Chapter XXIII (3)

With respect to the invitation, the Emperor's account of it to Count Walewski was that he had apologised to the Prince for the bad reception he had given His Royal Highness, and expressed a hope that he might have an opportunity of _doing better_ at Paris, if your Majesty and the Prince would honour him with a visit; and that His Royal Highness had then said, "the Queen hopes to see your Majesty at Windsor, and will be happy to make acquaintance with the Empress." The Emperor, however, had only taken this as a courteous return to his invitation, and not as intended for a positive invitation.

Lord Clarendon told Count Walewski that he believed the matter had passed inversely, and that the Prince had first communicated your Majesty's message.

Be that as it may, Count Walewski said the Emperor will be delighted to avail himself of the Queen's gracious kindness; nothing will give him so much pleasure....

[Pageheading: THE EMPEROR'S VISIT]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon._

BALMORAL, _24th September 1854._

The Queen returns the two letters from Lord Cowley. She is very sorry to see doubts arise as to the correctness of the intelligence about the safe debarkation of our whole expeditionary force in the Crimea, but still clings to the hope of its being true.

Count Walewski's account of the Emperor's version of his conversation with the Prince explains what the Prince suspected at one time himself, that the Emperor had not understood the Prince's remark as conveying a _direct_ invitation, but merely as a general term of civility. What the Prince intended to convey was something between the two, making it clear that he would be well received, and leaving it entirely open to him to come or not according to his own political views and circumstances. This appeared to the Prince the most polite and delicate, preventing all appearance as if a counter-visit for his own at Boulogne was expected. Lest the Emperor should not have rightly understood the Prince, he repeated the wish to see the Emperor in England, and the hope of the Queen to make the Empress's acquaintance also, _more directly_ to Marshal Vaillant, who gave the same answer as the Emperor had done--he hoped we should come to Paris in return.

Matters stand as well as possible with regard to the visit; in the Queen's opinion, the Emperor can come if he likes, and if prevented, is bound to nothing. Should he ask when his visit would be most agreeable to the Queen, the middle of November would be the time.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon._

BALMORAL, _30th September 1854._

The Queen returns the enclosed letters. The French show their usual vivacity in pressing so hard for decision upon what is to be done with Sebastopol when taken.[51] Surely we ought to have taken it first before we can dispose of it, and everything as to the decision about it must depend upon the state in which we receive it, and the opinion of the Military and Naval Commanders after they find themselves in possession of it. The Queen hopes, therefore, that Lord Clarendon will succeed in restraining French impatience as he has often done before.

[Footnote 51: Lord Clarendon had given the Queen the two
reasons for which the French were pressing, in anticipation,
the retention of the Crimea, viz. as affording suitable winter
quarters, and as a guarantee in case of peace negotiations.
On the 7th of September the allied forces had sailed for the
Crimea; on the 21st the Queen learned by telegram that 25,000
English, 25,000 French, and 8,000 Turks had landed safely
without encountering resistance, and begun the march to
Sebastopol. The Queen, with her usual kindly solicitude for
the health and comfort of her Ministers, had summoned Lord
Aberdeen from London to have the benefit of the Scotch air; he
remained at Balmoral from the 27th till the 30th, when he went
to his own house at Haddo. Immediately after his departure, a
telegram arrived from Lord Clarendon announcing the victory of
the Alma.]

[Pageheading: BATTLE OF THE ALMA]

_The Earl of Aberdeen to Queen Victoria._

HADDO HOUSE, _1st October 1854._

Lord Aberdeen presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He had the honour of receiving your Majesty's box this morning at nine o'clock by post; and he now sends a Messenger to Aberdeen, with Despatches received this morning from London, to meet the special conveyance to Balmoral this evening.

Lord Aberdeen humbly presumes to offer his most cordial congratulations to your Majesty on the great intelligence received by telegraph this morning. The account sent by Lord Stratford of the victory on the Alma must be correct; the report mentioned by Mr Colquhoun[52] may possibly be so too. At all events, we may fairly hope that the fall of Sebastopol cannot long be delayed.

Lord Aberdeen has written to Lord Clarendon this morning on the subject of the fortifications of Sebastopol, which although, somewhat embarrassing at the moment, is not attended with any great practical importance.

Lord Aberdeen regrets that the speedy return of the post prevents him from sending your Majesty a copy of his letter, which in substance, however, was to the following effect. Without attaching any undue importance to the decision, he was inclined to adhere to his first proposition of the immediate and entire destruction of the works. He did not see the advantage of doing the thing by halves; while the destruction of the sea defences only might give rise to erroneous impressions and would be of an equivocal character. The fall of Sebastopol would in fact be the conquest of the Crimea, and the Allies might winter there with perfect security, as, by occupying the lines of Perekop,[53] any access to the Crimea would effectually be prevented by land. Lord Aberdeen thought that with a view to peace, and the restitution of the Crimea to Russia, it would be more easy for the Emperor to accept the destruction of the fortifications when accomplished, than to agree to any stipulation having such an object.

