Chapter XX (4)

On my expressing my conviction that Lord Palmerston could not be very formidable to the Government, Lord John said: "I hope it will not come true what Lord Derby (then Lord Stanley) said after the last Ministerial crisis, when Lord John quizzed him at not having been able to get a Foreign Secretary--'Next time I shall have Lord Palmerston.'!"

ALBERT.

[Pageheading: COUNT WALEWSKI]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

DOWNING STREET, _23rd December 1851._

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He has just seen Count Walewski; he told him that he had an important piece of intelligence to give him; that your Majesty had been pleased to make a change in the Foreign Office, and to direct Lord Palmerston to give up the Seals.

He wished to give this intelligence that he might accompany it with an intimation that the policy towards France would continue to be of the most friendly character, and that there was nothing the Government more desired than to see a stable and settled Government in France; that they had every wish for the stability of the present French Government. Count Walewski said he had received various assurances of opinion from Lord Palmerston, which he supposed were adopted by Lord John Russell, and subsisted in force.

Lord John Russell said: "Not exactly; it is a principle of the English Government not to interfere in any way with the internal affairs of other countries; whether France chooses to be a Republic or a Monarchy, provided it be not a Social Republic, we wish to express no opinion; we are what we call in England a sheet of white paper in this respect; all we desire is the happiness and welfare of France." Count Walewski said it was of importance to the stability of the President that he should have a large majority; he would then give a Constitution.

Lord John Russell said each nation must suit itself in this respect; we have perhaps been in error in thinking our Constitution could be generally adopted; some nations it may suit, others may find it unfitted for them.

[Pageheading: LORD GRANVILLE APPOINTED]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _23rd December 1851._

The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letters, and is much rejoiced that this important affair has been finally so satisfactorily settled.

The Queen returns Lord Clarendon's letter, which she thinks a very good one.[39] The Queen hopes Count Walewski will have been satisfied, which she thinks he ought to be. The Queen will receive Lord Palmerston to deliver up the Seals, and Lord Granville to receive them, on Friday at half-past two.

[Footnote 39: Lord Clarendon, in answer to Lord John Russell,
expressed great reluctance to undertake the charge of
the Foreign Office, on the ground that Palmerston, always
suspicions of him, would insist that he had deliberately
undermined his position: while Lord Granville would be popular
with the Court and country.]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

DOWNING STREET, _24th December 1851._

Lord John Russell submits a private note of Lord Palmerston,[40] which only shows how unconscious he was of all that the rest of the world perceived.

[Footnote 40: In this letter, Lord Palmerston denied the
"charge of violations of prudence and decorum," adding, "I
have to observe that that charge is refuted by the offer
which you made of the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland, because I
apprehend that to be an office for the due performance of the
duties of which prudence and decorum cannot well be dispensed
with."]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _25th December 1861._

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters, and she returns the enclosures.

The articles in the _Times_ are very good; the other papers seem quite puzzled, and unable to comprehend what has caused Lord Palmerston's removal from office. Lord Palmerston's letter is very characteristic; he certainly has the best of the argument, and great care ought to be taken in bestowing any praise on him, as he always takes advantage of it to turn against those who meant it merely to soothe him. The Queen thought that there must be a Council for the swearing in of the new Secretary of State.

[Pageheading: LORD GRANVILLE]

_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _27th December 1851._

Yesterday the Council was held, at which the change of Seals was to take place. We waited for one hour and a half, but Lord Palmerston did not appear; his Seals had been sent from the Foreign Office to Lord John Russell!

Lord John told us he had written to Lord Palmerston, announcing him the appointment of Lord Granville, and added that in his long political life he had not passed a week which had been so painful to him. Lord Palmerston's answer was couched in these terms: "Of course you will believe that I feel that just indignation at the whole proceeding which it must produce."

Lord Lansdowne seemed anxious particularly on account of the clear symptoms appearing from the papers that both Radicals and Protectionists are bidding for Lord Palmerston.

