.
MR LABOUCHERE _Colonial Secretary_ LORD STANLEY
(afterwards LORD (afterwards EARL
TAUNTON) OF DERBY).
LORD PANMURE _War Secretary_ GENERAL PEEL.
(afterwards EARL
OF DALHOUSIE)
Sir G. C. LEWIS _Chancellor of the_ Mr DISRAELI
_Exchequer_ (afterwards EARL
OF BEACONSFIELD)
Sir CHARLES WOOD _First Lord of the_ Sir JOHN PAKINGTON
(afterwards VISCOUNT _Admiralty_ (afterwards LORD
HALIFAX) HAMPTON).
Mr VERNON SMITH _President of the_ EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH.
(afterwards LORD _Board of Control_
LYVEDEN)
LORD STANLEY OF _President of the_ Mr HENLEY.
ALDERLEY _Board of Trade_
Mr M. T. BAINES _Chancellor of the_ (_Not in the Cabinet._)
_Duchy of Lancaster_
DUKE OF ARGYLL _Postmaster-General_ (_Not in the Cabinet._)
(_Not in the Cabinet_) _First Commissioner_ LORD JOHN MANNERS
_of Works and_ (afterwards
_Public Buildings_ DUKE OF RUTLAND).
[Pageheading: THE ORSINI PLOT]
[Pageheading: THE EMPEROR AND THE CARBONARI]
_The Earl of Malmesbury to Queen Victoria._
WHITEHALL, _7th March 1858_.
The Earl of Malmesbury presents his humble duty to the Queen, and has
the honour to thank your Majesty for the interesting letter[12] sent
to him by your Majesty, and which he returns to your Majesty by
this messenger. Lord Malmesbury hopes and believes that much of the
excitement that prevailed on the _other_ side the water is subsiding.
All his letters from _private_ sources, and the account of Colonel
Claremont, agree on this point. In this country, if our differences
with France are settled, it is probable that the popular jealousy of
foreign interference will be killed; but at least for some time it
will show foreign Courts how dangerous it is _even to criticise_ our
_domestic_ Institutions. Lord Malmesbury has carefully abstained from
giving Lord Cowley or M. de Persigny the slightest hope that we could
alter the law, but has confined himself to saying that the law was
itself as much on its trial as the prisoners Bernard and Truelove.[13]
If, therefore, the law should prove to be a phantom of justice, or
anomalous in its action, whatever measures your Majesty's Government
may hereafter take to reform it, it will be received by France as an
unexpected boon and a proof of good faith and amity.
In attending to the idea referred to by your Majesty that the Emperor
took the oath of the Assassins' Society, Lord Malmesbury can almost
assure your Majesty that such is not the case.[14] Lord Malmesbury
first made His Majesty's acquaintance in Italy when they were both
very young men (twenty years of age). They were _both_ under the
influence of those romantic feelings which the former history and
the present degradation of Italy may naturally inspire even at a more
advanced time of life--and the Prince Louis Napoleon, to the knowledge
of Lord Malmesbury, certainly engaged himself in the conspiracies of
the time--but it was with the higher class of the Carbonari, men like
General Sercognani and General Pepe. The Prince used to talk to Lord
Malmesbury upon these men and their ideas and plans with all the
openness that exists between two youths, and Lord Malmesbury has many
times heard him condemn with disgust the societies of villains which
hung on the flank of the conspirators, and which deterred many of the
best families and ablest gentlemen in Romagna from joining them. Lord
Malmesbury believes the report therefore to be a fable, and at some
future period will, if it should interest your Majesty, relate to
your Majesty some details respecting the Emperor's share in the
conspiracies of 1828-1829....
[Footnote 12: This was a letter from the Prince de Chimay to
the King of the Belgians in reference to the Orsini plot.]
[Footnote 13: Before Lord Palmerston's Government had retired,
Simon Bernard, a resident of Bayswater, was committed
for trial for complicity in the Orsini _attentat_. He was
committed for conspiracy only, but, at the instance of the
new Government, the charge was altered to one of feloniously
slaying one of the persons killed by the explosion. As this
constructive murder was actually committed on French soil,
Bernard's trial had, under the existing law, to be held before
a Special Commission, over which Lord Campbell presided. The
evidence overwhelmingly established the prisoner's guilt,
but, carried away by the eloquent, if irrelevant, speech of Mr
Edwin James for the defence, the jury acquitted him. Truelove
was charged with criminal libel, for openly approving, in
a published pamphlet, Orsini's attempt, and regretting
its failure. The Government threw up the prosecution,
pusillanimously in the judgment of Lord Campbell, who records
that he carefuly studied, with a view to his own hearing
of the case, the proceedings against Lord George Gordon for
libelling Marie Antoinette, against Vint for libelling the
Emperor Paul, and against Peltier for libelling Napoleon I.]
