Chapter XXIX (1)

1860

_The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria._

LAEKEN, _6th January 1860_.

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,--I have to thank you for a _most affectionate_ and gracious letter of the 3rd....

I will speak to my pianist about Wagner's _Lohengrin_; he plays with great taste and feeling, and I purchased a fine Parisian piano to enable him to go on satisfactorily.

Now I must speak a little of passing events. Louis Napoleon wished for a Congress because it would have placed a new authority between himself and the Italians, whom he fears evidently concerning their fondness of assassinating people. The pamphlet, "The Pope and the Congress," remains _incomprehensible_[1]; it will do him much harm, and will deprive him of the confidence of the Catholics who have been in France his most devoted supporters. Now the Congress is then postponed, but what is to be done with Italy? One notion is, that there would be some arrangement by which Piedmont would receive more, Savoy would go to France, and England would receive Sardinia. I am sure that England would by no means wish to have Sardinia. It will give me great pleasure to hear what Lord Cowley has reported on these subjects. I understand that Louis Napoleon is now much occupied with Germany, and studies its resources. This is somewhat alarming, as he had followed, it seems, the same course about Italy. _Gare la bombe_, the Prussians may say. One cannot understand why Louis Napoleon is using so many odd subterfuges when plain acting would from the month of September have settled everything. I must say that I found Walewski at that time very sensible and conservative. His retiring will give the impression that things are now to be carried on in a less conservative way, and people will be much alarmed. I know Thouvenel, and liked him, but that was in the poor King's time. In England his nomination will not give much pleasure, I should imagine, as he was in the situation to oppose English notions in the Orient.... Your devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.

[Footnote 1: This famous pamphlet, issued (like that of
February 1859, _ante_, 25th January, 1859, note 7) under
the nominal authorship of M. de la Gueronniere, expounded
the Emperor'sview that the Pope should be deprived of his
temporal dominions, Rome excepted. Its publication brought
about the resignation of Count Walewski (who was succeeded
by M. de Thouvenel) and the abandonment of the proposed
Congress.]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _11th January 1860_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter, written after the Cabinet yesterday evening. She was much relieved by finding a proposal to call upon France and Austria not to interfere in Italy substituted for the former one implying war on our part for the defence of the Provisional Governments of Central Italy. The Queen must consider this new proposal, however, as partial and incomplete as long as Sardinia is not asked as well to abstain from interference. Austria has reversionary rights in Tuscany and Modena, Sardinia has no rights at all, if a desire for acquisition is not to be considered as one. Austria will probably say she has no intention of interfering as long as Sardinia does not, but she cannot allow Sardinia to possess herself of her inheritance under her very eyes. It is also incorrect to place France and Austria entirely in the same line; Austria being an Italian power in virtue of Venetia, and France having nothing whatever to do in Italy.

[Pageheading: WHIG TRADITIONS]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

PEMBROKE LODGE, _11th January 1860_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has just had the honour to receive your Majesty's letter of this date.

Lord John Russell has sent to Lord Palmerston the proposal he humbly submits to your Majesty.

He will therefore only venture to say that the doctrines of the Revolution of 1688, doctrines which were supported by Mr Fox, Mr Pitt, the Duke of Wellington, Lord Castlereagh, Mr Canning, and Lord Grey, can hardly be abandoned in these days by your Majesty's present advisers. According to those doctrines, all power held by Sovereigns may be forfeited by misconduct, and each nation is the judge of its own internal government.[2]

Lord John Russell can hardly be expected to abjure those opinions, or to act in opposition to them.

[Footnote 2: In a despatch of the 27th of October, Lord John
took the same ground in the case of Naples. After quoting with
approval the view taken by Vattel of the lawfulness of the
assistance given by the United Provinces to the Prince of
Orange, and his conclusion that it is justifiable to assist
patriots revolting against an oppressor for "good reasons," he
stated that the question was whether the people of Naples and
of the Roman States took up arms against their Government
for good reasons; and of this matter, he added, the people
themselves were the best judges.]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _11th January 1860_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's note of this day, in which she is not able to find any answer to her letter, or even an allusion to what she had written, viz. that Austria and France being asked to abstain from interference, such an arrangement would be partial and incomplete unless Sardinia was pledged also to non-interference. The Queen cannot make out what the doctrines of the Revolution of 1688 can have to do with this, or how it would necessitate Lord John to abjure them.

[Pageheading: AFFAIRS OF ITALY]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _17th January 1860_.

MY BELOVED UNCLE,--Your dear letter of the 13th reached me on Saturday, and I at once forwarded your letter to good and faithful Clark, who was for _two_ months unable to attend us from a severe attack of illness, but who is, I am happy to say, much better, indeed his own good self again, and who is now _here_.[3] This good account you give us of your precious health makes us truly happy. It is such a blessing.

