Chapter XXVI
1857
Queen Victoria to Mr Labouchere.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 8th January 1857.
The despatches from Sir George Grey[1] which the Queen returns are most interesting. The two chief objects to accomplish appear to be the bringing the Kaffirs in British Kaffraria within the pale of the law, so that they may know the blessings of it--and the re-absorption, if possible, of the Orange River Free State. To both these objects the efforts of the Government should be steadily directed.
[Footnote 1: See ante, 26th July, 1856. The task of dealing with the Hottentots and Kaffirs, and coming to an understanding with the recalcitrant Boers, was a difficult one.]
[Pageheading: HOME AND FOREIGN POLICY]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
BROADLANDS, 13th January 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and he and Lady Palmerston will have the honour of waiting upon your Majesty as soon as he is able to move. He is, however, at present on crutches, and can hardly expect to be in marching order for some few days to come. With regard to the matters that are likely to be discussed when Parliament meets, Viscount Palmerston would beg to submit that the one which has for some months past occupied the attention of all Europe, namely, the execution of the Treaty of Paris, has been settled in a manner satisfactory to all parties; and this is not only a great relief to the Government, but is also a security for the continuance of the Anglo-French Alliance, which would have been greatly endangered by the discussions and explanations that might otherwise have been forced on.
The various questions of difference between your Majesty's Government, and that of the United States, have also been settled, and the diplomatic relations between the two countries are about to be replaced upon their usual footing. This result will have given great satisfaction to the commercial and manufacturing interests.
Some discussion will take place as to the Expedition to the coast of Persia, and some persons will, of course, find fault with the whole policy pursued on that matter; but people in general will understand that Herat is an advanced post of attack against British India, and that whatever belongs nominally to Persia must be considered as belonging practically to Russia, whenever Russia may want to use it for her own purposes.
The outbreak of hostilities at Canton[2] was the result of the decision of your Majesty's officers on the spot, and not the consequence of orders from home. The first responsibility must therefore rest with the local authorities, but Viscount Palmerston cannot doubt that the Government will be deemed to have acted right in advising your Majesty to approve the proceedings, and to direct measures for obtaining from the Chinese Government concessions which are indispensable for the maintenance of friendly relations between China and the Governments of Europe.
Of domestic questions, that which will probably be the most agitated will be a large and immediate diminution of the Income Tax; but any such diminution would disturb the financial arrangements of the country, and it is to be hoped that Parliament will adopt the scheme which will be proposed by Sir G. C. Lewis, by which the Income Tax would be made equal in each of the next three years, the amount now fixed by Law for 1857 being diminished, but the amount now fixed by Law for 1858 and 1859 being increased....
Viscount Palmerston hears from persons likely to know, that the Conservative Party are not more united than they were last Session. That Mr Disraeli and the great bulk of his nominal followers are far from being on good terms together, and that there is no immediate junction to be expected between Mr Disraeli and Mr Gladstone.[3]
Mr Cobden has given it to be understood that he wishes at the next General Election to retire from the West Riding of Yorkshire. The real fact being that the line he took about the late war has made him so unpopular with his constituents that he would probably not be returned again.[4]
Viscount Palmerston has heard privately and confidentially that Lord John Russell wrote some little time ago to the Duke of Bedford to say that it had been intimated to him that an offer would be made to him if he were disposed to accept it, to go to the House of Lords and to become there the Leader of the Government. In case your Majesty may have heard this report, Viscount Palmerston thinks it right to say that no such communication to Lord John Russell was ever authorised by him, nor has been, so far as he is aware, ever made, and in truth Viscount Palmerston must candidly say that in the present state of public opinion about the course which Lord John has on several occasions pursued, he is not inclined to think that his accession to the Government would give the Government any additional strength.
[Footnote 2: See ante, Introductory Note, to Chapter XXVI. The difficulty with China had arisen out of her refusal to throw open the city of Canton to European trade in conformity with the Treaty of Nankin, ante, vol. i. 23rd November, 1842. Sir John Bowring, Chief Superintendent of Trade (and, in effect, British Plenipotentiary) at Hong-Kong, had resented this, and the feeling thus engendered had come to a crisis on the occasion of the seizure of the crew of the Arrow.]
[Footnote 3: The probability of this combination was now being perpetually mooted, and, in fact, the two ex-Chancellors combined in attacking the Budget.]
[Footnote 4: He stood instead for Huddersfleld, and was defeated by an untried politician; one Liberal (the present Lord Ripon) and one Conservative were returned unopposed in the West Riding.]
[Pageheading: CHURCH APPOINTMENTS]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 25th February 1857.
The Queen would wish to know before she approves of the appointment of Mr Alford, of Quebec Chapel, to the head Deanery of Canterbury, whether he is a very Low Churchman, as Lord Palmerston will remember that he agreed in her observation after the appointment of several of the Bishops, that it would be advisable to choose those who were of moderate opinions--not leaning too much to either side. Extreme opinions lead to mischief in the end, and produce much discord in the Church, which it would be advisable to avoid.[5]
With respect to the Garter, which the Duke of Norfolk has declined, she approves of its being offered to the Duke of Portland.[6] She thinks that the one now vacant by the death of poor Lord Ellesmere[7] might most properly be bestowed on Lord Granville--he is Lord President and Leader of the House of Lords, and acquitted himself admirably in his difficult mission as Ambassador to the Emperor of Russia's Coronation.
Should Lord Palmerston agree in this view he might at once mention it to Lord Granville.
[Footnote 5: The Deanery was offered to and accepted by Mr Alford.]
[Footnote 6: William John Cavendish Bentinck-Scott, fifth Duke (1800-1879). He did not accept the honour, which was conferred on the Marquis of Westminster.]
[Footnote 7: Lord Francis Egerton had inherited a vast property from the third and last Duke of Bridgewater (the projector of English inland navigation), and was created Earl of Ellesmere in 1846. The Garter was accepted by Lord Granville.]
[Pageheading: DEBATE ON CHINESE AFFAIRS]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
PICCADILLY, 28th February 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has seen Mr Hayter[8] this morning, and finds from him that the disposition of the House of Commons is improving, and that many of the supporters of the Government who had at first thought of voting with Mr Cobden[9] are changing their minds. It has been suggested to Viscount Palmerston that it would be useful to have a meeting of the Party in Downing Street on Monday, and that many wavering members only want to have something said to them which they could quote as a reason for changing their intended course; and Viscount Palmerston has given directions for summoning such a meeting.
Lord Derby has had meetings of his followers, and has told them that unless they will support him in a body he will cease to be their leader, as he will not be the head of a divided Party. Viscount Palmerston can scarcely bring himself to believe that the House of Commons will be so fickle as suddenly and without reason to turn round upon the Government, and after having given them last Session and this Session large majorities on important questions, put them in a minority on what Mr Disraeli last night in a few words said on the motion for adjournment described as a Vote of Censure. With regard, however, to the question put by your Majesty as to what would be the course pursued by the Government in the event of a defeat, Viscount Palmerston could hardly answer it without deliberation with his colleagues. His own firm belief is that the present Government has the confidence of the country in a greater degree than any other Government that could now be formed would have, and that consequently upon a Dissolution of Parliament, a House of Commons would be returned more favourable to the Government than the present. Whether the state of business as connected with votes of supply and the Mutiny Act would admit of a Dissolution, supposing such a measure to be sanctioned by your Majesty, would remain to be enquired into; but Viscount Palmerston believes that there would be no insurmountable difficulty on that score. He will have the honour of waiting upon your Majesty at a little before three to-morrow.
[Footnote 8: Mr (afterwards Sir) William Hayter, Liberal Whip, the father of Lord Haversham.]
[Footnote 9: See ante, Introductory Note, to Chapter XXVI. Mr Cobden's motion of censure affirmed that the papers laid on the table of the House did not justify the violent measures resorted to by the Government at Canton in the affair of the Arrow. He was supported by Lord John Russell, Mr Roebuck, Mr Gladstone, and Mr Disraeli, the latter emphatically challenging the Premier to appeal to the country.]
The Prince Albert to Viscount Palmerston.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 3rd March 1857.
MY DEAR LORD PALMERSTON,--The Queen has this moment received your letter giving so unfavourable an account of the prospects of to-night's division. She is sorry that her health imperatively requires her going into the country for a few days, and having put off her going to Windsor on account of the Debate which was expected to close yesterday, she cannot now do so again to-day. She feels, however, the inconvenience of her absence should the division turn out as ill as is now anticipated. The Queen could not possibly come to a decision on so important a point as a Dissolution without a personal discussion and conference with you, and therefore hopes that you might be able to go down to-morrow perhaps for dinner and to stay over the night.
The Queen feels herself physically quite unable to go through the anxiety of a Ministerial Crisis and the fruitless attempt to form a new Government out of the heterogeneous elements out of which the present Opposition is composed, should the Government feel it necessary to offer their resignation, and would on that account prefer any other alternative.... Ever, etc.,
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.[10]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, 5th March 1857.
(Quarter to Eight.)
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to state that his communication to the House of an intention to give the constituencies of the country an opportunity of judging between the present Government and any other administration which might be formed, has been on the whole well received, and, with the exception of Mr Gladstone, most of the persons who spoke intimated a willingness to allow without interruption the completion of such business as may be necessary before the Dissolution. Mr Disraeli said that he and those who act with him would give all fair assistance consistent with their opinions, but hoped nothing would be proposed to which they could reasonably object. Mr Gladstone, with great vehemence, repelled the charge of combination, evidently meaning to answer attacks made out of the House....
The result of what passed seems to be that no serious difficulty will be thrown in the way of an early Dissolution.
[Footnote 10: Mr Cobden's motion was carried by 263 to 247, and Lord Palmerston promptly accepted Mr Disraeli's challenge to dissolve Parliament.]
Earl Granville to Queen Victoria.
[Undated. ? 16th March 1857.]
Lord Granville presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to submit that Lord Derby made a speech of two hours, in which he glanced at the present state of affairs.[11] He made a personal attack on Lord Palmerston, and described his colleagues as cyphers and appendages. The rest of his speech was of a singularly apologetic and defensive character. He was quite successful in clearing himself from an understanding--not from political conversations with Mr Gladstone.
Lord Granville, in his reply, was thought very discourteous by Lord Malmesbury and Lord Hardwicke, who closed the conversation.
[Footnote 11: Lord Derby's resolutions in the Lords, which were to the same effect as Mr Cobden's motion, were rejected by 146 to 110. On the 16th of March Lord Derby took the opportunity of announcing the views of his chief supporters in reference to the General Election.]
[Pageheading: RETIREMENT OF THE SPEAKER]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.[12]
PICCADILLY, 18th March 1857.
... Viscount Palmerston begs to state that the Speaker has chosen the title of Eversley, the name of a small place near his residence[13] in Hampshire, all the large towns in the county having already been adopted as titles for Peers. The ordinary course would be that your Majesty should make him a Baron, and that is the course which was followed in the cases of Mr Abbot made Lord Colchester, and Mr Abercromby made Lord Dunfermline; but in the case of Mr Manners Sutton a different course was pursued, and he was made Viscount Canterbury. The present Speaker is very anxious that his services, which, in fact, have been more meritorious and useful than those of Mr Manners Sutton, should not appear to be considered by your Majesty as less deserving of your Majesty's Royal favour, and as the present Speaker may justly be said to have been the best who ever filled the chair, Viscount Palmerston would beg to submit for your Majesty's gracious approval that he may be created Viscount Eversley. It will be well at the same time if your Majesty should sanction this arrangement that a Record should be entered at the Home Office stating that this act of grace and favour of your Majesty being founded on the peculiar circumstances of the case, is not to [be] deemed a precedent for the cases of future Speakers.
Lord Canterbury was also made a Grand Cross of the Civil Order of the Bath; it will be for your Majesty to consider whether it might not be gracious to follow in all respects on the present occasion the course which was pursued in the case of Mr Manners Sutton.
[Footnote 12: On the 9th, Mr Speaker Shaw-Lefevre had announced in the House of Commons his intended retirement from the Chair, which he had occupied since 1839, when his election had been made a trial of strength between parties. He was voted an annuity of L4,000 a year, and created Viscount Eversley, receiving also the G.C.B.]
[Footnote 13: Heckfield Place, near Winchfield.]
[Pageheading: THE GENERAL ELECTION]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 24th March 1857.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--... The Opposition have played their game most foolishly, and the result is that all the old Tories say they will certainly not support them; they very truly say Lord Derby's party--that is those who want to get into office coute que coute--whether the country suffers for it or not, wanted to get in under false colours, and that they won't support or abide--which they are quite right in. There is reason to hope that a better class of men will be returned, and returned to support the Government, not a particular cry of this or that.... Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.[14]
[Footnote 14: In his address to the electors of Tiverton, the Premier declared that "an insolent barbarian, wielding authority at Canton, had violated the British flag, broken the engagements of treaties, offered rewards for the heads of British subjects in that part of China, and planned their destruction by murder, assassination, and poison." The courage and good temper displayed by Lord Palmerston, and the energy with which he had carried the country through the Crimean struggle, had won him widespread popularity, and the Peace party were generally routed, the prominent members all losing their seats. The Peelite ranks were also thinned, but Lord John Russell, contrary to general expectation, held his seat in the City. There were one hundred and eighty-nine new members returned, and the Ministry found themselves in command of a handsome majority.]
Earl Granville to Queen Victoria.
[Undated. ? 19th May 1857.]
Lord Granville presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to submit that the Lord Chancellor made the best statement he has yet done, introducing his Divorce Bill.[15]... Lord Lyndhurst made a most able speech in favour of the Bill, but wished it to go further, and give permission to a woman to sue for a divorce if she was "maliciously deserted" by her husband.... The Bishop of Oxford pretended that he was not going to speak at all, in order to secure his following instead of preceding the Bishop of London; but upon a division being called he was obliged to speak, and did so with considerable force and eloquence, but betraying the greatest possible preparation. The Bishop of London, after showing that the Bishop of Oxford's speech was a repetition of Mr Keble's speech, made an excellent answer. The Debate was finished by the Duke of Argyll.
For the Bill, 47. Against it, 18.
[Footnote 15: Before this date a divorce could only be obtained in England by Act of Parliament, after sentence in the ecclesiastical Court, and (in the case of a husband's application) a verdict in crim. con. against the adulterer. The present English law was established by the Bill of 1857, the chief amendment made in Committee being the provision exempting the clergy from the obligation to marry divorced persons. Bishop Wilberforce opposed the Bill strenuously, while Archbishop Sumner and Bishop Tait of London supported it. Sir Richard Bethell, the Attorney-General, piloted the measure most skilfully through the Commons, in the teeth of the eloquent and persistent opposition of Mr Gladstone, who, to quote a letter from Lord Palmerston to the Queen, opposed the second reading "in a speech of two hours and a half, fluent, eloquent, brilliant, full of theological learning and scriptural research, but fallacious in argument, and with parts inconsistent with each other."]
[Pageheading: THE FRENCH ENTENTE]
[Pageheading: THE EMPEROR'S VISIT]
The Earl of Clarendon to the Prince Albert.
20th May 1857.
SIR,--I have the honour to inform your Royal Highness that I have had a very long and interesting conversation with M. de Persigny to-day. He told me of the different Utopias which the Emperor had in his head, of His Majesty's conviction that England, France, and Russia ought between them to regler les affaires de l'Europe, of the peu de cas which he made of Austria or any other Power, and of the various little complaints which His Majesty thought he had against Her Majesty's Government, and which had been magnified into importance by the malevolence or the stupidity of the persons who had more or less the ear of the Emperor.[16]
M. de Persigny told me also that in a conversation with the Emperor at which he had taken care that Count Walewski should be present, he had solemnly warned the Emperor of the danger he would incur if he swerved the least from the path of his true interest which was the English Alliance, that all the Sovereigns who were flattering and cajoling him for their own purposes looked down upon him as an adventurer, and no more believed in the stability of his throne, or the duration of his dynasty, than they did in any other events of which extreme improbability was the character; whereas the English, who never condescended to flatter or cajole anybody, but who looked to the interests of England, were attached to the French Alliance and to the Sovereign of France because peaceful relations with that country were of the utmost importance to England. France was the only country in Europe that could do England harm, and on the other hand England was the only country that could injure France--the late war with Russia had not the slightest effect upon France except costing her money, but a war with England would set every party in France into activity each with its own peculiar objects, but all of them against the existing order of things--l'ordre social serait bouleverse and the Empire might perish in the convulsion.
