Chapter X: 1838 (continued) (2)

_Monday, 24th July._—We spoke of Sir Edmund Lyons,[542] who writes such long despatches; and who Lord Melbourne has never seen before; he was a Naval Officer and never employed before in the Diplomatic Service. He was the Captain who took out Otho. I then went over to the Closet, where the Prince Royal of Bavaria was introduced by Lord Palmerston and Baron Cetto. Having neither attendants nor uniform, he came in morning attire. He is not quite good-looking, but nearly so,—slim, not very tall, but very gentlemanlike and agreeable and lively. I made him sit down, and he was completely _à son aise_ and consequently put _me_ at ease. I showed Lord Melbourne Hayter’s sketch for his great picture of the Coronation; which Lord Melbourne liked very much, and which was very generally admired; Lord Melbourne looked at it for some time observing upon each part; he said that Hayter would never get it as good in the large picture as he had got it here. I then said to Lord Melbourne that I thought the Coronation made him ill, and all the worry of it; he said he thought he would have been ill without it; “It wasn’t the _Coronation_,” he said, “it was all these Peerages; but I think that’s subsiding a little now.” I asked if Lord Derby expected being made a Duke; Lord Melbourne replied, “No, I don’t think he did; I told him at once that could not be, and that generally satisfies people.” Lord Derby has a very good claim for it, Lord Melbourne said, for the following reasons:—George III. declared he never would make any Dukes, and wished to reserve that Title _only_ for the Royal Family; and he only made 2, Lord Melbourne thinks—the Duke of Northumberland and the Duke of Montagu[543]; Mr. Fox told the late Lord Derby that if he could ever make the King waive his objections, _he_ should be made a Duke; and _this_, Lord Melbourne said, certainly was a strong pledge for a Whig Government; but Lord Grey passed him over (Ld. M. doesn’t know why) and made the Duke of Sutherland and the Duke of Cleveland; and Lord Derby said in his letter to Lord Melbourne, “he did not see why the names of Vane (D. of Cleveland), Grenville (Duke of Buckingham), and Grosvenor (Ld. Westminster), should be preferred before him.”[544] He did not mention _Gower_, Lord Melbourne thinks from civility, but that he _feels_ the same respecting him. I asked _what Duke_ he wished to be; Lord Melbourne said he supposed Duke of Derby, which was formerly a Royal title, having belonged to the Dukes of Lancaster; he takes his title from Derby, a Hundred of Lancashire—_not_ from the C^o. of Derby. He thinks, Lord Melbourne continued, that he has a right to be Duke of Hamilton, through his mother, Lady Elizabeth Hamilton, who was daughter to James, 6th Duke of Hamilton, and a very handsome person; I asked who she married afterwards; Lord Melbourne replied, “It was a very awkward business; she _married_ nobody; she had a great attachment for the Duke of Dorset” (father to the late), “Lord Derby parted from her, but would not divorce her, in order that she might not marry the Duke of Dorset.” “The Duke of Dorset,” Lord Melbourne continued, “was a very handsome and agreeable man; with a great deal of gallantry....” I asked Lord Melbourne what sort of person Charles Sheridan was; he said an agreeable lively young man; but rather wild. We then spoke for a long time about all the Sheridans. C. Sheridan was in the Admiralty and rose to get £300 a year; but they fancied, he said, that he was in bad health, and made him give it up. There are three sons, Brinsley, Frank (who is with Lord Normanby), and Charles; “They are, like all the Sheridans, clever but careless, and have no application,” he said. They plagued Lord Melbourne constantly to give Charles a place; and Lord Melbourne offered him a Clerkship in the Audit Office; but he would not have that, and said it was less than he had had. George Anson[545] told Lord Melbourne it would be quite nonsense to give it to him, as he would never come, and there would be a complaint of him the first month. Lord Melbourne said that a person who leaves the situation he has, must not expect to be put in again in the same place he had. This is a £100 a year, “which is better than nothing.” I observed that a person who does not wish to submit to that cannot be very anxious to do much, in which Lord Melbourne agreed. This Charles Sheridan lives a good deal with the Chesterfields, and positively has nothing.[546] Lord Melbourne said, “I know they’ll get ruined, and we shall have to provide for them.” “They all have £60 a year.” There is one Charles Sheridan, an excessively ugly man, who is Uncle to all these people; he is Brinsley Sheridan’s son by his 2nd wife; his 1st wife was a professional singer, a Miss Linley, whom Lord Melbourne remembers when he was a boy; she died in 1794; she was excessively handsome[547]; “The women” (Lady Seymour) “are very like her; some of them,” he said. Spoke of young Brinsley Sheridan running away with his wife; of Lady Seymour, who, Lord Melbourne said, “is the most _posée_ of them all.” “She says those odd things,” Lord Melbourne continued, “as if they were quite natural.” They (the Seymours) are always teazing Lord Melbourne about _Titles_, and are so vexed at their boy’s having no title; and they never will call him anything else but the _Baby_[548]; I said that was foolish; “Very foolish; and I’ve told them so,” replied Lord Melbourne, “but I can’t convince them.” The Sheridan[549] who wrote the Dictionary was Great-Grandfather to all these; his Wife was a very clever woman, Lord Melbourne said, and wrote some very good books; “they have been a very distinguished family for a long time,” he added.