Affairs are in a sad and complicated state, and though we modify matters as much as we _can_, we can't entirely keep our Ministers (_the two_) from doing _something_. You will hear no doubt of the last proposal soon, viz. that France and Austria should _both_ agree _not_ to interfere in Italy--France withdrawing her troops from Rome, and Sardinia to be asked not to send any troops into the Duchies until there has been a _final vote_ expressive of their wishes. We could _not prevent_ this _proposal_, which I doubt being accepted--as the rest of the Cabinet thought it could _not_ be opposed, and entailed _no_ material _support_. This country _never_ would consent to be entangled in a _war_ for this Italian quarrel....

We have a large party again to-day for the _Play_ which we have to-morrow. We had a very successful one last week. The Persignys come to-day.

Now I must end. With Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 3: The Queen, later in the year, lent Bagshot Park
temporarily to Sir James Clark.]

[Pageheading: ANNEXATION OF SAVOY]

[Pageheading: VICTOR EMMANUEL]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _21st January 1860_.

The Queen returns the enclosed important letter from Lord Cowley, and Lord John Russell's answers--documents which she trusts will be communicated to the Cabinet. The Emperor shows unwillingness to evacuate Rome and Lombardy, disinclination to admit of the annexation of the Duchies to Sardinia, a feeling that he could not do so without appearing dishonourable in the eyes of Austria, and a determination to rob Sardinia of Savoy in order to repay the French Nation for the rupture with the Pope, and the abandonment of a protective tariff by the reconquest of at least a portion of the "_frontieres naturelles de la France_."[4] Lord Cowley's letter proves clearly that it is (as the Queen all along felt and often said) most dangerous for us to offer to bind ourselves to a common action with the Emperor with regard to Italy, whilst he has entered into a variety of engagements with the different parties engaged in the dispute, of which we know nothing, and has objects in view which we can only guess at, and which have not the good of Italy in view, but his own aggrandisement to the serious detriment of Europe.

With regard to Lord John Russell's answer, the Queen will only say that our proposal having been made by us after serious reflection and the anxious discussion of the Cabinet and the Queen, no deviation from it ought to take place without affording them ample opportunity to consider the bearings and probable results of such alteration.

[Footnote 4: The cession by King Victor Emmanuel of Savoy
(the cradle of his race) and of Nice to France was the
consideration offered at Plombieres for obtaining French
support to the movement for freeing Italy "from the Alps to
the Adriatic"; that result not having been achieved, a like
price was now offered for French assistance in effecting the
annexation of the Central Italian provinces.]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _22nd January 1860_.

The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's note and enclosures. She rather expects to be advised by her Ministers as to the course to be adopted in matters which may lead to angry debate in the House of Lords, than to give personal directions on a case so incompletely placed before her; Lord Willoughby's letter does not even name the persons in question nor the grounds upon which he assumes "they would not be received at Court."[5] The Queen does not know how far admission or non-admission trenches upon the privileges of the House; from the submitted printed regulation, however, she would gather that the Lord High Chamberlain has full power to admit or exclude. If Lord Palmerston were to see Lord Granville as Leader, and the Lord Chancellor as Speaker, of the House of Lords together with Lord Willoughby, they might so far discuss the question as to enable Lord Palmerston to submit a decision for the Queen's consideration to-morrow.

[Footnote 5: Lord Willoughby's question had reference to a
Peeress, who, he thought, would not be received at Court.
The difference between a State Opening of Parliament and
a Drawing-room was pointed out in Lord Palmerston's reply.
Though it would be "unpleasant to the Peeresses to find
themselves sitting next to a person with whom they do not
associate," the Premier advised no interference with the lady
in question, if she persisted in attending.]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _31st January 1860_.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Accept my warmest thanks for your kind letter of the 27th, received on Saturday--by which I am delighted to see what sport you have had. I have _such_ an aversion for hunting that I am _quite_ pleased to hear of the destruction of the _fifty-one_ foxes. I suppose it was not cold enough for _wolves_.

I think Parliament has had a wholesome effect upon certain people; and that they are _altogether frightened_. There has been a strong despatch written relative to Savoy--and altogether I think matters are taking a better turn. The feeling of _all_ parties and this _whole_ country is--to _let Italy settle its own affairs_--and _England to keep quite out of it_....

We shall see the good Aumales to-night, who are staying with the Van de Weyers at _New Lodge_,[6] which is _un vrai bijou_: you _must_ see it when you come here again, for it is one of the nicest and most charming houses I know.

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

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 6: On the borders of Windsor Forest.]

_The King of the Belgians to Queen Victoria._

LAEKEN, _3rd February 1860_.

MY DEAREST VICTORIA,--... New Lodge must be exceedingly pretty, and, God willing, I ought once to get sight of it. By all one can hear, the Italians certainly will attack the Austrians, if they are not told to leave it alone; Victor Emmanuel speaks openly of it, just as he did last year, when one also thought it was a mere bravado. Things look in most directions very gloomy; my neighbour is creating dangers for himself by the constitutional Government he gives to Italy. The French say, "Sommes-nous moins que les Italiens pour avoir un peu de liberte?" This may become more dangerous as things move on, not that I should regret it; we can never have any security as long as France remains without a constitutional Government. We have had slight beginnings of cold, but not much of it, but the glass was fearfully low. My ball of the 1st was rather pretty, and people were in great dancing mood. Princess Orloff, a Troubetzkoi, is a very pleasing young woman. There is also a pretty Princess Metchersky. We had some new English families _inconceivably ugly_; it is quite a calamity, they look as if they had been selected on purpose. Having still the happiness of being one of your Privy Council, I mean to propose some measure to obviate such a sad state of affairs. We have all of a sudden snow.... Your truly devoted Uncle,

LEOPOLD R.