[Footnote 14: The Queen had written:--"There are people
who pretend that the Emperor, who was once a member of the
Carbonari Club of Italy, and who is supposed to be condemned
to death by the rules of that Secret Society for having
violated his oath to them, has offered them to pardon Orsini,
if they would release him from his oath, but that the Society
refused the offer. The fact that all the attempts have been
made by Italians, Orsini's letter, and the almost mad state of
fear in which the Emperor seems to be now, would give colour
to that story." Orsini had written two letters to the Emperor,
one read aloud at his trial by his counsel, Jules Favre, the
other while lying under sentence of death. He entreated the
Emperor to secure Italian independence.]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _12th March 1858_.
(_Friday._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The Opposition benches very full; the temper not kind.
The French announcement,[15] which was quite unexpected, elicited
cheers, but only from the Ministerial side, which, he confesses, for a
moment almost daunted him.
Then came a question about the _Cagliari_ affair,[16] on which the
Government had agreed to take a temperate course, in deference to
their predecessors--but it was not successful. The ill-humour of the
House, diverted for a moment by the French news, vented itself on this
head.
What struck the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the course of the
evening most was the absence of all those symptoms of "fair trial,"
etc., which have abounded of late in journals and in Society.
Lord John said something; Mr Gladstone said something; but it was not
encouraging.
Nevertheless, in 1852 "fair trial" observations abounded, and the
result was not satisfactory; now it may be the reverse.
The House is wild and capricious at this moment.
Your Majesty once deigned to say that your Majesty wished in these
remarks to have the temper of the House placed before your Majesty,
and to find what your Majesty could not meet in newspapers. This
is the Chancellor of the Exchequer's excuse for these rough notes,
written on the field of battle, which he humbly offers to your
Majesty.
[Footnote 15: Parliament reassembled on the 12th of March,
and Mr Disraeli then stated that the "painful misconceptions"
which had for some time existed between England and France
had been "terminated in a spirit entirely friendly and
honourable."]
[Footnote 16: Two English engineers, Watt and Park, had been
on the Sardinian steamer _Cagliari_ when she was seized by the
Neapolitan Government, and her crew, including the engineers,
imprisoned at Naples. At the instance of the Conservative
Government, who acted more vigorously than their predecessors
had done, the engineers were released, and L3,000 paid to them
as compensation.]
[Pageheading: THE NAVY]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
OSBORNE, _15th March 1858_.
The Queen sends to Lord Derby a Memorandum on the state of preparation
of our Navy in case of a war, the importance of attending to which
she has again strongly felt when the late vote of the House of Commons
endangered the continuance of the good understanding with France.
The whole tone of the Debate on the first night of the reassembly of
Parliament has shown again that there exists a great disposition
to boast and provoke foreign Powers without any sincere desire to
investigate our means of making good our words, and providing for
those means which are missing.
The Queen wishes Lord Derby to read this Memorandum to the Cabinet,
and to take the subject of which it treats into their anxious
consideration.
The two appendices, stating facts, the one with regard to the manning
of the Navy by volunteers with the aid of bounties, the other with
regard to impressment, have become unfortunately more lengthy than the
Queen had wished, but the facts appeared to her so important that she
did not like to have any left out.
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _22nd March 1858_.
(_Monday, half-past eight o'clock._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
This evening was a great contrast to Friday. House very full on both
sides....
Mr B. Osborne commenced the general attack, of which he had given
notice; but, after five years' silence, his weapons were not as bright
as of yore. He was answered by the Government, and the House, which
was very full, became much excited. The Ministerial benches were in
high spirit.
The Debate that ensued, most interesting and sustained.
Mr Horsman, with considerable effect, expressed the opinions of that
portion of the Liberal Party, which does not wish to disturb the
Government.
Lord John Russell vindicated the Reform Bill of 1832 from the attacks
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and with great dignity and
earnestness.