_Tuesday, 25th July._—At a ¼ to 4 I _rode_ out with Lady Portman, Lord Uxbridge, Lord Lilford, Lord Portman, Col. Buckley, Col. Cavendish, and Miss Quentin, &c., and came home at 6. I rode _dear Tartar_ who went most beautifully; it was a delightful ride; we rode to Acton, and round by East Acton home. We never rode _harder_. We cantered almost the whole way going out, but coming home we _galloped_ at least for _3 miles_ without _once_ pulling up. We came home through the Park and in at the front entrance of the Palace. It was a charming ride. At 7 we dined. Besides we 13 (Lady Charlemont, Lord Headfort, Lady Caroline Barrington, and Wm. Cowper replacing Lord Byron, Lady Tavistock, Mrs. Campbell, and Sir H. Seton), Lord Conyngham dined here. I sat between Lord Conyngham and Lord Headfort. At a ¼ p. 8 I went to the Opera with Mamma, dear Feo, Lady Charlemont, Lady Caroline, Miss Cavendish, Lord Conyngham, Lord Headfort, Mr. Cowper, Col. Buckley, Col. Cavendish, and Lady Flora. It was _I Puritani_, and Lablache and Grisi were singing their Duo when we came in. Unfortunately poor Grisi was taken ill, quite at the end of the 1st act, and was unable consequently to sing her fine Scene in the 2nd act. Fanny Elsler danced the Chachucha (at my desire) between the 2nd and 3rd acts.

_Wednesday, 26th July._—Lord Melbourne said, “Lord Duncannon tells me he thinks that marriage of Lord Shelburne’s[550] is quite off.” Lord Melbourne said that somebody said to him (Ld. Shelburne) how handsome Miss Elphinstone was; upon which he replied, “I don’t think so; but beauty is not the thing to look to in a Wife.” Now this may have been repeated to her, Lord Melbourne says, and of course could not please her; and the young lady may have said, Lord Melbourne continued, “Why, you don’t seem to show that fondness for me you ought to have, and therefore I think we’d better break it off altogether.” Lady Kerry,[551] he said, had told Lord Duncannon that she believed it was all off; I observed, _Why_ then had Lord Lansdowne announced it to me, if it was not quite settled?—Lord Melbourne said, “The same thing happened to Lord Duncannon that happened to you”; Lord Lansdowne announced it to him—said it gave him great pleasure—that it was very nearly settled but they did not wish to speak of it for the present; “and two hours afterwards he got a letter from Lansdowne, saying it was not at all settled,” and that he should not mention it.[552] Lord Melbourne then asked if I had got the letter he sent me, from the Duchess of Sutherland to him, saying her sister Lady Burlington[553] gladly accepted the situation of Lady of the Bedchamber; and Lord Melbourne said, “That may now be considered as settled”; and that Lady Lansdowne had best be spoken to about it all; which I begged him to be kind enough to do, which he said he would. I told Lord Melbourne that Conyngham had told me that he heard from Frederic Byng, that Lord Essex[554] was so _excessively_ pleased at my having called up Lady Essex (Miss Stephens, the Singer that was, and married about 2 or 3 months ago to Lord Essex) at the Ball, and having spoken to her; this touched Lord Melbourne; we both agreed she was a very nice person.[555] Wrote my journal. At a ¼ to 8 I went into the Throne room with my Ladies and Gentlemen, Feo and Mamma, where I found the Duchess of Gloucester, the Duke of Sussex, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Augusta and George. After waiting a little while we went into the green drawing-room, which looked very handsome lit up, and was full of people _all_ in uniform. I subjoin an account of all the arrangements and all the people. After remaining for about five minutes in that room, talking to several people, amongst others to good Lord Melbourne, we went in to dinner, which was served in the Gallery, and looked, I must say, most brilliant and beautiful. We sat down _103_, and _might_ have been more. The display of plate at one end of the room was really very handsome. I sat between Uncle Sussex and Prince Esterhazy. The music was in a small Orchestra in the Saloon, and sounded extremely well. Uncle Sussex seemed in very good spirits, and Esterhazy in high force, and full of fun, and talking so loud. I drank a glass of _stein-wein_ with Lord Melbourne who sat a good way down on my left between the Duke of Devonshire and Lord Holland. After dinner we went into the Yellow drawing-room. Princesse Schwartzenberg looked very pretty but tired; and Mme. Zavadowsky beautiful, and so sweet and placid. About 20 m. after we ladies came in, the gentlemen joined us. I spoke to almost everybody; Lord Grey looked well[556]; the Duke of Wellington ill but cheerful and in good spirits. I spoke for some time also with Lord Melbourne, who thought the Gallery looked very handsome, and that the whole “did very well”; “I don’t see how it could do better,” he said. He admired the large diadem I had on. At about 11 came some people who (as the Gallery was full of dinner &c.) were obliged to come through the Closet, and of whom I annex a List. Lady Clanricarde I did not think looked very well; Lady Ashley, Lady Fanny, Lady Wilhelmina, and Lady Mary Grimston looked extremely pretty. Strauss played delightfully the whole evening in the Saloon. After staying a little while in the Saloon, we went and sat down in the further drawing-room, next to the dining-room. I sat on a sofa between Princesse Schwartzenberg and Mme. Stroganoff[557]; Lord Melbourne sitting next Mme. Stroganoff, and in a little while Esterhazy near him, and Furstenberg (who talked amazingly to Lord Melbourne, and made us laugh a good deal) behind him. The Duchess of Sutherland and the Duchess of Northumberland sat near Princess Schwartzenberg, and a good many of the other Ambassadors and Ambassadresses were seated near them. The Duchess of Cambridge and Mamma were opposite to us; and all the others in different parts of the room. Several gentlemen, foreigners, came up behind the sofa to speak to me. We talked and laughed a good deal together. I stayed up till a ¼ to 1. It was a successful evening....