On the whole, Lord Aberdeen was inclined to think that if the place should not be at once destroyed, it might be better to preserve it in its present state, until the matter should be further considered. The Allies would always have it in their power to act as they thought best, and the question might in some degree be affected by future events. The great objection to leaving the matter undecided for the present appeared to be from the possibility of differences hereafter between France and England upon the subject. After the astounding proposition made to Lord Raglan by the French Generals when actually embarked and at sea, it would be well to leave nothing in doubt. The Turks, too, might perhaps desire to have a voice in the matter, and might become troublesome....

[Footnote 52: Mr (afterwards Sir) Robert Gilmour Colquhoun
(1803-1870), Agent and Consul-General at Bucharest.]

[Footnote 53: A district on the isthmus of Crimea, guarded by
a wall and a ditch, the name meaning "Cross-ditch." The whole
isthmus is now often called Perekop.]

[Pageheading: INDIAN AFFAIRS]

[Pageheading: INDIA AND RUSSIA]

_The Marquis of Dalhousie to Queen Victoria._

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, _2nd October 1854._

The Governor-General presents his most humble duty to your Majesty, and begs to offer his respectful thanks for the very gracious manner in which your Majesty has been pleased to acknowledge the offer he has made to retain still the Government of India during the ensuing year.

The Governor-General does not affect to say that he makes no sacrifice in so doing. Many things unite to warn him that it is time he were gone: and his family circumstances, in which your Majesty has long shown so gracious an interest, have rendered the prospect of his remaining longer absent from England a source of much anxiety and perplexity to him. But he felt that this was no time for any man, high or low, to leave his post. And as a seven-years' experience must needs have rendered him more capable of immediate usefulness than any other, though a far abler man, without such experience could possibly be, he did not hesitate to offer the continued service which your Majesty might most justly expect, and which he is proud to render cheerfully.

Your Majesty's remark on the absence of any letter from the Governor-General of late would have disquieted him with apprehensions that he had been thought neglectful, but that your Majesty at the same time ascribed the silence to its real cause. Since the announcement of the termination of the Burmese War there has, in truth, been no occurrence which, of itself, seemed worthy of being made the subject of a report to your Majesty. India has been tranquil in all her borders. And although no event could well be more gratifying than this continuous tranquillity was in itself, still the periodical report of peace and quiet on all sides seemed likely to be as uninteresting as the monotonous, though satisfactory, "All's well" of a ring of sentries.

At Christmas the Governor-General anticipated having the honour of narrating to your Majesty the events of a year which he hoped would, before its close, have been fruitful of great results....

Very recently an interesting mission has arrived from the Khan of Kokan, a state to the north of Bokhara, reporting the capture of their fort of Ak Mussid by the Russians.

The fact was known before; but the mission is important from the certainty it imparts to us that all the Turcomans, the people of Kokan, of Khiva, and of Bokhara, all detest as much as they dread the Muscovites, with whose approach they are threatened.

The Khan asks for aid. We can render him but little. The only real bulwark which can be raised for these states of Central Asia--the only real barrier to the progress of Russia which can be set up there--must have their foundations in the Treaty, which may be framed by the Allied Powers after the present war shall have brought the spirit of Russia into temporary subjection.

The war in which your Majesty has engaged with that great Power has not been directly felt in this part of your Majesty's dominions; but its indirect influence is most sensibly apparent.

The notions entertained of Russia, and the estimate formed of her powers, by the nations of India, are exaggerated in the extreme. Although our pride must wince on hearing it, it is an unquestionable fact that the general belief in India at this moment is that Russia gravely menaces the power of England, and will be more than a match for her in the end.

This feeling cannot prudently be disregarded. The Governor-General need hardly say to your Majesty that he believes that any direct attack by Russia on these dominions at the present time is utterly impracticable; and that there is no more risk of an invasion of India by the Emperor Nicholas than of another by Mahmood of Ghuznee. Nevertheless, the uneasy feeling which now prevails among native States and among ourselves, partly of alarm, partly of indefinite expectation, ought to be guarded against; and the means of meeting any difficulties which may arise out of it should be at our command.

Earnestly desirous to contribute every possible aid to your Majesty's arms in the great contest now going on in Europe, the Governor-General has respectfully placed at the disposal of your Majesty's Ministers all the four regiments of Royal Cavalry now serving in India. The Infantry is already hardly adequate for our own necessities: and while the Governor-General will be quite ready to accept and to face any additional responsibilities which he may be called upon to bear, he has felt it to be his duty to state that, beyond the four regiments of Cavalry, European troops cannot safely be spared from India at the present time.

The Governor-General, however, feels that he is not indulging in any vain boast when he ventures to assure your Majesty that, under God's good blessing, these, your Dominions in the East, are at present absolutely safe.... Your Majesty's most obedient, most humble, and devoted Subject and Servant,

DALHOUSIE.