Lord Granville was very much overcome when he had his audience to thank for his appointment, but seemed full of courage and good-will. He said it would be as easy to him to avoid Lord Palmerston's faults as difficult to imitate his good qualities, promised to endeavour to establish a more decent usage between the Governments in their mutual communications, by setting the good example himself, and insisting upon the same on the part of the others; promised not to have anything to do with the newspapers; to give evening parties, just as Lord Palmerston had done, to which a good deal of his influence was to be attributed. He said a Member of Parliament just returned from the Continent had told him that an Englishman could hardly show himself without becoming aware of the hatred they were held in; the only chance one had to avoid being insulted was to say _Civis Romanus non sum_.

Lord Granville had been Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs under Lord Palmerston for three years from 1837-40, but, as he expressed himself, rather the sandwich between his principal and the clerks. Lord Palmerston had in these three years hardly once spoken to him upon any of the subjects he had to treat.

ALBERT.

[Pageheading: PALMERSTON'S ABSENCE EXPLAINED]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _27th December 1851._

The Queen forgot to remind Lord John Russell yesterday of his correspondence with Lord Palmerston, which he promised to let her have.

The Queen concludes from what Lord John said yesterday that he intended sounding the Duke of Newcastle relative to the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland.

Has Lord John ascertained the cause of Lord Palmerston's absence yesterday? If it was not accidental, she must say she thinks it most disrespectful conduct towards his Sovereign.

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

PEMBROKE LODGE, _27th December 1851._

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and submits a letter of Lord Palmerston, which explains his not going to Windsor. It appears to have arisen from a mistake in the message sent through Lord Stanley, and not from any want of respect to your Majesty.

_Viscount Palmerston to Lord John Russell._

CARLTON GARDENS, _27th December 1851._

MY DEAR JOHN RUSSELL,--I am distressed beyond measure by the note from you which I have this moment received on my arrival here from Hampshire. I understood from Stanley that you had desired him to tell me that if it was inconvenient for me to come up yesterday, I might send the Seals to you at Windsor, and that my presence would be dispensed with.[41] Thereupon I sent the Seals up by an early train yesterday morning to Stanley, that he might send them down to you as suggested by you, and I desired that they might be taken by a messenger by the special train.

I shall be very much obliged to you if you will have the goodness to explain this matter to the Queen, and I beg you to assure Her Majesty how deeply grieved I am that what appears to have been a mistake on my part should have led me to be apparently wanting in due respect to Her Majesty, than which nothing could possibly be further from my intention or thoughts. Yours sincerely,

PALMERSTON.

[Footnote 41: There is a fuller account given of Lord
Palmerston's version of the whole affair in a letter to his
brother, printed in Ashley's _Life of Lord Palmerston_, vol.
i. p. 315.]

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN ON FOREIGN POLICY]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _28th December 1851._

The Queen thinks the moment of the change in the person of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to afford a fit opportunity to have the principles upon which our Foreign Affairs have been conducted since the beginning of 1848 reconsidered by Lord John Russell and his Cabinet.

The Queen was fully aware that the storm raging at the time on the Continent rendered it impossible for any statesman to foresee with clearness and precision what development and direction its elements would take, and she consequently quite agreed that the line of policy to be followed, as the most conducive to the interests of England, could then only be generally conceived and vaguely expressed.

But although the Queen is still convinced that the general principles laid down by Lord John at that time for the conduct of our Foreign Policy were in themselves right, she has in the progress of the last three years become painfully convinced that the manner in which they have been _practically applied_ has worked out very different results from those which the correctness of the principles themselves had led her to expect. For when the revolutionary movements on the Continent had laid prostrate almost all its Governments, and England alone displayed that order, vigour, and prosperity which it owes to a stable, free, and good Government, the Queen, instead of earning the natural good results of such a glorious position, viz. consideration, goodwill, confidence, and influence abroad, obtained the very reverse, and had the grief to see her Government and herself treated on many occasions with neglect, aversion, distrust, and even contumely.

Frequently, when our Foreign Policy was called in question, it has been said by Lord John and his colleagues that the principles on which it was conducted were the right ones, and having been approved of by them, received their support, and that it was only the _personal manner_ of Lord Palmerston in conducting the affairs which could be blamed in tracing the causes which led to the disastrous results the Queen complains of.

