The Vienna Conference--Literary Occupations--A Roman Catholic Privy
Councillor--Negotiations at Vienna--The Emperor Napoleon in
London--The Emperor's brilliant Reception--Russia refuses the Terms
offered--The Sebastopol Committee--Debate on the War--Visit to
Paris--Resignation of M. Drouyn de Lhuys--The Emperor's Journey to
the Crimea--The Repulse at the Redan--Visit to Thiers--A Dinner at
the Tuileries--Conversation with the Emperor--M. Guizot on the
War--Death of Lord Raglan--A Dinner at Princess Lieven's--The
Palace of Versailles--Revelations of Lord John Russell's
Mission--Dinner with the Emperor at Villeneuve l'Étang--Lord John
Russell's Conduct at Vienna--Excitement in London--Lord John's
Resignation--Lord John's Conduct explained--'Whom shall we
Hang?'--Prorogation of Parliament.
_March 31st_, 1855.--Three weeks have passed away and I have had
nothing to say; nor indeed have I anything now of the least importance,
and can only glance at the general aspect of affairs. The Government, on
the whole, seems in a somewhat better condition. They say Palmerston
speaks better than he did, and his good humour and civility please. At
last the offices, except the Under-Secretaryship to the Colonies, are
filled up. Lord Elgin and Lord Seymour successively refused the Duchy of
Lancaster, and after going a begging for many weeks Lord Harrowby has
taken it. Laing and Wilson, and I think somebody else, declined the Vice
Presidency of the Board of Trade, and they have got Bouverie.
Within these few days the hopes of peace have waxed faint. The fatal
third point is an insurmountable obstacle, and it seems likely that we
shall be condemned to fight it out more fiercely than ever, and without
Austria, who, as I all along expected, will not join us in forcing hard
conditions on Russia. It remains to be seen whether we or Austria are
in fault, assuming the rupture of the negotiations to be inevitable. If
Austria recedes from what she had already agreed to, she is; if we
require anything more, we are. Drouyn de Lhuys has been here for
twenty-four hours, and goes on to Vienna directly to bring things to a
conclusion one way or another. Clarendon is pleased with him. The
Emperor is to be here in three weeks.
Having no public events nor any secret information to record, I must put
down my own private concerns, uninteresting as they are. I am busy on
the task of editing a volume of Moore's correspondence left to me by
John Russell, and finishing the second article upon King Joseph's
Memoirs.[1] These small literary occupations interest and amuse me, and,
being quite out of the way of politics, and seeing nobody, except
Clarendon at rare intervals, who can or will tell me anything, it is
well I can amuse myself with them; and now that I am growing old (for I
shall be sixty-one the day after to-morrow) it is my aim to cultivate
these pleasures more and more, and make them my refuge against the
infirmities which beset me, and the loss of youth. My great fear is lest
my eyesight should fail, and I earnestly hope I may die before such a
calamity should befall me.
The war goes languidly on, and I hear Raglan and Canrobert are
squabbling instead of acting, and that it seems to be more the fault of
Canrobert; but the melancholy truth is that there are two incompetent
generals in command, who have no skill or enterprise, and are letting
the opportunity for attacking the enemy slip away. A divided command and
two independent armies are in themselves an immense drawback, but when
they begin to disagree it becomes fatal. We have now an enormous force
there, and yet they seem incapable of doing anything and of striking any
great and serious blow.
[Footnote 1: Mr. Greville wrote the review of the Memoirs of King
Joseph Bonaparte which appeared in two successive articles of the
_Edinburgh Review_.]
THE CATHOLIC OATH.
_April 1st._--I went to a Council yesterday and got into a difficulty.
Without any previous notice, Mr. Monsell, a Roman Catholic, came to be
made a Privy Councillor. I had never sworn a Roman Catholic and did not
know what to do, so I proposed to Monsell to put it off till another
day, and meanwhile I would ascertain how he was to be sworn. The
difficulty was told to the Queen, and the Prince set about finding what
was to be done. He looked out the 10th George IV. (Emancipation Act),
and, just as we were summoned into the Queen's presence, Granville
brought the volume, put it into my hands, and told me I must administer
to Monsell the oath set forth there, in lieu of the oaths of abjuration
and supremacy. I was sure it was a mistake; but there was no time to
remonstrate, and I was compelled to bring him in and administer the
oath. As soon as I got back to my office and looked into the matter I
found it was all wrong, and that he had not, in fact, been sworn at all.
What he ought to have done was to take this oath in one of the Law
Courts, and then to have the Privy Councillor's oath administered to
him, and so I sent him word.
Afterwards I met Sidney Herbert, and he told me what he believed to be
the cause of Drouyn de Lhuys' coming here, and the actual state of
affairs at Vienna. We have proposed the reduction of the fleet; the
Russians refuse. The Emperor Napoleon would like, if possible, to obtain
some great success in the Crimea, and is not indisposed to continue the
war if he can see a reasonable hope of such an achievement; but when he
despairs of this his mind inclines to the other alternative, to make
peace (which would be popular in France), and he does not care very much
about the terms and is not averse to waive the condition as to the
fleet. But our Government want to insist on it, or go on with the war,
and Sidney Herbert believes they have succeeded in talking over Drouyn
de Lhuys and persuading him to join us in this determination, and to
carry it off to Vienna. However, he is very likely to be talked over
again there, and it remains to be seen whether the Emperor, if he really
wishes for peace, will not join with Austria in opposing us, and
accepting some other conditions. I always fancied that we had come to a
regular unmistakeable agreement with Austria what we should ask of
Russia, and that she had bound herself to join in the war if the terms
agreed in were refused, but, according to Sidney Herbert, this has never
been done. Clarendon did, indeed, _at last_ state distinctly to Austria
the terms on which France and England meant to insist, and Austria
expressed her concurrence in them as a matter of opinion, and her desire
to obtain them, consenting also to unite her efforts to theirs in
attempting to obtain them; but she never consented to go to war if they
were not conceded, therefore we have no reason to complain of her if the
negotiations break off on these grounds, and she refuses to depart from
her neutrality. She has all along said, she wished with all her heart we
could succeed in taking Sebastopol, but as we had not succeeded, and
apparently could not, it was impossible to press very stringent terms on
Russia; and she has never held out any expectation to us of joining in
the war against Russia, unless Russia refuses such reasonable and not
humiliating terms of peace as she herself thinks indispensable for the
objects to the attainment of which she has all along been a party. The
best chance of peace now is that the Emperor Napoleon may think he is
not likely to do any great things in the Crimea and that peace is his
best policy, and he is the real arbiter of peace and war. If he prefers
following in the wake of England, and to defer to our war policy, peace
will ascend to Heaven, and the odious war will be resumed with more fury
than ever, and no one can guess how long it will last, nor what will be
the end of it.