[Pageheading: DEPOSED INDIAN PRINCES]

[Pageheading: MAHARAJAH DHULEEP SINGH]

_Queen Victoria to the Marquis of Dalhousie._

BALMORAL, _2nd October 1854._

As the Queen knows that the East India Company are chiefly guided by Lord Dalhousie's advice with respect to all Indian affairs in public as well as of a more private nature, she thinks that she cannot do better than write to him upon a subject which she _feels_ strongly upon, and which she is sure that Lord Dalhousie will enter into. It is the position of those unfortunate Indian Princes who have, either themselves or their fathers, been for public reasons deposed. Two instances are now before the Queen's eyes upon which she wishes to state her opinion.

The first is old Prince Gholam Mohammed, and his son Prince Feroz Shah. The Queen understands (though she is not sure of the fact) that the old man is here in order to try to obtain his pension continued to his son. This is very natural, and it strikes the Queen to be an arrangement difficult to be justified, in a moral point of view, to give these poor people--who after _all_ were once so mighty--_no_ security beyond their lives. Whilst we remain permanently in possession of their vast Empire, they receive a pension, which is not _even_ continued to their descendants. Would it not be much the best to allow them, instead of a pension, to hold, perhaps under the Government, a property, which would enable them and their descendants to live respectably, maintaining a certain rank and position? The Queen believes that Lord Dalhousie himself suggested this principle in the case of the Ameers of Scinde.

Nothing is more painful for _any_ one than the thought that their children and grandchildren have no future, and may become absolutely beggars. How much more _dreadful_ must this be to proud people, who, like Prince Gholam, are the sons and grandsons of great Princes like Hyder Ali and Tippoo Sahib! Besides it strikes the Queen that the more kindly we treat Indian Princes, whom _we_ have _conquered_, and the more consideration we show for their birth and former grandeur, the more we shall attach Indian Princes and Governments to us, and the more ready will they be to come under our rule.

The second instance is that of the young Maharajah Dhuleep Singh (and the Queen must here observe that the favourable opinion she expressed of him, in her last letter to Lord Dalhousie, has only been confirmed and strengthened by closer acquaintance). This young Prince has the _strongest_ claims upon our generosity and sympathy; deposed, for _no_ fault of his, when a little boy of ten years old, he is as innocent as any private individual of the misdeeds which compelled us to depose him, and take possession of his territories. He has besides since become a Christian, whereby he is for ever cut off from his own people. His case therefore appears to the Queen still stronger than the _former_ one, as he was not even a conquered enemy, but merely powerless in the hands of the Sikh soldiery.

There is something too painful in the idea of a young deposed Sovereign, once so powerful, receiving a pension, and having _no_ security that his children and descendants, and these moreover Christians, should have any home or position.

The Queen hears that Lord Dalhousie himself would wish and advise his pension to be exchanged for a property on which the Maharajah might live, which he might improve (giving thereby a most valuable example) and transmit some day to his descendants, should he have any; she hopes therefore that this may be so settled, and that he may, on attaining the age of eighteen, have a comfortable and fitting position worthy his high rank.

Where such a property might be must be of course left to Lord Dalhousie to decide, but the Queen hopes that Lord Dalhousie will give it his serious attention.

[Pageheading: THE AUSTRIAN PROPOSALS]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon._

BALMORAL, _10th October 1854._

The Queen has received Lord Clarendon's letters of the 8th.[54] She cannot consider it wise to reject the Austrian proposals _altogether_, although we may usefully amend them. The success in the Crimea ought to be followed up by strengthening the alliance of the European powers, else it may turn out a sterile victory, and the English blood will have flowed in vain; for supposing even the whole Crimea to fall into our hands, it is not likely that the war will be concluded on that account. How are England and France to bring it to a termination single-handed? Our Army in the Crimea is the only one we have....

It is true that the Austrian proposal promises little performance on her part, yet the stipulation by Treaty that she will never let the Russians pass the Pruth again is a positive advantage to us; and the other, that a defensive and offensive alliance with us is to follow the breaking out of the war by Russia against Austria, although being entirely at _our_ expense, yet realises the chief condition which will make Austria hesitate less to bring it to a war with Russia. She always (and not without reason) dreaded to have to fight Russia single-handed, and the allied armies in the Crimea could not assist her. What reason could Austria put forward and justify to Prussia and Germany, for going to war at this moment? To obtain the evacuation of the Principalities was a tangible one, indeed the same _we_ put forward when _we_ declared war; but this is now obtained.

We must certainly not allow our policy to be mixed up with the miserable German squabbles, but we must acknowledge that Austria, as a member of the Confederation, is not and cannot be independent of them.

The Queen would accordingly advise a temperate consideration of the Austrian proposals and an amendment of them in those points which seem to require them, and which Lord Clarendon clearly points out in his letter, and the avoidance of anything which could weaken the _accord Europeen_.[55]

The Emperor Napoleon's answer to Lord Cowley with reference to this visit to England renders it probable to the Queen that he was not anxious to have the general invitation changed into a special one, _obliging_ him to come or to refuse. The answer is almost a refusal now, and has not improved our position. The Queen would wish that no anxiety should be shown to obtain the visit, now that it is quite clear to the Emperor that he will be _le bienvenu_ at any time. His reception here ought to be a boon to him and not a boon to us.