The result of this and other conversations appears to be an earnest desire of the Emperor to come to England on a private visit to the Queen, if possible at Osborne, and at any time that might be convenient to Her Majesty. M. de Persigny describes him as being intent upon this project, and as attaching the utmost importance to it in order to eclairer his own ideas, to guide his policy, and to prevent by personal communication with the Queen, your Royal Highness, and Her Majesty's Government the dissidences and mesintelligences which the Emperor thinks will arise from the want of such communications.
I fear that such a visit would not be very agreeable to Her Majesty, but in the Emperor's present frame of mind, and his evident alarm lest it should be thought that the Alliance has been in any way ebranlee, I cannot entertain a doubt that much good might be done, or, at all events, that much mischief might be averted by the Emperor being allowed to pay his respects to Her Majesty in the manner he proposes.
I have discussed the matter after the Cabinet this evening with Lord Palmerston, who takes entirely the same view of the matter as I have taken the liberty of expressing to your Royal Highness. I have the honour to be, with the greatest respect, Sir, your Royal Highness's most faithful and devoted Servant,
CLARENDON.
[Footnote 16: A difference had arisen as to the future of the Principalities--France, Sardinia, and Russia favouring their union, while England, Austria, and Turkey held that a single state, so formed, might become too Russian in its sympathies.]
The Prince Albert to the Earl of Clarendon.
OSBORNE, 21st May 1857.
MY DEAR LORD CLARENDON,--I have shown your letter to the Queen, who wishes me to say in answer to it that she will, of course, be ready to do what may appear best for the public interest. We shall, therefore, be ready to receive the Emperor, with or without the Empress, here at Osborne in the quiet way which he proposes. The present moment would, however, hardly do, Drawing-rooms and parties being announced in London, Parliament sitting, and the Season going on and the Queen having only a few days from the Grand Duke's visit to her return to Town. The latter half of July, the time at which the Queen would naturally be here and the best yachting season, might appear to the Emperor the most eligible, as being the least force.
Till then a cottage which is rebuilding will, we hope, be ready to accommodate some of the suite, whom we could otherwise not properly house.
I have no doubt that good will arise from a renewed intercourse with the Emperor; the only thing one may perhaps be afraid of is the possibility of his wishing to gain us over to his views with regard to a redistribution of Europe, and may be disappointed at our not being able to assent to his plans and aspirations.
ALBERT.[17]
[Footnote 17: See post, 4th August, 1857, note 30.]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 16th June 1857.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--The christening of little Beatrice[18] is just over--and was very brilliant and nice. We had the luncheon in the fine ball-room, which looked very handsome. The Archduke Maximilian (who is here since Sunday evening) led me to the chapel, and at the luncheon I sat between him and Fritz. I cannot say how much we like the Archduke; he is charming, so clever, natural, kind and amiable, so English in his feelings and likings, and so anxious for the best understanding between Austria and England. With the exception of his mouth and chin, he is good-looking; and I think one does not the least care for that, as he is so very kind and clever and pleasant. I wish you really joy, dearest Uncle, at having got such a husband for dear Charlotte, as I am sure he will make her happy, and is quite worthy of her. He may, and will do a great deal for Italy.[19]...
I must conclude for to-day, hoping soon to hear from you again. Ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 18: Princess Beatrice (now Princess Henry of Battenberg) was born on the 14th of April.]
[Footnote 19: The tragic end of a union which promised so brightly came in 1867, when the Archduke Maximilian, having accepted the Imperial crown of Mexico, offered to him by the Provisional Government, was shot by order of President Juarez. The Empress Charlotte had come to Europe a year earlier to seek help for her husband from the French Emperor. In consequence of the shock caused by the failure of her mission, her health entirely gave way.]
[Pageheading: THE INDIAN MUTINY]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
PICCADILLY, 26th June 1857.
... Viscount Palmerston is sorry to have received the accompanying account of the extension of the Mutiny among the native troops in India, but he has no fear of its results.[20] The bulk of the European force is stationed on the North-West Frontier, and is, therefore, within comparatively easy reach of Delhi, and about six thousand European troops will have returned to Bombay from Persia. It will, however, seem to be advisable to send off at once the force amounting to nearly eight thousand men, now under orders for embarkation for India; and when the despatches arrive, which will be about the middle of next week, it will be seen whether any further reinforcements will be required.
The extent of the Mutiny appears to indicate some deeper cause than that which was ascribed to the first insubordination. That cause may be, as some allege, the apprehension of the Hindoo priests that their religion is in danger by the progress of civilisation in India, or it may be some hostile foreign agency.
[Footnote 20: Alarming accounts of disturbances in India had been received for some weeks past, but Lord Palmerston failed to grasp the gravity of the situation. Even after the intelligence reached England of the mutiny of the native regiments at Meerut, on the 10th of May, and of the horrible massacres of women and children, the Ministry did not fully realise the peril threatening our Indian possessions.]
[Pageheading: THE VICTORIA CROSS]
Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure.
[Undated, ? June 1857.]
The Queen thinks that the persons decorated with the Victoria Cross might very properly be allowed to bear some distinctive mark after their name.[21] The warrant instituting the decoration does not style it "an Order," but merely "a Naval and Military Decoration" and a distinction; nor is it properly speaking an order, being not constituted. V.C. would not do. K.G. means a Knight of the Garter, C.B. a Companion of the Bath, M.P. a Member of Parliament, M.D. a Doctor of Medicine, etc., etc., in all cases designating a person. No one could be called a Victoria Cross. V.C. moreover means Vice-Chancellor at present. D.V.C. (decorated with the Victoria Cross) or B.V.C. (Bearer of the Victoria Cross) might do. The Queen thinks the last the best.
[Footnote 21: The Victoria Cross had just been instituted by Royal Warrant, and the Queen had, with her own hand, decorated those who had won the distinction, in Hyde Park, on the 26th of June.]
[Pageheading: REINFORCEMENTS FOR INDIA]
Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 29th June 1857.
The Queen has to acknowledge the receipt of Lord Panmure's letter of yesterday. She had long been of opinion that reinforcements waiting to go to India ought not to be delayed. The moment is certainly a very critical one, and the additional reinforcements now proposed will be much wanted. The Queen entirely agrees with Lord Panmure that it will be good policy to oblige the East India Company to keep permanently a larger portion of the Royal Army in India than heretofore. The Empire has nearly doubled itself within the last twenty years, and the Queen's troops have been kept at the old establishment. They are the body on whom the maintenance of that Empire depends, and the Company ought not to sacrifice the highest interests to love of patronage. The Queen hopes that the new reinforcements will be sent out in their Brigade organisation, and not as detached regiments; good Commanding Officers knowing their troops will be of the highest importance next to the troops themselves.
The Queen must ask that the troops by whom we shall be diminished at home by the transfer of so many regiments to the Company should be forthwith replaced by an increase of the establishment up to the number voted by Parliament, and for which the estimates have been taken, else we denude ourselves altogether to a degree dangerous to our own safety at home, and incapable of meeting a sudden emergency, which, as the present example shows, may come upon us at any moment. If we had not reduced in such a hurry this spring, we should now have all the men wanted!
The Queen wishes Lord Panmure to communicate this letter to Lord Palmerston. The accounts in to-day's papers from India are most distressing.
Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 3rd July 1857.
The Queen has received Lord Panmure's letter of yesterday. She has sanctioned the going of four Regiments to the East Indies. With regard to the reduction of the garrison of Malta to four Regiments, she hopes the Government will well consider whether this will not reduce this valuable and exposed spot to a state of insecurity.
The Queen is sorry to find Lord Panmure still objecting to a proper Brigade system, without which no army in the world can be efficient. We want General Officers, and cannot train them unless we employ them on military duty, not on clerks' duty in district or colony, but in the command of troops. The detachment of Regiments is no reason for having no system, and the country will not pay for General Officers whose employment is not part of a system; our Army is then deprived of its efficiency by the refusal to adopt a system on the part of the Government.
[Pageheading: DELHI]
[Pageheading: GRAVE ANXIETY]
Viscount Canning to Queen Victoria.
CALCUTTA, 4th July 1857.
Lord Canning presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and although unable to give to your Majesty the complete details of the capture of Delhi, and of the defeat of the rebels in that city,[22] as he has long desired to do, he can at least announce to your Majesty that the city is in the possession of the British troops, under Major-General Sir Henry Barnard; and that nothing remains in the hands of the insurgents except the Palace or Fort, in which they have all taken refuge. This was the state of things on the 13th and 14th of June, the latest day of which any certain accounts have been received from Delhi; but nothing was likely to interfere with the completion of the capture within forty-eight hours.
This event has been long and anxiously awaited, and the time which has elapsed has cost England and India very dear. Many precious lives have been lost, and much heartrending suffering has been endured, for which there can be no compensation. The reputation of England's power, too, has had a rude shake; and nothing but a long-continued manifestation of her might before the eyes of the whole Indian Empire, evinced by the presence of such an English force as shall make the thought of oppositon hopeless, will re-establish confidence in her strength.
Lord Canning much fears that there are parts of India where, until this is done, a complete return to peace and order will not be effected. Wherever the little band of English soldiers--little when compared with the stretch of country over which they have to operate--which Lord Canning has at his disposal has shown itself, the effect has been instantaneous.
Except at Delhi, there has scarcely been an attempt at resistance to an European soldier, and the march of the smallest detachments has preserved order right and left of the roads. The same has been the case in large cities, such as Benares, Patna, and others; all going to prove that little more than the presence of English troops is needed to ensure peace. On the other hand, where such troops are known not to be within reach, anarchy and violence, when once let loose, continue unrestrained; and, until further additions are made to the English regiments in the disturbed districts, this state of things will not only continue, but extend itself. The fall of Delhi will act to some degree as a check; but where rapine and outrage have raged uncontrolled, even for a few hours, it is to be feared that nothing but the actual presence of force will bring the country into order.
Lord Canning rejoices to say that to-day the first Regiment of your Majesty's Forces destined for China has entered the Hooghly. Lord Canning did not scruple, knowing how much was at stake, earnestly to press Lord Elgin to allow those forces to be turned aside to India before proceeding to the support of your Majesty's Plenipotentiary in China;[23] and to this, so far as regards the first two Regiments, Lord Elgin readily assented. From what Lord Canning has ventured to state above, your Majesty will easily understand the satisfaction with which each new arrival of an English transport in Calcutta is regarded by him.
As yet no military operations south of Delhi have been undertaken. Next week, however, a column composed of your Majesty's 64th and 78th (Highland) Regiments will reach Cawnpore[24] and Lucknow, in the neighbourhood of which it is probable that an opportunity will offer of striking a decisive blow at the band of rebels which, after that in Delhi, is the strongest and most compact. But Lord Canning greatly doubts whether they will await the onset. Unfortunately, they may run away from the English troops, and yet prove very formidable to any who are weaker than themselves--whether Indians or unarmed Europeans.
Your Majesty is aware that in the critical condition of affairs which now exists, Lord Canning has felt himself compelled to adopt the measure of placing the King of Oudh in confinement in Fort William, in consequence of the use made of his name by those who have been busy tampering with the Sepoys; and of the intrigues which there is good reason to believe that the Minister of the King, who is also in the Fort, has carried on in his master's name.[25] The King has been, and will continue to be, treated with every mark of respect and indulgence which is compatible with his position, so long as it may be necessary that he should be retained in the Fort.
Lord Canning earnestly hopes that your Majesty and the Prince are in the enjoyment of good health, and prays your Majesty to be graciously pleased to accept the expression of his sincere devotion and dutiful attachment.
[Footnote 22: After the outbreak at Meerut in May, the fugitive Sepoys fled to Delhi, and endeavoured to capture the magazine, which, however, was exploded by British soldiers. Delhi was not captured until September (see post, 25th September, 1857). On the 11th of July, the Government received intelligence of the spread of the Mutiny throughout Bengal, and the resulting diminution of the Indian Army.]
[Footnote 23: For Sir George Grey's action at Cape Town, in reference to the troops destined for China, see his Memoir, in the Dictionary of National Biography.]
[Footnote 24: On the 4th of June, two native regiments had mutinied at Cawnpore, and the English residents, under General Sir Hugh Wheeler, were besieged. After many deaths and much privation, the garrison were induced by the perfidy of Nana Sahib, who had caused the Cawnpore rising, to surrender, on condition of their lives being spared. On the 27th of June, not suspecting their impending fate, the enfeebled garrison, or what was left of it, gave themselves up. The men were killed, the women and children being first enslaved and afterwards massacred. On the 16th of July, General Havelock defeated Nana Sahib at Cawnpore, the city was occupied by the English, and a sanguinary, but well-merited, retribution exacted.]
[Footnote 25: The ex-King had been living under the protection of the Indian Government. The arrest took place early in June at his residence at Garden Beach.]
[Pageheading: DEBATE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
PICCADILLY, 27th July 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to state that Mr Disraeli this afternoon, in a speech of three hours, made his Motion on the state of India. His Motion was ostensibly for two papers, one of which does not exist, at least in the possession of the Government, and the other of which ought not to be made public, as it relates to the arrangements for defending India against external attack. He represented the disturbances in India as a national revolt, and not as a mere military mutiny; and he enumerated various causes which in his opinion accounted, for and justified this general revolt. Some of these causes were various measures of improved civilisation which from time to time during the last ten years the Indian Government had been urged by Parliament to take. Mr Vernon Smith followed, and in a very able speech answered in great detail Mr Disraeli's allegations. Sir Erskine Perry,[26] who evidently had furnished Mr Disraeli with much of his mistaken assertions, supported his views. Mr Campbell, Member for Weymouth, who had been many years in India, showed the fallacy of Mr Disraeli's arguments, and the groundlessness of many of his assertions. Mr Whiteside supported the Motion. Lord John Russell, who had after Mr Disraeli's speech communicated with the Government, expressed his disapprobation of Mr Disraeli's speech, and moved as an Amendment an Address to your Majesty expressing the assurance of the support of the House for measures to suppress the present disturbances, and their co-operation with your Majesty in measures for the permanent establishment of tranquillity and contentment in India.[27] Mr Mangles, the Chairman of the Directors, replied at much length, and very conclusively to Mr Disraeli's speech. Mr Liddell, with much simplicity, asked the Speaker to tell him how he should vote, but approved entirely of Lord John Russell's address. Mr Ayrton moved an adjournment of the Debate, which was negatived by 203 to 79. Mr Hadfield then shortly stated in his provincial dialect that "we can never keep our 'old upon Hindia by the Force of Harms." Mr Disraeli then made an animated reply to the speeches against him, but in a manner almost too animated for the occasion. Mr Thomas Baring set Mr Disraeli right, but in rather strong terms, about some proceedings of the Committee on Indian Affairs in 1853, with regard to which Mr Disraeli's memory had proved untrustworthy. Viscount Palmerston shortly made some observations on the Motion and the speech which had introduced it; and the Motion was then negatived without a division, and the Address was unanimously carried.
[Footnote 26: Chief Justice of Bombay 1847-1852, and M.P. for Devonport 1854-1859.]
[Footnote 27: "One of those dry constitutional platitudes," said Mr Disraeli in reply, "which in a moment of difficulty the noble lord pulls out of the dusty pigeon-holes of his mind, and shakes in the perplexed face of the baffled House of Commons." Mr Disraeli was admittedly much annoyed by the statesmanlike intervention of Lord John.]