THE EMPEROR NAPOLEON AT WINDSOR.
_April 17th._--Yesterday I went out 'with all the gazing town' to see
not the least curious of the many curious events I have lived to
witness, the entry of the Emperor and Empress of the French into London.
The day was magnificent, the crowd prodigious, the reception not very
clamorous, but cordial and respectful. A fine sight for them to see such
vast multitudes, so orderly and so prosperous, and without a single
soldier except their own escort. The Queen received them with the utmost
cordiality, and omitted none of the usual forms practised between
Sovereigns. She met the Imperial pair at the entrance to the Castle,
embraced the Emperor and then the Empress when she was presented to
her.
_April 20th._--The visit of the Emperor has been one continued ovation,
and the success of it complete. None of the Sovereigns who have been
here before have ever been received with such magnificence by the Court
or by such curiosity and delight by the people. Wherever and whenever
they have appeared, they have been greeted by enormous multitudes and
prodigious acclamations. The Queen is exceedingly pleased with both of
them; she thinks the Empress very natural, graceful, and attractive, and
the Emperor frank, cordial, and true. He has done his best to please
her, talked to her a great deal, amused her, and has completely
succeeded. Everybody is struck with his mean and diminutive figure and
vulgar appearance, but his manners are good and not undignified. He
talked a very long time to Lord Derby on Tuesday at Windsor and to Lord
Aberdeen on Wednesday. This last was very proper, because he had a great
prejudice against Aberdeen, and fancied he was his enemy, which Aberdeen
knew. When he was invested with the Garter, he took all sorts of
oaths--old feudal oaths--of fidelity and knightly service to the Queen,
and he then made her a short speech to the following effect:--'I have
sworn to be faithful to Your Majesty and to serve you to the best of my
ability, and my whole future life shall be spent in proving the
sincerity with which I have thus sworn, and my resolution to devote
myself to your service.' The fineness of the weather brought out the
whole population of London, as usual kept in excellent order by a few
policemen, and in perfect good humour. It was a beautiful sight last
night when the Royal and Imperial party went to the Opera in state; the
streets lit by gas and the houses illuminated and light as day,
particularly opposite the Travellers' Club, where I was. I am glad the
success of the visit has been so great, and the contentment of all the
parties concerned so complete, but it is well that all will be over
tomorrow, for such excitement and enthusiasm could not last much longer,
and the inconvenience of being beset by crowds, and the streets
obstructed, is getting tiresome.
I saw Cowley for a moment yesterday. He told me the Russians refused any
conditions which imposed loss of territory or limitation of naval
forces, and they declined to offer any counter project, though they are
ready to discuss anything we propose. He therefore considers the
continuance of the war unavoidable, and does not believe Austria will
join in it, though Drouyn de Lhuys still writes his own expectation that
she will. He said they had never said or done anything which bound them
to join, and that their diplomacy had been much more adroit and
successful than our's, but that this was principally the fault of the
French, who never would consent to take a peremptory course so as to
compel them to be explicit. The consequence of this is, that it will be
impossible to produce the diplomatic correspondence, and its retention
will put Parliament and the press in a fury, and expose the Government
to attacks which they will find it very difficult to repel or to
silence. They cannot give the reason why, and their enemies and
detractors will believe, or at least insist, that they do not dare
disclose their own share in the transaction. I asked Clarendon how it
was that the French Government in their last paper in the 'Moniteur'
said so positively that they had secured the cooperation of Austria if
the last conditions were refused by Russia; he replied that he supposed
they said so in order to make it the ground of an accusation against
Austria when the Conference broke up and she refuses to declare war.
Clarendon thinks we shall get the better of Russia, but that it will be
by blockading her ports and ruining her commerce, and not by military
operations, and that this may take two or three years or more, but is
certain in the end.[1]
[Footnote 1: The failure or suspension of the negotiations for peace at
Vienna was formally announced to Parliament on May 21, and the protocols
of the Conference laid upon the table.]
THE SEBASTOPOL COMMITTEE.
_May 24th._--The Sebastopol Committee is finished, and the result proves
that it is a very good thing to have had it, for no ill consequences
have come of it, and the evidence has benefited instead of injuring both
the Government and those who were most bitterly abused, especially
Hardinge and Newcastle, about the latter of whom there has been a
considerable reaction of opinion. In Parliament nothing has taken place
of much consequence. Ellenborough gave battle in the Lords and was
signally defeated. Layard had announced a hostile motion in the House of
Commons, which he has since given up to Disraeli, who brings forward a
regular want of confidence motion tonight, which will decide the fate of
the Government. Sir Francis Baring has moved an amendment which the
Peelites will not vote for, because it pledges the House to support the
war, they having now become furiously pacific; as if they were not
unpopular enough already, they are now doing all they can to mar their
own efficacy by giving their enemies a plausible case for attacking and
abusing them, and by breasting the tide of warlike zeal and passion,
which, though very absurd and very mischievous, is too strong and too
general to be openly and directly resisted at present. It is quite fit
and becoming to reason with it, and to endeavour to bring the public to
a more reasonable frame of mind, but great tact, caution, and good
management are required in doing this. It is very difficult to make out
what Gladstone and his friends (for it would be ridiculous to call them
a party) are at, and what they expect or desire in reference to their
political future. Palmerston is said to have done better in the House of
Commons lately than he did at first, but it is curious to see how
completely his popularity has evaporated. All the foolish people whose
pet he was, and who clamoured for him with the notion that he was to do
every sort of impossible thing, now that they find he can do no more
than other men, and that there never was any real difference between him
and his colleagues, are furious with him because they so deceived
themselves, and want to break the idol they set up.