[Pageheading: INDIAN HONOURS]

_Queen Victoria to Sir Charles Wood._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _9th February 1860_.

The Queen has attentively read Lord Canning's letter and enclosure. She quite agrees in his proposal as to the nature of the Order of Chivalry to be instituted, and the details which he recommends with regard to it. She also thinks that titles should be confined to those now known and borne in India, and to be given sparingly; but would object to the illimited power of the Governor-General and Viceroy in this respect. The highest dignities and titles ought to proceed directly from the Crown at the Viceroy's recommendation. The Queen concurs in the view that honours cannot well be made hereditary amongst Hindoos and Mussulmans, but where Princes (as we may hope will be the case sometimes hereafter) have become Christians, the hereditary nature of honours should not be withheld.[7] ...

[Footnote 7: Lord Canning had written that he thought it would
be best to adhere to the precise titles already in use in
India, and that they should be at the direct disposal of the
Queen's Representative, without reference to the Crown. He did
not recommend that titles should be hereditary (except in
very special cases), in a country where primogeniture was
not established. As to the proposed Order of Knighthood, Lord
Canning thought that the institution of such an Order would
be both expedient and opportune. He recommended that it should
include both British-born and Native subjects.]

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN AND HER MINISTERS]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _10th February 1860_.

The Queen sends a letter to Lord Palmerston which she has received yesterday evening from Lord John Russell.[8] She is induced to do so from a feeling that it is to Lord Palmerston, as head of the Government, that she has to look, when she may have reason to take exception to the tone of communications she may receive from members of his Cabinet. Lord Palmerston will not fail to perceive that the enclosed is not the kind of communication which the Foreign Secretary ought to make, when asked by his Sovereign to explain the views of the Cabinet upon a question so important and momentous as the annexation of Savoy to France, and the steps which they propose to take with regard to it. She need not remind Lord Palmerston that in her letter communicated to the Cabinet she had given no opinion whatever upon Italian liberation from a foreign yoke, nor need she protest against a covert insinuation, such as is contained in Lord John's letter, that she is no well-wisher of mankind and indifferent to its freedom and happiness. But she must refer to the constitutional position of her Ministers towards herself. They are responsible for the advice they gave her, but they are bound fully, respectfully, and openly to place before her the grounds and reasons upon which their advice may be founded, to enable her to judge whether she can give her assent to that advice or not. The Government must come to a standstill if the Minister meets a demand for explanation with an answer like the following: "I was asked by the Cabinet to give an answer, but as I do not agree with you, I think it useless to explain my views."

The Queen must demand that respect which is due from a Minister to his Sovereign. As the Queen must consider the enclosed letter as deficient in it, she thinks Lord John Russell might probably wish to reconsider it, and asks Lord Palmerston to return it to him with that view.

That Lord Palmerston may be acquainted with the course the correspondence has taken, the Queen encloses the two preceding letters.

[Footnote 8: The letter ran:--"Lord John Russell unfortunately
does not partake your Majesty's opinions in regard to Italy,
and he is unwilling to obtrude on your Majesty unnecessary
statements of his views.... Whatever may be the consequence,
the liberation of the Italian people from a foreign yoke
is, in the eyes of Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell, an
increase of freedom and happiness at which as well-wishers to
mankind they cannot but rejoice."]

[Pageheading: MR GLADSTONE'S BUDGET]

_Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria._

94 PICCADILLY, _10th February 1860_.

Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to state that Mr Gladstone made this afternoon his financial statement.[9] His speech lasted three hours, from five to eight, and was admirable, detailed, clear, comprehensive and eloquent; and he did not appear to be fatigued by the effort.[10] The statement was well received by the House, and though parts of the arrangement may, and no doubt will, be disputed and attacked as the various measures of which the arrangement is composed, pass through the House, there seems to be a fair probability that the Government will not sustain any serious defeat upon any part of the arrangement. The scheme is too extensive and complicated to admit of an abstract of it being given to your Majesty in this Report; but no doubt a condensed summary of it will be given in the newspapers of to-morrow.

[Footnote 9: The Budget of 1860 was contemporaneous with
the commercial treaty with France negotiated by Mr Cobden,
reducing _inter alia_ the import duties on French wine and
brandy, and English coal, flax, and pig-iron. Mr Gladstone
abolished the duties on a large number of imports, and
proposed to repeal that on paper (regarded not only as a means
for the diffusion of knowledge, but a commodity in various
industries).]

[Footnote 10: This was all the more remarkable, as the Budget
had been postponed owing to his illness.]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _11th February 1860_.