The Queen fully enters into the feelings of exultation and joy at the glorious victory of the Alma, but this is somewhat damped by the sad loss we have sustained, and the thought of the many bereaved families of all classes who are in mourning for those near and dear to them.

[Footnote 54: In one of which, in reference to Austria's
desire for an offensive and defensive treaty with Great
Britain, Lord Clarendon had described the Austrian terms as
irritating, and the discussion of them a mere waste of time.]

[Footnote 55: The Cabinet, at its meeting on the 20th, decided
to meet the Austrian proposals in the most conciliatory manner
possible.]

[Pageheading: THE ALMA]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

HULL, _13th October 1854._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Already far away from my loved beautiful Highlands and Mountains, I find a few minutes to write and thank you for your kind letter of the 2nd, with such lively and glowing descriptions of such glorious and beautiful scenery, which I hope and trust to see _some day_. Still, with all its beauties, I would not exchange it for our northern beauties, which really they are--for a _lovelier_ country with a _more beautiful_ combination of wood and mountain, and river, and cultivation with the greatest wildness, at the same time close at hand, cannot, I am sure, be seen; Stockmar is in the greatest admiration of it. We left it yesterday morning, slept at Holyrood last night, and came here this evening; the good people of this large port, having since two years entreated us to come here. We shall reach Windsor to-morrow.

We are, and indeed the whole country is, _entirely_ engrossed with one idea, one _anxious_ thought--the _Crimea_. We have received all the _most_ interesting and _gratifying_ details of the _splendid_ and decisive victory of the Alma; alas! it was a bloody one. Our loss was a heavy one--many have fallen and many are wounded, but my noble Troops behaved with a _courage_ and _desperation_ which was beautiful to behold. The Russians expected their position would hold out three weeks; their loss was immense--the whole garrison of Sebastopol was out. Since that, the Army has performed a wonderful march to Balaklava, and the bombardment of Sebastopol has begun. Lord Raglan's behaviour was worthy of the old Duke's--such coolness in the midst of the hottest fire. We have had all the details from young Burghersh[56] (a remarkably nice young man), one of Lord Raglan's Aides-de-camp whom he sent home with the Despatches, who was in the midst of it all. I feel so _proud_ of my dear noble Troops, who, they say, bear their privations, and the sad disease which still haunts them, with such courage and good humour.

George did enormously well, and was not touched. Now with Albert's love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 56: Francis, Lord Burghersh, afterwards twelfth Earl
of Westmorland (1825-1891).]

[Pageheading: FRANCE AND AUSTRIA]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _5th November 1854._

The Queen has received Lord Clarendon's letter referring to the new Draft of a Treaty with Austria proposed by the French Government, and has since attentively perused the Treaty itself.[57] Vague and inconclusive as it is as to _co-operation_ (which is the main object of our desire), it is a step in advance, and has the advantage of assuring Austria of our alliance should the war between her and Russia break out. The Queen regrets to find a Clause omitted which stood in the former French project (rejected by us about three weeks ago), stipulating that Austria was to prevent the re-entry of Russia into the Principalities. Although she would of her own accord have to do this, a treaty obligation towards the _belligerents_ to that effect would have made a considerable inroad into her position as a _neutral_ power, and secured a co-operation in the war--_ad hoc_ at least. Austria ought to be told, in the Queen's opinion, that this project of treaty contains almost nothing; and that her signing it _at once_ would give a moral pledge of her sincerity towards the Western Powers, who have to pay with the lives of their best troops every day that Austria hesitates to do what in the end she must find it in her own interest to do.

As to M. Olozaga's proposal,[58] the Queen thinks it ought to be treated like all the former ones, viz. met with the remark that we cannot discuss eventualities implying the dethronement of a Sovereign with whom we are on a footing of amity.

[Footnote 57: Lord Clarendon wrote that he and Lord John
Russell approved of the treaty, but that Lord Aberdeen thought
that Austria would not accept it; while Lord Palmerston felt
confident that Austria, even if her co-operation were not now
secured, would at least not lend her support to the King of
Prussia's scheme.

At this date only partial and misleading accounts had arrived
of the battle of Balaklava, and it was believed that four
English (not Turkish) redoubts had been taken; and, while the
disastrous charge of the Light Brigade had been announced, the
success of the heavy cavalry was not yet known. Anxiety began
accordingly to be felt at home as to the adequacy of the
allied forces to encounter the Russian army, augmented as
it now was by the troops which had recently evacuated the
Principalities. Accordingly fresh efforts were being made to
engage Austria in effectual alliance with the Western Powers.]

[Footnote 58: The document containing this proposal does
not seem to have been preserved among the papers. It was not
impossibly a scheme for betrothing King Pedro to the infant
Princess of the Asturias, thereby uniting the two Crowns, and
bringing about the dethronement of Queen Isabella.]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Clarendon._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _9th November 1854._

The Queen returns the letters from Lord Cowley and Count Walewski.[59] No consideration on earth ought to stand in the way of our sending what ships we can lay hold of to transport French reinforcements to the Crimea, as the safety of our Army and the honour of the Country are at stake. The Queen is ready to give her own yacht for a transport which could carry 1,000 men. Every account received convinces the Queen more and more that numbers alone can ensure success in this instance, and that without them we are running _serious_ risks.