[Pageheading: MARRIAGE OF PRINCESS CHARLOTTE]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
OSBORNE, 27th July 1857.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--At this very moment the marriage[28] is going on--the Knot is being tied which binds your lovely sweet child to a thoroughly worthy husband--and I am sure you will be much moved. May every blessing attend her! I wish I could be present--but my dearest Half being there makes me feel as I were there myself. I try to picture to myself how all will be. I could not give you a greater proof of my love for you all, and my anxiety to give you and dearest Charlotte pleasure, than in urging my dearest Albert to go over--for I encouraged and urged him to go though you cannot think combien cela me coute or how completely deroutee I am and feel when he is away, or how I count the hours till he returns. All the numerous children are as nothing to me when he is away; it seems as if the whole life of the house and home were gone, when he is away!
We do all we can to feter in our very quiet way this dear day. We are all out of mourning; the younger children are to have a half-holiday, Alice is to dine for the first time in the evening with us; we shall drink the Archduke and Archduchess's healths; and I have ordered wine for our servants, and grog for our sailors to do the same.
Vicky (who is painting in the Alcove near me) wishes me to say everything to you and the dear young couple, and pray tell dear Charlotte all that we have been doing....
Here we are in anxious (and I fear many people in very cruel) suspense, for news from India. They ought to have arrived the day before yesterday.
On Thursday, then, we are to have Prince Napoleon, and on the following Thursday the Emperor and Empress; and after them for one night, the Queen of Holland,[29] whose activity is astounding--and she sees everything and everybody and goes everywhere; she is certainly clever and amiable....
Now, with our children's affectionate love, ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
Pray offer my kind regards to all your visitors, even to those whom I do not know. I only hope my dearest husband will tell me all about everything. Vicky is constantly talking and thinking of Charlotte.
[Footnote 28: Of the Princess Charlotte to the Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian at Brussels.]
[Footnote 29: Sophia Frederica, born 1818, daughter of King William I. of Wuertemberg.]
[Pageheading: THE MILITIA]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 2nd August 1857.
The Queen has to thank Lord Palmerston for his letter of the 27th July.
The embodying of the Militia will be a most necessary measure, as well for the defence of our own country, and for keeping up on the Continent of Europe the knowledge that we are not in a defenceless state, as for the purpose of obtaining a sufficient number of volunteers for the Army.
The Queen hopes, therefore, that the Militia to be embodied will be on a proper and sufficient scale. She must say, that the last accounts from India show so formidable a state of things that the military measures hitherto taken by the Home Government, on whom the salvation of India must mainly depend, appear to the Queen as by no means adequate to the emergency. We have nearly gone to the full extent of our available means, just as we did in the Crimean War, and may be able to obtain successes; but we have not laid in a store of troops, nor formed Reserves which could carry us over a long struggle, or meet unforeseen new calls. Herein we are always most shortsighted, and have finally to suffer either in power and reputation, or to pay enormous sums for small advantages in the end--generally both.
The Queen hopes that the Cabinet will look the question boldly in the face; nothing could be better than the Resolutions passed in the House of Commons, insuring to the Government every possible support in the adoption of vigorous measures. It is generally the Government, and not the House of Commons, who hang back. The Queen wishes Lord Palmerston to communicate this letter to his Colleagues.
[Pageheading: THE NAVY]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 4th August 1857.
The defenceless state of our shores, now that the Army has been reduced to eighteen effective Battalions, and the evident inclinations of the Continental Powers, chiefly France and Russia, to dictate to us with regard to the Oriental Question, makes the Queen naturally turn her attention to the state of our naval preparations and force.
To render it possible to salute the Emperor[30] when he comes here, the old St Vincent has been brought out of the harbour, but has been manned chiefly by the men of the Excellent gunnery ship; and we have been warned by the Admiralty not to visit the Excellent in consequence. This does not show a very brilliant condition! But what is still more worthy of consideration is, that our new fleet, which had been completed at the end of the Russian War, was a steam fleet; when it was broken up at the Peace the dockyard expenses were also cut down, and men discharged at the very moment when totally new and extensive arrangements became necessary to repair and keep in a state of efficiency the valuable steam machinery, and to house our gunboat flotilla on shore. To render any of these steamships fit for sea, now that they are dismantled, with our small means as to basins and docks, must necessarily cost much time.
The Queen wishes accordingly to have a report sent to her as to the force of screw-ships of the Line and of other classes which can be got ready at the different dockyards, and the time required to get them to sea for actual service; and also the time required to launch and get ready the gunboats. She does not wish for a mere general answer from the Lords of the Admiralty, but for detailed reports from the Admirals commanding at the different ports, and particularly the Captains in command of the Steam Reserve. She would only add that she wishes no unnecessary time to be lost in the preparation of these reports. She requests Lord Palmerston to have these, her wishes, carried out.
[Footnote 30: The Emperor and Empress of the French arrived at Osborne on the 6th of August on a visit to the Queen and Prince, lasting for four days, during which time much discussion took place between the Prince and Emperor on affairs in Eastern Europe.]
[Pageheading: DEATH OF SIR HENRY LAWRENCE]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 22nd August 1857.
The Queen is afraid from the telegram of this morning that affairs in India have not yet taken a favourable turn. Delhi seems still to hold out, and the death of Sir H. Lawrence[31] is a great loss. The Queen must repeat to Lord Palmerston that the measures hitherto taken by the Government are not commensurate with the magnitude of the crisis.
We have given nearly all we have in reinforcements, and if new efforts should become necessary, by the joining of the Madras and Bombay Armies in the Revolt, for instance, it will take months to prepare Reserves which ought now to be ready. Ten Battalions of Militia to be called out is quite inadequate; forty, at least, ought to be the number, for these also exist only on paper. The augmentation of the Cavalry and the Guards has not yet been ordered.
Financial difficulties don't exist; the 14,000 men sent to India are taken over by the Indian Government, and their expense saved to us; and this appears hardly the moment to make savings on the Army estimates.
[Footnote 31: On the previous day, the Queen and Prince had returned from a visit to Cherbourg, and found very disquieting news from India. Sir Henry Lawrence was the Military Administrator and Chief Commissioner of Oudh; on the 30th of May, the 71st N.I. mutinied at Lucknow, but Sir Henry drove them from their position and fortified the Residency. Some weeks later, on sallying out to reconnoitre, the English were driven back and besieged in the Residency; Sir Henry dying from the effects of a wound caused by a shell.]
[Pageheading: RECRUITING]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
DOWNING STREET, 22nd August 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty.... Viscount Palmerston has had the honour of receiving your Majesty's communication of this morning. It is, no doubt, true that the telegraphic account received yesterday evening does not show, that at the dates mentioned from India, any improvement had taken place in the state of affairs, and the loss of Sir Henry Lawrence and of General Barnard,[32] but especially of the former, is deeply to be lamented.
With regard, however, to the measures now taking to raise a force to supply the place of the troops sent to India, and to enlist recruits to fill up vacancies in the Regiments in India, Viscount Palmerston would beg to submit that the steps now taking seem to be well calculated for their purpose. The recruiting for the Army has gone on more rapidly than could have been expected at this particular time of year, and in a fortnight or three weeks from this time will proceed still more rapidly; the ten thousand Militia to be immediately embodied will be as much as could probably be got together at the present moment without much local inconvenience; but if that number should be found insufficient, it would be easy afterwards to embody more. But, if the recruiting should go on successfully, that number of Militiamen in addition to the Regulars may be found sufficient. Viscount Palmerston begs to assure your Majesty that there is no wish to make savings on the amount voted for Army Services, but, on the other hand, it would be very inconvenient and embarrassing to exceed that amount without some urgent and adequate necessity....
[Footnote 32: He died of cholera at Delhi, on the 5th of July.]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 22nd August 1857.
In answer to Lord Palmerston's observations on our Military preparations, the Queen must reply that, although Lord Palmerston disclaims, on the part of the Government, the intention of making a saving on the Army estimates out of the fearful exigencies caused by the Indian Revolt, the facts still remain. The Government have sent fourteen Battalions out of the country and transferred them to the East India Company, and they mean to replace them only by ten new ones, whose organisation has been ordered; but even in these, they mean for the present to save four Companies out of every twelve. The Queen, the House of Lords, the House of Commons, and the Press, all call out for vigorous exertion, and the Government alone take an apologetic line, anxious to do as little as possible, to wait for further news, to reduce as low as possible even what they do grant, and reason as if we had at most only to replace what was sent out; whilst if new demands should come upon us, the Reserves which ought now to be decided upon and organised, are only then to be discussed. The Queen can the less reconcile herself to the system, of "letting out a little sail at a time," as Lord Palmerston called it the other day, as she feels convinced that, if vigour and determination to get what will be eventually wanted is shown by the Cabinet, it will pervade the whole Government machinery and attain its object; but that if, on the other hand, people don't see what the Government really require, and find them satisfied with a little at a time, even that little will not be got, as the subordinates naturally take the tone from their superiors. Ten Militia Regiments would not even represent the 10,000 men whom Parliament has voted the supplies for. A Battalion will probably not reach 600 for a time, and from these we hope to draw volunteers again!
The Queen hopes the Cabinet will yet look the whole question in the face, and decide while there is time what they must know will become necessary, and what must in the hurry at the end be done less well and at, probably, double the cost. The Queen can speak by very recent experience, having seen exactly the same course followed in the late War.
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 23rd August 1857.
The Queen approves of Lord Fife[33] and Lord R. Grosvenor being made Peers, and of an offer being made to Mr Macaulay, although she believes he will decline the honour....
[Footnote 33: James, fifth Viscount Macduff and Earl of Fife in the peerage of Ireland, was, on the 1st of October, created a Baron of the United Kingdom; he was the father of the present Duke of Fife. Lord Robert Grosvenor became Lord Ebury, and Mr Macaulay Lord Macaulay of Rothley Temple (his birthplace), in the county of Leicester.]
[Pageheading: THE ARMY RESERVES]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
OSBORNE, 25th August 1857.
The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter of yesterday, and must say that she is deeply grieved at her want of success in impressing upon him the importance of meeting the present dangers by agreeing on, and maturing a general plan by which to replace in kind the troops sent out of the country, and for which the money has been voted by Parliament.[34] To the formation of the full number of Battalions, and their full strength in Companies, Lord Palmerston objects that the men will not be found to fill them, and therefore it is left undone; to the calling-out of more Militia, he objects that they ought not to be used as Recruiting Depots, and if many were called out the speed with which the recruiting for the Army went on, would oblige them to be disbanded again. The War Office pride themselves upon having got 1,000 men since the recruiting began; this is equal to 1,000 a month or 12,000 a year, the ordinary wear and tear of the Army!! Where will the Reserves for India be to be found? It does not suffice merely to get recruits, as Lord Palmerston says; they will not become soldiers for six months when got, and in the meantime a sufficient number of Militia Regiments ought to be drilled, and made efficient to relieve the Line Regiments already sent, or yet to be sent, for these also are at present necessarily good for nothing.
The Queen must say that the Government incur a fearful responsibility towards their country by their apparent indifference. God grant that no unforeseen European complication fall upon this country--but we are really tempting Providence.
The Queen hopes Lord Palmerston has communicated to the Cabinet her views on the subject.
[Footnote 34: After referring to the necessity for supplying by fresh drafts the gaps created in the regiments in India, Lord Palmerston had written:--
"If the Militia officers were to find that they were considered merely as drill sergeants for the Line, they would grow careless and indifferent, and many whom it is desirable to keep in the Service would leave it.
"With regard to the number of Militiamen to be embodied, the question seems to be, What is the number which will be wanted for the whole period to the 31st of March, because it would be undesirable to call out and embody now Militia Regiments which would become unnecessary during the winter by the progress of recruiting, and which, from there being no funds applicable to their maintenance, it would become necessary to disembody. The men would be now taken from industrial employment at a time when labour is wanted, and would be turned adrift in the winter when there is less demand for labour.
"With respect to recruiting for the Army, every practicable means has been adopted to hasten its success. Recruiting parties have been scattered over the whole of the United Kingdom, and the permanent staff of the disembodied Militia have been furnished with Beating Warrants enabling them to enlist recruits for the Line; and the recruiting has been hitherto very successful. The only thing to be done is to raise men as fast as possible, and to post them as they are raised to the Regiments and Battalions for which they engage. The standard, moreover, has been lowered...."]
[Pageheading: LORD LANSDOWNE]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
PICCADILLY, 31st August 1857.
... Viscount Palmerston would beg to submit for your Majesty's consideration whether he might be authorised by your Majesty to offer to Lord Lansdowne promotion to the title of Duke. Your Majesty may possibly not have in the course of your Majesty's reign, long as it is to be hoped that reign will be, any subject whose private and public character will during so long a course of years as those which have been the period of Lord Lansdowne's career, have more entitled him to the esteem and respect of his fellow-countrymen, and to the approbation of his Sovereign.
Lord Lansdowne has now for several years given your Majesty's Government the great and valuable support of his advice in council, his assistance in debate, and the weight of his character in the country, without any office. His health and strength, Viscount Palmerston cannot disguise from himself, have not been this year such as they had been; and if your Majesty should contemplate marking at any time your Majesty's sense of Lord Lansdowne's public services, there could not be a better moment for doing so than the present; and Viscount Palmerston has reason to believe that such an act of grace would be very gratifying to the Liberal Party, and would be deemed well bestowed even by those who are of opposite politics.[35]
Mr Macaulay accepts the Peerage with much gratitude to your Majesty.
[Footnote 35: Lord Lansdowne declined the honour.]
[Pageheading: THE INDIAN MUTINY]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
BALMORAL CASTLE, 2nd September 1857.
DEAREST UNCLE,--... We are in sad anxiety about India, which engrosses all our attention.[36] Troops cannot be raised fast or largely enough. And the horrors committed on the poor ladies--women and children--are unknown in these ages, and make one's blood run cold. Altogether, the whole is so much more distressing than the Crimea--where there was glory and honourable warfare, and where the poor women and children were safe. Then the distance and the difficulty of communication is such an additional suffering to us all. I know you will feel much for us all. There is not a family hardly who is not in sorrow and anxiety about their children, and in all ranks--India being the place where every one was anxious to place a son!
We hear from our people (not Fritz) from Berlin, that the King is in a very unsatisfactory state. What have you heard?...
Now, with Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 36: At Balmoral the Queen learned in greater detail of the atrocities which had been committed upon the garrison at Cawnpore.]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
BROCKET, 10th September 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty and begs to submit that an impression is beginning to prevail that it would be a proper thing that a day should be set apart for National Prayer and Humiliation with reference to the present calamitous state of affairs in India, upon the same principle on which a similar step was taken during the Crimean War; and if your Majesty should approve, Viscount Palmerston would communicate on the subject with the Archbishop of Canterbury.... It is usual on such occasions that the Archbishop of Canterbury should attend,[37] but in consideration of the distance his attendance might well be dispensed with on the present occasion.
[Footnote 37: I.e. at the meeting of the Council which was to be summoned.]
[Pageheading: A DAY OF INTERCESSION]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
BALMORAL, 11th September 1857.
Lord Palmerston knows what the Queen's feelings are with regard to Fast-days, which she thinks do not produce the desired effect--from the manner in which they are appointed, and the selections made for the Service--but she will not oppose the natural feeling which any one must partake in, of a desire to pray for our fellow-countrymen and women who are exposed to such imminent danger, and therefore sanctions his consulting the Archbishop on the subject. She would, however, suggest its being more appropriately called a day of prayer and intercession for our suffering countrymen, than of fast and humiliation, and of its being on a Sunday, and not on a week-day: on the last Fast-day, the Queen heard it generally remarked, that it produced more harm than good, and that, if it were on a Sunday, it would be much more generally observed. However, she will sanction whatever is proper, but thinks it ought to be as soon as possible[38] (in a fortnight or three weeks) if it is to be done at all.