_Wednesday, 1st August._—I asked Lord Melbourne if he saw any likeness in me to the Duke of Gloucester; he said none whatever; for that when formerly they wished to make me angry, they always said I was like him. I asked if Lord Melbourne remembered the Duke’s father; he said he did; that he was a very good man, but also very dull and tiresome. His two brothers were Edward, Duke of York, who died long before Lord Melbourne was born, and Henry, the Duke of Cumberland. “The Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Cumberland always remained Whigs,” Lord Melbourne said, “and never could understand the King’s (George III.) change; they said the Whigs brought their Family to this country; they went with the King but could not understand it.” Lord Melbourne said, “Whenever George IV. took offence at the church, he used to say, ‘By God, my Uncle the Duke of Cumberland was right when he told me, The people you must be apprehensive of, are those black-legged gentlemen.’” I said to Lord Melbourne that Princess Sophia Matilda told me that George III. had four illnesses. Lord Melbourne said they were not all declared illnesses. The 1st, he said, was in 1788; the 2nd in 1800, then in 1804, which was not exactly allowed to be so; and the last in ’10, when he never got well again; it is said, Lord Melbourne told me, that he had been ill in the early part of his reign; as early as 63 or 4, but no one knows exactly; he had a very bad fever then. I observed that the Cheltenham Waters, it was said, brought it on the first time. Lord Melbourne said, so it was said, but that he did very odd things when he first went down there.... He used to give, Lord Melbourne said, all the orders before his being ill with perfect composure. Whenever he was going to be ill, the King heard—Lord Melbourne continued—perpetually ringing in his ears, one of Handel’s oratorios; and was constantly thinking of Octavius[558] who died, “of whom he (the King) said, ‘Heaven will be no Heaven to me if my Octavius isn’t there.’” But his “master delusion,” as Lord Melbourne expressed it, was thinking that he was married to Lady Pembroke (Lady Elizabeth Spencer that was, and Mother to the late Lord Pembroke, and who only died 7 or 8 years ago), with whom he had been very much in love in his young days, and very near marrying. I told Lord Melbourne I remembered going to see her when she was ninety, and she was very handsome even then. Lord Melbourne then told me how very near George III. was marrying Lady Sarah Lennox,[559] sister to the late Duke of Richmond, who was excessively handsome. Lord Melbourne said he was only prevented from marrying her “by her levity.” This was quite early in his reign. He told Lady Susan Strangways, Lord Ilchester’s Aunt, “Don’t you think I ought to marry a Subject? I think I ought; and that must be your friend” (meaning Lady Sarah Lennox); “and you may tell her so from me.” “Then,” Lord Melbourne continued, “she” (Lady Sarah) “committed every sort of folly; she entered into a flirtation with the Marquis of Lothian, rode out with him after a masquerade quite early in the morning; this was represented to the King, and _détournée_’d His Majesty a little,” said Lord Melbourne laughing. Nothing could equal the beauty of the Women at that time, said Lord Melbourne, from all the accounts he heard, the Duchess of Argyll and Lady Coventry, sisters,[560] &c....

_Sunday, 5th August._—Spoke of Lord Alfred’s[561] having gone to see his father’s leg, which is buried at Waterloo, and of _100 old women_ having come to see him get into his carriage when they heard whose son he was. We spoke of all this; of Sir H. Vivian’s suffering much now, Lord Melbourne said, in consequence of a severe blow he got at Waterloo “by a spent grape shot.” Lord Melbourne went over to Brussels almost immediately _after_ the battle of Waterloo, to see Sir Frederic Ponsonby[562] who was dreadfully wounded, stabbed through and through; Lord Melbourne said, though he lived for 20 years afterwards, he certainly died in consequence of these wounds. I asked Lord Melbourne if he didn’t think Johnson’s Poetry very hard; he said he did, and that Garrick said, “Hang it, it’s as hard as Greek.” His Prose he admires, though he said pedantry was to be observed throughout it; and Lord Melbourne thinks what he _said_ superior to what he _wrote_. In spite of all that pedantry, Lord Melbourne said, “a deep feeling and a great knowledge of human nature” pervaded all he said and wrote....

_Tuesday, 7th August._—I asked him if he had seen Pozzo, which he told me in the evening he was going to do; he said he had, and it was about the Pasha of Egypt[563]; and he said Russia would go quite with England in the whole affair and quite approved of England’s intention of sending a Fleet there; at the same time, Lord Melbourne said, he stated distinctly, that if we didn’t send a Fleet, they would be obliged to march an Army into Turkey for its protection; but, Lord Melbourne said he hoped, from what he saw by the last despatches, that the Pasha had given up the idea of declaring his Independence. “I think he only tried it,” Lord Melbourne said, “to see what effect it would make!” Lord Melbourne said he had also seen Lord Palmerston, and had spoken to him about these Belgian Affairs, which they still hope, in spite of many difficulties, to settle; and they have now satisfied Sebastiani,[564] who, Lord Melbourne said, was of a jealous disposition and thought they were going on without him with Bülow[565]; Lord Palmerston had only got from Van de Weyer a statement of this Debt,[566] Lord Melbourne said; but that it would be impossible to alter; I expressed a fear of the Belgians resisting. Lord Melbourne said (which is quite true) that it would be very awkward if Uncle Leopold came over just in the midst of these Conferences, which would have the effect, as if he came for that purpose, and which Lord Melbourne said would prevent their acting as much for his interests as they otherwise might do. I said I quite felt it; but that Lord Melbourne had best send for Stockmar and get him to settle it with the King....

_Sunday, 12th August._—Saw Stockmar for a little while, and then took leave of this good and kind friend, which I was really sorry to do. He told me he had been to see Lord Melbourne, and he said I should have (what _I_ have _always_ had) the greatest confidence in Lord Melbourne, and ask his advice, not only in Political Matters, but in domestic affairs,—and ask his advice just like a _Father_, which are quite my feelings. Lord Melbourne was very funny about the Statue of the Duke of Wellington which is put up (in wood) only as a Trial, on the Archway on Constitution Hill,[567] and which we think looks dreadful and much too large; but Lord Melbourne said he thought a statue would look well there, and that it should be as large. We then observed what a pity Wyatt should do the statue, as we thought he did them so ill; and we mentioned George III.’s; but Lord Melbourne does not dislike that, and says it’s exactly like George III., and like his way of bowing.[568] He continued, “I never will have anything to do with Artists; I wished to keep out of it all; for they’re a waspish set of people....”

