Chapter XXI (2)

With regard to the Militia Bill, she must admit that her suggestions are liable to the objections pointed out by Lord Derby, although they would offer advantages in other respects. The Queen will therefore sanction the measure as proposed, and now further explained by Lord Derby.

The despatches transmitted from the Foreign Office referring to the Swiss question[23] could not fail to give the Queen as much satisfaction as they did to Lord Derby, as they show indications of a more conciliatory intention, _for the present_ at least. As Switzerland has yielded, France and Austria ought to be satisfied, and the Queen only hopes we may not see them pushing their demands further after a short interval!

The probability of a war with the Burmese is a sad prospect. The Queen thinks, however, that the view taken by Lord Dalhousie of the proceedings at Rangoon, and of the steps now to be taken to preserve peace, is very judicious, and fully concurs with the letter sent out by the Secret Committee. She now returns it, together with the despatch.

The despatches from Prince Schwartzenberg to Count Buol are satisfactory in one sense, as showing a readiness to return to the English Alliance, but unfortunately only under the supposition that we would make war upon liberty together; they exhibit a profound ignorance of this country.[24] The Queen is quite sure that Lord Derby will know how to accept all that is favourable in the Austrian overtures without letting it be supposed that we could for a moment think of joining in the policy pursued at this moment by the great Continental Powers. As Lord Derby's speech has been referred to by Prince Schwartzenberg, it would furnish the best text for the answer. The President seems really to have been seriously ill.

[Footnote 23: The French had been pressing the Swiss
Government to expel refugees, and Austria supported the French
President.]

[Footnote 24: Lord Derby had urged that a more conciliatory
message should accompany Lord Granville's last despatch,
which, because of its unfriendly tone, Count Buol had delayed
sending on to Vienna. The precise language (he said) must
depend on what information Count Buol could supply.]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

OSBORNE, _14th March 1852._

The Queen has received this morning Lord Derby's letter respecting the St Albans' Disfranchisement Bill, and is glad to hear that Lord Derby means to take up this Bill as dropped by the late Government. Whether the mode of transferring these seats proposed by Lord Derby will meet with as little opposition in Parliament as he anticipates, the Queen is not able to form a correct judgment of. It may be liable to the imputation of being intended to add to the power of the landed interest. This might not be at all objectionable in itself, but it may be doubtful how far the House of Commons may be disposed to concur in it at the present moment. This will be for Lord Derby to consider, but the Queen will not withhold her sanction from the measure.

She knows that Lord John Russell meant to give the vacant seats to Birkenhead. Are not there two seats still vacant from the Disfranchisement of Sudbury? and would it not be better (if so) to dispose of all four at the same time? There is an impression also gaining ground that, with a view to prevent the Franchise being given exclusively to _Numbers_, to the detriment of _Interests_, it might be desirable to give new seats to certain corporate bodies, such as the Scotch Universities, the Temple and Lincoln's Inn, the East India Company, etc., etc.[25]

[Footnote 25: The Government eventually proposed that the four
seats taken from St Albans and Sudbury should be assigned to
South Lancashire and the West Riding; but, on the ground that
a Ministry on sufferance should confine itself to necessary
legislation, Mr Gladstone induced the House by a great
majority to shelve the proposal.]

[Pageheading: MR DISRAELI]

[Pageheading: THE OPPOSITION]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _15th March 1852._ (_Monday night._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, informs your Majesty of what occurred in the House of Commons this evening.

Mr Villiers opened the proceedings, terse and elaborate, but not in his happiest style. He called upon the House to contrast the state of the country at the beginning of the year and at the present moment. But he could not induce the House to believe that "all now was distrust and alarm."

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, declined to bring forward in the present Parliament any proposition to change our commercial system, and would not pledge himself to propose in a future Parliament any duty on corn. He said a duty on corn was a measure, not a principle, and that if preferable measures for the redress of agricultural grievances than a five-shilling duty on corn (mentioned by Mr Villiers) could be devised, he should adopt them--a declaration received with universal favour on the Government side.

Lord John Russell replied to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in consequence of some notice by the former of the strange construction of a new Opposition to force a Dissolution of Parliament by a Minister who, three weeks ago, had declared such Dissolution inexpedient. It was not a successful speech.

The great speech on the Opposition side was that of Sir James Graham: elaborate, malignant, mischievous. His position was this: that Lord Derby, as a man of honour, was bound to propose taxes on food, and that if he did so, revolution was inevitable.

Mr Gladstone and Lord Palmerston both spoke in the same vein, the necessity of immediate Dissolution after the passing of the "necessary" measures; but the question soon arose, What is "necessary"?

Lord Palmerston thought the Militia Bill "necessary," upon which the League[26] immediately rose and denied that conclusion.

There seemed in the House a great reluctance to avoid a violent course, but a very general wish, on the Opposition side, for as speedy a Dissolution as public necessity would permit.

The evening, however, was not disadvantageous to the Government. All which is most humbly submitted to your Majesty, by your Majesty's most dutiful Subject and Servant,

B. DISRAELI.

[Footnote 26: The members belonging to the Manchester School
of Politics.]