She will hold a Council whenever it is wished.[39]
[Footnote 38: It was kept on the 7th of October (a Wednesday).]
[Footnote 39: Shortly after the date of this letter came the intelligence from India that Delhi had not fallen, and that the Lucknow garrison was not yet relieved. This news, coupled with the tidings of fresh outbreaks, and the details of the horrors of Cawnpore, generated deep feelings of resentment in the country.]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon.
BALMORAL CASTLE, 23rd September 1857.
The Queen hopes that the arrival of troops and ships with Lord Elgin will be of material assistance, but still it does not alter the state of affairs described by the Queen in her letter, which she wrote to Lord Palmerston, and which she is glad to see Lord Clarendon agrees in. Though we might have perhaps wished the Maharajah[40] to express his feelings on the subject of the late atrocities in India, it was hardly to be expected that he (naturally of a negative, though gentle and very amiable disposition) should pronounce an opinion on so painful a subject, attached as he is to his country, and naturally still possessing, with all his amiability and goodness, an Eastern nature; he can also hardly, a deposed Indian Sovereign, not very fond of the British rule as represented by the East India Company, and, above all, impatient of Sir John Login's[41] tutorship, be expected to like to hear his country-people called fiends and monsters, and to see them brought in hundreds, if not thousands, to be executed.
His best course is to say nothing, she must think.
It is a great mercy he, poor boy, is not there.
[Footnote 40: Lord Clarendon had written that he was "sorry to learn that the Maharajah (Dhuleep Singh) had shown little or no regret for the atrocities which have been committed, or sympathy with the sufferers."]
[Footnote 41: Sir John Spencer Login, formerly surgeon at the British Residency, Lucknow, guardian of the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh, 1849-1858.]
[Pageheading: LETTER FROM LORD CANNING]
[Pageheading: SIR COLIN CAMPBELL]
[Pageheading: INDIA]
[Pageheading: THE POLICY OF CLEMENCY]
Viscount Canning to Queen Victoria.
CALCUTTA, 25th September 1857.
Lord Canning presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and asks leave again to address your Majesty, although the desire which he has felt that his next letter should announce to your Majesty the fall of Delhi, and the first steps towards a restoration of your Majesty's Authority throughout the revolted Districts, cannot as yet be accomplished. But although it is not in Lord Canning's power to report any very marked success over the Rebels, he can confidently assure your Majesty that a change in the aspect of affairs is gradually taking place, which gives hope that the contest is drawing to a close, and the day of punishment at hand....
Another ground for good hopes is the appearance of things at Lucknow. News just received from Sir James Outram announces that he has joined General Havelock's force at Cawnpore, and that the Troops crossed the Ganges into Oudh on the 19th, with hardly any opposition. The European force now advancing on Lucknow is about [....][42] strong, well provided with Artillery. The beleaguered Garrison was in good spirits on the 16th of September, and had provisions enough to last to the end of the month. They had lately inflicted severe losses on their assailants, and some of the latter had dispersed. The influential proprietors and chiefs of the country had begun to show symptoms of siding with us.
This is a very different state of things from that which existed when General Havelock's force retired across the Ganges in July; and Lord Canning prays and believes that your Majesty will be spared the pain and horror of hearing that the atrocities of Cawnpore have been re-enacted upon the brave and enduring garrison of Lucknow. Every English soldier who could be made to reach Cawnpore has been pushed on to General Outram, even to the denuding of some points of danger in the intervening country, and General Outram's instructions are to consider the rescue of the garrison as the one paramount object to which everything else is to give way. The garrison (which, after all, is nothing more than the House of the Resident, with defences hastily thrown up) contains about three hundred and fifty European men, four hundred and fifty women and children, and one hundred and twenty sick, besides three hundred natives, hitherto faithful. The city, and even the province, may be abandoned and recovered again, but these lives must be saved now or never; and to escape the sorrow and humiliation of such barbarities as have already been endured elsewhere is worth any sacrifice. It is in consideration of the state of things at these two most critical points, Delhi and Lucknow, that Lord Canning ventures to ask your Majesty to look hopefully to the events of the next few weeks; notwithstanding that he is unable to announce any signal success....
Sir Colin Campbell has been in a state of delight ever since his favourite 93rd landed five days ago.[43] He went to see them on board their transport before they disembarked, and when Lord Canning asked how he found them, replied that the only thing amiss was that they had become too fat on the voyage, and could not button their coats. But, indeed, all the troops of the China force have been landed in the highest possible condition of health and vigour. The 23rd, from its large proportion of young soldiers, is perhaps the one most likely to suffer from the climate and the hardships of the Service--for, although no care or cost will be spared to keep them in health and comfort, Lord Canning fears that hardships there must be, seeing how vast an extent of usually productive country will be barren for a time, and that the districts from which some of our most valuable supplies, especially the supply of carriage animals, are drawn, have been stripped bare, or are still in revolt. As it is, the Commander-in-Chief has most wisely reduced the amount of tent accommodation for officers and men far below the ordinary luxurious Indian allowance.
The presence of the ships of the Royal Navy has been of the greatest service. At least eleven thousand seamen and marines have been contributed by them for duty on shore, and the broadsides of the Sanspareil, Shannon, and Pearl, as they lie along the esplanade, have had a very reassuring effect upon the inhabitants of Calcutta, who, until lately, have insisted pertinaciously that their lives and property were in hourly danger.[44]
No line-of-battle ship has been seen in the Hooghly since Admiral Watson sailed up to Chandernagore just a hundred years ago;[45] and certainly nothing in his fleet was equal to the Sanspareil. The natives stare at her, and call her "the four-storied boat."
For the future, if Delhi should fall and Lucknow be secured, the work of pacification will go forward steadily. Many points will have to be watched, and there may be occasional resistance; but nothing like an organised contest against authority is probable. The greatest difficulties will be in the civil work of re-settlement. The recent death of Mr Colvin,[46] the Lieutenant-Governor of the North-Western Provinces, has removed an officer whose experience would there have been most valuable. He has died, fairly exhausted; and is the fourth officer of high trust whose life has given way in the last four months.
One of the greatest difficulties which lie ahead--and Lord Canning grieves to say so to your Majesty--will be the violent rancour of a very large proportion of the English community against every native Indian of every class. There is a rabid and indiscriminate vindictiveness abroad, even amongst many who ought to set a better example, which it is impossible to contemplate without something like a feeling of shame for one's fellow-countrymen. Not one man in ten seems to think that the hanging and shooting of forty or fifty thousand mutineers, besides other Rebels, can be otherwise than practicable and right; nor does it occur to those who talk and write most upon the matter that for the Sovereign of England to hold and govern India without employing, and, to a great degree, trusting natives, both in civil and military service, is simply impossible. It is no exaggeration to say that a vast number of the European community would hear with pleasure and approval that every Hindoo and Mohammedan had been proscribed, and that none would be admitted to serve the Government except in a menial office. That which they desire is to see a broad line of separation, and of declared distrust drawn between us Englishmen and every subject of your Majesty who is not a Christian, and who has a dark skin; and there are some who entirely refuse to believe in the fidelity or goodwill of any native towards any European; although many instances of the kindness and generosity of both Hindoos and Mohammedans have come upon record during these troubles.
To those whose hearts have been torn by the foul barbarities inflicted upon those dear to them any degree of bitterness against the natives may be excused. No man will dare to judge them for it. But the cry is raised loudest by those who have been sitting quietly in their homes from the beginning and have suffered little from the convulsions around them unless it be in pocket. It is to be feared that this feeling of exasperation will be a great impediment in the way of restoring tranquillity and good order, even after signal retribution shall have been deliberately measured out to all chief offenders.[47]
Lord Canning is ashamed of having trespassed upon your Majesty's indulgence at such length. He will only add that he has taken the liberty of sending to your Majesty by this mail a map which has just been finished, showing the distribution of the Army throughout India at the time of the outbreak of the Mutiny. It also shows the Regiments of the Bengal Army which have mutinied, and those which have been disarmed, the number of European troops arrived in Calcutta up to the 19th of September, and whence they came; with some few other points of information.
There may be some slight inaccuracies, as the first copies of the map have only just been struck off, and have not been corrected; but Lord Canning believes that it will be interesting to your Majesty at the present moment.
Lord Canning begs to be allowed to express his earnest wishes for the health of your Majesty, and of His Royal Highness Prince Albert, and to offer to your Majesty the humble assurance of his sincere and dutiful devotion.
[Footnote 42: Word omitted in the original.]
[Footnote 43: At the battle of the Alma, Sir Colin Campbell, in command of the 2nd or Highland Brigade of the 1st Division, had, with his Highlanders in line, routed the last compact column of the Russians. On the 11th of July 1857, he was appointed Commander-in-Chief in India, and started literally at one day's notice, reaching Calcutta on the 14th of August.]
[Footnote 44: The services of the Naval Brigade, at the relief of Lucknow, were warmly recognised by Sir Colin Campbell, and especially the gallantry of Captain Peel of the Shannon.]
[Footnote 45: In retribution for the atrocity of the Black Hole of Calcutta, Watson, under instructions from Clive, reduced Chandernagore on the 23rd of March 1757; the battle of Plassey was fought on the 23rd of June.]
[Footnote 46: John Russell Colvin, formerly Private Secretary to Lord Auckland, had been Lieutenant-Governor since 1853.]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon.
BALMORAL, 28th September 1857.
The Queen is much surprised at Lord Clarendon's observing that "from what he hears the Maharajah was either from nature or early education cruel."[48] He must have changed very suddenly if this be true, for if there was a thing for which he was remarkable, it was his extreme gentleness and kindness of disposition. We have known him for three years (our two boys intimately), and he always shuddered at hurting anything, and was peculiarly gentle and kind towards children and animals, and if anything rather timid; so that all who knew him said he never could have had a chance in his own country. His valet, who is a very respectable Englishman, and has been with him ever since his twelfth year, says that he never knew a kinder or more amiable disposition. The Queen fears that people who do not know him well have been led away by their present very natural feelings of hatred and distrust of all Indians to slander him. What he might turn out, if left in the hands of unscrupulous Indians in his own country, of course no one can foresee.
[Footnote 48: See ante, 23rd September, 1857, note 40.]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 17th October 1857.
The Queen has received yesterday evening the box with the Dockyard Returns. It will take her some time to peruse and study them; she wishes, however, to remark upon two points, and to have them pointed out also to Sir Charles Wood,[49] viz. first, that they are dated some as early as the 27th August, and none later than the 10th September, and that she received them, only on the 17th October; and then that there is not one original Return amongst them, but they are all copies! When the Queen asks for Returns, to which she attaches great importance, she expects at least to see them in original.
[Footnote 49: First Lord of the Admiralty.]
[Pageheading: MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 25th October 1857.
The Queen returns these letters. It would be well if Lord Clarendon would tell Lord Bloomfield not to entertain the possibility of such a question as the Princess Royal's marriage taking place at Berlin.[50] The Queen never could consent to it, both for public and private reasons, and the assumption of its being too much for a Prince Royal of Prussia to come over to marry the Princess Royal of Great Britain IN England is too absurd, to say the least. The Queen must say that there never was even the shadow of a doubt on Prince Frederick William's part as to where the marriage should take place, and she suspects this to be the mere gossip of the Berliners. Whatever may be the usual practice of Prussian Princes, it is not every day that one marries the eldest daughter of the Queen of England. The question therefore must be considered as settled and closed....
[Footnote 50: The marriage took place at the Chapel Royal, St James's.]
[Pageheading: DEATH OF THE DUCHESS DE NEMOURS]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 12th November 1857.
The Queen thanks Lord Clarendon much for his kind and sympathising letter, and is much gratified at Count Persigny's kind note. He is a good, honest, warm-hearted man, for whom we have sincere esteem. The news from India was a great relief and a ray of sunshine in our great affliction.[51] The Queen had the happiness of informing poor Sir George Couper of the relief of Lucknow, in which for four months his son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren were shut up. The loss of two such distinguished officers as Generals Nicholson and Neill, and alas! of many inferior ones, is, however, very sad.
We visited the house of mourning yesterday, and no words can describe the scene of woe.[52] There was the venerable Queen with the motherless children, admirable in her deep grief, and her pious resignation to the Will of God! yet even now the support, the comfort of all, thinking but of others and ready to devote her last remaining strength and her declining years to her children and grandchildren. There was the broken-hearted, almost distracted widower--her son--and lastly, there was in one room the lifeless, but oh! even in its ghostliness, most beautiful form of his young, lovely, and angelic wife, lying in her bed with her splendid hair covering her shoulders, and a heavenly expression of peace; and in the next room, the dear little pink infant sleeping in its cradle.
The Queen leaves to Lord Clarendon's kind heart to imagine what this spectacle of woe must be, and how deeply afflicted and impressed we must be--who have only so lately had a child born to us and have been so fortunate! The Prince has been completely upset by this; and she was besides like a dear sister to us. God's will be done! But it seems too dreadful almost to believe it--too hard to bear. The dear Duchess's death must have been caused by some affection of the heart, for she was perfectly well, having her hair combed, suddenly exclaimed to the Nurse, "Oh! mon Dieu, Madame"--her head fell on one side--and before the Duke could run upstairs her hand was cold! The Queen had visited her on Saturday--looking well--and yesterday saw her lifeless form in the very same spot!
If Lord Clarendon could give a slight hint to the Times to say a few words of sympathy on the awful and unparalleled misfortune of these poor exiles, she is sure it would be very soothing to their bleeding hearts.... The sad event at Claremont took place just five days later than the death of poor Princess Charlotte under very similar circumstances forty years ago; and the poor Duchess was the niece of Princess Charlotte's husband.
[Footnote 51: Havelock, in consequence of the strength of the rebels in Oudh, had been unable to march to the assistance of Lucknow immediately after the relief of Cawnpore. He joined hands with Outram on the 10th of September, and reinforced the Lucknow garrison on the 25th.]
[Footnote 52: In a pathetic letter, just received, the Duc de Nemours (second son of Louis Philippe) had announced the death of his wife, Queen Victoria's beloved cousin and friend. She was only thirty-five years of age, and had been married at eighteen. She had seemed to make a good recovery after the birth of a child on the 28th of October, but died quite suddenly on the 10th of November, while at her toilette.]
[Pageheading: CRISIS IN THE CITY]
[Pageheading: SUSPENSION OF BANK CHARTER ACT]
Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria.
DOWNING STREET, 12th November 1857.
Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to state that the condition of financial affairs became worse to-day than it was yesterday.[53] The Governor of the bank represented that almost all private firms have ceased to discount bills, and that the Reserve Fund of the Bank of England, out of which discounts are made and liabilities satisfied, had been reduced last night to L1,400,000, and that if that fund should become exhausted the bank would have to suspend its operations. Under these circumstances it appeared to Viscount Palmerston, and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that a case had arisen for doing the same thing which was done under somewhat similar circumstances in 1847--that is to say, that a letter should be written by the first Lord of the Treasury and the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Governor of the Bank of England, saying that if under the pressure of the emergency the bank should deem it necessary to issue more notes than the amount to which they are at present confined by law, the Government would apply to Parliament to grant them an indemnity.
This Measure, in 1847, had the effect of stopping the then existing panic, and the necessity for making such an issue did not arise; on the present occasion this announcement will, no doubt, have a salutary effect in allaying the present panic, but as the bank had to discount to-day bills to the amount of L2,000,000, which they could not have done out of a fund of L1,400,000, unless deposits and payments in, to a considerable amount, had been made, the probability is that the issue thus authorised will actually be made. The Governor and Deputy-Governor of the bank represented that the communication, in order to be effectual and to save from ruin firms which were in imminent danger, ought to be made forthwith, so that they might be enabled to announce it on the Stock Exchange before the closing of business at four o'clock. Viscount Palmerston and Sir George Lewis therefore signed at once, and gave to the Governor of the bank the letter of which the accompanying paper is a copy, the pressure of the matter not allowing time to take your Majesty's pleasure beforehand.