He was followed by Mr Drummond on the same subject in a telling
epigram. Then Lord Palmerston, in reply to the charges of Mr Horsman,
mild and graceful, with a sarcastic touch. The general impression of
the House was very favourable to the Ministry; all seemed changed; the
Debate had cleared the political atmosphere, and, compared with our
previous state, we felt as if the eclipse was over.
[Pageheading: RESIGNATION OF PERSIGNY]
_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _23rd March 1858_.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--You will, I trust, forgive my letter being short,
but we have only just returned from Aldershot, where we went this
morning, and really have been quite baked by a sun which was hardly
hotter in August, and without a breath of wind....
Good Marie[17] has not answered me, will you remind her? I _did_ tell
her I hoped for her child's[18] sake she would give up the nursing, as
we Princesses had other duties to perform. I hope she was not shocked,
but I felt I only did what was right in telling her so.
I grieve to say we lose poor Persigny, which is a real loss--but he
would resign. Walewski behaved ill to him. The Emperor has, however,
named a successor which is _really_ a compliment to the Army and the
Alliance--and besides a distinguished and independent man, viz. the
Duc de Malakhoff.[19] This is very gratifying.
In all this business, Pelissier has, I hear, behaved extremely well. I
must now conclude. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 17: Marie Henriette, Duchess of Brabant, afterwards
Queen of the Belgians; died 1902.]
[Footnote 18: Princess Louise of Belgium was born on the 4th
of February.]
[Footnote 19: Formerly General Pelissier; see _ante_, 14th
September, 1855, note 80.]
[Pageheading: THE HOUSE OF COMMONS]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _23rd March 1858_.
(_Tuesday._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The discussion on the Passport Question, this evening, was not without
animation; the new Under-Secretary, Mr Fitzgerald,[20] makes way with
the House. He is very acute and quick in his points, but does not
speak loud enough. His tone is conversational, which is the best
for the House of Commons, and the most difficult; but then the
conversation should be heard. The general effect of the discussion was
favourable to the French Government.
In a thin House afterwards, the Wife's Sister Bill was brought
in after a division. Your Majesty's Government had decided among
themselves to permit the introduction, but a too zealous member of the
Opposition forced an inopportune division.
[Footnote 20: William Robert Seymour Vesey Fitzgerald, M.P.
for Horsham 1852-1865. He was Governor of Bombay 1867-1872.]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _25th March 1858_.
(_Thursday._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The Lease of the Lord-Lieutenancy was certainly renewed to-night--and
for some years. The majority was very great against change at present,
and the future, which would justify it, it was agreed, should be the
very decided opinion of the Irish members. It was left in short to
Ireland.
The Debate was not very animated, but had two features--a most
admirable speech by Lord Naas,[21] quite the model of an official
statement, clear, calm, courteous, persuasive, and full of knowledge;
it received the praises of both sides.
The other incident noticeable was Mr Roebuck's reply, which was one of
the most apt, terse, and telling I well remember, and not bitter.
[Footnote 21: Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant,
afterwards (as Earl of Mayo) Viceroy of India, assassinated in
the Andaman Islands, 1872.]
[Pageheading: CAPTURE OF LUCKNOW]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _13th April._
(_Tuesday night._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The night tranquil and interesting--Lord Bury, with much intelligence,
introduced the subject of the Straits Settlements;[22] the speech of
Sir J. Elphinstone,[23] master of the subject, and full of striking
details, produced a great effect. His vindication of the convict
population of Singapore, as the moral element of that strange society,
might have been considered as the richest humour, had it not been for
its unmistakable simplicity.
His inquiry of the Governor's lady, who never hired any servant but
a convict, whether she employed in her nursery "Thieves or
Murderers?"--and the answer, "Always murderers," was very
effective....
The Secretary of State having sent down to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer the telegram of the fall of Lucknow,[24] the Chancellor of
the Exchequer read it to the House, having previously in private shown
it to Lord Palmerston and others of the late Government.
After this a spirited Debate on the conduct of Members of Parliament
corruptly exercising their influence, in which the view recommended
by the Government, through Mr Secretary Walpole, was adopted by the
House.
[Footnote 22: These detached provinces were at this time under
the control of the Governor-General of India; but in 1867 they
were formed into a Crown Colony.]
[Footnote 23: Sir J. D. H. Elphinstone, Conservative member
for Portsmouth, afterwards a Lord of the Treasury.]
[Footnote 24: Sir Colin Campbell had at length obtained entire
possession of the city, which had been in the hands of the
rebels for nine months.]