_Tuesday, 14th August._—I went and fetched the Speech, and he read it to me, in his beautiful, clear manner, and with that fine voice of his, and full of fine expression. I always feel that _I_ can read it better when I have heard him read it. The Speech is, as Lord Melbourne said, “not long and safe.”

_Wednesday, 15th August._—Lady Normanby then practised putting on my crown, for to-morrow. After this I read my Speech twice over, in my crown. Played and sang. Wrote. Wrote my journal. I forgot to say that I got in the morning, 2 notes from Lord Melbourne in which it seemed almost certain that the Prorogation could only take place on Friday; but at a little before 2 I got another note from him, in which he said that he heard from Lord John, it could take place next day, and therefore, that there would be a Council. I asked Lord Melbourne if it ever had been usual for the Sovereign to _read_ the Speech _after_ the Prime Minister had done so at the Council, as Lord Lansdowne had twice asked that question. Lord Melbourne said, never; but that the late King had done it once, when he was in a great state of irritation, and had said, “I will read it myself, paragraph by paragraph.” This was the last time the late King ever prorogued Parliament in person. I asked if Brougham was in the House; he said no, he was gone. I told him I heard Brougham had asked Lady Cowper down to Brougham Hall; but that she wouldn’t go; I asked if she knew him (Brougham) well; Lord Melbourne said very well, and “I’ve known him all my life; he can’t bear me now; he won’t speak to me; I’ve tried to speak to him on ordinary subjects in the House of Lords, but he won’t answer, and looks very stern”; Lord Melbourne said, laughing, “Why, we’ve had several severe set-to’s, and I’ve hit him very hard.” I asked if he (B.) didn’t still sit on the same bench with Lord Melbourne. “Quite on the gangway; only one between,” replied Lord Melbourne. Lord Melbourne and I both agreed that it was _since_ the King’s death that Brougham was so enraged with Lord Melbourne; for, till then, he would have it that it was the _King’s_ dislike to him (and the King made no objection whatever to him, Lord Melbourne told me) and _not Lord Melbourne_; “he wouldn’t believe me,” Lord M. said; and _now_ he’s undeceived. Brougham always, he said, used to make a great many speeches. I observed that I thought if his daughter was to die, he would go mad; but Lord Melbourne doesn’t think so; and said, “A man who is always very odd never goes really mad.”

_Thursday, 16th August._—“You were rather nervous,”[569] said Lord Melbourne; to which I replied, dreadfully so; “More so than any time,” he continued. I asked if it was observed; he said, “I don’t think anyone else would have observed it, but I could see you were.” Spoke of my fear of reading it too low, or too loud, or too quick; “I thought you read it very well,” he said kindly. I spoke of my great nervousness, which I said I feared I never would get over. “I won’t flatter Your Majesty that you ever will; for I think people scarcely ever get over it; it belongs to a peculiar temperament, sensitive and susceptible; that shyness generally accompanies high and right feelings,” said Lord Melbourne most kindly; he was so kind and paternal to me. He spoke of my riding, which he thought a very good thing. “It gives a feeling of ease the day one has done with Parliament,” said Lord Melbourne. He spoke of the people in the Park when I went to the House; and I said how very civil the people were—_always_—to me; which touched him; he said it was a very good thing; it didn’t do to rely too much on those things, but that it was well it was there. I observed to Lord Melbourne how ill and out of spirits the Duke of Sussex was; “I have ended the Session in great charity,” said Lord Melbourne, “with the Duke of Wellington, but I don’t end it in charity with those who didn’t vote with the Duke when he voted with us”; we spoke of all that; “The Duke is a very great and able man,” said Lord Melbourne, “but he is more often wrong than right.” Lord Holland wouldn’t allow this; “Well, let’s throw the balance the other way,” continued Lord Melbourne, “but when he is wrong he is _very_ wrong.”

_Friday, 17th August._—I then told Lord Melbourne that I had so much to do, I didn’t think I possibly could go to Windsor on Monday; he said if I put off going once for that reason, I should have to put it off again, which I wouldn’t allow; I said there were so many things to go, and to pack,—and so many useless things; “I wouldn’t take those useless things,” said Lord Melbourne laughing. I then added that he couldn’t have an idea of the number of things women had to pack and take; he said many men had quite as much,—which I said couldn’t be, and he continued that Lord Anglesey had _36_ trunks; and that many men had 30 or 40 different waistcoats, and neck-cloths, to choose from; which made me laugh; I said a man _couldn’t_ really want more than 3 or 4 coats for some months. He said in fact 6 were enough for a year,—but that people had often fancies for more. I said our dresses required such smooth packing; “Coats ought to be packed smooth,” replied Lord Melbourne. I asked Lord Melbourne if Pozzo had spoken at all about the Belgian affairs. He said he told him he wouldn’t meddle with them at all. Spoke of Pozzo’s disliking Lord Palmerston, who didn’t, he fancied, treat him with enough _égard_; and Lord Melbourne said Palmerston keeps them waiting sometimes for a long while,—which, though they say they don’t mind it, they do mind; and we both agreed that he was a little apt to sneer sometimes, and to make it appear absurd what people said. I said, independent of Uncle’s coming—hurting his interests in the Conferences—his own country was in too disturbed a state to do so[570]; Lord Melbourne said whatever would be done would be attributed to Uncle’s presence; that justice must be done to Belgium; but that there was such a desire in the Cabinet to settle the affair, that they wouldn’t be disposed to listen to any unreasonable demands of Belgium; I said one felt less anxious reading the Speech at the close than at the beginning of the Session. Lord Melbourne said he didn’t know; “The responsibility is so much greater during the Vacations; when Parliament is sitting one comes at once to Parliament; one has that to go to, and hears the worst at once....”