The state of things now is more urgent than that which existed in 1847, when the similar step was taken; at that time the Reserve Fund was about L1,900,000, last night it was only L1,400,000; at that time the bullion in the bank was above L8,000,000, it is now somewhat less than L8,000,000; at that time things were mending, they are now getting worse.
But however necessary this Measure has been considered, and however useful it may be expected to be, it inevitably entails one very inconvenient consequence. The Government have authorised the bank to break the law, and whether the law shall actually be broken or not, it would be highly unconstitutional for the Government not to take the earliest opportunity of submitting the matter to the knowledge of Parliament. This course was pursued in 1847. The letter from Lord John Russell and Sir Charles Wood to the Governor of the bank was dated on the 25th October, Parliament then stood prorogued in the usual way to the 11th November, but a council was held on the 31st October, at which your Majesty summoned Parliament to meet for the despatch of business on the 18th November; and on that day the session was opened in the usual way by a Speech from the Throne. It would be impossible under present circumstances to put off till the beginning of February a communication to Parliament of the step taken to-day.
Viscount Palmerston therefore would beg to submit for your Majesty's approval that a Council might be held at Windsor on Monday next, and that Parliament might then be summoned to meet in fourteen days. This would bring Parliament together in the first days of December, and after sitting ten days, or a fortnight, if necessary, it might be adjourned till the first week in February.[54]
Viscount Palmerston submits an explanatory Memorandum which he has just received for your Majesty's information from the Chancellor of the Exchequer....
[Footnote 53: The financial crisis had originated in numerous stoppages of banks in the United States, where premature schemes of railway extension had involved countless investors in ruin; in consequence, the pressure on firms and financial houses became even more acute than in 1847; see ante, vol. ii., 14th October, 1847. The bank rate now rose to 10 per cent. as against 9 per cent. in that year, and the bank reserve of bullion was alarmingly depleted.]
[Footnote 54: Parliament accordingly met on the 3rd of December, and the Session was opened by the Queen in person. The Act of Indemnity was passed without serious opposition, and a select committee re-appointed to enquire into the operation of the Bank Charter Act.]
[Pageheading: ARMY ESTABLISHMENT]
Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure.
OSBORNE, 18th December 1857.
The Queen has had some correspondence with Lord Panmure upon the Establishment of the Army for the next financial year.[55] She wishes now to lay down the principle which she thinks ought to guide our decision, and asks Lord Palmerston to consider it with his colleagues in Cabinet. Last year we reduced our Army suddenly to a low peace establishment to meet the demand for reduction of taxation raised in the House of Commons. With this peace establishment we had to meet the extraordinary demands of India, we have sent almost every available regiment, battalion, and battery, and are forced to contemplate the certainty of a large increase of our force in India as a permanent necessity. What the Queen requires is, that a well-considered and digested estimate should be made of the additional regiments, etc., etc., so required, and that after deducting this number from our establishment of 1857-1858, that for the next year should be brought up again to the same condition as if the Indian demand, which is foreign to our ordinary consideration, had not arisen. If this be done it will still leave us militarily weaker than we were at the beginning of the year, for the larger English Army maintained in India will require proportionally more reliefs and larger depots.
As the Indian finances pay for the troops employed in India, the Force at home and in the colonies will, when raised to its old strength, not cost a shilling more than the peace establishment of 1857 settled under a pressure of financial reduction.
Anything less than this will not leave this country in a safe condition. The Queen does not ask only for the same number of men as in 1857-1858, but particularly for Regiments of Cavalry, Battalions of Infantry and Batteries of Artillery, which alone would enable us in case of a war to effect the increase to a war establishment.
The Queen encloses her answer to Lord Panmure's last letter.
[Footnote 55: On the 14th of December, the Queen had pressed the immediate formation of two new Cavalry Regiments.]
[Pageheading: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 24th December 1857.
The Queen only now returns to Lord Palmerston the Memorandum containing the Heads of an arrangement for the future Government of India, which the Committee of Cabinet have agreed to recommend. She will have an opportunity of seeing Lord Palmerston before the Cabinet meet again, and to hear a little more in detail the reasons which influenced the Committee in their several decisions. She wishes only to recommend two points to Lord Palmerston's consideration: 1st, the mode of communication between the Queen and the new Government which it is intended to establish. As long as the Government was that of the Company, the Sovereign was generally left quite ignorant of decisions and despatches; now that the Government is to be that of the Sovereign, and the direction will, she presumes, be given in her name, a direct official responsibility to her will have to be established. She doubts whether any one but a Secretary of State could speak in the Queen's name, like the Foreign Secretary to Foreign Courts, the Colonial Secretary to the Governors of the Colonies, and the Home Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland and the Lieutenants of the Counties of Great Britain, the Judges, Convocations, Mayors, etc., etc. On the other hand, would the position of a Secretary of State be compatible with his being President of a Council? The Treasury and Admiralty act as "My Lords," but they only administer special departments, and do not direct the policy of a country in the Queen's name. The mixture of supreme direction, and also of the conduct of the administration of the department to be directed, has in practice been found as inconvenient in the War Department as it is wrong in principle.
The other point is the importance of having only one Army, whether native, local, or general, with one discipline and one command, that of the Commander-in-Chief. This is quite compatible with first appointments to the native Army, being vested as a point of patronage in the members of the Council, but it ought to be distinctly recognised in order to do away with those miserable jealousies between the different military services, which have done more harm to us in India than, perhaps, any other circumstance.
Perhaps Lord Palmerston would circulate this letter amongst the members of the Committee who agreed upon the proposed scheme?
[Pageheading: DEATH OF HAVELOCK]
Viscount Canning to Queen Victoria.
GOVERNMENT HOUSE, CALCUTTA, 24th December 1857.
Lord Canning presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs permission to express to your Majesty at the earliest opportunity the respectful gratitude with which he has received your Majesty's most gracious letter of the 9th of November.
However certain Lord Canning might have been as to the sentiments with which your Majesty would view the spirit of bitter and unreasoning vengeance against your Majesty's Indian subjects with which too many minds are imbued in England as well as in this country, it has been an indescribable pleasure to him to read what your Majesty has condescended to write to him upon this painful topic. Your Majesty's gracious kindness in the reference made by your Majesty to what is said by the newspapers is also deeply felt by Lord Canning. He can truly and conscientiously assure your Majesty of his indifference to all such attacks--an indifference so complete indeed as to surprise himself.
Lord Canning fears that the satisfaction which your Majesty will have experienced very shortly after the date of your Majesty's letter, upon receiving the news of Sir Henry Havelock's entry into Lucknow, will have been painfully checked by the long and apparently blank interval which followed, and during which your Majesty's anxieties for the ultimate safety of the garrison, largely increased by many precious lives, must have become more intense than ever. Happily, this suspense is over; and the real rescue effected by a glorious combination of skill and intrepidity on the part of Sir Colin Campbell and his troops must have been truly gratifying to your Majesty.[56] The defence of Lucknow and the relief of the defenders are two exploits which, each in their kind, will stand out brightly in the history of these terrible times.
... Lord Canning has not failed to transmit your Majesty's gracious message to Sir Colin Campbell, and has taken the liberty to add your Majesty's words respecting his favourite 93rd, which will not be less grateful to the brave old soldier than the expression of your Majesty's consideration for himself.
Your Majesty has lost two most valuable officers in Sir Henry Havelock and Brigadier-General Neill. They were very different, however. The first was quite of the old school--severe and precise with his men, and very cautious in his movements and plans--but in action bold as well as skilful. The second very open and impetuous, but full of resources; and to his soldiers as kind and thoughtful of their comfort as if they had been his children.
With earnest wishes for the health and happiness of your Majesty and the Prince, Lord Canning begs permission to lay at your Majesty's feet the assurance of his most dutiful and devoted attachment.
[Footnote 56: Sir Colin Campbell had relieved Lucknow on the 17th of November, but Sir Henry Havelock (as he had now become) died from illness and exhaustion. General Neill had been killed on the occasion of the reinforcement in September, ante, 12th November, 1857.]
[Pageheading: ARMY ORGANISATION]
Queen Victoria to Lord Panmure.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 29th December 1857.
The Queen has received Lord Panmure's letter and Memorandum of the 24th. She must say that she still adheres to her views as formerly expressed. Lord Panmure admits that the two plans don't differ materially in expense. It becomes, then, a mere question of organisation and of policy. As to the first, all military authorities of all countries and times agree upon the point that numerous cadres with fewer men give the readiest means of increasing an army on short notice, the main point to be attended to in a constitutional and democratic country like England. As to the second, a system of organisation will always be easier defended than mere numbers arbitrarily fixed, and Parliament ought to have the possibility of voting more or voting fewer men, according to their views of the exigencies of the country, or the pressure of finance at different times, and to be able to do so without deranging the organisation.
The Queen hopes Lord Panmure will look at our position, as if the Indian demands had not arisen, and he will find that to come to Parliament with the Cavalry borne on the estimates reduced by three regiments (as will be the case even after two shall have returned from India, and the two new ones shall have been formed), will certainly not prove too little anxiety on the part of the Government to cut down our military establishments.
Introductory Note
TO CHAPTER XXVII
On the 25th of January of the new year (1858) Prince Frederick William of Prussia (afterwards the Emperor Frederick) was married, with brilliant ceremonial, to the Princess Royal, at the Chapel Royal, St James's, an event marked by general national rejoicings; another event in the private life of the Queen, but one of a melancholy character, was the death of the Duchess of Orleans at the age of forty-four.
A determined attempt was made by Orsini, Pierri, and others, members of the Carbonari Society, to assassinate the Emperor and Empress of the French by throwing grenades filled with detonating powder under their carriage. The Emperor was only slightly hurt, but several bystanders were killed, and very many more wounded. The plot had been conceived, and the grenades manufactured in England, and a violently hostile feeling was engendered in France against this country, owing to the prescriptive right of asylum enjoyed by foreign refugees. The French militaires were particularly vehement in their language, and Lord Palmerston so far bowed to the demands of the French Foreign Minister as to introduce a Bill to make the offence of conspiracy to murder, a felony instead of, as it had previously been, a misdemeanour. The Conservative Party supported the introduction of the Bill, but, on the second reading, joined with eighty-four Liberals and four Peelites in supporting an Amendment by Mr Milner Gibson, postponing the reform of the Criminal Law till the peremptory demands of Count Walewski had been formally answered. The Ministry was defeated and resigned, and Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli returned to Office. Orsini and Pierri were executed in Paris, but the state trial in London of a Dr Bernard, a resident of Bayswater, for complicity, ended, mainly owing to the menacing attitude of France over the whole question, in an acquittal. The Italian nationality of the chief conspirators endangered, but only temporarily, the important entente between France and Sardinia.
Before the resignation of the Ministry, the thanks of both Houses of Parliament were voted to the civil and military officers of India for their exertions in suppressing the Mutiny; the Opposition endeavoured to obtain the omission of the name of Lord Canning from the address, till his conduct of affairs had been discussed. The difficulties in India were not at an end, for Sir Colin Campbell had been unable to hold Lucknow, and had transferred the rescued garrison to Cawnpore, which he re-occupied. It was not till the end of March that Lucknow was captured by the Commander-in-Chief, who was raised to the peerage as Lord Clyde, after the taking of Jhansi and of Gwalior in Central India, by Sir Hugh Rose, had virtually terminated the revolt.
In anticipation of the capture of Lucknow, the Governor-General had prepared a proclamation for promulgation in Oudh, announcing that, except in the case of certain loyal Rajahs, proprietary rights in the soil of the province would be confiscated. One copy of the draft was sent home, and another shown to Sir James Outram, Chief Commissioner of Oudh, and, in consequence of the latter's protest against its severity, as making confiscation the rule and not the exception, an exemption was inserted in favour of such landowners as should actively co-operate in restoring order. On receiving the draft in its unaltered form, Lord Ellenborough, the new President of the Board of Control, forwarded a despatch to Lord Canning, strongly condemning his action, and, on the publication of this despatch, the Ministry narrowly escaped Parliamentary censure. Lord Ellenborough himself resigned, and was succeeded by Lord Stanley. Attempts had been made by both Lord Palmerston and Lord Derby to pass measures for the better government of India. After two Bills had been introduced and withdrawn, the procedure by resolution was resorted to, and a measure was ultimately passed transferring the Government of India to the Crown.
The China War terminated on the 26th of June, by the treaty of Tien-tsin, which renewed the treaty of 1842, and further opened up China to British commerce. A dispute with Japan led to a treaty signed at Yeddo by Lord Elgin and the representatives of the Tycoon, enlarging British diplomatic and trade privileges in that country.
The Budget of Mr Disraeli imposed for the first time a penny stamp on bankers' cheques; a compromise was arrived at on the Oaths question, the words "on the true faith of a Christian" having hitherto prevented Jews from sitting in Parliament. They were now enabled to take the oath with the omission of these words, and Baron Rothschild took his seat for the City of London accordingly.
Among the other events of importance in the year were the satisfactory termination of a dispute with the Neapolitan Government arising out of the seizure of the Cagliari; a modified union, under a central Commission, of Moldavia and Wallachia; the despatch of Mr Gladstone by the Conservative Government as High Commissioner to the Ionian Islands; and the selection of Ottawa, formerly known as Bytown, for the capital of the Dominion of Canada.
Chapter XXVII
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.
Public sympathy was entirely with him, especially when he vindicated the policy which he had asserted, but took upon himself the whole and sole responsibility of having authorised the publication of the despatch--which he vindicated--and announced his own resignation rather than embarrass his colleagues. Lord Grey shortly entered his protest against bringing into discussion the policy of the Proclamation and of the consequent despatch, into which Lord Ellenborough had certainly entered too largely, opposing, very broadly, the principle of confiscation against that of clemency. Lord Derby followed Lord Grey, and after an interruption on a point of form, vindicated the policy advocated in Lord Ellenborough's despatch, at the same time that he expressed not only his hope, but his belief, that in practice the Governor-General would be found (and more especially judging from the alterations inserted in the last Proclamation of which an unofficial copy has been received) acting on the principles laid down in Lord Ellenborough's despatch. In the tribute which he felt it his duty to pay to the personal, as well as political, character of Lord Ellenborough, the House concurred with entire unanimity and all did honour to the spirit which induced him to sacrifice his own position to the public service; and to atone, and more than atone, for an act of indiscretion by the frank avowal that he alone was responsible for it. Lord Derby thinks that the step which has been taken may, even probably, prevent the Motions intended to be made on Friday; and if made, will, almost certainly, result in a majority for the Government.
Lord Derby believes that he may possibly be in time to telegraph to Malta early to-morrow, to Lord Canning. In that case he will do himself the honour of submitting to your Majesty a copy of the message[31] sent, though he fears it will be impossible to do so before its despatch. He proposes in substance to say that the publication has been disapproved--that Lord Ellenborough has resigned in consequence--but that your Majesty's Government adhere in principle to the policy laid down in the despatch of 19th April, and entertain an earnest hope that the Governor-General, judging from the modifications introduced into the amended Proclamation, has, in fact, the intention of acting in the same spirit; but that your Majesty's Government are still of opinion that confiscation of private property ought to be made the exception, and not the rule, and to be enforced only against those who may stand out after a certain day, or who may be proved to have been guilty of more than ordinary crimes.
Lord Derby hopes that your Majesty will excuse a very hasty sketch of a very large subject.
[Footnote 31: The Earl of Derby to Lord Lyons.
12th May 1858.
Send on the following message to Lord Canning by the Indian mail.