_May 30th._--The division last Friday night gave Government a larger
majority than anybody expected,[1] and if it did not give them
permanent strength it averted immediate danger. Gladstone made a fine
speech, but gave great offence to all who are not for peace, and exposed
himself to much unpopularity. The discussion is only suspended till
Parliament meets again, when the amendments will be debated, and there
will no more divisions; but in the meantime the news which has arrived
of the successes in the Crimea, and the fair prospect there appears of
still greater advantages, must serve to silence the advocates of peace
and encourage those who are all for war, and to render a contest popular
which is likely to be crowned with brilliant results, and, as many
imagine, to give us the means of dictating peace on our own terms. I
believe in the prospect of success, but not that it will reduce the
Russians to make peace on our terms, particularly as the conditions will
infallibly be harder than before. But I do marvel that they did not make
peace at Vienna on the terms which were there offered them, when they
must have known that all the chances of war were against them. The
Emperor of Russia might have taken warning from the history and fate of
Napoleon, who constantly refused the terms he could have obtained, and
continually insisted on something more than his enemies would give him,
and by this obstinacy lost his crown. The most interesting incident
which occurred last week was the scene at the end of the debate between
Graham and John Russell, who had a fight of considerable asperity; and
according to all appearances the Peelites and the Whigs are completely
two. When Graham was reconciled to Lord John two or three years ago, he
vowed that nothing should separate them again, but 'quam parum stabiles
sunt hominum amicitiæ,' and now they appear to be as antagonistic as
ever. But, to be sure, Graham could not contemplate or foresee all the
tricks which Lord John played during the whole time he was a member of
Aberdeen's Government.
Notwithstanding the success of Government in the House of Commons and of
the armies in the Crimea, things are in a very unsatisfactory and
uncomfortable state here, and nobody knows what will happen. There is no
confidence in any party or any men, and everybody has a vague
apprehension of coming but undefined evil and danger. The world seems
out of joint.
[Footnote 1: Mr. Disraeli's Motion condemning the Government for their
misconduct of the war was rejected by 319 to 219. Lord John Russell
made a warlike speech in the course of this debate.]
A VISIT TO PARIS.
_Paris, June 17th._--Having resolved to go to Vichy for my health, here
I am on the road; I crossed over yesterday morning, a very disagreeable
but short passage from Folkestone, good journey by rail, and got here at
nine o'clock, being lodged very hospitably at the Embassy. French
carriages on the railway are much better than ours, particularly the
second class; the country between Boulogne and Paris looks well and
thriving. I had some talk with Cowley last night before we went to bed,
when he gave me an account of the circumstances of Drouyn de Lhuys'
resignation.[1] He also descanted on the difficulties of the Government
here and of the maintenance of the alliance, which he attributes up to
this time entirely to the good faith and fairness of the Emperor
himself, and his determination that nothing shall interrupt the good
understanding between the two countries, on which he is above all things
bent. The Emperor says it is a great misfortune that there are no men of
capacity or character whose services he can command, nor in fact any
men, if he could command their services, in whom the public would be
disposed to place confidence. Cowley had no very good opinion of Drouyn
de Lhuys, and said no reliance could be placed in him; but in some
respects he is a loss, because he has a certain capacity and clean
hands, he is enormously rich, and guiltless of any peculation or
jobbery. When Drouyn announced that he meant to go to Vienna, Lord
Cowley urged him to go to England first and come to an understanding
with the Cabinet there as to the terms which should be proposed at the
Conference. He consented and went, and Cowley urged Clarendon to have
the agreement put down in writing that there might be no mistake about
it. This was done, and Drouyn went to Vienna. When he took upon himself
to make the proposition he did, it was in direct opposition to his
agreement with us, but he thought he should bring the Emperor to concur
with him and to sanction it. The Emperor seemed at first disposed to do
so, and when he saw Cowley intimated as much to him. Cowley submitted
that it was quite contrary to the understanding with us, and objected on
every ground to the proposal. The Emperor said he really got quite
confused in the intricacies and details of this affair, but he would see
Drouyn again and speak to him upon it. Cowley requested (a very strange
request as he owned) that he might be present at the interview. The
Emperor seemed somewhat surprised, but acquiesced. When Cowley came he
found Drouyn had been there an hour, and that Marshal Vaillant was also
present. They went over the ground again and Drouyn said what he had to
say, when Cowley merely said he would not go into the general question
and would only ask whether M. Drouyn's proposal was in conformity with
what had been settled in London, and he appealed to Marshal Vaillant
whether the termination of the war on such terms would be advisable. It
was impossible to maintain that the terms were consistent with the joint
agreement, and Vaillant declared that if the French army was brought
away, and a peace made on conditions which would appear to tarnish the
honour of their arms, he would not answer for the consequences. This put
an end to the discussion. Drouyn de Lhuys retired, and as soon as he got
home sent his resignation to the Emperor, who wrote him back a very
goodhumoured answer advising him to recall it, and expressing a wish
that he would come and talk the matter over with him, when he had no
doubt they should come to a satisfactory understanding. Drouyn
persisted, and then the Emperor accepted his resignation and sent for
Walewski. I asked Cowley how Walewski was likely to do, and he said
wretchedly, and that he was not of a calibre to fill such a post.
THE EMPEROR'S JOURNEY TO THE CRIMEA.
He told me all about the intended journey of the Emperor to the Crimea
and why it was given up. The Emperor was bent on it, while all the
Ministers deprecated it and did all they could to prevent it. They
suggested that, if any misfortune occurred while he was there, he could
not quit the army; if any success, he would infallibly stay to pursue
it, so that his speedy return could not be counted on. This failed to
move him. The intention was that Jérome should be, not Regent, but Chief
of the Council of Ministers, and they advised Jérome only to consent to
take this office on condition that he was invested with the same
despotic power as the Emperor himself. This His Majesty would not
consent to, as the Ministers foresaw, and this was the reason why the
expedition was given up.
[Footnote 1: At the Conference at Vienna M. Drouyn de Lhuys departed
from the conditions of peace agreed to between the French and British
Governments, and was disposed to accept the more favourable terms which
were supported by Austria. This led to his disavowal and resignation on
his return to Paris. It turned out that Lord John Russell, the British
envoy to the Conference, had taken a similar course.]
_Paris, June 23rd._--I came here to pass through to Vichy, and
accordingly on Tuesday last to Vichy I went. I arrived there in the
evening, found a detestable apartment without a fireplace; the weather
was intolerable, it never ceased raining, and the cold was intense.