_Sunday, 19th August._—Spoke of the Phœnix Park being considered unwholesome; of its being drained by what they call the Sub-soil-plough. He repeated the anecdote about Lord Talbot; the present Lord Talbot—(I believe I have already noted down the anecdote as he told it me twice before, but am not quite sure)—asked someone why they had never thought of draining the Phœnix Park, and they replied, “Why, your Ancestors were so much employed in draining the _Country_, that they had no time to think of draining the Park.” He said Talleyrand told an anecdote of a lady in the time of the Revolution who was speaking of what she would be, and she said, “Paysanne, oui; mais Bourgeoise, jamais.” I said to Lord Melbourne I was afraid he disliked the Germans, as he was always laughing at them, which he wouldn’t allow at all and laughed much. He said, “I’ve a great opinion of their talents, but not of their beauty.” He asked if I had seen Mr. MacNeill’s[571] despatches giving an account of his going into _Herat_ at night; I replied, I had not; Lord Melbourne said it was a very curious and even fearful account, his going through these Barbaric Armies at night, 9 o’clock, all the Persians without, prepared for the Attack, and all those within, for Defence; and he gave an interesting account of one of the principal persons in Herat; Mr. MacNeill said he found them quite disposed to negotiate, but when he returned to the Shah’s camp, he found the Russian Ambassador there, and the Shah would listen to nothing; so Mr. MacNeill came away. Spoke of not liking the Cathedral Service and all that singing, and Lord Melbourne said, “It is inconsistent with a calm and right devotion; it’s papistical, and theatrical.”[572]

_Monday, 20th August._—Spoke of Pozzo’s being very civil to Lord Melbourne; Lord Melbourne said, “He’s very fond of me,” upon which I said, “I don’t wonder at that,” which made Lord Melbourne smile. He continued, that Lord Palmerston gave Pozzo rather unnecessary offence by not treating him with respect and _égard_, which those sensitive Corsicans and Italians expect. I said to Lord Melbourne, I felt often ashamed at being so ignorant about many things, and at being obliged to ask him about so many things. He replied MOST KINDLY, “Oh! no, you know everything very well; it’s impossible for anybody to know everything that it is right for them to know.” We spoke of the Archduke Charles, who, as Mr. Macgregor told Lord Melbourne, “and as we know,” he said, was a most able man, but wouldn’t take the slightest part in public affairs. We spoke of how many brothers there are still alive: Archduke Charles, Archduke Palatine, Archduke John, Archduke Rainer, and Archduke Louis. Spoke of Hayter’s Picture, and of his having made the Duchess of Sutherland so like already. Spoke of the Duchess of Sutherland’s features being large, which he agreed in; but that he liked large features, for that people with small features and “_Squeeny_ noses” never did anything. Spoke of the business of the Army, which Lord Melbourne said he was afraid Lord Howick would bring on, and that there would be a good deal of difficulty about it. Lord Howick, he says, has pledged himself about it, and is displeased with the Horse-Guards. He (Lord Howick) is very indiscreet in the House of Commons, Lord Melbourne said. He has written Lord Melbourne a letter about this Army business, which Lord Melbourne told him he would answer; but he begged Lord Melbourne not to write to him, as long as he was at Spa,—as the letter would be read. I said I hoped Lord Melbourne had never found me indiscreet, or that I had ever repeated things which I ought not to have done. He said, “Not at all; no one is so discreet,” and that it was impossible sometimes to help letting out things. I then also begged him always to tell me, when he heard anything, might it be agreeable or disagreeable, and that he should never be afraid of telling me so; which he promised to do.[573]

_Tuesday, 21st August._—Lord Melbourne said he had seen Lord Palmerston, who told him he hoped to be able soon to bring this Belgian business[574] to a sort of conclusion; that he had had several conversations with Bülow, and Senfft,[575] “who seems a very fair man”; and that they think they may settle this Debt, and satisfy the Belgians by this slight change. “Then I talked to him,” continued Lord Melbourne, “about the King’s coming, and that it would be more for the disadvantage of his Interests.” I then spoke of my having received such an odd present of a Kitten in the morning, which made him laugh. (I got a basket, which they said came from Sir Henry Wheatley, and which I thought was full of flowers, and when my Maid opened it, we found a pretty little _Kitten_ in it—which some poor people sent me as a present.)

_Monday, 27th August._—Of Uncle Leopold; when he married Princess Charlotte; Lord Melbourne hadn’t the slightest acquaintance with her, and never had spoken to her. She never came to her father at that time. Lord M. said he never went near the Princess of Wales, for he said considering that he opposed the Regent so much in Parliament, he didn’t wish to oppose him in his quarrels with his Wife; for, he said, he had been so much with the Prince of Wales, and was so much attached to him, that he thought that would have been wrong.