The publication of the Secret Despatch of 19th April has been disapproved. Lord Ellenborough has resigned office. His successor has not been appointed. Nevertheless the policy indicated in the above despatch is approved by Her Majesty's Government. Confiscation of property of private individuals (Talookdars and others) ought to be the exception and not the rule. It ought to be held out as a penalty on those who do not come in by a given day. From your amended Proclamation it is hoped that such is your intention. Let it be clearly understood that it is so. You were quite right in issuing no Proclamation till after a signal success. That once obtained, the more generous the terms, the better. A broad distinction must be drawn between the Talookdars of Oudh and the Sepoys who have been in our service. Confidence is felt in your judgment. You will not err if you lean to the side of humanity, especially as to nations of Oudh.
No private letters have been received from you since the change of Government.]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
14th May 1858.
The Queen returns the extracts Lord Derby has sent to her. Lord Ellenborough's despatch,[32] now before her for the first time, is very good and just in principle. But the Queen would be much surprised if it did not entirely coincide with the views of Lord Canning, at least as far as he has hitherto expressed any in his letters. So are also the sentiments written by Sir J. Lawrence; they contain almost the very expressions frequently used by Lord Canning.
Sir J. Login,[33] who holds the same opinion, and has great Indian experience, does not find any fault with the Proclamation, however seemingly it may sound at variance with these opinions, and this on account of the peculiar position of affairs in Oudh. It is a great pity that Lord Ellenborough, with his knowledge, experience, activity, and cleverness, should be so entirely unable to submit to general rules of conduct. The Queen has been for some time much alarmed at his writing letters of his own to all the most important Indian Chiefs and Kings explaining his policy. All this renders the position of a Governor-General almost untenable, and that of the Government at home very hazardous.
[Footnote 32: This was a later despatch of Lord Ellenborough's, also in reference to the pacification of Oudh, and not shown to the Cabinet before it was sent.]
[Footnote 33: See ante, 23rd September, 1857, note 41.]
[Pageheading: LORD ABERDEEN CONSULTED]
[Pageheading: PREROGATIVE OF DISSOLUTION]
[Pageheading: STATE OF PARTIES]
Memorandum by Sir Charles Phipps.
[Undated. ? 15th May 1858.]
Upon being admitted to Lord Aberdeen, I informed him that the Queen and Prince were anxious to hear his opinion upon the present most unfortunate state of affairs, but that, knowing how easily every event was perverted in such times as the present, Her Majesty and His Royal Highness had thought that it might have been subject to misapprehension had he been known to have been at Buckingham Palace, and that I had been therefore directed to call upon him, with a view of obtaining his opinion and advice upon certain important points.
The first was the question of a Dissolution of Parliament in the event of the Government being defeated upon the question which was at present pending. I told him that I was permitted to communicate to him in the strictest confidence, that in a late Audience which Lord Derby had with the Queen, he had asked her permission to be allowed to announce that, in the event of an adverse majority, he had Her Majesty's sanction to a Dissolution of Parliament.
That the Queen had declined to give such sanction, or even such a pledge, and equally guarded herself against being supposed to have made up her mind to refuse her sanction to a Dissolution, had told Lord Derby that she could not then make any prospective decision upon the subject. I told him that in point of fact Her Majesty was disinclined to grant to Lord Derby her authority for a Dissolution, but that the Queen had at once refused to grant to Lord Derby her sanction for making the announcement he wished, as she considered that it would be a very unconstitutional threat for him to hold over the head of the Parliament, with her authority, by way of biassing their decision.
Lord Aberdeen interrupted me by saying that the Queen had done quite right--that he never heard of such a request being made, or authority for such an announcement being sought--and he could not at all understand Lord Derby making such an application. He knew that the Government had threatened a Dissolution, that he thought that they had a perfect right to do so, but that they would have been quite wrong in joining the Queen's name with it.
He said that he had never entertained the slightest doubt that if the Minister advised the Queen to dissolve, she would, as a matter of course, do so. The Minister who advised the Dissolution took upon himself the heavy responsibility of doing so, but that the Sovereign was bound to suppose that the person whom she had appointed as a Minister was a gentleman and an honest man, and that he would not advise Her Majesty to take such a step unless he thought that it was for the good of the country. There was no doubt of the power and prerogative of the Sovereign to refuse a Dissolution--it was one of the very few acts which the Queen of England could do without responsible advice at the moment; but even in this case whoever was sent for to succeed, must, with his appointment, assume the responsibility of this act, and be prepared to defend it in Parliament.
He could not remember a single instance in which the undoubted power of the Sovereign had been exercised upon this point, and the advice of the Minister to dissolve Parliament had been rejected--for it was to be remembered that Lord Derby would be still at this time her Minister--and that the result of such refusal would be that the Queen would take upon herself the act of dismissing Lord Derby from office, instead of his resigning from being unable longer to carry on the Government.
The Queen had during her reign, and throughout the numerous changes of Government, maintained an unassailable position of constitutional impartiality, and he had no hesitation in saying that he thought it would be more right, and certainly more safe, for her to follow the usual course, than to take this dangerous time for exercising an unusual and, he believed he might say, an unprecedented, course, though the power to exercise the authority was undoubted.
He said that he did not conceive that any reasons of expediency as to public business, or the possible effects of frequent general elections, would be sufficient grounds for refusing a Dissolution (and reasons would have to be given by the new Minister in Parliament), and, as he conceived, the only possible ground that could be maintained as foundation for such an exercise of authority would be the fearful danger to the existence of our power in India, which might arise from the intemperate discussion upon every hustings of the proceedings of the Government with respect to that country--as the question proposed to the country would certainly be considered to be severity or mercy to the people of India.
Upon the second point, as to a successor to Lord Derby in the event of his resignation, he said that the Queen would, he thought, have no alternative but to send for Lord Palmerston. The only other person who could be suggested would be Lord John Russell, and he was neither the mover of the Resolutions which displaced the Government, nor the ostensible head of the Opposition, which the late meeting at Cambridge House pointed out Lord Palmerston to be. That he was not very fond of Lord Palmerston, though he had forgiven him all, and he had had much to forgive; and that in the last few days it had appeared that he had less following than Lord John; but the Queen could not act upon such daily changing circumstances, and it was evident that Lord Palmerston was the ostensible man for the Queen to send for.
Lord Aberdeen seemed very low upon the state of public affairs. He said that the extreme Liberals were the only Party that appeared to gain strength. Not only was the Whig Party divided within itself, hated by the Radicals, and having a very doubtful support from the independent Liberals, but even the little band called the Peelites had entirely crumbled to pieces. In the House of Lords, whilst the Duke of Newcastle voted with the Opposition, he (Lord Aberdeen) had purposely abstained from voting, whilst, in the House of Commons, Cardwell moved the Resolution, and Mr Sidney Herbert would, he believed, vote for it; Gladstone would speak on the other side, and Sir J. Graham would also vote with the Government.
He concluded by saying that if the majority against the Government was a very large one, he thought that Lord Derby ought not to ask to dissolve; but that he knew that the members of the Government had said that the present Parliament was elected upon a momentary Palmerstonian cry, and was quite an exceptional case, and that they would not consent to be driven from office upon its verdict.
[Pageheading: THE QUEEN AND DISSOLUTION]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 16th May 1858.
We saw Lord Derby after church. He brought interesting letters from Lord Canning to Lord Ellenborough, of which copies follow here. It is evident that Lord Canning thinks that he is taking a most merciful course, and expects pacification from his "Proclamation," attributing the slow coming in of the chiefs to the Proclamation not being yet sufficiently known.
Lord Ellenborough's, and indeed the Government's, hearts, must have had curious sensations in reading Lord Canning's frank declaration, that he did not mean to resign on hearing of the formation of the Tory Government unless told to do so, and he had no fears that he would be treated in a way implying want of confidence to make him resign, feeling safe as to that in Lord Ellenborough's hands!
Lord Derby spoke much of the Debate, which he expects to go on for another week. He expects to be beaten by from 15 to 35 votes under present circumstances, but thinks still that he could be saved if it were known that the Queen had not refused a Dissolution, which was stoutly maintained by Lord Palmerston's friends. He begged again to be empowered to contradict the assertion. The Queen maintained that it would be quite unconstitutional to threaten Parliament, and to use her name for that purpose. Lord Derby quite agreed, and disclaimed any such intention, but said there were modes of letting the fact be known without any risk. We agreed that we could not enter into such details. The Queen allowed him (Lord Derby) to know that a Dissolution would not be refused to him, and trusted that her honour would be safe in his hands as to the use he made of that knowledge. He seemed greatly relieved, and stated that had he had to resign, he would have withdrawn from public business, and the Conservative Party would have been entirely, and he feared for ever, broken up. On a Dissolution he felt certain of a large gain, as the country was in fact tired of the "Whig Family Clique"; the Radicals, like Mr Milner Gibson, Bright, etc., would willingly support a Conservative Government.
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: COLLAPSE OF THE ATTACK]
Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria.[34]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, 21st May 1858.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The fullest House; it is said 620 Members present; it was supposed we should have divided at three o'clock in the morning; Mr Gladstone was to have spoken for the Government at half-past ten--very great excitement--when there occurred a scene perhaps unprecedented in Parliament.
One after another, perhaps twenty Members, on the Opposition benches, rising and entreating Mr Cardwell to withdraw his Resolution. After some time, silence on the Government benches, Mr Cardwell went to Lord John Russell, then to Lord Palmerston, then to Lord John Russell again, then returned to Lord Palmerston, and retired with him.
What are called the interpellations continued, when suddenly Lord Palmerston reappeared; embarrassed, with a faint smile; addressed the House; and after various preluding, announced the withdrawal of the Motion of Censure.
A various Debate followed; the Chancellor of the Exchequer endeavouring, as far as regards Lord Canning, to fulfil your Majesty's wishes. It is impossible to estimate the importance of this unforeseen event to your Majesty's servants. It has strengthened them more than the most decided division in their favour, for it has revealed complete anarchy in the ranks of their opponents. With prudence and vigilance all must now go right.
The speech of Sir James Graham last night produced a very great effect. No report gives a fair idea of it. The great country gentleman, the broad views, the fine classical allusions, the happiest all omitted, the massy style, contrasted remarkably with Sir Richard Bethell.
[Footnote 34: Lord Shaftesbury's Motion in the Lords had been lost by a majority of nine. In the Commons, Mr Cardwell was replied to in a brilliant speech by Sir Hugh Cairns, the Solicitor-General. The speeches of Sir James Graham, Mr Bright, and others, showed that the Opposition was disunited, and when it was understood that Mr Gladstone would support the Ministry, the Liberal attack collapsed. Mr Disraeli, deprived of the satisfaction of making an effective reply, subsequently compared the discomfiture of his opponents to an earthquake in Calabria or Peru. "There was," he said, in the course of a speech at Slough, "a rumbling murmur, a groan, a shriek, a sound of distant thunder. No one knew whether it came from the top or bottom of the House. There was a rent, a fissure in the ground, and then a village disappeared, then a tall tower toppled down, and the whole of the Opposition benches became one great dissolving view of anarchy."]
[Pageheading: CAUSES OF THE COLLAPSE]
[Pageheading: OFFER TO MR GLADSTONE]
The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria.
ST JAMES'S SQUARE, 23rd May 1858. (Sunday night.)
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, gratefully acknowledges your Majesty's gracious letter just received, and the telegraphic message with which he was honoured in answer to his on Friday night. Your Majesty can hardly be expected to estimate, at a distance from the immediate scene of action, the effect of the event of that evening. It was the utter explosion of a well-constructed mine, under the feet, not of the assailed, but of the assailants; and the effect has been the greater from the immense attendance in London of Members of the House of Commons. No effort had been spared. Lord Castlerosse, only just married, had been sent for from Italy--but Lord Derby hopes that he had not been induced to come--for nothing. It is said that of the 654 Members of whom the House is composed, 626 were actually in London. The Government could rely on 304 to 308, and the whole question turned on the absence, or the conversion, of a small number of "Liberal" Members. The result is to be attributed to two causes; first, and principally, to the fear of a Dissolution, and to the growing conviction that in case of necessity your Majesty would sanction such a course, which had been strenuously denied by Lord Palmerston--and in which Lord Derby hopes that your Majesty will have seen that your Majesty's name has never, for a moment, been brought in question; and secondly, to the effect produced by the correspondence between the Governor-General and Sir James Outram.[35] And here Lord Derby may perhaps be allowed the opportunity of removing a misconception from your Majesty's mind, as to any secret intelligence or underhand intrigue between Lord Ellenborough and Sir James Outram, to the detriment of Lord Canning. Lord Derby is in the position to know that if there is one person in the world to whom Lord Ellenborough has an utter aversion, and with whom he has no personal or private correspondence, it is Sir James Outram. Anything therefore in common in their opinions must be the result of circumstances wholly irrespective of private concert. Lord Derby has written fully to Lord Canning, privately, by the mail which will go out on Tuesday; and while he has not concealed from him the opinion of your Majesty's servants that the Proclamation, of which so much has been said, conveyed too sweeping an Edict of Confiscation against the landowners, great and small, of Oudh, he has not hesitated to express also his conviction that Lord Canning's real intentions, in execution, would not be found widely to differ from the views of your Majesty's servants. He has expressed to Lord Canning his regret at the premature publication of the Draft Proclamation, at the same time that he has pointed out the injustice done both to your Majesty's Government and to the Governor-General by the (Lord Derby will hardly call it fraudulent) suppression of the private letters addressed to the President of the Board of Control, and deprecating judgment on the text of the Proclamation, until explanation should be received. Lord Derby cannot but be of opinion that this suppression, of which Lord Palmerston was fully cognisant, was an act which no political or party interests were sufficient to justify.
The state of the Government, during the late crisis, was such as to render it impossible to make any arrangement for filling up Lord Ellenborough's place at the Board of Control. Application has since been made to Mr Gladstone,[36] with the offer of that post, or of that of the Colonial Department, which Lord Stanley would give up for the convenience of your Majesty's Government, though unwillingly, for India. Mr Gladstone demurred, on the ground of not wishing to leave his friends; but when pressed to name whom he would wish to bring with him, he could name none. Finally, he has written to ask advice as to his course of Sir James Graham, who has returned to Netherby, and of Lord Aberdeen; and by them he will probably be guided. Should he finally refuse, Lord Stanley must take India; and the Colonies must be offered in the first instance to Sir E. B. Lytton, who probably will refuse, as he wants a Peerage, and is doubtful of his re-election; and failing him, to Sir William Heathcote, the Member for the University of Oxford, who, without official experience, has great Parliamentary knowledge and influence, and, if he will accept, is quite equal to the duties of the office. Lord Derby trusts that your Majesty will forgive this long intrusion on your Majesty's patience. He has preferred the risk of it, to leaving your Majesty uninformed as to anything which was going on, or contemplated....
If Lord Dalhousie should be in a state to converse upon public affairs, there is no one with whom Lord Derby could confer more confidentially than with him; nor of whose judgment, though he regrets to differ with him as to the annexation of Oudh, he has a higher opinion. He will endeavour to ascertain what is his present state of health, which he fears is very unsatisfactory, and will see and converse with him, if possible.
[Footnote 35: Especially Outram's remonstrance against what he considered the excessive severity of the Proclamation.]
[Footnote 36: See Mr Disraeli's curious letter printed in Morley's Gladstone, vol. i. p. 587, asking Mr Gladstone whether the time had not come when he might deign to be magnanimous. Sir E. B. Lytton accepted the office.]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 4th June 1858.
The Queen has to thank Lord Derby for his satisfactory letter received yesterday. She has heard from Mr Disraeli to-day relative to the answer given by him to the question asked yesterday in the House of Commons as to what the Government meant to do.[37] He says that he hears there are rumours of other Motions on the subject. These the Queen hopes there will be no difficulty in defeating.
The Duke of Cambridge seems rather uneasy altogether, but the Queen, though equally anxious about it, owns she cannot contemplate the possibility of any real attempt to divest the Crown of its prerogative in this instance. The Army will not, she feels sure, stand it for a moment, and the Queen feels sure, that if properly defined and explained, the House of Commons will not acquiesce in any such disloyal proceeding.