[Footnote 59: The Count wrote that France was ready to send
20,000 men to the Crimea, if England could furnish transports.
Lord Clarendon added: "We have not a single available steamer,
as all must be left in the Baltic until the ice sets in, and
the stores, ammunition, and clothing for the Army are going
out in sailing vessels."]

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _14th November 1854._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--I am quite shocked to find that I missed writing my letter to-day--but really _la tete me tourne_. I am so bewildered and excited, and my mind so entirely taken up by the news from the Crimea, that I really forget, and what is worse, I get so confused about everything that I am a very unfit correspondent. My whole soul and heart are in the Crimea. The conduct of our _dear noble_ Troops is _beyond praise_; it is quite heroic, and really I feel a pride to have _such Troops_, which is only equalled by my grief for their sufferings. We now know that there has been a pitched battle on the 6th, in which we have been victorious over much greater numbers, but with great loss on both sides--the greatest on the Russian. But we know _nothing_ more, and now we must live in a suspense which is indeed dreadful. Then to think of the numbers of families who are living in _such_ anxiety! It is terrible to think of all the wretched wives and mothers who are awaiting the fate of those nearest and dearest to them! In short, it is a time which requires courage and patience to bear as one ought.

Many thanks, dearest Uncle, for your kind letter of the 11th, which I received on Saturday. The Brabants will soon leave you; I shall write to Leo to-morrow or next day, _quand je pourrais un peu rassembler mes idees_. I must now conclude, dearest Uncle. With Albert's affectionate love, ever your devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Pageheading: INKERMAN]

_Queen Victoria to Lord Raglan._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _18th November 1854._

The Queen has received with pride and joy the telegraphic news of the glorious, but alas! bloody victory of the 5th.[60] These feelings of pride and satisfaction are, however, painfully alloyed by the grievous news of the loss of so many Generals, and in particular Sir George Cathcart--who was so distinguished and excellent an officer.[61]

We are most thankful that Lord Raglan's valuable life has been spared; and the Queen trusts that he will not expose himself more than is absolutely necessary.

The Queen cannot sufficiently express her high sense of the great services he has rendered and is rendering to her and the country, by the very able manner in which he has led the bravest troops that ever fought, and which it is a pride to her to be able to call her own. To mark the Queen's feelings of approbation she wishes to confer on Lord Raglan the Baton of Field-Marshal. It affords her the sincerest gratification to confer it on one who has so nobly earned the highest rank in the Army, which he so long served in under the immortal hero, who she laments could not witness the success of a friend he so greatly esteemed.

Both the Prince and Queen are anxious to express to Lord Raglan their unbounded admiration of the heroic conduct of the Army, and their sincere sympathy in their sufferings and privations so nobly borne.

The Queen thanks Lord Raglan for his kind letter of the 28th ultimo.

[Footnote 60: The English loss at the battle of Inkerman was
over 2,500 killed and wounded; the French lost 1,800. The
loss of the enemy was doubtful, but the Russian estimate (much
smaller than our own) was about 12,000 killed, wounded, and
prisoners. The Grand Dukes Nicholas and Michael both fought in
the battle.]

[Footnote 61: Besides Sir George Cathcart, Brigadier-Generals
Strangways and Goldie were killed. Sir George Brown was shot
through the arm, Major-Generals Bentinck and Codrington, and
Brigadier-General Adams were all severely wounded, but not so
seriously. Sir de Lacy Evans a few days earlier, being then
in shattered health, had had a fall from his horse, and was
absent from the battle.]

[Pageheading: LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S PROPOSAL]

_The Earl of Aberdeen to Queen Victoria._

LONDON, _23rd November 1854._

Lord Aberdeen presents his most humble duty to your Majesty. He regrets, at a moment of such public interest and importance, to trouble your Majesty with domestic difficulties; but he thinks it his duty to lay before your Majesty the enclosed correspondence without delay.[62] Lord Aberdeen has for some time past expected a proposition of this kind, and it is impossible not to see that it may be attended with very serious consequences. At first Lord Aberdeen was in doubt whether the proposition was made by Lord J. Russell in concert with Lord Palmerston; but this appears not to be the case. Much will therefore depend on the decision of Lord Palmerston. Should he join with Lord John, matters will probably be pushed to extremity; but should he decline, Lord Aberdeen does not think that Lord John will venture to act alone.

[Footnote 62: Lord John Russell urged, in this correspondence,
that Lord Palmerston should supersede the Duke of Newcastle at
the War Office.]

[Pageheading: MAHARAJAH DHULEEP SINGH]

_Queen Victoria to the Marquis of Dalhousie._

_24th November 1854._

The Queen thanks Lord Dalhousie for his long and most interesting and satisfactory letter of the 2nd of October.