[Pageheading: THE QUESTION OF DISSOLUTION]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

OSBORNE, _17th March 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I delayed writing till to-day as I wished to see the papers first, and be able to give you an account of the first Debate in the two Houses. They are not satisfactory, because both Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli refuse to give a straightforward answer as to their policy, the uncertainty as to which will do serious harm.[27] The Opposition are very determined, and _with_ right, to insist on this being given, and on as early a Dissolution as possible. The Government will be forced to do this, but it is very unwise, after all _this_ agitation for the last five years and a half, _not_ [to] come forward manfully and to state what they intend to do. We tried to impress Lord Derby with the necessity of this course, and I hoped we had succeeded, but his speech has not been what it ought to have been in this respect.

The President seems more occupied at home than abroad, which I trust he may remain.

Stockmar is well.... _One_ thing is pretty _certain_--that _out_ of the _present state_ of confusion and discordance, a _sound state_ of _Parties_ will be obtained, and _two Parties_, as of old, will again exist, without which it is _impossible_ to have a _strong_ Government. _How_ these Parties will be formed it is impossible to say at present. Now, with Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 27: This uncertainty led to the Anti-Corn-Law
League, which had been dissolved in 1846, being revived.]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _19th March 1852._ (_Friday night, twelve o'clock._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, lays before your Majesty what has taken place in the House of Commons to-night.

At the commencement of public business, Lord John Russell, in a very full House, after some hostile comments, enquired of Her Majesty's Ministers whether they were prepared to declare that Her Majesty will be advised to dissolve the present Parliament, and call a new one, with the least possible delay consistent with a due regard to the public interest, in reference to measures of _urgent_ and _immediate_ necessity.

The question was recommended by Lord John Russell as one similar to that put to him in 1841 by Sir Robert Peel.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer in reply observed that there was a distinction between the position of the present Ministry and that of Lord John Russell in 1841, as in that and in the other precedents quoted in 1841 by Sir Robert Peel, the Ministry had been condemned by a vote of the House of Commons.

He said it was not constitutional and most impolitic for any Ministers to pledge themselves to recommend their Sovereign to dissolve Parliament at any stated and specific time, as circumstances might occur which would render the fulfilment of the pledge injurious or impracticable; that it was the intention of the Ministers to recommend your Majesty to dissolve the present Parliament the moment that such measures were carried which were necessary for your Majesty's service, and for the security _and good government_ of your Majesty's realm; and that it was their wish and intention that the new Parliament should meet to decide upon the question of confidence in the Administration, and on the measures, which they could then bring forward in the course of the present year.

This announcement was very favourably received.

The discomfiture of the Opposition is complete, and no further mention of stopping or limiting supplies will be heard of.

All which is most humbly submitted to your Majesty by your Majesty's most dutiful Subject and Servant,

B. DISRAELI.

[Pageheading: INTERVIEW WITH LORD DERBY]

[Pageheading: PROTECTION]

_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _22nd March 1852._

We came to Town from Osborne the day before yesterday, and saw Lord Derby yesterday afternoon, who is in very good spirits about the prospect of affairs. He told the Queen that he thought he might state that the Government had gained a good deal of ground during the last week, and that there was now a general disposition to let the necessary measures pass Parliament, and to have the dissolution the end of June or beginning of July. He hoped the Queen did not think he had gone too far in pledging the Crown to a Dissolution about that time; but it was impossible to avoid saying as much as that a new Parliament would meet in the autumn again, and have settled the commercial policy before Christmas.

To the Queen's questions, whether there would not be great excitement in the country produced by the General Election, and whether Parliament ought not to meet immediately after it, he replied that he was not the least afraid of much excitement, and that there was great advantage in not meeting Parliament immediately again, as the Government would require a few months to prepare its measures, and to take a sound view of the new position of affairs. He anticipated that there would be returned a large proportion of Conservatives, some Free Traders, some Protectionists; but not a majority for the re-imposition of a duty on corn, _certainly_ not a majority large enough to justify him in proposing such a Measure. Now he was sure he could not with honour or credit abandon that Measure unless the country had given its decision against it; but then he would have most carefully to consider how to revise the general state of taxation, so as to give that relief to the agricultural interest which it had a right to demand.

He had received the most encouraging and flattering letters from the agriculturists of different parts of the country, all reposing the most explicit confidence in him, and asking him not to sacrifice the Government for the sake of an immediate return to Protection. They felt what Lord Derby must say he felt himself, that, after the fall of this Government, there would necessarily come one of a more democratic tendency than any the country had yet had to submit to. He thought most politicians saw this, and would rally round a Conservative standard; he knew that even many of the leading Whigs were very much dissatisfied with the company they find themselves thrown into and alarmed at the progress of Democracy.

ALBERT.

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _23rd March 1852._

... Here matters have improved rather for the Government, and it seems now that they will be able to get through the Session, to dissolve Parliament at the end of June or beginning of July, and to meet again in November. And then Protection will be done away with. If only they had not done so much harm, and played with it for six long years! What you say of the advantage of having had Governments from all parties we have often felt and do feel; it renders changes much less disagreeable. In the present case our acquaintance is confined almost entirely to Lord Derby, but then _he is_ the Government. They do _nothing_ without him. He has all the Departments to look after, and on being asked by somebody if he was not much tired, he said: "I am quite well with my babies!..."

VICTORIA R.

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _29th March 1852._ (_Monday night._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, informs your Majesty of what has occurred in the House of Commons to-night.