The Queen acknowledges the receipt of Lord Palmerston's two letters of yesterday evening. She willingly accepts Lord John Russell's expressions of regret, and certainly was led to read that one passage which Lord Palmerston explains in the sense which he supposed.

The Queen has received the draft to Lord Cowley, and has written her observations upon it to Lord John, who will communicate them to him. She thinks that the omissions which she has pointed out can be very well supplied consistently with that international courtesy which Lord Palmerston truly says ought to be observed.[11]

[Footnote 11: In this despatch, Lord John wrote that
the Government could not believe that a country in the
circumstances of France could be endangered by the existence,
"on the other side of the Alps, of a State of 11,000,000 of
people lately joined by a cement not yet dry, threatened, on
the side of Lombardy, by Austria, and not very certain of its
own independence."]

_Earl Granville to the Prince Albert._

BRIGHTON, _11th February 1860_.

SIR,--Lord John produced before the Cabinet his draft of despatch in answer to M. Thouvenel. He read, without allusion to the previous correspondence, the Queen's Memorandum on his draft.

Lord Palmerston supported Lord John, who was fidgety and nervous. We all criticised the draft. We thought it too much or too little. We recommended that he should either write shortly, saying that he did not acquiesce in M. Thouvenel's arguments, but as the French Government did not consider the question as now in existence, and promised that it should not be revised without the consent of Savoy, and consultation with the Great Powers, if the Government would reserve what they had to say on a question of such immense European importance--or going into the subject he should state the whole argument and objections of the Government to the scheme.

We thought the historical reminiscences offensive to France, while the language of the despatch was not sufficiently firm to satisfy what was expected from the Government. We warned him that in this case public opinion would be at least as critical as the Queen.

Lord John gave us to understand that he would alter his draft, but I do not feel any security that it will be done in a satisfactory manner.

I am, Sir, with the greatest respect, your Royal Highness's obedient, humble, and faithful servant,

GRANVILLE.

[Pageheading: LORD COWLEY AND THE EMPEROR]

_Earl Cowley to Lord John Russell._ (_Submitted to the Queen._)

PARIS, _7th March 1860_.

MY DEAR LORD JOHN,--I send a messenger this evening, in order that you may not hear from any one else of the passage of arms which took place between the Emperor and myself yesterday evening. You will find the account of it in the enclosed despatch. The more I reflect on it, the less I think that I could pass over the Emperor's conduct and language without notice. His tone and manner were really offensive, and if I had let them pass unheeded might have been repeated on another occasion. I must say that nothing could have been more friendly than His Majesty's bearing after I had spoken to him. He was profuse in his excuses, and the Empress told me later in the evening that he was _desole_--"qu'il s'etait laisse entrainer par un mouvement d'humeur," etc. I, of course, said that I should think no more about it.

One good thing has been gained by it, that the Emperor has declared that he does not mean to act in defiance of the opinion of the Great Powers....

I wish that I had not this disagreeable history to trouble you with, but do not attach greater importance to it than it merits. I look upon it as at an end.

COWLEY.

[Pageheading: LORD COWLEY AND THE EMPEROR]

[Pageheading: LORD COWLEY'S REMONSTRANCE]

[Pageheading: THE EMPEROR'S _AMENDE_]

[_Enclosure._]

_Earl Cowley to Lord John Russell._ (_Submitted to the Queen._)

PARIS, _7th March 1860_.

MY LORD,--It is with extreme regret that I call your Lordship's attention to the following occurrence.

There was a concert last night at the Tuileries, to which the Chiefs of the Diplomatic Body were invited. On these occasions seats are assigned to the Ambassadors according to their accidental rank, and I was placed between the Nuntio and the Russian Ambassador. It is customary for the Emperor, during the interval between the two parts of the concert, to say a few words to each of the Ambassadors individually, and it is obvious that what His Majesty says to one may easily be overheard by that one's immediate neighbours.

Yesterday evening the Emperor, after saying a few words of no importance to the Nuntio, addressed himself to me in a manner and tone very unusual with him, animadverting upon the hostile sentiments evinced towards him in the English Parliament and Press.[12] "Wishing to avoid a discussion, I merely observed that I regretted that matters should be in such a state, but that His Majesty must be aware that there was quite as great irritation on this side the water. The Emperor enquired sharply whether this was to be wondered at, considering the terms and imputations applied to himself, and to the French nation, in England? They were only defending themselves against unfair attacks, His Majesty said. It was really too bad, he continued; he had done all in his power to maintain a good understanding with England, but the conduct of England rendered it impossible. What had England to do with Savoy? And why was she not to be satisfied with the declaration that His Majesty had made to me, that he had no intention to annex Savoy to France without having previously obtained the consent of the Great Powers.

"Pardon me, Sire," I said, "for interrupting your Majesty, but it is just what you did not say. Had you permitted me to convey that assurance to Her Majesty's Government, I will answer for it that all those interpellations in Parliament would long since have ceased, and that Her Majesty's Government and the country would at all events have awaited the decision at which the Great Powers might have arrived."