The Queen is certainly not disposed to defend the personal manner in which Lord Palmerston has conducted Foreign Affairs, but she cannot admit that the errors he committed were merely _faults in form and method_, that they were no more than acts of "inconsideration, indiscretion, or bad taste." The Queen considers that she has also to complain of what appeared to her deviations from the principles laid down by the Cabinet for his conduct, nay, she sees distinctly in their practical application a _personal and arbitrary perversion_ of the very nature and essence of those principles. She has only to refer here to Italy, Spain, Greece, Holstein, France, etc., etc., which afford ample illustrations of this charge.

It was one thing for Lord Palmerston to have attempted such substantial deviations; it will be another for the Cabinet to consider whether they had not the power to check him in these attempts.

The Queen, however, considering times to have now changed, thinks that there is no reason why we should any longer confine ourselves to the mere assertion of abstract principles, such as "non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries," "moral support to liberal institutions," "protection to British subjects," etc., etc. The moving powers which were put in operation by the French Revolution of 1848, and the events consequent on it, are no longer so obscure; they have assumed distinct and tangible forms in almost all the countries affected by them (in France, in Italy, Germany, etc.), and upon the state of things now existing, and the experience gained, the Queen would hope that our Foreign Policy may be _more specifically defined_, and that it may be considered how the general principles are to be practically adapted to our peculiar relations with each Continental State.

The Queen wishes therefore that a regular programme embracing these different relations should be submitted to her, and would suggest whether it would not be the best mode if Lord John were to ask Lord Granville to prepare such a paper and to lay it before her after having revised it.

This would then serve as a safe guide for Lord Granville, and enable the Queen as well as the Cabinet to see that the Policy, as in future to be conducted, will be in conformity with the principles laid down and approved.

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

PEMBROKE LODGE, _29th December 1851._

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has received your Majesty's communication of yesterday, and will transmit it to Lord Granville.

It is to be observed, however, that the traditionary policy of this country is not to bind the Crown and country by engagements, unless upon special cause shown, arising out of the circumstances of the day.

For instance, the Treaty of Quadruple Alliance between England, France, Spain, and Portugal was contrary to the general principle of non-intervention; so was the interference in Portugal in 1847, but were both justified by circumstances.

Thus it is very difficult to lay down any principles from which deviations may not frequently be made.

The grand rule of doing to others as we wish that they should do unto us is more applicable than any system of political science. The honour of England does not consist in defending every English officer or English subject, right or wrong, but in taking care that she does not infringe the rules of justice, and that they are not infringed against her.[42]

[Footnote 42: A summary of Lord Granville's Memorandum in
reply (which was couched in very general terms) will be found
in Lord Fitzmaurice's _Life of Earl Granville_, vol. ii. p.
49.]

[Pageheading: AFFAIRS IN FRANCE]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _30th December 1851._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Most warmly do I thank you for your kind and affectionate and interesting letter of the 26th, which I received on Sunday. All that you say about Lord Palmerston is but too true.... He _brouilled_ us and the country with every one; and his very first act precipitated the unfortunate Spanish marriages which was _le commencement de la fin_. It is too grievous to think how much misery and mischief might have been avoided. However, now he has done with the Foreign Office for ever, and "the veteran statesman," as the newspapers, to our great amusement and I am sure to _his_ infinite annoyance, call him, must rest upon his laurels.... I fear much lest they should be imprudent at Claremont; the poor Queen hinted to Mamma that she hoped you would not become a friend to the President; no doubt you can have no sympathies for him, but _just because_ you are related to the poor Orleanses, you feel that you must be doubly cautious to do nothing which could provoke the enmity of Louis Napoleon. I fear that poor Joinville _had_ some _mad_ idea of going to France, which, fortunately, his illness prevented. It would have been the height of folly. Their only safe policy is to remain entirely passive _et de se faire oublier_, which was Nemours' expression to me two years ago; nothing could be wiser or more prudent than he was then--but I don't think they were wise since. _La Candidature_ of Joinville was in every way unwise, and led Louis Napoleon to take so desperate a course. Nemours told me also _last_ year that they were not at all against a _fusion_, but that they could not _disposer de la France_, unless called upon to do so by the nation. I wish you would caution them to be very circumspect and silent--for all the mistakes made by others is in _their_ favour; in fact, no good for them could come till Paris is old enough to be his own master--unless indeed they all returned under Henri V., but a Regency for Paris would be an impossibility....