Mr Secretary Walpole introduced the Militia Bill in a statement equally perspicuous and persuasive.

Opposed by Mr Hume and Mr Gibson, the Government Measure was cordially supported by Lord Palmerston.

Lord John Russell, while he expressed an opinion favourable to increased defence, intimated a preference for regular troops.

Mr Cobden made one of his cleverest speeches, of the cosmopolitan school, and was supported with vigour by Mr Bright. A division is threatened by the ultra-Movement party, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer hopes to ward it off, and is somewhat sanguine of ultimate success in carrying the Measure.

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _30th March 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Many thanks for your dear letter of the 26th, which I received on Saturday. Here we shall have some trouble with our Militia Bill, which all of a sudden seems to have caused dissatisfaction and alarm. Lord Derby is quite prepared to drop Protection, as he knows that the Elections will bring a Free Trade, though a Conservative majority. Mr Disraeli (_alias_ Dizzy) writes very curious reports to me of the House of Commons proceedings--much in the style of his books....

[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND ITALY]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _10th April 1852._

The Queen hopes that both Lord Derby and Lord Malmesbury will give their earnest attention to the change in the politics of Italy, which is evidently on the point of taking place, according to the enclosed despatch from Mr Hudson.[28] What Count Azeglio[29] says in his Memorandum with respect to Austria is perfectly just. But France, as the champion of Italian liberty and independence, would become most formidable to the rest of Europe, and Louis Napoleon, in assuming for her this position, would be only following the example of his uncle, which we know to be his constant aim.[30]

[Footnote 28: British Envoy at Turin.]

[Footnote 29: Premier of Sardinia.]

[Footnote 30: Lord Derby in reply, after reviewing the whole
matter, counselled non-interference, the keeping of a vigilant
watch on French and Austrian actions, encouragement of
Sardinia in her constitutional action, and the making use of
any opportunity to secure both the independence of Piedmont
and the reform of the Papal Administration.]

[FRANCE AND ITALY]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _13th April 1852._

The Queen has received Lord Derby's letter of the 11th inst., in which he states very clearly the difficulties which stand in the way of an active interference of this country in the affairs of Italy. The Queen did not mean to recommend in her letter of the 10th on this subject any active interference, as she is of opinion that our present want of due influence in Italy is chiefly owing to our former ill-judged over-activity. The Queen agrees therefore entirely with Lord Derby in thinking that "all that can be done now is carefully to watch the proceedings of France and Austria in this matter, so as to profit by every good opportunity to protect the independence of Piedmont, and, if possible, produce some improvement in the internal Government of Rome," and she would accordingly like to see her respective Foreign Ministers instructed in this sense.

The Queen continues, however, to look with apprehension to the possible turn which the affairs of Italy may take, proceeding from the political views of the President. It is not improbable that he may act now that he is omnipotent upon the views contained in his celebrated letter to Edgar Ney in 1849, which were at the time disapproved by the Assembly.[31] He will feel the necessity of doing something to compensate the French for what they have lost by him at home, to turn their attention from home affairs to those abroad, and to the acquisition of power and influence in Europe; and certainly, were he to head Italian liberty and independence, his power of doing mischief would be immense. After all, such an attempt would not be more inconsistent for him than it was for General Cavaignac, as President of the _Republique Democratique_, to get rid of the Roman Republic, and to reinstate the Pope by force of arms.

The Queen wishes Lord Derby to communicate this letter to Lord Malmesbury, from whom she has also just heard upon this subject.

[Footnote 31: In this letter the President of the Republic had
expressed his admiration at the conduct of the French troops
in the Roman expedition under General Oudinot, and his warm
approval of the policy that led to the campaign.]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _19th April 1852._ (_Monday night, half-past twelve._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, reports to your Majesty that, after a dull debate, significant only by two of the subordinate Members of the late Administration declaring their hostility to the Militia Bill, Lord John Russell rose at eleven o'clock and announced his determination to oppose the second reading of it.[32] His speech was one of his ablest--statesmanlike, argumentative, terse, and playful; and the effect he produced was considerable.

Your Majesty's Government, about to attempt to reply to it, gave way to Lord Palmerston, who changed the feeling of the House, and indeed entirely carried it away in a speech of extraordinary vigour and high-spirited tone.

The Ministers were willing to have taken the division on his Lordship sitting down, but as the late Government wished to reply, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not oppose the adjournment of the debate.

The elements of calculation as to the division are very complicated, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer is still inclined to believe that the second reading of the Bill will be carried.

[Footnote 32: This tactical blunder, much condemned at the
time, estranged many of the Whigs from Lord John.]

[Pageheading: THE BUDGET]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _25th April 1852._

The Queen wishes to remind Lord Derby that the time for the presentation of the Budget to the House of Commons being very close at hand, none of the Measures referring to the finances of the country which the Government may have to propose have as yet been laid before her.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _26th April 1852._

The Queen has received Lord Derby's explanation of his views with regard to the Budget,[33] and will be glad to see him on Wednesday at three o'clock. She had been alarmed by vague rumours that it was the intention of the Government to propose great changes in the present financial system, which, with an adverse majority in the House of Commons and at the eve of a Dissolution, must have led to much confusion. She thinks the course suggested by Lord Derby to consider the Budget merely as a provisional one for the current year, by far the wisest, the more so as it will leave us a surplus of L2,000,000, which is of the utmost importance in case of unforeseen difficulties with Foreign Powers.[34]

[Footnote 33: Its chief feature was a renewal of the expiring
Income Tax.]