Finding that it was useless to take the waters or baths in such weather,
and being disgusted with the whole thing, I resolved to return to Paris,
which I did on Friday, and here I am comfortably established in the
Embassy again.
On my arrival I was greeted with the painful intelligence of the repulse
sustained by the French and English on the 18th in the attack on the
Mamelon and Redan batteries, and of the great losses which both armies
had suffered. This failure has cast a great gloom over Paris and London,
and the disappointment is greater because we had become so accustomed to
success that everybody regarded failure in anything as impossible.
Cowley told me that the Emperor was excessively annoyed, and the more
because they entirely disapprove of Pélissier's proceedings. Without
tying him down or attempting from hence to direct the operations of the
campaign, they had given Pélissier the strongest recommendations to
abstain from assaults which they had reason to believe would not be
decisive and would cost a vast number of lives, and they were very
anxious the operations against the Russians in the field should be
pressed instead. There had been some half angry communications between
the Government and Pélissier, who had talked of resigning the command.
The opinions of the Government had been principally formed from those of
General Niel, who had constantly reported his conviction to the above
mentioned effect, and had earnestly deprecated these assaults. Then
there is reason to apprehend that such unsuccessful attempts may produce
bad blood and mutual accusations between the allied forces. Already
Pélissier and Raglan have begun to cast the blame of the failure on each
other, though apparently the difference has not yet swelled to any
serious amount. I have always thought that it would have been better to
have no divided command, but to place an English corps under a French
commander-in-chief, and a French squadron under an English admiral. This
was what the Emperor proposed, and he wrote a letter himself on the
subject, which Cowley promised to show me. We have had much conversation
about the Emperor, his character and his capacity, and I am puzzled how
to understand and to do justice to the latter. Being such as he is
represented to be, and having the defects he has, it is difficult to
comprehend his having accomplished the great things he has, and raised
himself to such a situation and such a height of personal power.
_June 24th._--Last night I went to Thiers', where I found Mignet, Roger
du Nord, and others of his adherents, none of whom I recollected, nor
they me. This morning I called on Achille Fould, who told me the Emperor
knew I was here and would like me to be presented to him, and it was
settled that this should be done. I am nothing loth, for I have a
curiosity to see this remarkable man and to converse with him. Madame de
Lieven told me this morning that not long before the Revolution of '48
Jérome Bonaparte had entreated her to exert her influence to get him
made a peer.
A DINNER AT THE TUILERIES.
_June 26th._--Yesterday morning arrived an invitation to dine at the
Tuileries the same evening. I went there, was ushered into a room with
eight or ten men in it, none of whom I knew except Count Bacciochi,
whom I had met at Fould's the day before--three in uniform, the rest in
plain clothes. A man, whom I suppose to be the _aide de camp de
service_, came forward to receive me and invited me to sit down.
Presently the same or another man came and said 'Milord' (they all
milorded me), _'vous vous mettrez à table, s'il vous plaît, à côté de
l'Empereur à sa droite._' I was then taken into the next room, which
adjoins the cabinet of the Emperor. In a few minutes His Majesty made
his appearance; he immediately came up to me, bowed very civilly, and
asked me the usual questions of when I came to Paris, etc. In a minute
dinner was announced and we went in. As we walked in he said to me,
'L'Impératrice sera bien fâchée de ne vous avoir pas vu.' At dinner,
which did not last above twenty-five minutes, he talked (a sort of
dropping conversation) on different subjects, and I found him so easy to
get on with that I ventured to start topics myself. After dinner we
returned to the room we had left, and after coffee, seeing me staring
about at the portraits, he said all his family were there, and he told
me who they all were and the history of these portraits, which, he said,
had made the tour of the world.
After this he asked me to sit down, which I did at a round table by his
side, and M. Visconti on the other side of me, and then we had a
conversation which lasted at least an hour and a half on every
imaginable subject. It was impossible not to be struck with his
simplicity, his being so natural and totally without any air or
assumption of greatness, though not undignified, but perfectly _comme il
faut_, with excellent manners, and easy, pleasant, fluent conversation.
I was struck with his air of truth and frankness, and though of course I
could not expect in my position and at this first interview with him
that he should be particularly expansive, yet he gave me the idea of
being not only not reserved but as if, when intimate, he would have a
great deal of _abandon_. It was difficult to bring away all the subjects
he discussed, and I do not know that he said anything wonderfully
striking, but he made a very favourable impression on me, and made me
wish to know more of him, which I am never likely to do.
He talked of the war and its conduct, of the faults committed, and of
the characters and talents of the generals engaged, comparing them, much
to their disadvantage, with the generals of the Empire. I asked him
which were the best, and he said all the African generals were much of
the same calibre: Changarnier, Lamoricière, St. Arnaud, Canrobert,
Pélissier--very little difference between them. The war they waged in
Africa was of a peculiar character, and did not render them more capable
of conducting great strategical operations in Europe. He talked of
Thiers and Odilon Barrot, and described scenes with the latter in
Council when Barrot was his Minister; of the 'Times' and its influence;
of Spain; in short, of a vast variety of subjects; of the Exhibition
here, and with some appearance of disappointment that the people will
not go to it. His simplicity and absence of all _faste_ were remarkable;
thus, I asked him what he thought of the Hango affair, when he said it
was not so bad as had been reported. 'I have had an account of it from
Admiral Penaud to-day; should you like to see it?' I said 'Yes,' when he
got up, went into his cabinet, and came back with the letter in his
hand; and a little while after, when we were talking of the siege of
Sebastopol, he asked if I had ever seen a very good engineer's map of
the whole thing; and when I said I had not, he said, 'Then I will show
you one;' and he again went into his cabinet and brought it out. After
this long palaver he took leave of me, shaking hands with much apparent
cordiality.