_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._
WINDSOR CASTLE, _2nd April 1858_.
MY DEAR UNCLE,--I am sure you will kindly be interested in knowing
that the Examination and Confirmation of Bertie have gone off
extremely well.[25] Everything was conducted as at Vicky's, and I
thought _much_ of you, and wished we could have had the happiness of
having you there. I enclose a Programme. The examination before
the Archbishop and ourselves by the Dean on Wednesday was long and
difficult, but Bertie answered extremely well, and his whole manner
and _Gemuethsstimmung_ yesterday, and again to-day, at the Sacrament
to which we took him, was gentle, good, and proper.... Now, good-bye,
dear Uncle. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 25: See the Prince Consort's letter to Stockmar,
_Life of the Prince Consort_, vol. iv. p. 205.]
[Pageheading: NAVAL PREPARATIONS]
_Queen Victoria to Sir John Pakington._
WINDSOR CASTLE, _12th April 1858_.
The Queen has received Sir John Pakington's letter of the 10th,
and thanks him for the transmission of the printed copy of his
confidential Memorandum.
The object of the paper which the Queen sent from Osborne to Lord
Derby was to lead by a thorough investigation to an exact knowledge
of the state of our Naval preparations in the event of a war, with
the view to the discovery and suggestion of such remedies as our
deficiencies imperatively demand. This investigation and thorough
consideration the Queen expects from her Board of Admiralty, chosen
with great care, and composed of the most competent Naval Authorities.
She does not wish for the opinion of this or that person, given
without any responsibility attaching to it, nor for mere returns
prepared in the Office for the First Lord, but for the collective
opinion of Sir John Pakington and his Board with the responsibility
attaching to such an opinion given to the Sovereign upon a subject
upon which the safety of the Empire depends. The Queen has full
confidence in the honour of the gentlemen composing the Board,
that they will respect the _confidential_ character of the Queen's
communication, and pay due regard to the importance of the subject
referred to them.
[Pageheading: PROCEDURE BY RESOLUTION]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _12th April 1858_.
(_Monday night._)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
House reassembled--full. Chancellor of Exchequer much embarrassed with
impending statement, on the part of your Majesty's servants, that they
intended to propose Resolutions on the Government of India, instead of
at once proceeding with their Bill.[26]
Received, five minutes before he took his seat, confidential
information, that Lord John Russell, wishing to defeat the prospects
of Lord Palmerston, and himself to occupy a great mediatory position,
intended, himself, to propose the mezzotermine of resolutions!
Chancellor of Exchequer felt it was impossible, after having himself
introduced a Bill, to interfere with the Resolutions of an independent
member, and one so weighty and distinguished: therefore, confined his
announcement to the Budget on Monday week, and consequent postponement
of India Bill.
Soon after, Lord John rose, and opened the case, in a spirit most calm
and conciliatory to the House, and to your Majesty's Government.
The Chancellor of Exchequer responded, but with delicacy, not wishing
rudely to deprive Lord John of his position in the matter; deeming it
arrogant--but the real opposition, extremely annoyed at all that was
occurring, wishing, at the same time, to deprive Lord John of the
mediatory position, and to embarrass your Majesty's Government
with the task and responsibility of preparing and introducing the
resolutions, _insisted_ upon Government undertaking the task. As the
Chancellor of Exchequer read the sketch of the Resolutions in his box,
this was amusing; he undertook the responsibility, thus urged, and
almost menaced; Lord John, though greatly mortified at not bringing
in the Resolutions himself, for it is since known they were prepared,
entirely and justly acquits Chancellor of Exchequer of any arrogance
and intrusion, and the affair concludes in a manner dignified and more
than promising. It is now generally supposed that after the various
Resolutions have been discussed, and passed, the Bill of your
Majesty's servants, modified and reconstructed, will pass into a law.
The Chancellor of Exchequer will have a copy of the Resolutions,
though at present in a crude form, made and forwarded to your Majesty,
that they may be considered by your Majesty and His Royal Highness.
Chancellor of Exchequer will mention this to Lord Derby, through whom
they ought to reach your Majesty.
After this unexpected and interesting scene, because it showed, in its
progress, a marked discordance between Lord John and Lord Palmerston,
not concealed by the latter chief, and strongly evinced by some of his
principal followers, for example, Sir C. Wood, Mr Hall, Mr Bouverie,
the House went into Committee on the Navy Estimates which Sir J.