[Footnote 34: Accordingly, no financial changes were proposed
until after the General Election. See _post_, p. 406.]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _26th April._ (_Monday night, twelve o'clock._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, reports to your Majesty that the Militia Bill has been carried (second reading) by an immense majority.

For 315
Against 165

The concluding portion of the debate was distinguished by the speeches of Mr Sidney Herbert and Mr Walpole, who made their greatest efforts; the first singularly happy in his treatment of a subject of which he was master, and the last addressing the House with a spirit unusual with him.

[Pageheading: FRANCE AND THE BOURBONS]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _27th April 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I thank you much for your kind and affectionate letter of the 23rd. I have somehow or other contrived to lose my day, for which reason I can only write a very short letter. It seems to be generally believed that Louis Napoleon's assumption of the title of Emperor is very near at hand, but they still think war is not likely, as it would be such bad policy.

What you say about the ill-fated Spanish marriages, and the result of the poor King's wishing to have no one but a Bourbon as Queen Isabel's husband being that the _French won't_ have _any_ Bourbon, is indeed strange. It is a melancholy result.

I shall certainly try and read Thiers' _Revolution, Consulat, et Empire_, but I can hardly read _any_ books, my whole _lecture_ almost being taken up by the immense quantity of despatches we have to read, and then I have a good deal to write, and must then have a little leisure time to rest, and _de me delasser_ and to get out. It is a great deprivation, as I delight in reading. Still, I will not forget your recommendation.

I am sorry to say _nothing_ is definitely settled about our dear Crystal Palace. With Albert's love, ever your truly devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

_Queen Victoria to Mr Disraeli._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _1st May 1852._

The Queen has read with great interest the clear and able financial statement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer made in the House of Commons last night, and was glad to hear from him that it was well received.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Malmesbury._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _13th May 1852._

With respect to this despatch from Lord Howden,[35] the Queen wishes to observe that hitherto we have on all similar occasions declined accepting any Foreign Order for the Prince of Wales, on account of his being too young and not even having any of the English Orders. Might this not therefore be communicated to Lord Howden?

[Footnote 35: British Minister at Madrid.]

[Pageheading: AFFAIRS IN FRANCE]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

OSBORNE, _27th May 1852._

The Queen returns the enclosed most interesting letters. It is evident that the President is meeting with the first symptoms of a reviving public feeling in France; whether this will drive him to hurry on the Empire remains to be seen. All the Foreign Powers have to be careful about is to receive an assurance that the _Empire_ does _not_ mean a _return to the policy of the Empire_, but that the existing Treaties will be acknowledged and adhered to.

The session seems to advance very rapidly. The Queen hails Lord Derby's declaration of his conviction that a majority for a duty on corn will not be returned to the new Parliament, as the first step towards the abandonment of hostility to the Free Trade on which our commercial policy is now established, and which has produced so flourishing a condition of the finances of the country.

Mr Disraeli's speech about Spain was very good, though he had certainly better not have alluded to Portugal.

We return to Town to-morrow.

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _21st June 1852._ (_Nine o'clock._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, reports to your Majesty that Lord John Russell introduced to the notice of the House of Commons to-night the recent Minute of the Committee of Council on Education.

Lord John Russell made a languid statement to a rather full House. His speech was not very effective as it proceeded, and there was silence when he sat down.

Then Mr Walpole rose and vindicated the Minute. He spoke with animation, and was cheered when he concluded.

Sir Harry Verney followed, and the House very much dispersed; indeed the discussion would probably have terminated when Sir Harry finished, had not Mr Gladstone then risen. Mr Gladstone gave only a very guarded approval to the Minute, which he treated as insignificant.

It was not a happy effort, and the debate, for a while revived by his interposition, continued to languish until this hour (nine o'clock), with successive relays of mediocrity, until it yielded its last gasp in the arms of Mr Slaney.

The feeling of the House of Commons, probably in this representing faithfully that of the country, is against both the violent parties in the Church, and in favour of a firm, though temperate, course on the part of the Crown, which may conciliate a vast majority, and tend to terminate dissension.

[Pageheading: DISTURBANCES AT STOCKPORT]

_Queen Victoria to Mr Walpole._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _1st July 1852._

The Queen is much distressed at the account she has read in the papers of the dreadful riot at Stockport,[36] alas! caused by that most baneful of all Party feelings, _religious_ hatred,[37] and she is very anxious to know what Mr Walpole has heard.

[Footnote 36: The Church question was brought into the
political arena in the General Election, which was now in
progress; much violence was manifested during the contest.]

[Footnote 37: "It is additional proof, if more were wanting,"
wrote Mr Walpole in reply, "that all Parties should forbear as
much as possible from the ostentatious parade of anything that
can provoke either the one or the other."]

_The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria._

LAEKEN, _23rd July 1852._

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,--... We are very much plagued by our Treaty with France. Victor Hugo has written a book against Louis Napoleon, which will exasperate him much, and which he publishes _here_; we can hardly keep Victor Hugo here after that.[38] The great plague of all these affairs is their constant return without the least advantage to any one from the difficulties they created.... Your devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.