_June 27th._--Bosquet has written to the Emperor that these assaults on
the Russian works are only a useless waste of time. Marshal Vaillant has
told Cowley that they agree in this, but they must either recall their
general or let him go on in his own way, and if they interfere, the
blame of any disaster will inevitably fall on them, no matter what might
be the cause. I dined with Flahaut yesterday; in the morning rode round
all the boulevards, a grand promenade by which Paris is well seen; and I
met Guizot at Madame de Lieven's, who talked of the war and asked how
it was ever to end. 'People go to war,' he said, 'to make conquests or
to make peace; you profess not to intend the first, how do you propose
to effect the second? By reducing Russia to accept your terms--can you
do so? will she yield? If not, what then?--you may wound her, but you
can't strike her in a vital part; and the more barbarous she is, the
more she will consent to suffer and the less she will be disposed to
yield.' He gave me an account (in short) of the bother about the Academy
and the Emperor's interference. They do not mean to give way, but they
think he will; if he does not, he will have to dissolve them.
DEATH OF LORD RAGLAN.
_Paris, July 5th._--One of my attacks of gout came on this day week and
disabled me from going anywhere, doing anything, and still more from
writing anything. In the meanwhile we received the news of Lord Raglan's
death.[1] Though they do not care about it here, there has been a very
decent display of sympathy and regret, and the Emperor wrote to Cowley
with his own hand a very proper letter. There is good reason to believe
that the fatal termination of Lord Raglan's illness was in some (perhaps
in great) measure produced by vexation and disappointment at the failure
of the 18th, and annoyance at the many embarrassments of his position.
It is certain that for a considerable time great disunion and poignant
differences existed between him and the French generals. Canrobert wrote
home a very unhandsome letter, in which he gave as one of his reasons
for resigning the impossibility of going on with Raglan. I believe
Raglan complained of Canrobert with much better reason. On the 18th
Pélissier changed the plan of attack that had been agreed on between
them; and, besides all the mistakes that occurred in the French
operations, there seems to have been a want of continual and active
concert between the two commanders-in-chief during the operations.
Raglan proposed a general attack on the town when the assaults failed,
which Pélissier refused to agree to. There is a fair probability this
would have succeeded, as an English force did get into a part of the
town, stayed there some time, and got away unobserved. There is now a
bad feeling, a disposition to recrimination, between the two armies
which may have very bad effects, and it is awful to think our army is
under an untried man of whom nothing is known, and who is not likely to
have more weight with, and receive more consideration from, the French
generals than his predecessor. However desirable unity of command may
be, in the present temper of the troops and after all that has occurred
it would be impossible. General Torrens, who is here, speaks in high
terms of Raglan, especially of his magnanimity in bearing all the blame
which has been thrown upon him and never saying one word in his own
vindication, which might have entirely exonerated him but have done some
injury to the cause. Torrens thinks that in all or almost all in which
he has appeared most obnoxious to censure he could have triumphantly
excused himself, and have proved that the causes were attributable to
others and not to himself. His must have been a painful as it was an
ungrateful service, and it was a melancholy and untimely end.
[Footnote 1: Lord Raglan died in the Crimea on June 28.]
_Paris, July 6th._--I went yesterday to the Exhibition in the morning;
then to Notre Dame and the Luxembourg Gardens and drove about Paris;
dined _en trio_ with Madame de Lieven and Guizot, when there was of
course nothing but political talk. Guizot thinks there has been not only
a series of diplomatic blunders, but a wonderful want of _invention_,
not to strike out some means of adjusting this quarrel, in which I agree
with him. This morning Labouchere and I went to Versailles. Fould had
given me a letter to the Director of the Museum there, M. Soulié, whom
we found very intelligent, well informed, and obliging. We told him our
object was to avoid the _giro regolare_ of the endless rooms fitted up
with bad pictures by Louis Philippe, and to see the apartments full of
historical associations from the time of Louis XIV. down to the
Revolution. We were completely gratified, and he took us over everything
we wished to see, being admirably qualified as a cicerone by his
familiarity with the localities and the history belonging to them. We
saw all the apartments in which Louis XIV. lived, and what remains of
those of Madame de Maintenon. The Palace has been so tumbled about at
different times, and such alterations made in it, that it is not always
easy to ascertain correctly where the rooms of certain personages were,
but our guide proved to our complete satisfaction that certain rooms he
showed us were those which really did belong to Madame de Maintenon. We
saw too in minute detail the apartments of Louis XVI. and Marie
Antoinette, and the passages through which she fled to escape from the
irruption of the mob on the 5th of October. The whole thing was as
interesting as possible.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S RETURN.
_Paris, July 9th._--I meant to have left Paris last night, but, an
invitation arriving to dine with the Emperor at St. Cloud today, I put
off going till tomorrow. I went yesterday to Versailles to see the
_grandes eaux_ and was disappointed, and dined there with the
Ashburtons. This morning telegraphic news came of a Russian sortie last
night; no details of course. Yesterday we were thrown into consternation
by the intelligence from London of the revelations of John Russell in
the House of Commons and the discussion thereupon. Le Marchant wrote to
Labouchere and told him the effect was as bad as possible, and the whole
case very deplorable. My own opinion is that nobody could have acted
more indiscreetly and unjustifiably than John Russell has done, and he
has sacrificed his character and authority in a way which he will find
it difficult to get over. But I am disposed to agree with him that the
terms proposed by Austria, if they could have been brought to maturity
and carried out, were quite sufficient to make peace upon, and that the
negotiations ought to have continued in order to endeavour to bring
about this result. The effect of this public announcement to the whole
world, that the English Minister at the Congress as well as the French
one was willing to accept the terms proposed by Austria, will not fail
to make a great sensation, and produce a considerable effect both in
Germany and in France. In England it is doubtful whether it will have
any other result than to damage John Russell himself, and increase the
vulgar prejudice against public men. My own idea is that it will render
the war still more unpopular in France, and the English alliance
likewise, because it will encourage the prevailing notion that the war
is carried on for English interests and in deference to the wishes of
England. Though John Russell declared that the resolution of the Emperor
to part with Drouyn de Lhuys and reject the Austrian proposal had been
made before the intention of the English Cabinet was known, this will
not be believed, or at all events everybody will be convinced that he
knew what the sentiments of England were, and that he really acted in
conformity with them, as was beyond all doubt the case.
A DINNER AT VILLENEUVE L'ÉTANG.