It is peculiarly gratifying to hear of such quiet and prosperity in her vast Indian dominions, in which the Queen ever takes the liveliest interest, and at the present moment of intense anxiety, when England's best and noblest blood is being profusely shed to resist the encroaching spirit of Russia. The heroism of our noble Troops in the midst of herculean difficulties and great privations is unequalled, and will fill Lord Dalhousie's loyal and patriotic heart with pride and admiration. Though entirely concurring in his opinion that Russia can undertake no invasion of India, her spirit of encroachment on the north frontier must be carefully watched and, if possible, put a stop to, when peace is made.

The progress of the railroad will make an immense difference in India, and tend more than anything else to bring about civilisation, and will in the end facilitate the spread of Christianity, which hitherto has made but very slow progress.

The Queen was already aware of the idea formerly entertained by the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh of marrying the young Princess of Coorg.[63] Agreeing as she does with Lord Dalhousie in the wisdom of advising the young man to pause before he makes his choice of a wife, she thinks such a marriage between these two most interesting young Christians most desirable; indeed, as Lord Dalhousie himself observes, the difficulty of any other marriage for either must be great. The young people have met and were pleased with each other, so that the Queen hopes that their union will, in the course of time, come to pass. Her little god-daughter has been here lately, and though still childish for her age (she is nearly fourteen) is pretty, lively, intelligent, and going on satisfactorily in her education.

Of the young Maharajah, who has now been twice our guest, we can only speak in terms of praise. He promises to be a bright example to all Indian Princes, for he is thoroughly good and amiable, and most anxious to improve himself.

[Footnote 63: A few years earlier, while still holding his
ancestral creed, Dhuleep Singh, had made overtures to the
ex-Rajah of Coorg with a view to his betrothal to the eldest
daughter of the latter; but at that time the matter was
dropped. After becoming a Christian, and having also heard of
the baptism of the Princess of Coorg, the Maharajah renewed
his proposal, which, however, was not eventually accepted. The
Princess married an English officer, and died in 1864, aged
twenty-four.]

[Pageheading: BATTLE OF INKERMAN]

_Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar[64] to Queen Victoria._

CAMP BEFORE SEBASTOPOL, _28th November 1854._

MADAM,--Your Majesty's very kind letter reached me by the last mail. I avail myself of your permission to write to you again, although there is not much to say since I last wrote to Prince Albert on the 7th or 8th of this month. I wrote to him soon after the battle of Inkerman, when I was still under the excitement of that fearful scene, and I am afraid that I made use of expressions that I was afterwards sorry that I had done. I believe I made some reflections on our Commanders, which are at all times wrong. By this time your Majesty will, of course, be in possession of all the details of that fearful day, on which our loss was so very great.[65] I made a mistake in stating the number of dead in the Grenadiers; it was much larger than I stated. I think we must have suffered more than any other Corps, for, on the following day, when the roll was called, two hundred and twenty-five men were absent; of these one hundred and one were killed, and the rest wounded. There cannot be any doubt that we allowed ourselves to be surprised, for the first notice we had of the Russians was receiving their heavy shot in the camp of the 2nd Division. Nearly all their tents were torn by round shot. It is even said that a shell lodged in an officer's portmanteau, burst, and, of course, scattered all his goods to the winds. Experience has made us wise, or rather Lord Raglan wise, for since that day the French and ourselves have been busy in entrenching our right; it is now so strong that no enemy can attack us there with the slightest chance of success; it is only a pity it was not done before. The Turks were chiefly employed making these redoubts, which is in fact the only thing they have done except burying the dead Russians. Never shall I forget the sight of the dead and dying Russians on the field. Some of these poor wretches had to lie on the field for at least sixty hours before they were removed to the hospital tents; the majority of course died. I am afraid this is one of the necessities of war, for we had to remove our own people first. I went round the hospitals next morning. It was a horrid sight to see the bodies of the men who had died during the night stretched before the tents, and to see the heaps of arms and legs, with the trousers and boots still on, that had been cut off by the surgeons.

The Russians were so near that most of the officers had to use their swords and revolvers. Many single acts of daring took place; among others, Colonel Percy,[66] of our Regiment, dashed in front of his Company, sword in hand, into a dense body of Russians who were in a battery. I was not in the thick of it, but was engaged with an outlying picquet on the left of the attack. George was in the very thick of it, and, not seeing me, kept asking some of our men where I was. They did not know. He tells me that he thought for a long time I was killed, and even fancied that he had seen me lying on the ground; it turned out later to have been poor Colonel Dawson's[67] body which he mistook for me.

On the 14th we had a terrible storm, such a one as, fortunately for mankind, does not happen but very rarely. All our tents of course were blown down, and we passed the day very uncomfortably; but at sea it was terrible. At Balaklava alone more than two hundred and sixty souls perished, and eleven ships went down. George will have been able to give you a perfect account of it, for, for many hours, the _Retribution_ was in imminent danger. I went a few days after the storm to see him on board.[68] ... He had a little fever or ague on him, but was otherwise well. He has now gone to Constantinople....