Pakington introduced in a speech, lucid, spirited, and comprehensive.
The feeling of the House as to the maintenance of the Navy was good.
[Footnote 26: Lord Palmerston had obtained leave, by a large
majority, to introduce an India Bill, vesting the Government
of India in a Council nominated by the Crown. On his accession
to office, Mr Disraeli proposed that the Council should be
half nominative and half elective, and in particular that
London, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, and Belfast should
each be entitled to elect one member. These proposals were
widely condemned, and especially by Mr Bright.]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Malmesbury._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _1st May 1858_.
The Queen has received a draft to Lord Cowley on the Danish
Question,[27] which she cannot sanction as submitted to her. The
question is a most important one, and a false step on our part may
produce a war between France and Germany. The Queen would wish Lord
Malmesbury to call here in the course of to-morrow, when the Prince
could discuss the matter with him more fully.
[Footnote 27: The dispute as to the Duchies of Schleswig and
Holstein. The German Diet had refused to ratify the Danish
proposal that Commissioners should be appointed by Germany and
Denmark to negotiate an arrangement of their differences.
Lord Malmesbury had written that the Governments (including
England) which had hitherto abstained from interference,
should now take measures to guard against any interference
with the integrity of the Danish Monarchy. The Queen and
Prince considered that the attitude of the British Government
was unnecessarily pro-Danish.]
[Pageheading: THE OUDH PROCLAMATION]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._
HOUSE OF COMMONS, _7th May 1858_.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
At half-past four o'clock, before the Chancellor of the Exchequer
could reach the House, the Secretary of the Board of Control had
already presented the Proclamation of Lord Canning, and the despatch
thereon of Lord Ellenborough, without the omission of the Oudh
passages.[28]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has employed every means to recall the
papers, and make the necessary omissions, and more than once thought
he had succeeded, but unhappily the despatch had been read by Mr
Bright, and a considerable number of members, and, had papers once
in the possession of the House by the presentation of a Minister
been surreptitiously recalled and garbled, the matter would have been
brought before the House, and the production of the complete documents
would have been ordered.
In this difficult and distressing position the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, after consultation with his colleagues in the House of
Commons, thought it best, and, indeed, inevitable, to submit to
circumstances, the occurrence of which he deeply regrets, and humbly
places before your Majesty.
[Footnote 28: See _ante_, Introductory Note to Chapter XXVII.
The draft proclamation (differing from the ultimate form in
which it was issued), with a covering despatch, were sent
home to the Board of Control by Lord Canning, who at the same
time wrote an unofficial letter to Mr Vernon Smith, then
President of the Board, stating that he had not been able to
find time before the mail left to explain his reasons for
adopting what appeared a somewhat merciless scheme of
confiscation. Lord Ellenborough thereupon wrote a despatch,
dated the 19th of April, reprobating the Governor-General for
abandoning the accustomed policy of generous conquerors, and
for inflicting on the mass of the population what they would
feel as the severest of punishments. This despatch was made
public in England, as will be seen from the dates, before it
could possibly have reached Lord Canning.]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _9th May 1858_.
The Queen has received Lord Derby's letter of last night, and was
glad to see that he entirely concurs with her in the advantage and
necessity of appointing a Commission to consider the question of the
organisation of the future Army of India.[29] She only hopes that no
time will be lost by the reference to the different bodies whom Lord
Derby wishes previously to consult, and she trusts that he will not
let himself be overruled by Lord Ellenborough, who may very likely
consider the opinion and result of the labours of a Committee as
entirely valueless as compared with his own opinions.
The Queen has not the same confidence in them, and is, therefore,
doubly anxious to be advised by a body of the most competent persons
after most careful enquiry.
[Footnote 29: The Queen had written that she thought the
Commission should be composed of officers of the Home and the
Indian Armies, some politicians, the Commander-in-Chief, the
President of the Board of Control, with the Secretary-for-War
as President.]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _9th May 1858_.
The Queen has received Lord Derby's letter of yesterday. She is
very sorry for the further complication likely to arise out of the
communication to the House of Commons of the despatch in full,
which is most unfortunate, not less so than the communication of it
previously to Mr Bright and his friends. The Queen is anxious not to
add to Lord Derby's difficulties, but she must not leave unnoticed the
fact that the despatch in question ought never to have been written
without having been submitted to the Queen. She hopes Lord Derby will
take care that Lord Ellenborough will not repeat this, which must
place her in a most embarrassing position.