_July 10th._--I dined at Villeneuve l'Étang. We went to the Palace of
St. Cloud in Cowley's carriage, where we found an equerry and one of the
Emperor's carriages, which took us to Villeneuve. A small house, pretty
and comfortable enough, and a small party, all English--Duke and Duchess
of Hamilton, Lord Hertford, Lord and Lady Ashburton, General Torrens and
his _aide de camp_, Cowley and myself, the Duc de Bassano, Comte de
Montebello, the _aide de camp de service_, and M. Valabrègue, _écuyer_,
that was the whole party. The Emperor sat between the two ladies, taking
the Duchess in to dinner. It lasted about three quarters of an hour, and
as soon as it was over His Majesty took us all out to walk about the
place, see the dairy and a beautiful Bretonne cow he ordered to be
brought out, and then to scull on the lake, or _étang_, which gives its
name to the place. There were a number of little boats for one person to
scull and one to sit, and one larger for two each; the Emperor got into
one with the Duchess, and all the rest of the people as they liked, and
we passed about half an hour on the water. On landing, ices, etc., were
brought, and the carriages came to the door at nine o'clock, a _char à
banc_ with four _percherons_ and postillions exactly like the old French
postboy, and several other open carriages and pair. The two ladies got
into the centre of the _char à banc_, Cowley, Hertford, and I were
invited to get up before, and the Emperor himself got up behind with
somebody else, I did not see who. We then set off and drove for some
time through the woods and drives of Villeneuve and St. Cloud, and at
last, at about ten o'clock, we were set down at the Palace. There we all
alighted, and, after walking about a little, the Emperor showing us the
part which Marie Antoinette had built and telling some anecdotes
connected with Louis XVIII. and Louis Philippe, and the Château, he
shook hands with all of us very cordially and dismissed us. His Majesty
got into the _char à banc_ and returned to Villeneuve, and we drove back
to Paris. When we were walking about the court of the Château (it was
quite dark) the sentinel challenged us--'Qui va là?' when the Emperor
called out in a loud voice, 'L'Empereur.'
Of course, in this company there was nothing but general conversation,
and I had no opportunity of having any with His Majesty; but he was
extremely civil, offering me his cigars, which I declined, and
expressing anxiety that I should not catch cold. He made the same
impression on me as before as to his extreme simplicity and the easiness
of his intercourse; but I was struck with his appearance being so very
_mesquin_, more than I thought at first.
Lady Ashburton told me she had received a letter from Ellice, telling
her that the affair in the House of Commons had produced the most
serious effect, and that it would probably end in the retirement of John
Russell, and eventually to a change of Government. He had got a story,
which I utterly disbelieve, that Milner Gibson had been instigated by
John Russell himself to give him this opportunity of saying what he did,
which was certainly more than he need have said.[1] Lord John seems for
some time past to have been bereft of his senses, and to commit nothing
but blunders one after another. What has been passing in his mind, and
what his real objects are or have been, it would puzzle anybody to say.
If he had personal views and wanted to regain the station and power
which he had lost, never did any man take such false steps and pursue so
erroneous a course to obtain his ends. He had in some measure retrieved
the character and consideration which he forfeited by his conduct at the
beginning of this year; but I do not see how he is ever to get over
this, nor how his followers can any longer have any confidence in him,
and I do not believe the country at large ever will. As to his opinion
on the terms of peace, I agree with it, and think it would have been
wiser to close with Buol's proposal, and to continue to negotiate; but
this makes no difference as to his conduct in the affair, for which
there is no excuse. He never ought to have committed himself at Vienna;
his instructions were clear and precise and quite inconsistent with
Buol's proposition. He might have engaged to bring it before his
Government, but should, especially as he was a Cabinet Minister, have
abstained from expressing any opinion of his own upon it. He appears at
Vienna to have been easily talked over, and to have been exceedingly
wanting in diplomatic finesse and penetration; but all I have picked up
here in conversation proves to me that there have been errors
innumerable and the greatest mistakes in the conduct of these affairs
throughout, and the exigencies of the alliance and the necessity of
concerting everything to the most minute particular with both Cabinets
have produced results not less unfortunate in diplomacy than in war. The
affair before Sebastopol the night before last turns out to have been of
no importance, only a demonstration against the English lines.
[Footnote 1: On July 6, Lord John Russell declared in the House of
Commons, in answer to a question put by Mr. Milner Gibson, that he was
personally convinced that the terms proposed at Vienna by the Austrian
Government gave a fair prospect of the termination of hostilities, but
that on his return to England the Government declined to accept them. M.
Drouyn de Lhuys, the French envoy, had also been in favour of these
terms. This declaration appeared to be wholly inconsistent with the
warlike speech which Lord John had made, on his return, on May 24. Sir
E. B. Lytton then gave notice of a motion condemning the conduct of the
Ministers charged with negotiating at Vienna; but Lord John Russell
anticipated the inevitable vote of censure by resigning office, and he
was succeeded in the Colonial Department by Sir William Molesworth. This
transaction was held to reflect deep discredit on Lord John Russell's
conduct, and justifies the severe language applied to him in the text,
but this was somewhat mitigated by Mr. Greville in a subsequent
passage.]
LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S EXPLANATION.
_London, July 13th._--I left Paris on Tuesday night at 7.30, got to
Calais at three; low water and steamer three miles out at sea; went out
in a boat in a torrent of rain which had lasted the whole journey and
all day. Train was just gone when we got to Dover, but we arrived in
town about eleven. I found a precious state of affairs, all confusion
and consternation, Bulwer having given notice of a motion of want of
confidence on account of John Russell, whose affair has brought himself
and the Government to the very brink and almost to the certainty of
ruin. There is as much excitement against Palmerston's Government, all
on account of Lord John, as there was a few months ago against Aberdeen.