[Footnote 38: Victor Hugo (1802-1885) had founded the journal,
_L'Evenement_, in 1848: he was exiled in 1851, and published
_Napoleon le Petit_ in Belgium. After the fall of the Empire
he returned to France, and in 1877 published his _Histoire
d'un Crime_.]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

OSBORNE, _26th August 1852._

The Queen has been considering the subject of the vacant Garter, and the names which Lord Derby proposed to her. She is of opinion that it would not be advisable on the whole to give the Garter to Lord Londonderry; that the Duke of Northumberland has by far the strongest claim to this distinction. At the same time, the Queen would have no objection to bestow it on Lord Lonsdale, if this is desirable, in order to facilitate any Ministerial arrangements which Lord Derby may have in contemplation.

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN INHERITS A FORTUNE]

_The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria._

LAEKEN, _10th September 1852._

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,--... That Mr Neild[39] should have left that great fortune to you delighted me; it gives the possibility of forming a private fortune for the Royal Family, the necessity of which nobody can deny. Such things only still happen in England, where there exists loyalty and strong affection for Royalty, a feeling unfortunately much diminished on the Continent of Europe, though it did exist there also....

[Footnote 39: John Camden Neild, an eccentric and miserly
bachelor, nominally a barrister, died on the 30th of August,
bequeathing substantially the whole of his fortune (amounting
to half a million) to the Queen. As there were no known
relatives, the Queen felt able to accept this legacy; but she
first increased the legacies to the executors from L100 to
L1000 each, made provision for Mr Neild's servants and others
who had claims on him, restored the chancel of North Marston
Church, Bucks, where he was buried, and inserted a window
there to his memory.]

[Pageheading: DEATH OF DUKE OF WELLINGTON]

_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._

BALMORAL, _17th September 1852._

The death of the Duke of Wellington[40] has deprived the Country of her greatest man, the Crown of its most valuable servant and adviser, the Army of its main strength and support. We received the sad news on an expedition from Allt-na-Giuthasach to the Dhu Loch (one of the wildest and loneliest spots of the Highlands) at four o'clock yesterday afternoon. We hurried home to Allt-na-Giuthasach, and to-day here, where it became important to settle with Lord Derby the mode of providing for the command of the Army, and the filling up of the many posts and places which the Duke had held.

[Footnote 40: The Duke passed away at Walmer on the 14th of
September, in his eighty-fourth year.]

I had privately prepared a list of the mode in which this should be done, and discussed it with Victoria, and found, to both Lord Derby's and our astonishment, that it tallied in _every_ point with the recommendations which he had thought of making.

I explained to Lord Derby the grounds upon which I thought it better not to assume the Command myself, and told him of the old Duke's proposal, two years ago, to prepare the way to my assuming the Command by the appointment of a Chief of the Staff, on Sir Willoughby Gordon's death, and the reasons on which I then declined the offer. Lord Derby entirely concurred in my views, and seemed relieved by my explanation; we then agreed that for the loss of _authority_ which we had lost with the Duke, we could only make up by increase in _efficiency_ in the appointments to the different offices. That Lord Hardinge was the only man fit to command the Army.

He should then receive the Command-in-Chief. The Ordnance which he would vacate should be given to Lord Fitzroy Somerset, hitherto Military Secretary (with the offer of a peerage).[41] The Constableship of the Tower to Lord Combermere; the Garter to Lord Londonderry; the Grenadier Guards and the Rifle Brigade to me; the Fusiliers vacated by me to the Duke of Cambridge (or the Coldstream, Lord Strafford exchanging to the Fusiliers); the 60th Rifles vacated by me to Lord Beresford; the Rangership of the Parks in London to George (Duke of Cambridge); the Wardenship of the Cinque Ports to Lord Dalhousie; the Lieutenancy of Hampshire to Lord Winchester. I reserved to me the right of considering whether I should not assume the command of the Brigade of Guards which the Duke of York held in George IV.'s time, to which William IV. appointed himself, and which has been vacant ever since Victoria's accession, although inherent to the Constitution of the Guards.

[Footnote 41: He became Lord Raglan.]

Lord Derby had thought of George for the Command-in-Chief, as an alternative for Lord Hardinge, but perceived that his rank as a Major-General and youth would hardly entitle him to such an advancement. He would have carried no weight with the public, and we must not conceal from ourselves that many attacks on the Army which have been sleeping on account of the Duke will now be forthcoming.

Victoria wishes the Army to mourn for the Duke as long as for a member of the Royal Family.

Lord Derby proposes a public funeral, which cannot take place, however, before the meeting of Parliament in November. He is to find out how this is to be accomplished on account of the long interval.

The correspondence here following[42] shows what doubts exist as to the person in whom the Command of the Army is vested in case of a vacancy. I consider Lord Palmerston's letter as a mere attempt to arrogate supreme power for his Office,[43] which rests on no foundation. The Secretary at War has no authority whatever except over money, whilst the Commander-in-Chief has no authority to spend a penny without the Secretary at War.

ALBERT.

[Footnote 42: These letters, which are of no special
importance, contained a statement from Lord Palmerston to the
effect that the appointment to the Commandership-in-Chief was
vested in the Secretary at War.]