[Pageheading: ELLENBOROUGH'S RESIGNATION]
_The Earl of Ellenborough to Queen Victoria._
EATON SQUARE, _10th May 1858_.
Lord Ellenborough presents his most humble duty to your Majesty, and
regarding the present difficult position of your Majesty's Government
as mainly occasioned by the presentation to Parliament of the letter
to the Governor-General with reference to the Proclamation in Oudh,
for which step he considers himself to be solely responsible, he deems
it to be his duty to lay his resignation at your Majesty's feet.
Lord Ellenborough had no other object than that of making it
unmistakably evident to the Governor as well as to the governed in
India that your Majesty was resolved to temper Justice with Clemency,
and would not sanction any measure which did not seem to conduce to
the establishment of permanent peace.[30]
[Footnote 30: On the same day Lord Shaftesbury in the
Lords and Mr Cardwell in the Commons gave notice of Motions
censuring the Government for Lord Ellenborough's despatch. The
debates commenced on the 14th.]
[Pageheading: A CRISIS]
[Pageheading: ELLENBOROUGH'S STATEMENT]
_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _11th May 1858_.
Lord Derby had an Audience at twelve o'clock. He said he had received
a copy of Lord Ellenborough's letter, and had told him that should
the Queen consult him (Lord Derby) he should advise her to accept the
resignation, Lord Ellenborough had behaved in the handsomest
manner, and expressed his belief that he had brought bad luck to the
Government, for this was now the second difficulty into which they had
got by his instrumentality, the first having been the Election Clause
in the India Bill. Lord Derby hoped that this resignation would stop
the vote of censure in the House of Commons, as the House could not
hold responsible and punish the Cabinet for that with which they had
had no concern. If the House persisted, it was clear that the motives
were factious, and he hoped the Queen would allow him to threaten a
Dissolution of Parliament, which he was certain would stop it. The
Queen refused to give that permission; she said he might leave it
quite undecided whether the Queen would grant a Dissolution or not,
and take the benefit of the doubt in talking to others on the subject;
but she must be left quite free to act as she thought the good of the
country might require at the time when the Government should have been
beat; there had been a Dissolution within the year, and if a Reform
Bill was passed there must be another immediately upon it; in the
meantime most violent pledges would be taken as to Reform if a general
election were to take place now. Lord Derby concurred in all this, and
said he advised the threat particularly in order to render the reality
unnecessary; when she persisted in her refusal, however, on the
ground that she could not threaten what she was not prepared to do, he
appeared very much disappointed and mortified.
We then discussed the state of the question itself, and urged the
necessity of something being done to do away with the injurious
impression which the publication of the despatch must produce in
India, as the resignation of Lord Ellenborough left this quite
untouched, and Parliament might with justice demand this. He agreed,
after much difficulty, to send a telegraphic despatch, which might
overtake and mitigate the other. On my remark that the public were
under the impression that there had been collusion, and that Mr Bright
had seen the despatch before he asked his question for its production,
he denied this stoutly, but let us understand that Mr Bright had
known of the existence of such a despatch, and had wished to put his
question before, but had been asked to defer it until Lord Canning's
Proclamation should have appeared in the newspapers! (This is nearly
as bad!!) The Queen could not have pledged herself to dissolve
Parliament in order to support such tricks!
ALBERT.
It was arranged that Lord Derby should accept Lord Ellenborough's
resignation in the Queen's name.
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Ellenborough._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _11th May 1858_.
The Queen has to acknowledge Lord Ellenborough's letter, which she did
not wish to do before she had seen Lord Derby.
The latter has just left the Queen, and will communicate to Lord
Ellenborough the Queen's acceptance of his resignation, which he has
thought it right to tender to her from a sense of public duty.
[Pageheading: LORD DERBY'S DESPATCH]
_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._
ST JAMES'S SQUARE [_11th May_].
(9 P.M., _Tuesday_.)
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty the
expression of his hope that the discussion, or rather conversation,
which has taken place in the House of Lords this evening, may have
been not only advantageous to the Government, but beneficial in its
results to the public service....
After the discussion, Lord Ellenborough made his statement; and it is
only doing bare justice to him to say that he made it in a manner
and spirit which was most highly honourable to himself, and was fully
appreciated by the House.