I found Brooks's in a state of insurrection, and even the
Attorney-General (Cockburn) told me that the Liberal party were resolved
to go no further with John Russell, and that nothing but his resignation
could save the Government, even if that could; that they might be
reconciled to him hereafter, but as long as the war lasted they
repudiated him. Meanwhile he has not resigned. There was a long Cabinet
the day before yesterday in which they discussed the state of affairs,
and what measures could be taken. Lord John offered to resign, but they
would not hear of it, and came to a resolution to stand or fall
together. I saw Clarendon yesterday, who was fully aware of the
imminence of the danger and of the probability of their being out on
Monday; he said Lord John's whole conduct was inconceivable, and he knew
not to what to attribute his strange speech, in which he had made for
himself a much worse case than the circumstances really warrant and
given to the world impressions which are not correct; for in point of
fact he did not urge Buol's proposal upon the Cabinet, but when he laid
it before them and found it not acceptable, he at once yielded to all
the arguments against it, and instead of making any attempt to get peace
made on those terms, he joined with all his colleagues in their
conviction of the necessity of carrying on the war vigorously; and this
conviction induced him to make the warlike speech with which he is now
reproached as being inconsistent with the opinions he was entertaining
(as it is said) at the time he made it. Yesterday he attempted to make
something of an explanation, but he only floundered further into the
mire, and was laughed at. Everybody thinks he made his case worse
rather than better, but he really seems to have lost his head. His whole
conduct at Vienna and here has exhibited nothing but a series of
blunders and faults, and he has so contrived it, that no explanations he
can possibly make will extenuate them, or place him in a tolerable light
in the eyes of the public. In the morning yesterday I had occasion to
call on Disraeli about some business, when he talked over the state of
affairs very freely and gave me to understand that he intended and
expected to turn out the Government and to come in with his party, but
he owned that their materials for forming a tolerable Government were
very scanty, that he would not attempt their old Government over again,
but, except Lytton Bulwer, of whom he spoke in terms of high praise, he
knew not where to find any fresh men worth anything.
_Bath, July 19th._--I came here on Saturday night. In the course of
Friday morning I met Drumlanrig, who told me the subordinate place men
had caused John Russell to be informed that if he did not resign they
should, and vote for Bulwer's motion on Monday. This produced his
resignation, but under circumstances as mortifying as possibly could be,
and which must have made him deeply regret that he did not resign at
first, although he is not to be blamed for having yielded to the wishes
of his colleagues, and I am satisfied he did so from the best motives.
It was no sooner known that he had resigned than the excitement began to
subside, and everybody thought that Bulwer would withdraw his motion,
and at all events nobody doubted that it would come to nothing. The
motion was withdrawn but the debate took place, and such a debate!--it
was impossible to read it without indignation and disgust. Bulwer's
speech was a tissue of foul abuse with the grossest and most wilful
misrepresentations and endeavours to draw inferences he knew to be false
and fallacious, with the hope and purpose of damaging the characters of
the Ministers. In these times, when the great evil is the bad opinion
which the public has been led to entertain of public men, Bulwer
endeavours, for a mere party purpose, to aggravate that hostile feeling
and to make the world believe that, in a great party and a Cabinet
composed of men whose characters have never been impugned, there is
neither truth, sincerity, nor good faith, and by producing such an
impression to bring the aristocracy into greater disrepute. Disraeli, of
course, spoke in the same tone, Palmerston was very bad, and his speech
was quite unbecoming his position. John Russell's defence was not
calculated to relieve him from the weight of obloquy and unpopularity he
had brought on himself, and the whole thing was unsatisfactory, except
that it denoted the end of the contest and the disappointment of the
Opposition, whose hopes had been so highly raised.
APOLOGY FOR LORD JOHN.
After much consideration of John Russell's conduct, I think it is not
obnoxious to the severe censure with which it has been visited, and
though he has committed errors, they are venial ones and admit of a fair
explanation. Had not Buol's publication revealed to the world what had
passed between them confidentially, nothing of it would have been known,
and he would have been left to the enjoyment of the popularity he had
gained by his anti-Russian speech. The statement about him in Buol's
Circular naturally led to questions, and then it was necessary to tell
everything and lay bare the arcana of Cabinets and Conferences; and when
he endeavoured to explain his own conduct it became, amidst all the
complexities of the case itself, its endless variety of details and
confusion of dates, next to impossible to unravel it satisfactorily, and
quite impossible to protect himself from the imputations which an
unscrupulous and malignant assailant could easily contrive to bring
against him; and in this great difficulty he displayed no tact and
ingenuity in extricating himself from the dilemma in which he was
placed; on the contrary, he went blundering on, exposing himself to many
charges, all plausible and some true, of inconsistency, inaccuracy, and
insincerity, and he made in his speeches a case against himself which
left very little for his enemies to do. It might be strange in any other
man, but is perhaps only consistent in him, that he is now more
indignant with the friends who refused to follow and support him on
this occasion than either ashamed or angry with himself for having
blundered into such a scrape. He writes, meanwhile, to his brother, who
has sent me his letter, in these terms:--'I have endeavoured to stand by
and support Palmerston, too much so, I fear, for my own credit, but had
I resigned on my return from Vienna, I should have been abused as
wishing to trip him up and get his place: in short, the situation was
one of those where only errors were possible. I have acted according to
my own conscience; let that suffice.' False reasoning and wounded pride
are both apparent in this letter, but he is quite right when he says
that 'only errors had become possible.' There is no course he could have
taken that would not have exposed him to bitter attacks and reproaches,
and these unavoidable errors were not confined to himself.
LORD JOHN'S CONDUCT AT VIENNA.
The first thing that strikes me is that the Cabinet ought to have
accepted his resignation when he first tendered it; but there were no
doubt difficulties and objections to that course, and their reluctance
to let him throw himself overboard was not unnatural and was generous.