[Footnote 43: Lord Palmerston had held the office of Secretary
at War from 1809 to 1828.]

[Pageheading: THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BALMORAL, _17th September 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I am sure you will mourn _with us_ over the loss we and this whole nation have experienced in the death of the _dear_ and great old Duke of Wellington. The sad news will have reached you, I doubt not, on Wednesday or yesterday. We had gone on Wednesday, as I had mentioned, to our little Shiel of Allt-na-Giuthasach to spend two days there, and were enjoying ourselves very much on a beautiful expedition yesterday, and were sitting by the side of the Dhu Loch, one of the severest, wildest spots imaginable, when one of our Highlanders arrived bringing a letter from Lord Derby (who is here), confirming the report which we had already heard of--but entirely disbelieved--and sending me a letter from Lord Charles Wellesley, saying that his dear father had only been ill a few hours, and had hardly suffered at all. It was a stroke, which was succeeded rapidly by others, and carried him off without any return of consciousness. For _him_ it is a blessing that he should have been taken away in the possession of his great and powerful mind and without a lingering illness. But for this country, and for us, his loss--though it could not have been long delayed--is irreparable! He was the pride and the _bon genie_, as it were, of this country! He was the GREATEST man this country ever produced, and the most _devoted_ and _loyal_ subject, and the staunchest supporter the Crown ever had. He was to us a true, kind friend and most valuable adviser. To think that all this is gone; that this great and immortal man belongs now to History and no longer to the present, is a truth which we cannot realise. We shall soon stand sadly alone; Aberdeen is almost the only personal friend of that kind we have left. Melbourne, Peel, Liverpool--and now the Duke--_all_ gone!

You will kindly feel for and with us, dearest Uncle.

Lord Hardinge is to be Commander-in-Chief, and he is quite the _only_ man _fit_ for it.

Albert is much grieved. The dear Duke showed him great confidence and kindness. He was so fond of his little godson Arthur--who will now be a remaining link of the dear old Duke's, and a pleasant recollection of him. Ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

_The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria._

LAEKEN, _17th September 1852._

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,--You will be much grieved at the loss of the Duke. It must give you satisfaction to think that you were always kind to him, and that he was very sincerely devoted to you and appreciated Albert. Since 1814 I had known much of the Duke; his _kindness_ to me had been very _marked_, and I early discovered that he was very favourable to my marriage with Charlotte, then already in agitation. Since, he was _always kind_ and _confidential_, even in those days of persecution against me, the result of the jealousy of George IV.; he never was influenced by it, or had the meanness of many who, in the days of misfortune, quickly leave one. The only case in which we were at variance was about the boundaries of Greece. He had some of the old absolute notions, which in that case were not in conformity with the real interests of England and of Europe. Even last year he spoke so very kindly to me on the subject of our Continental affairs. Rarely fickle Fortune permits a poor mortal to reach the conclusion of a long career, however glorious, with such complete success, so undisturbed by physical or moral causes. The Duke is the noblest example of what an Englishman may be, and to what greatness he may rise in following that honourable and straight line.

When one looks at the Manchester school, compared to the greatness to which men like the Duke raised their country, one cannot help to be alarmed for the future. You are enjoying the Highlands, but the weather seems also not very favourable; here it is uncertain, and at times very cold.... Your truly devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.

[Pageheading: FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS]

_The Prince Albert to the Earl of Derby._

BALMORAL, _22nd September 1852._

MY DEAR LORD DERBY,--The Queen wishes me to answer your kind letter of yesterday.

Her letter to you and to Mr Walpole of this morning will have apprised you that she sanctions the Guard of Honour having been placed at Walmer, and the Duke's body having been taken possession of formally on the part of the Crown.

It would be a great pity if Lord Fitzroy were to be obliged to decline the Peerage on account of poverty; at the same time it may be difficult to relieve him from the payment of fees by a public grant. Under these circumstances, rather than leave Lord Fitzroy unrewarded, and a chance of his feeling mortified at a moment when his cheerful co-operation with Lord Hardinge is so important to the public service--the Queen would _herself_ bear the expense of the fees. If this were to hurt Lord Fitzroy's feelings, you could easily manage it so that he need never know from what source the L500 came. The Queen leaves this matter in your hands. Ever yours truly,

ALBERT.

_Queen Victoria to Mr Walpole._

BALMORAL CASTLE, _22nd September 1852._

The Queen has just received Mr Walpole's letter of the 20th, informing her of the difficulty of having the Funeral Service, _according_ to the _Liturgy_, performed _twice_; she trusts, however, that means may be found to enable the Queen's intentions to be carried out, as communicated to Mr Walpole in Lord Derby's official letter. Whether this is to be done by leaving the body for two months without the Funeral Service being read over it, or by reading the Funeral Service now in the presence of the family, and treating the _Public Funeral_ more as a translation of the remains to their final place of rest, the Queen must leave to be decided by those who have the means of personally sounding the feelings of the Duke's family, the dignitaries of the Church, and the public generally.

An impressive religious ceremony might certainly be made of it at St. Paul's, even if the actual Funeral Service should not be read on the occasion....