We spent a very happy Christmas, and now wish you a very happy New Year--for many succeeding years. Also to the children, who I hope were pleased with the prints, etc.

We have got young Prince Nicholas of Nassau here, a pretty, clever boy of nineteen, with a good deal of knowledge, and a great wish to learn and hear, which is a rare thing for the young Princes, of our day in particular. I must stop now, as I fear I have already let my pen run on for too long, and must beg to be excused for this voluminous letter.

With Albert's love ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Pageheading: THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _30th December 1851._

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letters of yesterday. She quite agrees with him and his colleagues in thinking it of importance to strengthen the Government, and she is pleased with his proposal to communicate with the Duke of Newcastle as to what assistance he and his friends can give to the Government.

The Queen expects better results from such a negotiation, with an ostensible head of a Party, than from attempts to detach single individuals from it, which from a sense of honour they always felt scruples in agreeing to.

[Pageheading: THE _TE DEUM_ IN PARIS]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _31st December 1851._

The Queen sees in the papers that there is to be a _Te Deum_ at Paris on the 2nd for the success of the _coup d'etat_, and that the Corps Diplomatique is to be present. She hopes that Lord Normanby will be told not to attend. Besides the impropriety of his taking part in such a ceremony, his doing so would entirely destroy the position of Lord John Russell opposite Lord Palmerston, who might with justice say that he merely expressed his personal approval of the _coup d'etat_ before, but since, the Queen's Ambassador had been ordered publicly to thank God for its success.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

TO CHAPTER XXI

Early in 1852, the Whig Government, impaired in public credit by the removal of Lord Palmerston, attempted once more a coalition with the Peelites, office being offered to Sir James Graham; the overtures failed, and soon, after the meeting of Parliament, the ex-Foreign Secretary, whose version of the cause of his dismissal failed to satisfy the House of Commons, succeeded in defeating the Government on their Militia Bill, affairs in France having caused anxiety as to the national defences. The Government Bill was for the creation of a local Militia, Lord Palmerston preferring the consolidation of the regular Militia. A Ministry was formed by Lord Derby (formerly Lord Stanley) from the Protectionist Party, but no definite statement could be elicited as to their intention, or the reverse, to re-impose a duty on foreign corn. Mr Disraeli, who became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was the mainspring of the Government policy, showed great dexterity in his management of the House of Commons without a majority, and carried a Militia Bill in the teeth of Lord John Russell; but a plan of partial redistribution failed. The elections held in the summer did not materially improve the Ministerial position, and, on the meeting of Parliament in the autumn, the Fiscal Question had to be squarely faced. After much wrangling, Protection was finally abandoned, and the Government saved for the moment, but on their House-tax proposals they were defeated, after an impassioned debate, by a coalition of Whigs, Peelites, and Radicals, from whom Lord Lansdowne and Lord Aberdeen (and finally the latter alone) were called upon to construct a strong representative Government. The Duke of Wellington had died in September, and his funeral was the signal for an outburst of national feeling. During the year the Houses of Parliament designed by Sir Charles Barry, though not absolutely completed, were formally opened by the Queen; the new House of Lords had already been in use.

In France, the first result of the _coup d'etat_ was Louis Bonaparte's election as President for ten years by an immense majority; late in the year he assumed the Imperial title as Napoleon III., and the Empire was formally recognised by the majority of the Powers; the Emperor designed to add to his prestige by contracting a matrimonial alliance with Princess Adelaide of Hohenlohe. In the East of Europe a dispute had commenced between France and Russia about the Holy Places in Palestine. Simultaneously with the death of the Duke of Wellington, the era of European peace was destined to come to an end, and Nicholas, encouraged by the advent to power of Aberdeen (whom he had met in 1844, and with whom he had frankly discussed European politics), was hoping for the consummation of his scheme for the partition of Turkey.

To Great Britain the year was a memorable one, in consequence of the granting of a Constitution to New Zealand.