May I beg of your Majesty to remember me kindly to Prince Albert and the Duchess of Kent. I have the honour, etc.

EDWARD OF SAXE-WEIMAR.

[Footnote 64: Son of Duke Charles Bernard and Duchess Ida, the
latter being a Princess of Saxe-Meiningen and sister to Queen
Adelaide. The Prince was at this time Lieut.-Colonel and
A.D.C. to Lord Raglan. He was afterwards A.D.C. to the Queen
and ultimately Commander of the Forces in Ireland. He died in
1902.]

[Footnote 65: See _ante_, 18th November, 1854, note 60.]

[Footnote 66: Colonel Henry Hugh Manvers Percy, 1817-1877,
whose father afterwards became the fifth Duke of
Northumberland. The Legion of Honour, the Medjidie, and the
V.C. were all subsequently conferred on him.]

[Footnote 67: Hon. Thomas Vesey Dawson, brother of the third
Lord Cremorne (created Earl of Dartrey).]

[Footnote 68: In this terrible hurricane the _Prince_, a
new and magnificent steamer, with a cargo of the value of
L500,000, including powder, shot and shell, beds, blankets,
warm clothing for the troops, and medical stores for the
hospitals, was lost; six men only of a crew of one hundred and
fifty were saved; but the soldiers of the Forty-sixth, whom
she was conveying to Balaklava, had happily been landed.
Thirty of our transports, as well as the French warship _Henri
IV._, were wrecked. A thousand men were lost, and many more
escaped drowning, only to fall into the hands of the
Cossacks and be carried to Sebastopol. One solitary source
of consolation could be found in the circumstance that the
tempest did not occur at an earlier period, when six hundred
vessels, heavily laden and dangerously crowded together, were
making their way from Varna to Old Fort.]

[Pageheading: THE CRIMEAN MEDAL]

_Queen Victoria to the Duke of Newcastle._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _30th November 1854._

The Queen thinks that no time should be lost in announcing the intention of the Queen to confer a _medal_ on all those who have been engaged in the arduous and brilliant campaign in the Crimea.

The medal should have the word "_Crimea_" on it, with an appropriate device (for which it would be well to lose no time in having a design made) and _clasps_--like to the Peninsular Medal, with the names _Alma_ and _Inkerman_ inscribed on them, according to who had been in one or both battles. _Sebastopol_, should it fall, or any other name of a battle which Providence may permit our brave troops to gain, can be inscribed on other clasps hereafter to be added. The names _Alma_ and _Inkerman_ should likewise be borne on the colours of all the regiments who have been engaged in these bloody and glorious actions.

The Queen is sure that nothing will gratify and encourage our noble troops more than the knowledge that this is to be done.

We have just had two hours' most interesting conversation with General Bentinck,[69] whose sound good sense and energy make us deeply regret that he is not now on the spot; he is, however, ready to go out again next year, as Lord Raglan wishes to give him a Division. We hope that, after two or three months' rest, he may be able to go out again.

[Footnote 69: General (afterwards Sir Henry) Bentinck had been
wounded at Inkerman; he returned to the Crimea to command a
Division.]

[Pageheading: LORD JOHN RUSSELL]

_The Earl of Aberdeen to Queen Victoria._

LONDON, _7th December 1854._

Lord Aberdeen presents his humble duty to your Majesty. He would have been desirous of personally submitting to your Majesty the result of the meeting of the Cabinet last night; but he was apprehensive that his sudden journey to Windsor Castle this morning would give rise to speculations and conjectures which, in the present state of the Ministry, it is as well to avoid.

Lord Aberdeen thinks he may venture to assure your Majesty that the correspondence recently circulated is regarded by all the Members of the Cabinet precisely in the same light; and that the propositions of Lord John Russell are considered by all as quite untenable. Lord Palmerston forms no exception; and, whatever may be his views in future, it is clear that at present he contemplates no changes in the Government. Lord John was himself fully aware of this unanimity, and remained entirely silent with respect to his former suggestions. He dwelt in general terms on the absence of vigour in the prosecution of the war, and stated his conviction that the same course would be observed in future. He referred to his position in the House of Commons with much bitterness, and declared that he would never pass such another Session of Parliament as the last. He attributed the frequent defeats of the Government in the House of Commons to the Reform Bill having been withdrawn, by which it was shown that hostile attacks might be made with impunity.

It was obvious, however, that the drift of his observations tended to the substitution of himself as the Head of the Government rather than to any change of Departments; and this he did not deny, when Lord Aberdeen pointed out the inference to be drawn from his remarks.

Finally, Lord John said that he had quite made up his mind. He was ready to continue in office during the short Session before Christmas, and to defend all that had been done; but that he was determined to retire after Christmas. An observation being made that it would be unconstitutional to go into Parliament with such a determination, he replied that, if such was the opinion, he would request Lord Aberdeen to convey his resignation to-morrow morning to your Majesty, which, at all events, would be perfectly constitutional.