The defence which his conduct really admits of may be (to state it very
briefly) thus set forth. I put it loosely, and as it strikes me, taking
a general view of the case; to make it more accurate and complete, the
dates and the documents should be before me, which they are not. He went
to Paris with instructions precisely corresponding with what was
verbally arranged in London between Drouyn de Lhuys and the Cabinet, and
they were conjointly to propose the conditions which the two Governments
had agreed to require from Russia; but still they were not the bearers
of an Ultimatum, they did not go to give law to Russia, or as judges to
pronounce sentence upon her. They went to confer and to negotiate, to
endeavour to obtain the precise terms which would be entirely
satisfactory to their two Governments, and failing in this to see what
they could obtain. If they were instructed to insist on the limitation,
just as they proposed it at the Conference, and to accept nothing else,
nothing either short of it or varying from it, then the very idea of a
Conference and a negotiation was a mockery and a delusion. It was a
mockery to invite the Russian plenipotentiary to make proposals, and the
conduct of the Allies was disingenuous and deceitful. Certainly Austria
never contemplated, still less would she have been a party to, such a
course of proceeding; and her notion was, and, of course, that of Russia
also, that there should be a _bonâ fide_ negotiation, and an attempt to
bring about an understanding by the only way in which an understanding
ever can be brought about--mutual concessions. We proposed the
limitation scheme, and Austria backed us up in it cordially, sincerely,
and forcibly, at least to all appearance. Russia rejected it on the
ground of its incompatibility with her honour and dignity. Then Russia
made proposals, which the Allies, Austria included, rejected as
insufficient. John Russell and Drouyn de Lhuys appear to have fought
vigorously in the spirit of their instructions, but when they found
there was no chance of the Russians consenting to the limitation, they
both became anxious to try some other plan, by which peace might
possibly be obtained, and they each suggested something. At last, when
the Conference was virtually at an end, as a last hope and chance Buol
produced his scheme. John Russell had already committed himself to an
approval of the principle of it, by the plan he had himself suggested,
and, when he found that both his French and Turkish colleagues were
willing to accept it, it is not surprising that he should have told Buol
privately and confidentially that he acquiesced in it, and would urge it
on his Government. As it has turned out, this was a great indiscretion
for which he has been severely punished. As he had every reason to
believe that Buol's plan would not be acceptable to his own Government,
what he ought to have done was to give notice to Clarendon that such a
proposal had been made, and to beg it might be considered before any
final resolution was taken, and to tell Buol that he had done so; to
promise that he would submit to the Cabinet all the arguments that had
been used in its favour, but to abstain from any expression of his own
opinion, and shelter himself from the necessity of giving any by the
tenour of his own instructions. When he found the French Minister for
Foreign Affairs consenting, he might very well suppose that the French
Government would not reject the proposal, and that he should not be
justified in putting a peremptory veto on what France was disposed to
accept as sufficient. Besides, although he has never put forward such an
argument in any of his speeches, he may have thought, as I do, that
'counterpoise' and 'limitation' were the same thing in principle, and
the only difference between them one of mode and degree. Buol's
counterpoise involved limitation, our limitation was to establish a
counterpoise; therefore, even in the spirit of the instructions and
arguments of the French and English Governments, their plan of
limitation having failed, Buol's plan of counterpoise was entitled to
consideration,[1] and the only question ought to have been whether it
would have been effectual for the purpose common to all, and whether it
would be an honourable mode of terminating the war.
John Russell's fault was committing himself to Buol as approving his
plan before he knew how it would be viewed at home; but I see neither
impossibility nor inconsistency in his having regarded it favourably at
Vienna, and being biassed by all the arguments in its favour which there
beset him on all sides, and when he returned to England and found the
opinions of all his colleagues adverse to it, and heard their reasons
for being so, that he should have been convinced by them, have
subscribed to the general decision, and joined cordially with them in
the vigorous prosecution of the war. Having come finally to this
conclusion, his warlike speech was not unnatural, and he made it
probably very much to prove to his own colleagues that he was in earnest
with them. There was no necessity for his proclaiming what had passed at
Vienna, as nothing had happened in consequence, and the question was not
what impression had been made on his mind there in the course of the
negotiations, but what was the opinion and what the resolution at which
he finally arrived when all was over. But he has repeatedly in the
course of his career contrived to do a vast deal of mischief by a very
few words, and so it was in this instance. When he was driven to
_confess_ that he had endorsed Buol's proposal, and said that he was
still of the same opinion, his opponents were able with every appearance
of truth to say that he had intended to conceal what he had done at
Vienna, and to deceive the country, both as to his past conduct and his
present opinions; and as it was obvious from his own avowal that he
still was of the same opinion as at Vienna, his war speech was
hypocritical and insincere, and he was unfit to be in a Cabinet pledged
to carry on the war earnestly and vigorously. Against such an attack it
was very difficult to make a good defence, and I doubt whether the most
lucid and circumstantial statement and the most natural explanation of
his own motives and sentiments at different periods of the transaction
would have received a patient hearing and dispassionate consideration.
The House of Commons and the public were in that frame of mind that will
not listen, and cannot be fair and just, and he became, and could hardly
avoid becoming, the victim of his own want of caution and prudent
reserve and the excessive complication of the circumstances and details
of the case.
[Footnote 1: The proposal submitted to the Conference by Count Buol was
that each of the Powers should have the right to maintain a limited
naval power in the Black Sea. The whole discussion turned upon
suppression of the naval supremacy of Russia in the Black Sea and the
manner in which it was to be effected.]
COMMAND OF THE ARMY.
_London, July 28th._--I returned from Bath yesterday; went to Newmarket
in the evening and returned this morning. There is nothing new at home
and abroad; to all outward appearance the siege standing still, but they
say it is going on in a safe and judicious manner calculated to bring
about success. General Simpson wants to resign, but no man fit to
succeed him can be found.[1] I have read the pamphlet 'Whom shall we
Hang?' and think it makes a very good case for the late Government,
especially Newcastle, but it is so long that few people will read it;
and though it may convince and satisfy some one here and there, it will
not suffice to stem the torrent which is so swollen by ignorance and
malice. At Brooks's this afternoon I met Fitzroy, who said a great deal
to me about the condition of the Government, of the state and
disposition of the House of Commons, and Palmerston's management there,
and his conduct as a leader.
[Footnote 1: Upon the death of Lord Raglan General Simpson, an officer
of whom little was known, succeeded, as senior in rank, to the command
of the army. He retained the command but a short time, General
Codrington having been appointed by the Government to succeed him.]
_London, August 14th._--Since my last date I have been to Goodwood, and
since then here, having had nothing to note beyond what has appeared in
all the newspapers. Parliament was prorogued yesterday, after a session
of average duration, but marked by a great many incidents of a
disagreeable character, and exhibiting a downward tendency as regards
the future tranquillity and prosperity of the country. The last few days
were marked by an angry contest provoked by Lord Grey in the Lords, not
altogether without cause: the Limited Liability Bill came up so late
that, according to the Standing Order, it could not be considered.
Government moved the suspension of the Order, which was carried, but
there was no time to discuss properly the provisions of the bill, and it
was hurried through the House by force, probably in an incomplete form.
Grey was very angry, and fought it tooth and nail, declaring his
opposition to a Government which had, he insisted, behaved so ill. Mr.
Monsell was made a Privy Councillor, the oath having been altered to
meet his scruples, in spite of all the remonstrances I could offer
against such an unworthy compliance as this appears to me.