_Tuesday, 28th August._—Lord Melbourne then read me a letter from Lord John about all this Belgian business; he says that he won’t support Belgium in its new claims. Lord Melbourne said, “It’s very well of John saying he won’t support,” and so forth, but that it would be impossible for us not to take one side; our interests would compel us to do so; they lay so much with the Low Countries; England, he said, could never permit France to have possession of Antwerp, which was such a great Maritime place. He then read me a letter from Lord Minto relative to an alarm which prevails, and which was caused, Lord Melbourne says, by a speech the Duke of Wellington made in the House, about the weakness of our Naval force; which Lord Minto quite disclaims. Lord Melbourne sent him a paper of Sir Robert Inglis’s[576] about the Russian, French, and American Fleets; which Lord Minto says is quite erroneous; Lord Minto states that in a very few weeks, he could be quite ready for war; Lord M. says, what countries generally ruin themselves with, is, keeping up their Naval and Military Establishments during the time of peace; and he said, “Better be at War then.”[577] He owned that the Russians sending their fleet to the Black Sea “certainly is far from pleasant.” Then I spoke of Lord Ponsonby’s great alarm about Russian Influence, which Lord Melbourne said always was the case. Spoke of Queen Charlotte’s having been supposed to have had a great many presents which she was fond of, from Mrs. Hastings[578]; and Lord Melbourne said the King was thought rather to go with Hastings, who was accused and tried for misdemeanours in India. There was an ivory bed-stead Queen Charlotte got, which Lord M. believed was at Frogmore now. Spoke of Queen Adelaide’s having got all those Shawls which the King of Oude sent. This led us to speak of the Crown Jewels; of there not being many, yet more than I ever wished to wear, of my not liking those sort of things. Lord M. said he didn’t like a profusion of them, but thought a few fine ones the best. Spoke of the Jewels which Queen Charlotte left to her daughters. Lord Melbourne said the Queen Consort can do with her _own_ things what she pleases; can make her own Will, and “is a _femme seule_,” for no other woman can—all is her husband’s. Lord Melbourne (in reply to my question when he first knew George IV.) said, as soon as he could remember any one; he was 4 when the King was 21, in ’83, when Lord Melbourne’s father was first put about the Prince of Wales. “He used to be at Whitehall, or Piccadilly[579] where we then lived, morning, noon and night,” Lord Melbourne said; and he used to come down to Brocket; he always was fond of children and took notice of them; I said he took notice of me; I observed how much more submissive we were to him than to the late King; Lord Melbourne said George IV. had more power. Lord Melbourne said _none_ of the Royal Family could marry without the Sovereign’s leave since the Marriage Act, passed early in George III.’s reign, in consequence, Lord Melbourne believes, of the Duke of Cumberland’s marrying a Mrs. Luttrell[580] which was very much disliked; else the Duke of Sussex might have married Lady Augusta, and the late King Mrs. Jordan, Lord Melbourne said. The member of the Royal Family, Lord Melbourne continued, gives notice to the Privy Council of his intention to marry, and if they don’t disapprove, it’s supposed the King will consent. Lord Melbourne said it was a difficult subject the marriage of the Royal Family; marrying a subject was inconvenient, and there was inconvenience in foreigners; “It was very often done” (marrying subjects); “Kings did it; and I don’t know there was any harm in it,” said Lord Melbourne. Anne Hyde was the last who married a Prince who became _King_, and that was considered a dreadful thing. Lord M. said he had been looking at some of those letters [George III.’s] to Lord North which seemed to him very ill written,[581] both as to hand and style, and in bad English. Lord North was a great favourite of George IV.’s, Lord Melbourne said; “Lord North was a very easy, good-natured man,” and the King knew him “when he first came in to life.” Lord Thurlow, whom Mr. Pitt beat and turned out in ’93,[582] turned to George IV. and became also a great favourite of his. He was clever but ill-tempered, Lord Melbourne said.

_Wednesday, 29th August._—Lord Melbourne said he had been looking at those letters to Lord North, and found on closer examination that they were written with much more practical knowledge and knowledge of men than he had at first thought. The letters he has been reading are relative to a Negotiation which the King entered into, with the Opposition, in order to strengthen the Government; and Lord Melbourne related several parts of it, which made him smile and which he said were true enough. Lord Melbourne said he (George III.) couldn’t bear Mr. Fox, for that he says in one of these letters that he (Lord North) might offer him any situation which did not bring him in immediate contact with the King, or into the Closet; and as he (Mr. Fox) never had any principles, he wouldn’t have any difficulty in changing. These letters prove, Lord Melbourne said, what strong personal dislikes the King had. These letters to Lord North, Lord M. thinks, were returned to George IV. by Mrs. Douglas on the death of her husband, who was the son of Lady Glenbervie, Lord North’s daughter; Lord North had three daughters, Lady Glenbervie, Lady Sheffield, and Lady Charlotte Lindsay (whom I know); all very clever, Lord M. says. He had 3 sons, George (who was a very pleasant, lively man and a great bon-vivant, Lord M. says), Frederic, and Frank; who were all in succession Earls of Guilford. The present Lord is son to Lord North’s brother[583] who was a Bishop, Lord M. told me. Lord North died in ’93, and Lord M. remembers seeing him (when Lord M. was a boy) led into the House of Lords, quite blind, at Hastings’ trial; he was Lord Guilford for a very short time.

Lord M. does not think that George III. was very fond of Mr. Pitt. Spoke of the violent dislikes George III. and George IV. had; William IV. had them also, but Lord M. said they were easily got over. Spoke of George III.’s hand-writing; of mine, which Lord M. thinks very legible and generally very good; of my inclination to imitate hand-writings, and people,—which Lord M. said, showed quickness, and was in the Family; of George IV.’s mimickry. I said I kept a journal, which, as Lord Melbourne said, is very laborious, but a very good thing; for that it was astonishing in transacting business, how much one forgot, and how one forgot _why_ one did the things.

_Thursday, 30th August._— ... I gave Lord M. this Pamphlet of Sir H. Taylor’s which Mamma lent me. We talked about many things, and in going home I asked Lord M. how long Lord North had been Prime Minister to George III.; “From ’70 till ’82,” he told me. “The Duke of Grafton” (who preceded him, and was the present Duke of Grafton’s father) “went away,” Lord M. continued, “without telling any body and without telling the King; they were difficult times, and he went away; I know why he went away, people are always doing those foolish things; and the King didn’t know what to do; he sent for Lord Gower”[584] (I forget what he was), who, I think Lord M. said, refused it; “and then he sent for his Chancellor of the Exchequer” (Lord North) “and made him his Prime Minister.” Lord M. spoke of Dr. Keate, and told me an anecdote of him and George III.; and then he said that Dr. Keate couldn’t bear to be reminded of his boyish days at Eton; somebody, who Lord M. knows, reminded Keate when he was walking across the School-Yard with him, of the window, pointing at it, out of which they had often jumped, upon which Dr. Keate said, “Don’t mention it; it’s a very foolish remark.”