The Queen does not understand Lord John Russell's voting with the majority, for she never understood him to express any such opinion.
[Footnote 37: A question was asked whether it was the intention of the Government to take any step in consequence of a resolution of the House in favour of placing the whole administration and control of the Army under the sole authority of a single Minister. Mr. Disraeli replied that "considering the great importance of the subject,... the comparatively small number of Members in the House when the division took pace, and the bare majority by which the decision was arrived at, Her Majesty's Government do not feel that it is their duty to recommend any measure in consequence of that resolution."]
[Pageheading: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA]
Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, 24th June 1858.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.
The India Bill was read a second time without a division.[38] Lord Stanley made a clear and vigorous exposition of its spirit and provisions; Mr Bright delivered a powerful oration on the condition of India--its past government and future prospects; the rest of the discussion weak and desultory.
No serious opposition apprehended in Committee, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has fixed for this day (Friday)[39] and almost hopes that he may conclude the Committee on Monday. He proposes to proceed with no other business until it is concluded.
When the Bill has passed, the temper of the House, and its sanitary state,[40] will assist him in passing the remaining estimates with rapidity; and he contemplates an early conclusion of the Session.
It will be a great thing to have carried the India Bill, which Mr Thomas Baring, to-night, spoke of in terms of eulogy, and as a great improvement on the project of the late Government. It is, the Chancellor of the Exchequer really thinks, a wise and well-digested measure, ripe with the experience of the last five months of discussion; but it is only the antechamber of an imperial palace; and your Majesty would do well to deign to consider the steps which are now necessary to influence the opinions and affect the imagination of the Indian populations. The name of your Majesty ought to be impressed upon their native life. Royal Proclamations, Courts of Appeal, in their own land, and other institutions, forms, and ceremonies, will tend to this great result.
[Footnote 38: This was the third Bill of the Session, and was founded on the Resolutions, ante, 12th April, 1858, note 26. The Government of India was transferred from the dual jurisdiction of the Company and the Board of Control, to the Secretary of State for India in Council, the members of the Council (after the provisions for representing vested interests should have lapsed) to be appointed by the Secretary of State. A certain term of residence in India was to be a necessary qualification, and the members were to be rendered incapable of sitting in Parliament, and with a tenure of office as assured as that of judges under the Act of Settlement.]
[Footnote 39: The letter is ante-dated. The 24th of June was a Thursday.]
[Footnote 40: In consequence of the polluted condition of the Thames, the Government carried a measure enabling the Metropolitan Board of Works, at a cost of L3,000,000, to purify "that noble river, the present state of which is little creditable to a great country, and seriously prejudicial to the health and comfort of the inhabitants of the Metropolis."--Extract from the Queen's Speech, at the close of the Session.]
[Pageheading: INDIAN CIVIL SERVICE]
[Pageheading: THE SOVEREIGN'S PREROGATIVES]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
OSBORNE, 8th July 1858.
The Queen in reading in the papers yesterday, on her way here from the camp, the Debate in the House of Commons of the previous night, was shocked to find that in several important points her Government have surrendered the prerogatives of the Crown. She will only refer to the clauses concerning the Indian Civil Service and the right of peace and war.
With respect to the first, the regulations under which servants of the Crown are to be admitted or examined have always been an undoubted right and duty of the Executive; by the clause introduced by Lord Stanley the system of "Competitive Examination" has been confirmed by Act of Parliament. That system may be right or wrong; it has since its introduction been carried on under the Orders in Council; now the Crown and Government are to be deprived of any authority in the matter, and the whole examinations, selection, and appointments, etc., etc., are to be vested in the Civil Commissioners under a Parliamentary title.
As to the right of the Crown to declare war and make peace, it requires not a word of remark; yet Lord Stanley agrees to Mr Gladstone's proposal to make over this prerogative with regard to Indian questions to Parliament under the auspices of the Queen's Government; she is thus placed in a position of less authority than the President of the American Republic.[41]
When a Bill has been introduced into Parliament, after having received the Sovereign's approval, she has the right to expect that her Ministers will not subsequently introduce important alterations without previously obtaining her sanction. In the first of the two instances referred to by the Queen, Lord Stanley introduced the alteration himself; in the second he agreed to it even without asking for a moment's delay; and the Opposition party, which attempted to guard the Queen's prerogative, was overborne by the Government Leader of the House.
The Queen must remind Lord Derby that it is to him as the head of the Government that she looks for the protection of those prerogatives which form an integral part of the Constitution.
[Footnote 41: An important amendment made at the instance of Mr Gladstone provided that, except for repelling actual invasion or upon urgent necessity, the Queen's Indian forces should not be employed in operations outside India, without Parliamentary sanction.]
The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria.
LAEKEN, 16th July 1858.
MY TRULY BELOVED VICTORIA,--Nothing can be kinder or more affectionate than your dear letter of the 13th, and it would have done your warm heart good to have seen how much I have been delighted and moved by it. I can only say that I love you both more tenderly than I could love my own children. When your plans will be nearer maturity, you will have the great kindness to let me know what will be your Royal pleasure, to enable me de m'y conformer bien exactement.
The feeling which occasions some grumbling at the Cherbourg visit[42] is in fact a good feeling, but it is not over-wise. Two things are to be done--(1) To make every reasonable exertion to remain on personal good terms with the Emperor--which can be done. One party in England says it is with the French nation that you are to be on loving terms; this cannot be, as the French dislike the English as a nation, though they may be kind to you also personally. (2) The next is, instead of a good deal of unnecessary abuse, to have the Navy so organised that it can and must be superior to the French. All beyond these two points is sheer nonsense.
After talking of Chambord,[43] to my utter horror he is here, and asked yesterday to see me to-day. It is not fair to do so, as the legitimists affect to this hour to consider [us] here as rebels. I could not refuse to see him, as, though distantly, still he is a relation; but I mean to do as they did in Holland, to receive him, but to limit to his visit and my visit our whole intercourse. If he should speak to me of going to England, I certainly mean to tell him que je considerais une visite comme tout a fait intempestive.... Your devoted Uncle,
LEOPOLD R.
[Footnote 42: On the 4th of August, the Queen and Prince, accompanied by the Prince of Wales, visited the Emperor and Empress at Cherbourg.]
[Footnote 43: See ante, 16th January, 1854, and note 5.]
[Pageheading: BRITISH COLUMBIA]
Queen Victoria to Sir E. Bulwer Lytton.
OSBORNE, 24th July 1858.
The Queen has received Sir E. Bulwer Lytton's letter.[44] If the name of New Caledonia is objected to as being already borne by another colony or island claimed by the French, it may be better to give the new colony west of the Rocky Mountains another name. New Hanover, New Cornwall, and New Georgia appear from the maps to be the names of sub-divisions of that country, but do not appear on all maps. The only name which is given to the whole territory in every map the Queen has consulted is "Columbia," but as there exists also a Columbia in South America, and the citizens of the United States call their country also Columbia, at least in poetry, "British Columbia" might be, in the Queen's opinion, the best name.
[Footnote 44: Stating that objections were being made in France to the name of New Caledonia being given to the proposed colony between the Pacific and the Rocky Mountains.]
[Pageheading: ARMY COMMISSIONS]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
OSBORNE, 29th July 1858.
The Queen has been placed in a most unpleasant dilemma by the last vote in the House of Commons;[45] she feels all the force of Lord Derby's objections to risking another defeat on the same question and converting the struggle into one against the Royal Prerogative; yet, on the other hand, she can hardly sit still, and from mere want of courage become a party to the most serious inroad which has yet been made upon it. It is the introduction of the principle into our legislation that the Sovereign is no longer the source of all appointments under the Crown, but that these appointments are the property of individuals under a Parliamentary title, which the Queen feels bound to resist. Lord John Russell's Motion and Sir James Graham's speech only went to the Civil appointments; but after their Motion had been carried on a division, Lord Stanley gave way to Sir De Lacy Evans also with regard to a portion of the Army! If this principle is recognised and sanctioned by the entire legislature, its future extension can no longer be resisted on constitutional grounds, and Lord John in fact reminded Lord Stanley that the latter had stated that he only refrained from making the application general from thinking it premature, himself being of opinion that it ought to be carried further, and yet its extension to the Army reduces the Sovereign to a mere signing machine, as, to carry the case to its extreme consequence, Law would compel her to sign the Commission for the officers, and they might have the right to sue at law for the recovery of their property vested in them by Act of Parliament (viz., their Commissions) if the Crown doubted for any reason the fitness of an appointment!! Have these consequences been considered and brought distinctly before Parliament? It strikes the Queen that all the Commons want is a Parliamentary security against the abolition of the Competitive System of Examinations by the Executive. Can this not be obtained by means less subversive of the whole character of our Constitution? The Queen cannot believe that Lord Derby could not find means to come to some agreement with the Opposition, and she trusts he will leave nothing undone to effect this.
[Footnote 45: The Lords Amendments on the subject of competitive examination were rejected by a majority of thirteen in the Commons, and, in the circumstances, Lord Derby had advised abiding by the decision and not risking another defeat.]
[Pageheading: NAVAL ESTIMATES]
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
OSBORNE, 2nd August 1858.
The Queen feels it her duty to address a few lines to Lord Derby on the subject of the reports made to Sir John Pakington on the subject of the French Naval preparations, to which she has already verbally adverted when she saw Lord Derby last. These reports reveal a state of things of the greatest moment to this country. It will be the first time in her history that she will find herself in an absolute minority of ships on the sea! and this inferiority will be much greater in reality than even apparent, as our fleet will have to defend possessions and commerce all over the world, and has even in Europe a strategical line to hold extending from Malta to Heligoland, whilst France keeps her fleet together and occupies the centre of that line in Europe.
The Queen thinks it irreconcilable with the duty which the Government owes to the country to be aware of this state of things without straining every nerve to remedy it. With regard to men in whom we are also totally deficient in case of an emergency, a Commission of Enquiry is sitting to devise a remedy; but with regard to our ships and dockyards we require action, and immediate action. The plan proposed by the Surveyor of the Navy appears to the Queen excessively moderate and judicious, and she trusts that the Cabinet will not hesitate to empower its execution, bearing in mind that L200,000 spent now will probably do more work during the six or nine months for working before us, than L2,000,000 would if voted in next year's estimate, letting our arrears in the dockyards, already admitted to be very great, accumulate in the interval. Time is most precious under these circumstances!
It is true that this sum of money would be in excess of the estimates of last Session, but the Queen feels sure that on the faith of the reports made by the Admiralty, the Government would find no difficulty in convincing Parliament that they have been good stewards of the public money, in taking courageously the responsibility upon themselves to spend judiciously what is necessary, and that the country will be deeply grateful for the honesty with which they will have served her.
The Queen wishes Lord Derby to communicate this letter to the Cabinet.
Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby.
BABELSBERG, 15th August 1858.
The Queen has asked Lord Malmesbury to explain in detail to Lord Derby her objections to the draft of Proclamation for India. The Queen would be glad if Lord Derby would write it himself in his excellent language, bearing in mind that it is a female Sovereign who speaks to more than 100,000,000 of Eastern people on assuming the direct Government over them after a bloody civil war, giving them pledges which her future reign is to redeem, and explaining the principles of her Government. Such a document should breathe feelings of generosity, benevolence, and religious feeling, pointing out the privileges which the Indians will receive in being placed on an equality with the subjects of the British Crown, and the prosperity following in the train of civilisation.[46]
[Footnote 46: The draft Proclamation was accordingly altered so as to be in strict harmony with the Queen's wishes. See post, 2nd December, 1858, and note 52.]
[Pageheading: PROCLAMATION FOR INDIA]
Queen Victoria to Lord Stanley.
OSBORNE, 4th September 1858.
The Queen sends to Lord Stanley a Memorandum embodying her wishes with respect to the transaction of business between herself and the new Secretary of State. He will find that she has omitted any reference to Military appointments, as Lord Stanley seemed anxious to defer a settlement on this point; she expects, however, that in all cases in which her pleasure was taken by the Commander-in-Chief, even during the administration of the East India Company and Board of Control, the same practice will be continued unaltered.
The Queen has received Lord Stanley's letter of yesterday. He has given her no answer with respect to Sir James Melvill.[47]
Whenever the Proclamation is finally printed, the Queen would wish to have a copy sent her. A letter she has received from Lady Canning speaks of Lord Canning's supposed Amnesty in Oudh as a fabrication; she has sent the letter to Lord Derby.
[Footnote 47: The Queen had asked how it was that Sir J. Melvill's name was not included among those submitted to her for appointments in connection with the new military organisation in India. Sir James had been Financial Secretary, and afterwards Chief Secretary, for the East India Company. He now became the Government Director of Indian railways, and a Member of the Council of India.]
Memorandum by Queen Victoria.
OSBORNE, 4th September 1858.
The Queen wishes the practice of the Office[48] with reference to submissions to her to be as nearly as possible assimilated to that of the Foreign Office.
All despatches, when received and perused by the Secretary of State, to be sent to the Queen. They may be merely forwarded in boxes from the Office without being accompanied by any letter from the Secretary of State, unless he should think an explanation necessary. No draft of instructions or orders to be sent out without having been previously submitted to the Queen. The label on the boxes of the Office containing such drafts to be marked "For Approval."
In cases of Civil appointments the Secretary of State will himself take the Queen's pleasure before communicating with the gentlemen to be appointed.
Copies or a precis of the Minutes of the Council to be regularly transmitted to the Queen.
The Secretary of State to obtain the Queen's sanction to important measures previously to his bringing them before the Council for discussion.
[Footnote 48: The India Office.]
[Pageheading: LORD PALMERSTON]
Memorandum by the Prince Albert.
OSBORNE, 4th September 1858.
The most remarkable feature of the last Session of Parliament has been the extraordinary unpopularity of Lord Palmerston, for which nothing can account; the only direct reproach which is made to him, is to have appointed Lord Clanricarde Privy Seal, and to have been overbearing in his manner. Yet a House of Commons, having been elected solely for the object, and on the ground of supporting Lord Palmerston personally (an instance in our Parliamentary history without parallel), holds him suddenly in such abhorrence, that not satisfied with having upset his Government, which had been successful in all its policy, and thrown him out, it will hardly listen to him when he speaks. He is frequently received with hooting, and throughout the last Session it sufficed that [he] took up any cause for the whole House voting against it, even if contrary to the principles which they had themselves advocated, merely to have the satisfaction of putting him into a minority. How can this be accounted for? The man who was without rhyme or reason stamped the only English statesman, the champion of liberty, the man of the people, etc., etc., now, without his having changed in any one respect, having still the same virtues and the same faults that he always had, young and vigorous in his seventy-fifth year, and having succeeded in his policy, is now considered the head of a clique, the man of intrigue, past his work, etc., etc.--in fact hated! and this throughout the country. I cannot explain the enigma except by supposing that people had before joined in a cry which they thought was popular without themselves believing what they said and wrote, and that they now do the same; that the Radicals used his name to destroy other statesmen and politicians, and are destroying him now in his turn; that they hoped to govern through him, and that they see a better chance now of doing it through a weak and incapable Tory Government which has entered into a secret bargain for their support. Still the phenomenon remains most curious.[49]
[Footnote 49: Charles Greville, in his Journal (16th June 1858), noted the same circumstance, and drew the inference that Palmerston's public career was drawing to a close.]
Lord Palmerston himself remains, outwardly at least, quite cheerful, and seems to care very little about his reverses; he speaks on all subjects, bids for the Liberal support as before, even at the expense of his better conviction (as he used to do), and keeps as much as possible before the public; he made an official tour in Ireland, and is gone to visit the Emperor Napoleon at Paris; his Chinese policy upon which the general Dissolution had taken place in 1857 has just been crowned by the most complete success by the advantageous treaty signed at Pekin by Lord Elgin; and yet even for this the public will not allow him any credit. Lady Palmerston, on the contrary, is said to be very unhappy and very much hurt.