"But I told you," continued the Emperor, "that I would consult the Great Powers."

"Yes, Sire," I replied, "but your Majesty did not add that you would abide by their decision."

This conversation had taken place, not only within the hearing of the Russian Ambassador, but the Emperor's remarks were addressed almost as much to my colleague as to myself. Turning then entirely towards General Kisseleff, the Emperor continued: "The conduct of England is inexplicable. I have done all in my power to keep on the best terms with her; but I am at my wits' end _(je n'en puis plus)._ What," His Majesty exclaimed again, "has England to do with Savoy? What would have been the consequence if, when she took possession of the Island of Perim[13] for the safety of her Eastern dominions, I had raised the same objections that she has now raised to the annexation of Savoy, which I want as much for the safety of France?"

His Majesty continued to speak for a few seconds in the same strain, and I felt my position to be most awkward. With the remembrance of His Majesty's intemperate words to M. de Huebner on New Year's Day, 1859,[14] in my mind, I did not like to leave unnoticed observations of the tendency I have mentioned. At the same time I had to bear in mind that I was not present on an official occasion, but that I was the Emperor's guest, and that it would not be right to continue a discussion in the presence of others. These thoughts passed rapidly through my mind, and I determined to be guided by a night's reflection in taking any further step in this matter. What that reflection might have produced I cannot say, but circumstances led to more immediate explanations.

As the Emperor moved on, the circle in which we were standing was not strictly kept, and after a few minutes I found myself standing a little in front, in the open space round which the circle was formed. The Emperor again accosted me, and was beginning in the same strain, when I ventured to interrupt His Majesty and to tell him that I considered myself justified in calling his attention to the unusual course he had adopted, in indulging, in presence of the Russian Ambassador, in his animadversions on the conduct of England. That His Majesty, if he had, or thought he had, any cause for remonstrance or blame with regard to England, should address himself to me, was not only natural, but would be a course which I should always beg him to take, because free discussion was the best remedy for pent-up feeling. I should answer as best I could, and endeavour to convince His Majesty when I thought him wrong. Or if His Majesty considered it right to complain of the conduct of England to the Russian Ambassador, I had no desire to interfere, provided it was not done in my presence; but what I could not approve, or consider compatible with my own dignity, or that of the Government which I represented, was that complaints respecting England should be addressed to me in the hearing of the Russian Ambassador, and to the Russian Ambassador in my hearing.

Leaving then this official tone, I added that, considering the long and intimate relations which His Majesty had been graciously pleased to permit should exist between himself and me, and knowing, as he did, the personal attachment which I bore him, and the anxiety which I had ever manifested to smooth difficulties and prevent misunderstandings between the two Governments, in doing which I had perhaps exposed myself to the suspicion of being more French than I ought to be, I had not expected to have been addressed, as I had been, in the presence of the Russian Ambassador, or to have heard words addressed to that Ambassador complaining of the sentiments of the English nation.

The Emperor frequently interrupted me, expressing his great regret at what had occurred. He could assure me, His Majesty said, that he had spoken without any bad intention--that he had just read what had occurred in Parliament the night before, and that he had been greatly hurt at the strictures passed upon his conduct; I must recollect further that he had not spoken of the Government, but of those who attacked him. Again, His Majesty begged me to think no more of the matter, repeating the assurance that he had spoken without intention.

In the course of this second conversation the Emperor again asked, but in a very different tone, why England had taken up the question of Savoy which so little regarded her. Had it been Prussia or one of the Continental Powers, His Majesty could have understood it, but not a word of remonstrance had proceeded from any one of them. I replied that I did not think the Emperor could rely on that silence as indicating approbation, but at all events, I said, the position of Her Majesty's Government was very different from that of the other powers. How was it possible, I asked, for Her Majesty's Government to remain silent in presence of the interpellations respecting Savoy which were, night after night, put to them? And if His Majesty enquired why these interpellations were put, I would answer him that, if my judgment was correct, it was not so much on account of the actual plan of annexing Savoy, as on account of the circumstances connected with the whole transaction. They were, in fact, interpellations of mistrust. And how, I asked, could it be otherwise? What could the English people think on its transpiring that in spite of His Majesty's declarations, both before and during the war, that in going to war he meditated no special advantages for France, overtures had positively been made months before, to Sardinia, for the eventual cession of Savoy; why had not His Majesty told us fairly, in commencing this war, that if, by the results of the war, the territory of Sardinia should be greatly augmented, he might be obliged, in deference to public opinion in France, to ask for some territorial advantage? Such a declaration, although it might have rendered the British Government still more anxious to prevent the war, would have hindered all the manifestation of public opinion which is now taking place.

The Emperor seemed to feel the weight of these observations, and he ended the conversation by saying, that if this question of Savoy should go further, he had pledged himself to consult the Great Powers, and that he need hardly add that if their opinion should be unfavourable to his wishes, it would have great weight with him. "It is not likely," said His Majesty, "that I should act against the advice of Europe."