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _23rd October 1852._

Shortly after the formation of Lord Derby's Government, the Queen communicated to him a Memorandum respecting the necessity of attending to our national defences on a systematic plan. The Queen would now wish to hear how far we have advanced in this important object since that time. Lord Derby would perhaps call on the General Commanding-in-Chief, the Master-General of the Ordnance, and the First Lord of the Admiralty, as well as the Home Secretary, to make a report upon this. It will soon be necessary to consider what will have to be done for the future to complete the various plans. The Queen is no alarmist, but thinks that the necessity of our attending to our defences once having been proved and admitted by Parliament and two successive Governments, we should not relax in our efforts until the plans then devised are thoroughly carried out.

[Pageheading: LOUIS NAPOLEON]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _26th October 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--... I must tell you an anecdote relating to Louis Napoleon's entry into Paris, which Lord Cowley wrote over, as going the round of Paris. It is: that under one of the Triumphal Arches a Crown was suspended to a string (which is very often the case) over which was written, "_Il l'a bien merite_." Something damaged this crown, and they removed it--_leaving_, however, the _rope_ and _superscription_, the effect of which must have been somewhat edifying!

It is not at all true that foreign Officers are not to attend at the funeral of the dear old Duke; on the contrary, we expect them from Prussia, Austria, and Russia, and the Duke of Terceira (whom we shall see to-night) is already come from Portugal to attend the ceremony.

I must now conclude. With Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Malmesbury._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _8th November 1852._

As we seem to be so near the declaration of the Empire in France, and as so many opinions are expressed on the subject of the title to be assumed by Louis Napoleon, the Queen is anxious to impress Lord Malmesbury with the importance of our not committing ourselves on this point, and not giving our allies to understand that we shall join them in not acknowledging Napoleon III.[44] Objectionable as this appellation no doubt is, it may hardly be worth offending France and her Ruler by refusing to recognise it, when it is of _such_ importance to prevent their considering themselves the aggrieved party; any attempt to dictate to France the style of her Ruler would strengthen Louis Napoleon's position; our object should be to leave France alone, as long as she is not aggressive.

All of this should be well weighed.

[Footnote 44: Louis Napoleon himself claimed no hereditary
right to the Imperial dignity, but only that conferred by
election: he acknowledged as national all the acts which
had taken place since 1815, such as the reigns of the
later Bourbons and of Louis Philippe. (See _Memoirs of an
ex-Minister_.)]

[Pageheading: NATIONAL DEFENCES]

_The Prince Albert to Viscount Hardinge._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _8th November 1852._

MY DEAR LORD HARDINGE,--In reference to our conversation of yesterday, and the Queen's request to Lord Derby that he should call upon the different departments of the Admiralty, Army, Ordnance, and Home Office to furnish a report as to how far the measures begun last spring to put our defences in a state of efficiency have been carried out, and what remains to be done in that direction--I beg now to address you in writing. The object the Queen wishes to obtain is, to receive an account which will show what means we have _really_ at our disposal for purposes of defence, _ready for action_ at the shortest possible notice, and what remains to be done to put us into a state of security, what the supply of the wants may cost (approximately), and what time it would require.

As it will be not only convenient but necessary that the Horse Guards and Ordnance should consult together and combine their deliberations, I beg this letter to be understood to apply as well to Lord Raglan as to yourself, and that you would meet and give the answer to the Queen's questions conjointly.

(_A detailed list follows._)

These questions would all present themselves at the moment when we received the intelligence of a threatened _coup de main_ on the part of Louis Napoleon, when it would be too late to remedy any deficiency. The public would be quite ready to give the necessary money for our armament, but they feel with justice that it is unfair to ask them for large sums and then always to hear, _We are quite unprepared_. They don't understand and cannot understand details, but it is upon matters of detail that our security will have to depend, and we cannot be sure of efficiency unless a comprehensive statement be made showing the whole.

I beg this to be as short as possible, and if possible in a tabular shape. Ever yours truly,

ALBERT.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _13th November 1852._

The Queen was very sorry to hear from Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli that Mr Villiers' Motion[45] will create Parliamentary difficulties.

With respect to the financial statement, she must most strongly impress Lord Derby with the necessity of referring to our defenceless state, and the necessity of a _large_ outlay, to protect us from foreign attack, which would almost ensure us against war. The country is fully alive to its danger, and Parliament has perhaps never been in a more likely state to grant what is necessary, provided a comprehensive and efficient plan is laid before it. Such a plan ought, in the Queen's opinion, to be distinctly promised by the Government, although it may be laid before Parliament at a later period.

[Footnote 45: This Motion, intended to extort a declaration
from the House in favour of Free Trade, and describing the
Corn Law Repeal as "a just, wise, and beneficial measure," was
naturally distasteful to the Ministers. Their _amour-propre_
was saved by Lord Palmerston's Amendment omitting the
"_odious_ epithets" and affirming the principle of
unrestricted competition.]

[Pageheading: FINANCIAL POLICY]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

LONDON, _14th November 1852._

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, begs permission to enclose an answer to the Address for your Majesty's approbation, and which should be delivered, if your Majesty pleases, to the House of Commons to-morrow.