_Friday, 31st August._—Lord M. then said, that the French were going to send out a fleet to Mexico, with which State they have been in a quarrel for some time,—and that they meant to send the Prince de Joinville with it, to ask for reparation, and if not, to attack the fort of Aloa which commands the river, and which it would not be agreeable for us if the French were to possess; and Lord Palmerston proposes we should send a swift sailing Vessel to Mexico to apprize the Mexicans of what was to take place and to advise them to make reparation. And also, Lord P. proposes sending a Vessel to Guiana, where the French are making great encroachments, and to see what they are about.

_from a portrait by Eugene Lami_]

Lady Cork[585] is 92, a very strange old woman; Lord M. knows her; she was clever, a great favourite of George III. and Queen Charlotte. She was a Miss Monckton, sister to Lord Galway, he said. Lord M. said in returning Dr. Hook’s sermon (which I sent him to read) when he came in, that it was eager, but nothing very particular, and able. Lady Holland seems “very fond of Senfft,” Lord M. observed; “she would settle that Embassy too, as she does every thing else,” he said laughing. Lord M. said, in speaking of Taylor’s pamphlet,[586] “There is no force in it; it isn’t pointed.” Taylor is very fond of writing, he says, and fancies he writes well. Spoke of Lady C. Bury’s book.[587] Lord M. says these things make less impression than people fancy; they “make a day’s noise; but nobody minds them much.” Spoke of Lady Anne Hamilton,[588] who attended Queen Caroline at her Trial; Lady Charlotte Lindsay gave evidence. “Lord Egremont said,” continued Lord M., “‘As for Guilford,[589] he twaddled like a waiting maid when he gave evidence; but his Sister lied like a man,’” which made us both laugh very much. Spoke of Kenney,[590] who is Author (Lord M. told me) of _Love, Law, and Physic_, and _Raising the Wind_, and is at Holland House. Spoke of my knowing Rogers and Moore; having seen Scott and Southey. Lord M. rather admires Southey’s works, and thinks his _Life of Nelson_ very pretty. Spoke of his _Life of Cowper_. Spoke of a new book lying on the table, sent to me by Granville Penn,[591] which Lord M. looked at and said he thought might be curious; it is the _Life of Sir William Penn_, Admiral in Cromwell’s time, and who, with Venables, took Jamaica. Spoke of Mrs. Hutchinson’s _Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson_, which Lord M. thinks very curious; spoke of her violence; spoke of Clarendon’s book which Lord M. said “is a fine book.” I observed there were few books on the Parliamentary side; he replied few at the time, but a good many since. He mentioned one by Brodie, a Scotchman; Bishop Burnet’s Memoirs of his own time, during Charles II.’s reign; and he said, “There is a book which I think would amuse Your Majesty, and would be of use to you, and which isn’t long, which is Guizot’s account of the Revolution.” It’s only in 2 vols., and is a summary of whole thing, he said.

Lord M. said Lady Holland was a great friend of Pozzo’s, and that his first acquaintance with Pozzo was at Holland House. I asked if she knew Sebastiani; he said she did, but didn’t like him much, except from his connection with Napoleon “whom she adored.” She never knew Napoleon, Lord Melbourne added, but saw him at Paris at the Peace of Amiens. She used to send him things she knew he liked, said Lord M.; when he was at St. Helena she sent him _gâteaux_ and chocolate, &c. “She was half on his side,” Lord M. continued, “if not more.” Spoke of Lady E. Wortley’s[592] admiration for Napoleon. Soult was no friend of Napoleon, Lord M. said; none of them, he continued, were to be compared to Napoleon himself; the two best after Napoleon, Lord M. said, were Dessaix who was killed at Marengo, and Kleber who was murdered in Egypt.

I asked Lord M. what Lord Gower, whom he mentioned to me before, was; that Lord Gower, he said, was the Duke of Sutherland’s grandfather; he was “Lord Privy Seal” when the King sent for him.[593] “He did not think himself equal to it” (being Prime Minister); “he was a man who took great part in politics.” Lord M. also told me that he believes the present Lord Bute to be the great-grandson of the Minister of George III. “George III. found the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pitt, and everything was going on very well, when he was advised to change; he couldn’t bear Mr. Pitt; who was afterwards Lord Chatham; and he took Lord Bute in his place; and then followed all that unpopularity.” I asked if these letters of George III. showed great confidence in Lord North; Lord M. said “they show a great liking for him, more than a great confidence.” That the King never seemed to think him strong enough; Lord North, all along, Lord M. continued, was pursuing a Policy contrary to what he himself approved, but which he was urged to by the King: and Lord North remonstrated very much with the King. The difference, Lord M. observed before, between George IV. and his father, was, that the former (which Knighton’s Memoirs show, Lord M. said) always required somebody to lean upon, whereas the latter always wished to act for himself, and only yielded, but said at the same time he disliked doing it. He never would have yielded on the Catholic Question, Lord M. continued, nor would the Duke of York; the late King was for it; but George IV. did it very unwillingly. George III. was deeply hurt at the loss of the American provinces, which I observed was no wonder; I said I thought it was _his_ fault. Lord M. said most likely it was; but that it was impossible any longer to keep up the great Colonial Policy, namely that they should exclusively trade with England and make nothing for themselves; even Lord Chatham, Lord M. said, who all along advocated their cause, “said they shouldn’t drive one hob-nail for themselves.” The Separation was easily done, they had nothing to do but to declare it. Lord M. continued that the first settlers were composed of people who left England in discontent,—of dissenters &c., and consequently no loyal people could spring from them. Spoke of the people whom William III. ennobled, which I’ve no time to enumerate. He told a most absurd anecdote of a very fat little porter at Lansdowne House. “He is a leading man in all the Parish Debates,” said Lord M.; “and somebody told Albemarle, ‘He speaks very well; to tell you the truth he speaks very like my lord.’”