I end, my Lord, as I commenced, in regretting this occurrence. I could have wished that the Emperor had not spoken to me a second time yesterday, and that I had had a little time for reflection. I feel that I spoke to His Majesty under considerable emotion, caused by the tone and manner which he had adopted; but I am certain that not a word escaped me which was not respectful to himself. To have passed the matter over, would, in my judgment, have been a fault, but on the whole I should have preferred conveying impressions to His Majesty through M. Thouvenel. I earnestly trust, however, that Her Majesty's Government will view my conduct in a favourable light.

It is but justice to my Russian colleague to state that nothing could have been in better taste than his remarks in answer to the Emperor's observations to him. I have told General Kisseleff this morning that having had an opportunity to do so, I had expressed to the Emperor the opinion that it would have been better had His Majesty avoided irritating topics concerning England in the presence of another foreign representative. It is not my intention to open my lips on the subject to any one else.

COWLEY.

[Footnote 12: The annexation of Savoy had been debated in the
House of Commons, and Mr Bright had expressed his readiness
that Savoy should rather perish than that England should
interfere in a matter in which she had no concern. He was
sharply censured by Lord John Manners.]

[Footnote 13: Perim had been permanently taken possession of
by Great Britain, in 1857.]

[Footnote 14: See _ante_, p. 310, note 2.]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

CHESHAM PLACE, _9th March 1860_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to submit a despatch which he received in a private letter from Lord Cowley.

The strange scene related in it will remind your Majesty of some scenes already famous in the history of Napoleon I. and Napoleon III.

Lord John Russell requests your Majesty's permission to write a secret despatch in answer, entirely approving the conduct and language of Lord Cowley.

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN'S APPROVAL]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

OSBORNE, _10th March 1860_.

The Queen, in returning Lord Cowley's private letter and secret despatch, agrees with Lord John Russell, that he has deserved praise for his mode of answering the Emperor's Napoleonic address.[15] ...

[Footnote 15: The ratification by the House of Commons of the
Commercial Treaty, and Mr Gladstone's message to the Emperor,
enclosing a copy of his Budget speech, gave the Emperor an
opportunity of making amends to Lord Cowley for his hasty
language.]

_Queen Victoria to Sir Charles Wood._

OSBORNE, _12th March 1860_.

The Queen is sorry to find that Lord Canning does not approve of any of the modes suggested by Sir Charles Wood, for giving the Chiefs security of title and possession. The object appears to the Queen so important as a means of protection against the temptation of our own representatives to seize upon the possessions of these Chiefs at any convenient opportunity--and as a means of giving confidence to those Chiefs that the Queen's Government is not actuated by rapacity--that she must hope Lord Canning will indicate some mode, appearing less objectionable to him, for attaining the same object. The Queen would be glad to have a copy of Lord Canning's letter.

[Pageheading: SWISS CLAIMS]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _25th March 1860_.

The Queen has just seen the Swiss Note, and has returned it to the Foreign Office.[16] With reference to Lord John Russell's letter of this morning, she has only to express her anxiety that her Government should not look upon this question as one of an _optional_ character to take up or not. We have no choice, and the consideration whether what we are doing may be pleasing or displeasing to France cannot be entertained for a moment, although the Queen is grieved to find from Lord Cowley's last letter that he considers the question from that point of view. We are parties to a treaty of guarantee together with other Powers, and have as such a clear and solemn _duty_ to perform. We should therefore openly and avowedly call upon our partners in this treaty and guarantee to consider the note addressed by the Swiss Confederation to us.

The proper course would be to summon the Ministers of the Contracting Powers to the Foreign Office (not excluding the French Ambassador), and to go with them into the matter. This would take it out of the hands of the Emperor and M. de Thouvenel, and make (the Queen is certain of it) a deep impression upon them.

The Queen wishes this letter to be shown to Lord Palmerston and Lord John's other colleagues.

[Footnote 16: The Swiss Government claimed that the districts
of Chablais and Faucigny (being parts of Savoy which had
been handed over to Sardinia by the Treaty of Vienna under a
guarantee for their neutrality) should be given to Switzerland
for the protection of their frontier. The French Emperor
maintained that it was sufficient for him to guarantee the
neutrality of those districts. Speaking on the night of the
26th, Lord John Russell said: "The powers of Europe, if they
wish to maintain peace, must respect each other's limits, and,
above all, restore and not disturb that commercial confidence
which is the result of peace, which tends to peace, and which
ultimately forms the happiness of nations."]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _2nd April 1860_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter and Memorandum.[17] In whatever Lord John might say in the House of Commons, care should be taken not to give the French a handle to make the other Powers believe that there exists an understanding between them and us. It is by making each of them believe in their turn that the others have agreed with France that the Emperor paralyses their action. If he will promise distinctly to give up the neutral territory to Switzerland, that would be an understanding which we might well avow, but the Queen fears Count Persigny with all his anxiety to smooth matters (as he says) will not be able to give this assurance, and consequently if Lord John sent the Commons home with a declaration that matters would be _satisfactorily_ settled, and the Emperor intends to keep the neutral territory after all, it would unnecessarily make them dupes once more, as the Government have from time to time given assurances based on French promises, which were belied by subsequent acts.