Referring to a letter from your Majesty, shown to him yesterday by Lord Derby, the Chancellor of the Exchequer also begs permission to state that, in making the financial arrangements, he has left a very large margin for the impending year (April 1853-4), which will permit the fulfilment of all your Majesty's wishes with respect to the increased defence of the country, as he gathered them from your Majesty's gracious expressions, and also from the suggestion which afterwards, in greater detail, His Royal Highness the Prince deigned to make to him.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer will deeply consider the intimation graciously made in your Majesty's letter to Lord Derby as to the tone on this subject to be adopted in the House of Commons, and he will endeavour in this, and in all respects, to fulfil your Majesty's pleasure.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer fears that he sent to your Majesty a somewhat crude note from the House of Commons on Thursday night, but he humbly begs your Majesty will deign to remember that these bulletins are often written in tumult, and sometimes in perplexity; and that he is under the impression that your Majesty would prefer a genuine report of the feeling of the moment, however miniature, to a more artificial and prepared statement.

_Queen Victoria to Mr Disraeli._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _14th November 1852._

The Queen has received with much satisfaction Mr Disraeli's letter of this day's date, in which he informs her of his readiness to provide efficiently for the defence of the country, the call for which is _very_ urgent. Lord Malmesbury, with whom the Prince has talked very fully over this subject, will communicate further with Mr Disraeli and Lord Derby on his return to Town to-morrow.

[Pageheading: LORD DALHOUSIE]

[Pageheading: INDIA AND THE DUKE]

_The Marquis of Dalhousie to Queen Victoria._

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, _23rd November 1852._

The Governor-General still retains some hope of seeing general peace restored in India before he quits it finally, as your Majesty's Ministers and the Court of Directors have some time since requested him not to retire from its administration in January next, as he had intended to do.

Many private considerations combined to draw him homewards, even though the honour and the advantages of retaining this Office were willingly recognised. But the gracious approbation with which his services here have been viewed was a sufficient motive for continuing them for some time longer, if they were thought profitable to the State.

Your Majesty has very recently been pleased to bestow upon him a still further distinction, which calls not merely for the expression of his deep and humble gratitude to your Majesty, but for a further devotion to your Majesty's service of whatever power he may possess for promoting its interests.

That your Majesty should prefer him at all to an Office of such traditional distinction as the Wardenship was an honour to which the Governor-General would never at any time have dreamt of aspiring. But by conferring it upon him thus--during his absence--and above all, by conferring it upon him in immediate succession to one whom he must all his life regard with reverence, affection, and gratitude--your Majesty has surrounded this honour with so much of honourable circumstance that the Governor-General is wholly unable to give full expression to the feelings with which he has received your Majesty's goodness.

The Governor-General is very sensible that in him, as Lord Warden, your Majesty will have but a sorry successor to the Duke of Wellington in every respect, save one. But in that one respect--namely in deep devotion to your Majesty's Crown, and to the true interests of your Empire--the Governor-General does not yield even to the Master he was long so proud to follow.

In every part of India the highest honours have been paid to the memory of the Duke of Wellington, which your Majesty's Empire in the East and its armies could bestow.

Even the Native Powers have joined in the homage to his fame. In the mountains of Nepaul the same sad tribute was rendered by the Maharajah as by ourselves, while in Mysore the Rajah not only fired minute guns in his honour, but even caused the Dusserah, the great Hindoo festival, to be stopped throughout the city, in token of his grief.

Excepting the usual disturbance from time to time among the still untamed mountain tribes upon our north-western border, there is entire tranquillity in India. The season has been good, and the revenue is improving.

Respectfully acknowledging the letter which he had lately the honour of receiving from your Majesty, and the gracious message it contained to Lady Dalhousie, who, though much improved in health, will be compelled to return to England in January, the Governor-General has the honour to subscribe himself with the utmost respect and gratitude, your Majesty's most obedient, most humble, and devoted Subject and Servant,

DALHOUSIE.

[Pageheading: THE FUNERAL]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _23rd November 1852._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--What you say about Joinville has interested us very much, and we have confidentially communicated it to Lord Derby, who is never alarmed enough. There is, however, a belief that the Orleans family have been very imprudent, and that Louis Napoleon has heard things and expressions used which did a great deal of harm, and Lord Derby begged me to warn them very strongly and earnestly on this point; _I_ cannot do much, but I think _you_ might, for in fact they might _unintentionally compromise us seriously_. The Government are rather shaky; Disraeli has been imprudent and blundering, and has done himself harm by a Speech he made about the Duke of Wellington, which was borrowed from an _eloge_ by Thiers on a French Marshal!!![46]

You will have heard from your children and from Charles how very touching the ceremony both in and out of doors was on the 18th. The behaviour of the millions assembled has been the topic of general admiration, and the foreigners have all assured me that they never could have believed _such_ a number of people could have shown such feeling, such respect, for _not_ a sound was heard! I cannot say _what_ a deep and _wehmtuehige_ impression it made on me! It was a beautiful sight. In the Cathedral it was much more touching still! The dear old Duke! he is an irreparable loss!

We had a great dinner yesterday to all the Officers. There is but one feeling of indignation and surprise at the conduct of Austria [47] in taking _this_ opportunity to slight England in return for what happened to _Haynau_[48] for _his own_ character. Ernest Hohenlohe was extremely anxious you should know the reason why he may _possibly_ appear one evening at the Elysee (they are gone for three or four days to Paris).