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: THE IONIAN ISLANDS]
Sir E. Bulwer Lytton to Queen Victoria.
COLONIAL OFFICE, 1st November 1858.
Sir E. B. Lytton, with his humble duty to the Queen, submits to your Majesty's pleasure the appointment of the Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone, as special High Commissioner to the Ionian Islands.
Differences of long standing between the Executive and Legislative branches of the Ionian Constitution, aggravated by recent dissensions between the Senate and Municipal Magistrature, render it very expedient to obtain the opinion of a statesman of eminence, formed upon the spot, as to any improvements in the workings and results of the Constitution which it might be in the power of the protecting Sovereign to effect. And Sir Edward thinks it fortunate for the public service that a person so distinguished and able as Mr Gladstone should be induced to undertake this mission.
Sir Edward ventures to add that, should Her Majesty be graciously pleased to approve this appointment, it is extremely desirable that Mr Gladstone should depart at the earliest possible day, and that Sir Edward may be enabled to make the requisite announcement to the Lord High Commissioner by the first mail.
[Pageheading: LORD STANLEY AND MR DISRAELI]
[Pageheading: SUGGESTED RESIGNATION]
Mr Disraeli to the Prince Albert.
GROSVENOR GATE, 18th November 1858. (Wednesday night.)
SIR,--After the Committee of the Cabinet on the Reform Bill, which sat this morning for five hours, Lord Stanley expressed a wish to have some private conversation with me.
Although I would willingly have deferred the interview till a moment when I was less exhausted, I did not think it wise, with a person of his temperament, to baulk an occasion, and therefore assented at once.
I give your Royal Highness faithfully, but feebly, and not completely, the results of our conversation.
1. With respect to the relations between his office and Her Majesty, he said he was conscious that they had been conducted with great deficiency of form, and, in many respects, in an unsatisfactory manner; but he attributed all this to the inexperience and "sheer ignorance" of a Department which had not been accustomed to direct communication with the Crown. Some portion of this, he said, he had already remedied, and he wished to remedy all, though he experienced difficulties, on some of which he consulted me.
He accepted, without reserve, and cordially, my position, that he must act always as the Minister of the Queen, and not of the Council, but he said I took an exaggerated view of his relations with that body; that he thoroughly knew their respective places, and should be vigilant that they did [? not] overstep their limits; that he had never been, of which he reminded me, an admirer of the East India Company, and had no intention of reviving their system; that the incident of submitting the legal case to the Council, etc., had originated in a demand on the part of the Commander-in-Chief, which involved, if complied with, a grant of money, and that, under these circumstances, an appeal to the Council was inevitable.
2. He agreed with me, that, on all military matters, he would habitually communicate with the Commander-in-Chief, and take His Royal Highness's advice on all such points; and that copies of all military papers, as I understood Lord Stanley, should be furnished to His Royal Highness.
3. Having arrived at this point, I laid before him the views respecting military unity, which formed the subject matter of recent conversations. Lord Stanley assented to the principles which I attempted to enforce; and in reply to my reminding him that the old military system of India had entirely broken down, he said he contemplated terminating the independent authority of the Commander-in-Chief at the inferior Presidencies, and of establishing the absolute and complete authority of Her Majesty's Commander-in-Chief in India. He did not seem to see his way to any further step at present, and I did not think it judicious on this occasion to press the subject further.
Throughout this interview, Lord Stanley's manner was candid, very conciliatory, and, for him, even soft. He was pleased to say that it was a source of great satisfaction to him that your Royal Highness had deigned to confer confidentially with me on the subject, and make me, as it were, a "Mediator" on matters which, he assured me with great emphasis, had occasioned him an amount of anxiety almost intolerable.
He had recurred, in the course of this interview, to a suggestion which he had thrown out on Tuesday, viz. that the difficulties of the position might be removed, or greatly mitigated, by his retirement from the office, and accepting, if his continuance in the Government was desirable, another post. I therefore thought it best at once to point out to him that such a course of proceeding would only aggravate all the inconveniences and annoyances at present existing; that his retirement would be the signal for exaggerated rumours and factious machinations, and would have the most baneful effect on the discussion in Parliament generally of all those military topics with which we were threatened; that, far from being satisfactory to Her Majesty and your Royal Highness, I was convinced that the Queen and yourself would hear of such an intention with regret.
Lord Stanley ultimately adopted entirely this view of his position, and he parted from me with an earnest expression of his hope that the painful misconceptions which had prevailed might at once, or at least in due course, entirely disappear.
This, Sir, is a very imperfect report of an important interview, but, as I collected from Lord Stanley, that nothing was really settled in his conference on Tuesday with Lord Derby and the Lord Chancellor, I have thought it my duty, without loss of time, to forward it to your Royal Highness, and have the honour to remain, ever, Sir, your most obedient and sincerely obliged Servant,
B. DISRAELI.
The Prince Albert to Mr Disraeli.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 18th November 1858.
MY DEAR MR DISRAELI,--I am very much obliged to you for your long letter after a Cabinet meeting of five hours, and subsequent interview with Lord Stanley, whom I am much pleased to hear you found so anxious to remedy the present state of things. I am glad that you made it clear to him that the Queen had never connected in her mind the objections which she felt bound to take with anything personal, which could be removed by Lord Stanley's relinquishing the Indian Secretaryship. The difficulty would still remain to be solved, only under additional complication and disadvantage. Lord Derby told me to-day that he was drawing up a Memorandum which, when seen by the Chancellor and Lord Stanley, was to be submitted to the Queen. Ever yours truly,
ALBERT.[50]
[Footnote 50: On the same day Lord Stanley wrote a lengthy letter to the Queen justifying the course he had taken.]
[Pageheading: THE INDIA OFFICE]
Queen Victoria to Lord Stanley.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 20th November 1858.
The Queen has received Lord Stanley's letter entering into the subject of the difficulties which have arisen in the conduct of the new Indian Department. She had from the first foreseen that it would not be an easy matter to bring the establishments of the old Company's Government to fall into the practice and usages of the Constitutional Monarchy, and was therefore most anxious that distinct rules should be laid down before the installation of the new Government, which unfortunately was not done, but she trusts will now be devised and adopted.
The Queen most readily gives Lord Stanley credit for every intention to remove the obstacles in the way of the solution of these difficulties as far as he was able, but she cannot but fear that the particular form in which the opinion of the Law Officers has been asked, and the fact [that] the eighteen members of the Council (all naturally wedded to a system under which they were trained) were made parties to the discussion between herself and her Secretary of State on these difficulties--must increase instead of diminishing them.
The account given by Mr Temple, together with the last printed letters and Memoranda from the Punjab, give us serious cause of apprehension for the future, and show that the British Army is the only safeguard at present.
[Pageheading: LORD CANNING'S PROCLAMATION]
Queen Victoria to Viscount Canning.[51]
WINDSOR CASTLE, 2nd December 1858.
The Queen acknowledges the receipt of Lord Canning's letter of the 19th October, which she received on the 29th November, which has given her great pleasure.
It is a source of great satisfaction and pride to her to feel herself in direct communication with that enormous Empire which is so bright a jewel of her Crown, and which she would wish to see happy, contented, and peaceful. May the publication of her Proclamation be the beginning of a new era, and may it draw a veil over the sad and bloody past!
The Queen rejoices to hear that her Viceroy approves this passage about Religion.[52] She strongly insisted on it. She trusts also that the certainty of the Amnesty remaining open till the 1st January may not be productive of serious evil.
The Queen must express our admiration of Lord Canning's own Proclamation, the wording of which is beautiful. The telegram received to-day brings continued good news, and announces her proclamation having been read, and having produced a good effect.
The Queen hopes to hear from Lord Canning, whenever he can spare time to write. She misses hearing from Lady Canning, not having heard from her since the 30th August; but the Queen fears that she is herself to blame, as she has not written to Lady Canning for a long time; she intends doing so by the next mail....
Both the Prince and herself hope that Lord Canning's health is now perfectly good, as well as dear Lady Canning's. We ask him to remember us to her, and also to Lord Clyde.
The Queen concludes with every wish for Lord Canning's success and prosperity, and with the assurance of her undiminished and entire confidence.
[Footnote 51: The Queen's Proclamation to her Indian subjects had been received by Lord Canning on the 17th of October, when he also learned that the title of Viceroy was in future to dignify the Governor-General's office.]
[Footnote 52: "Firmly relying ourselves on the truth of Christianity, and acknowledging with gratitude the solace of religion, we disclaim alike the right and desire to impose our convictions on any of our subjects." The Proclamation proceeded to state that all the Queen's Indian subjects should be impartially protected by the law, and live unmolested in the observance of their several religions.]
[Pageheading: FRANCE AND ITALY]
The Earl of Malmesbury to Queen Victoria.
LONDON, 10th December 1858.
The Earl of Malmesbury presents his humble duty to the Queen, and has already anticipated your Majesty's wishes respecting the Emperor Napoleon.[53] Lord Malmesbury has written to Lord Cowley a private letter, desiring him to show it to His Majesty. It is in the same sense as your Majesty's, and states that if he is anxious to improve the lot of the worst governed country, namely the Papal States, he should, instead of sulking with Austria, make an attempt with his Catholic brother to ameliorate the Papal Government. It is not for Protestant England to take the initiative, as her object would be misunderstood and attributed to sectarian motives; but England could give her moral support, and even her material aid eventually, if it were required to establish an improved Administration of the Roman States. Austria would gain by having a quiet frontier. The correspondence which took place in 1856 and 1857 between Lord Clarendon and Mr Lyons shows that this is the only effective way of ameliorating the condition of Italy without a war.
Lord Malmesbury thinks he can assure your Majesty that none is at present contemplated by the Emperor Napoleon (who has just contradicted the report officially), and Count Buol is of the same opinion. The latter is constantly hurting the vanity of the French Government by his irritable despatches, and neither party makes the slightest effort to command their temper; but it appears impossible that Napoleon can make a casus belli against Austria. Besides this, your Majesty may be assured that no warlike preparations are making in France, such as must precede such a plan as an Italian war.
Lord Malmesbury entirely agrees with your Majesty that it is desirable that His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales should visit and remain at Rome incognito. It is also indispensable that when there His Royal Highness should receive no foreigner or stranger alone, so that no reports of pretended conversations with such persons could be circulated without immediate refutation by Colonel Bruce. Lord Malmesbury will instruct Mr Odo Russell to inform His Holiness of your Majesty's intentions in respect of the Prince.
[Footnote 53: Viz. that the Emperor's mind should be diverted from his project of originating a war in Italy. On the previous day Lord Malmesbury had written to the Queen: "Lord Clarendon may have told your Majesty that the Emperor Napoleon was so ignorant of the locality of Villafranca that he looked for it on the map in the Adriatic, and was confounded when Lord Clarendon showed His Majesty that it was the Port of Nice and ten miles from his frontier!"]
Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians.
OSBORNE, 17th December 1858.
MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I wrote in such a hurry on Wednesday that I wish to make amends by writing again to-day, and entering more properly into what you wrote about in your kind letter....
I really hope that there is no real desire for war in the Emperor's mind; we have also explained to him strongly how entirely he would alienate us from him if there was any attempt to disturb standing and binding treaties. The Empress-Dowager of Russia[54] is very ill, they say, with bronchitis and fever.
I did not tell you, that when we went on the 2nd to Claremont I was not pleased with the Queen's appearance. She had had a slight cold, and I thought her very feeble. They keep her rooms so fearfully [hot] that it must really be very weakening for her and predispose her to cold. I am ever, your devoted Niece,
VICTORIA R.
[Footnote 54: The Empress Alexandra Feodorovna (formerly the Princess Louise Charlotte of Prussia, sister to King Frederick William IV.), widow of the Emperor Nicholas.]
Introductory Note
TO CHAPTER XXVIII
Parliamentary Reform was the question of the hour at the outset of the year 1859, and the Derby Government, though with difficulty able to maintain itself in power, took the courageous step of introducing a Reform Bill, the chief feature of which was the introduction of a franchise based on personal property. Mr Walpole and Mr Henley thereupon withdrew from the Ministry, and Lord John Russell, from below the gangway, proposed an Amendment, protesting against interference with the established freehold franchise, and calling for a larger extension of the suffrage in towns. Lord Palmerston and the Liberal Opposition supported the Amendment, while Mr Gladstone, who was opposed to most of the provisions of the Bill, supported it in preference to the Amendment, pleading, at the same time, for the retention of the small boroughs. The Ministry were defeated, and Parliament thereupon dissolved, but not until the civil functionaries and all ranks of the native and European army had received its thanks for the final suppression of the Indian Mutiny. The Ministry gained twenty-five seats at the polls, but were still in a minority, and as soon as it was known that Lord John Russell and Lord Palmerston were reconciled, the end was in sight. A hostile Amendment to the Address was carried by a majority of thirteen, but on Lord Derby's resignation, the Queen was placed in a dilemma by the competing claims of Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell, who had each been Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Party. Unwilling to be compelled to decide between them, she called upon Lord Granville to form a Ministry representative of all sections of the Liberal Party; but the difficulties proved insuperable, and Lord Palmerston eventually formed a Ministry in which the Whigs, the Peelites, and the Manchester School were all represented, though Mr Cobden declined to join the Government. Mr Gladstone, who had returned from the mission he had undertaken for the Derby Cabinet, and voted with them in the critical division, became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and kept his seat for Oxford University by a majority of nearly two hundred.
The continent of Europe was the scene of a contest between Austria on the one hand, who was struggling to maintain her position in Italy, and France with Sardinia on the other. Sardinia, under the guidance of Cavour, had joined the alliance of England and France against Russia; and in July 1858 an interview at Plombieres, under rather mysterious circumstances, between Cavour and Louis Napoleon, led to effective confederacy; a marriage, arranged or suggested at the same time, between Princess Clothilde of Sardinia and a cousin of the Emperor, brought the two illustrious houses still closer together. In the spring of 1859, Sardinia prepared to take up arms to resist Austrian predominance, and the assistance of the guerilla leader, Garibaldi, was obtained. Count Cavour, in reply to interrogatories from the British Government, stated officially his grievances against Austria, while Lord Malmesbury despatched Lord Cowley on a special mission to Vienna to mediate between Austria and France. In April, however, after a curt summons to the Sardinians to disarm had been disregarded, Austria invaded Piedmont, and Victor Emmanuel placed himself at the head of his army. The first engagement took place, with unfavourable results to the Austrians, at Montebello, followed by French victories at Palestro and Magenta. A revolution had meanwhile taken place in Florence. The Grand Duke had fled, and a Commissioner to administer the affairs of the Grand Duchy had been appointed by the King of Sardinia with the assent of the Tuscans, who now joined the Franco-Sardinian alliance, while risings also took place in Parma and Modena. The Austrians were again defeated at Malegnano, and, on the 8th of June, the French Emperor and King Victor Emmanuel entered Milan amid great enthusiasm. The bloody action of Solferino was fought on the 24th of June, but on the 11th of July a treaty of peace was, somewhat unexpectedly, concluded between the French and Austrian Emperors at Villafranca, under which an Italian Confederation was to be erected, Lombardy substantially ceded to Sardinia, the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the Duke of Modena reinstated, and Venetia, though included in the Confederation, to remain subject to the Imperial Crown of Austria; these preliminaries were subsequently converted into a definite treaty at Zurich. Meanwhile, the newly constituted representative Assemblies in Tuscany, Romagna, and the Duchies, unanimously pronounced for incorporation in the kingdom of Victor Emmanuel.
At home, on the 14th of October, the Queen opened the Glasgow waterworks at the outflow of Loch Katrine, the construction of which had necessitated engineering operations at that time considered stupendous; a few days later an appalling shipping calamity occurred, in the wreck of the Royal Charter near Anglesey, and the loss of 459 lives.