Is the Memorandum for the Queen to keep?

The Conference should be here, and on _no_ account at Paris.

[Footnote 17: Describing a conversation between Lord
Palmerston and Persigny, the former suggesting that a
statement should be made by Lord John in the House, in
reference to the securities to be given for the neutrality
and independence of Switzerland, such as would pacify the
Emperor.]

[Pageheading: DEATH OF PRINCE HOHENLOHE]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _25th April 1860_.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I write to you on this paper to-day, as it is our good Alice's birthday--her seventeenth! She is a good, dear, amiable child, and in very good looks just now. Her future is still undecided, she is quite free, and _all_ we wish is a good, kind husband--_no_ brilliant position (which there is not to be got), but a quiet, comfortable position.

Bertie returned last night delighted with his tour,[18] and with our beloved old Coburg, in _spite of snow_. I will tell him to give you an account of it. He made a very favourable impression there. He gives a good account of dear Stockmar too.

Many, many thanks for your dear kind letter of the 20th, with the enclosure from dear Charlotte, whose happy, contented disposition is a great blessing.

I was sure you would grieve for poor, dear, honest Ernest Hohenlohe[19]; Feodore feels it dreadfully, and writes beautifully about it. Thank God! she has every comfort in her second son, Hermann, who--by an arrangement made last year with the eldest and poor Ernest--has the entire management of everything; Charles has a certain income and Weikersheim[20]; while Hermann has Langenburg and the management of everything else; he naturally leaves the Austrian Service.

We are too delighted to hear that you are, D.V., ready to come by the 2nd of June; it will be so great a pleasure, and to dear Mamma too, who is _unberufen_ wonderfully well. She is here again since yesterday, and will stay till the 2nd. Clem was quite astonished at her looks. The poor Queen will be seventy-eight to-morrow. She is very tolerably well.

How well do I remember that speech of Oscar's in the carriage. It certainly took us _all_ in....

I fear I must end for to-day. With Albert's affectionate love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

Bertie was much pleased with little Louise.[21]

[Footnote 18: The Prince of Wales had been spending a week at
Coburg and Gotha, which he had not previously seen.]

[Footnote 19: Prince Ernest died on the 12th of April, and was
succeeded by his second son Hermann.]

[Footnote 20: A small town in Wuertemberg, and part of the
estate of the Princes of Hohenlohe-Langenburg.]

[Footnote 21: Elder child of the Duke of Brabant (now King
Leopold II.).]

[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND NAPLES]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

[_Undated._ ? _26th April 1860._]

The Queen has just received Lord John Russell's letter. She must say that she would consider it the _deepest_ degradation to this country if she was compelled to appear at the Emperor's Congress summoned to Paris, in order to register and put her seal to the acts of spoliation of the Emperor!

Lord Cowley was very strong on the effect which our yielding that point would have on his position at the French Court.

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _30th April 1860_.

The Queen thinks that the main argument is omitted in the draft, viz. that the attempts, such as Sardinia is suspected to contemplate, are morally bad and reprehensible in themselves, besides being politically inexpedient. The Queen would be sorry to see a despatch go forth on this subject, arguing on the ground of expediency alone. She trusts Lord John Russell will find it easy to introduce a passage which would place it on record, that we do attach importance to public justice and morality. When amended, the Queen would like to have a copy of the draft.

[Pageheading: THE DOCTRINES OF 1688]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _30th April 1860_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He is sorry he cannot agree that there would be any moral wrong in assisting to overthrow the Government of the King of the Two Sicilies. The best writers on International Law consider it a merit to overthrow a tyrannical government, and there have been few governments so tyrannical as that of Naples. Of course the King of Sardinia has no right to assist the people of the Two Sicilies unless he was asked by them to do so, as the Prince of Orange was asked by the best men in England to overthrow the tyranny of James II.--an attempt which has received the applause of all our great public writers, and is the origin of our present form of government.[22]

[Footnote 22: See _ante_, 11th January, 1860.]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _30th April 1860_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter, and trusts he will see, upon further reflection, that the case before us is not one in which the Revolution of 1688, and the advent of William III. called to the Throne, can be appealed to as a parallel. The draft warns the Government of Sardinia "_not to seek for new acquisitions_," as the new "_Provinces_ annexed have hardly as yet been thoroughly amalgamated." Now, no public writer nor the International Law will call it morally right, that one state should abet revolution in another, not with the disinterested object of defending a suffering people against tyranny, but in order to extinguish that State and make it "an acquisition" of its own. If William III. had made England a Province of Holland, he would not have received the applause Lord John quotes. The Queen trusts that in appreciation of this distinction, he will introduce some amendment in the sense indicated in her former letter.

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS, _30th April 1860_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he confesses he cannot see anything morally wrong in giving aid to an insurrection in the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily. But he admits that to do so for the sake of making new acquisitions would be criminal, and that he is not justified in imputing this motive to the King of Sardinia. Count Cavour would probably at once disclaim it.