END OF VOL. I

_Printed by Hazell, Watson & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury._

FOOTNOTES

[1] In later years the volumes of the Queen’s Journals were of larger size, but they were always simply bound in half calf or half morocco.

[2] They were ultimately paid by the Queen immediately after her accession.

[3] Kensington Palace.

[4] The Journal was written in pencil and inked over afterwards.

[5] Edward, first Earl of Powis (1754–1839), was the eldest son of the great Lord Clive; his eldest son, afterwards second Earl, married Lucy, daughter of the third Duke of Montrose; his second son, Robert Clive, M.P., married Harriet, younger daughter of the fifth Earl of Plymouth: these are the ladies referred to in the text. The barony of Windsor, which had fallen into abeyance, was afterwards terminated in favour of Lady Harriet Clive.

[6] Lady Catherine Jenkinson, elder daughter of the third Earl of Liverpool, was married later to Colonel Francis Vernon Harcourt, son of the Archbishop of York and Equerry to the Duchess of Kent.

[7] Sir Richard Bulkeley, tenth Baronet, M.P. for Anglesey, afterwards Lord Lieutenant of Carnarvonshire. He had just married Maria Frances, daughter of Sir Thomas Stanley-Massy-Stanley.

[8] Lady Williams, wife of Sir John Williams of Bodelwyddan, first Baronet.

[9] Daughter of Sir John Conroy, Comptroller to the Duchess of Kent.

[10] Louise Lehzen became Governess to Princess Victoria in 1824. In 1827 George IV. created her a Hanoverian Baroness. When in 1830 the Duchess of Northumberland was made the Princess’ Governess, her “faithful Lehzen” remained on as Lady in Waiting. She stayed at Court till 1842, when she returned to Germany.

[11] Sir John Williams, afterwards Sir John Williams-Hay, second Baronet, of Bodelwyddan.

[12] Robert, Earl Grosvenor (1767–1845), had in 1831 been created Marquess of Westminster; he had married Eleanor, only daughter of Thomas, first Earl of Wilton. Richard, Lord Grosvenor, their eldest son, married Elizabeth Mary, daughter of the first Duke of Sutherland; Thomas, the second son, inherited, under a special remainder, his grandfather’s Earldom of Wilton, and married Mary Margaret, daughter of Edward, twelfth Earl of Derby.

[13] Wife of Sir Philip Grey Egerton, and daughter of George John Legh, of High Legh, Cheshire.

[14] Robert, third son of Lord Westminster, at this time M.P. for Chester and afterwards for Middlesex, was created in 1857 Lord Ebury.

[15] Elinor, afterwards Duchess of Northumberland.

[16] Gilbert le Grosvenator, nephew of Hugh Lupus, Earl of Chester.

[17] Joan (_temp._ Henry VI.), only daughter and heiress of John Eton of Eton (now Eaton), married Raufe le Grosvenor, Lord of Hulme.

[18] Sir Thomas Grosvenor, third Baronet, M.P. for Chester, married Mary, only daughter and heiress of Alexander Davis, of Ebury, Middlesex. She died in 1730.

[19] William Spencer, sixth Duke of Devonshire. His mother was Georgiana, famous for her beauty and its influence over George IV. and Lord Grey. The sixth Duke inherited from his mother his Whig proclivities. He was a patron of arts and letters. Devonshire House under his bachelor rule was a centre of hospitality. That the Duke never married, notwithstanding his admiration of the fair sex, gave rise to much speculation and gossip.

[20] William, Lord Cavendish, grandson of George Augustus Henry, first Earl of Burlington, and great-grandson of the fourth Duke of Devonshire. In 1858 he became the seventh Duke, and died in 1891. He married in 1829 Blanche Georgiana, daughter of the sixth Earl of Carlisle. He was beloved and respected by all who were privileged to know him. In the spheres of education and science his quiet activities were not unremarked. He was an admirable landlord and a most efficient man of affairs. For his careful education of his eldest son, the Marquess of Hartington, the nation owes him a large debt of gratitude.

[21] Thomas, seventh Earl of Newburgh, married 1817 Margaret, daughter of the Marquess of Ailsa. Died 1833.

[22] Rt. Hon. William S. S. Lascelles, M.P., third son of the second Earl of Harewood, married Caroline Georgiana, eldest daughter of the sixth Earl of Carlisle.

[23] James Archibald (1776–1845), first Lord Wharncliffe, and his wife Elizabeth, daughter of John, first Earl of Erne.

[24] George William, Lord Morpeth, afterwards seventh Earl of Carlisle, a prominent but comparatively undistinguished member of every Whig Administration from 1835 to 1864.

[25] Sister of Lord Cavendish (afterwards seventh Duke of Devonshire) referred to above. She became the wife of F. J. Howard, M.P. for Youghal.

[26] Sir Augustus Clifford, formerly Usher of the Black Rod, married Elizabeth Frances, sister of the fourth Marquess Townshend.

[27] Afterwards wife of Charles William Grenfell, M.P.

[28] Henry Manners, third Lord Waterpark.

[29] John, sixteenth Earl of Shrewsbury (1791–1852).

[30] Lord Liverpool’s second daughter, married, first, to Lord Milton, secondly to George Savile Foljambe, of Osberton, Notts.

[31] Louisa, third daughter of Lord Liverpool, married John Cotes of Woodcote, Salop.

[32] Francis, first Lord Churchill, third son of George, fourth Duke of Marlborough.

[33] Montagu, fifth Earl of Abingdon, married Emily, sister of the third Viscount Gage.

[34] Sir John Conroy.

[35] Thomas Gaisford, Dean of Christ Church, 1831–1855.

[36] Philip Nicholas Shuttleworth, afterwards (1840–1842) Bishop of Chichester.

[37] George, Viscount Cantelupe (1814–1850), died in the lifetime of his father, the fifth Earl de la Warr.

[38] Jacob, afterwards fourth Earl of Radnor (1815–1889).