He therefore proposes to alter these words. The despatch went this evening by the usual messenger; but, if your Majesty approves of the alteration, it can be made to-morrow morning by telegraph to Turin.

[Pageheading: INDIAN HONOURS]

_Sir Charles Wood to Queen Victoria._

INDIA OFFICE, _3rd May 1860_.

Sir Charles Wood, with his humble duty, begs to submit for your Majesty's consideration, whether the letters of thanks to those Civil Servants who have not been thought deserving of the honour of C.B. should run in your Majesty's name, or in that of the Government.

Your Majesty desired that thanks for service should be in your Majesty's name, but there will be nearly two hundred of these letters to different officers, and Sir Charles Wood doubted whether it would be right to use your Majesty's name so profusely. He is inclined to think that it would be better to use your Majesty's name only when addressing higher officers. Sir Charles Wood encloses drafts of letters in both ways.

Sir Charles Wood also encloses an address on the occasion of the Thanksgiving in India, delivered by a Hindoo.

_Queen Victoria to Sir Charles Wood._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _4th May 1860_.

The Queen returns these papers. She wishes the thanks to Civil Servants to be given in all cases, where to be given by the Home Government, in her own name. The Bath or Knighthood comes directly from the Sovereign, and so should the thanks; the Civil Servants are the Queen's servants, and not the servants of the Government. The Hindoo address is very striking and gratifying as a symptom.[23] Presuming that Sir Charles does not want the copy back again, the Queen has kept it.

[Footnote 23: The copy of this address does not seem to have
been preserved.]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _8th May 1860_.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--... Really it is too bad! _No_ country, no human being would ever dream of _disturbing_ or _attacking_ France; every one would be glad to see her prosperous; but _she_ must needs disturb every quarter of the Globe and try to make mischief and set every one by the ears; and, of course, it will end some day in a _regular crusade_ against _the universal disturber_ of _the world!_ It is really monstrous!

Dear Mamma returned to Frogmore on Friday, and Alfred left us on Thursday, sailed from Portsmouth on Saturday, but had to stop at Plymouth for some derangement in the machinery till to-day. He was very low at going, though very happy to return to his ship. Now, with Albert's affectionate love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Pageheading: VISIT TO ALDERSHOT]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _15th May 1860_.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Many, many thanks for your very kind letter received on Saturday. We returned yesterday evening from Aldershot, where we spent two very pleasant days with very warm weather. Sunday was a beautiful day and we rode over to Farnham, the Bishop of Winchester's Palace, and it was quite beautiful, the country is so green and sweet--and enjoyable. The warm rain of last week has produced a burst of Spring which is quite beautiful. Yesterday morning it rained when we first went out, but it cleared and became a beautiful day, and we had a pretty field day. Your old Regiment looked extremely well. In the afternoon we saw some very interesting rifle-shooting. The whole Army practises this now most unremittingly, and we saw three different companies of the Guards fire at 300 yards, and so on to 900 yards, and _hit_ the target! They fired in _volleys_. It is very satisfactory, as this precision would be very _telling_ in action. I think you would be interested by it.

I _hope_ you have forgiven my hurried note of Saturday--but I was _so_ anxious at the time. We go to Osborne on the 19th, I am happy to say, till the 31st.

Affairs continue to be very threatening, and keep everybody in suspense.... Ever, dearest Uncle, your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

OSBORNE, _22nd May 1860_.

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I write to you from here, where it is wonderfully beautiful and unusually _hot_ for May--it is _quite_ like July, but the _late_ Spring has brought out everything together in the most wonderful manner. The foliage of many trees is hardly out yet, but there are all the fruit-trees in fullest blossom--the lilacs and peonies out--the thorns only beginning and every wild flower in profusion--the grass splendidly green, and a fragrance about everything which is too delicious; and the birds singing _most_ beautifully. The nightingales were last night singing all round the house....

Affairs are in a most bewildered state. Lord Palmerston is _very stout and right_ about our neighbour. I am glad to be able to _refute most positively_ the report of our _ships_ having _prevented_ the Neapolitans from firing; the _case_ is _quite_ clear, and the French and Neapolitan Governments themselves have spread this falsehood.

The House of Lords have thrown the Bill for the Abolition of the paper Duties[24] _out_ by a very large majority, which is a _very good thing_. It will save us a large amount of revenue.

I must end for to-day. Hoping that these lines will find you quite well, ever your devoted _Daughter_ (I _wrote_ by mistake _but_ will leave, as it _only_ expresses what _my feelings_ are) and Niece,

VICTORIA R.

We have quite a small party on the 1st, with some choral singing.

[Footnote 24: This part of Mr Gladstone's financial scheme had
lost a good deal of its early popularity: it had only passed
the third reading in the Commons by the small majority of
nine, and the Premier had already told the Queen that the
Peers would perform a public service by rejecting it. The
majority against it in the House of Lords was 89.]

[Pageheading: THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND MONEY BILLS]

[Pageheading: COMMITTEE OF THE COMMONS]

_Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria._

94 PICCADILLY, _22nd May 1860_.