Lord Aberdeen feels it to be his duty to state to your Majesty that, whatever may be the real cause, Lord John has made up his mind to act in the manner he has announced.

In this situation it is Lord Aberdeen's desire to come to your Majesty's assistance by any means in his power. Lord John's defection will be a great blow, from which it is very doubtful if the Government could recover; but Lord Aberdeen will come to no conclusion or form any decided opinion until he shall have had the honour of seeing your Majesty.

[Pageheading: CABINET DISSENSIONS]

_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _9th December 1854._

Lord Aberdeen arrived yesterday evening, leaving the Cabinet sitting, revising the Speech from the Throne.[70] He had come to no decision. Sir James Graham and Mr Gladstone had been anxious that he should accept Lord John's resignation at once. He himself felt reluctant to do anything which might be considered harsh towards Lord John, and might make him a martyr hereafter. There was no doubt, however, that they could not go on with Lord John. The universal feeling of the Cabinet seemed to be one of indignation ... at Lord John's conduct. Nobody had expressed himself stronger about it than Lord Lansdowne to Lord Clarendon, feeling it, as he said, "quite a necessity to speak out." The Chancellor said he owed his political allegiance to Lord John as well as his office; but as a man of honour he could not go with him. Lord Granville feels the same. Lord Palmerston had written a long and very able letter to Lord John, proving the impossibility of joining the offices of Secretary at War and Secretary of State for War. Lord John had now, however, dropped his proposal altogether, and made it quite clear that it was Lord Aberdeen he wished to have removed. He said to Lord Palmerston: "When the Cabinet was formed, I always understood that Lord Aberdeen would soon give me up my old place; it has now lasted more than two years, and he seemed to get enamoured with office, and I could not meet the House of Commons in the position I was in last Session."

[Footnote 70: Parliament was to meet on the 12th, chiefly for
the purpose of passing a Foreign Enlistment Bill, authorising
the immediate enlistment of 15,000 (afterwards reduced to
10,000) foreigners, to be drilled in this country.]

In answer to Lord Palmerston's enquiry what he would do, and how he could expose the Country to such fearful risks at such a moment, he said that he would support the Government out of office. "You will support it at the head of a very virulent Opposition," was Lord Palmerston's reply; "and when you have succeeded in overthrowing the Government, which has difficulty enough to hold its ground even with your assistance, what will you say to the Country? Will you say: 'Here I am. I have triumphed, and have displaced, in the midst of most hazardous operations, all the ablest men the Country has produced; but I shall take their place with Mr Vernon Smith, Lord Seymour, Lord Minto, and others....'"

Sir Charles Wood is the only person who says it is all nothing, and he knows Lord John, and it is sure to blow over.

Lord Aberdeen said it is come to a point where this is no longer possible, as he laid his ground not only on the position that the war had been badly conducted, but that it _would_ be so for the future.

At the Cabinet yesterday a significant incident occurred: Lord John asked what should become of Reform. Lord Aberdeen's answer was, that it had been set aside on account of the war, and that as the war was now raging at its height, it could not be brought on again. Later, when they came to the passage about Education, Lord John made an alteration in the Draft, adding something about strengthening the institutions of the Country. Lord Palmerston started up and asked: "Does that mean Reform?" Lord John answered: "It might or might not." "Well, then," said Lord Palmerston, with a heat of manner which struck the whole Cabinet, and was hardly justified by the occasion, "I wish it to be understood that I protest against any direct or indirect attempt to bring forward the Reform question again!" Lord John, nettled, muttered to himself, but loud enough to be heard by everybody: "Then I shall bring forward the Reform Bill at once."

It is evident to me that after this a junction between Lord Palmerston and Lord John is impossible, and that it must have been Lord Palmerston's object to make this clear to the Cabinet. Lord Aberdeen has declared that he is quite willing to yield his post to Lord John--but that it would not suffice to have got a head--that there must be some Members also, and where are they to be found? He is certain that not one of the present Cabinet could now serve under Lord John. An attempt to solve the question how the present Government is to be maintained, naturally leads everybody to the same conclusion: that Lord Palmerston must be substituted for Lord John as the Leader of the House of Commons. Disagreeable as this must be ... to Lord Aberdeen, and dangerous as the experiment may turn out, we agreed with Lord Aberdeen that he should make the offer to him with the Queen's consent. An alternative proposed by Lord Clarendon, that Lord Aberdeen should ask Lord John what he advised him to do under the circumstances, was strongly condemned by me, as depriving Lord Aberdeen of all the advantage of the initiative with Lord Palmerston. Lord Aberdeen states his great difficulty to be not only the long antecedent and mutual opposition between him and Lord Palmerston, but also the fact that Lord Palmerston loved war for war's sake, and he peace for peace' sake.... He consoled himself, however, at last by the reflection that Lord Palmerston was not worse than Lord John in that respect, and, on the other hand, gave greater weight to the consideration of what was practicable. It remains open for the present whether Lord John is to act as the organ for the Government during the short Session, and resign afterwards, or to resign now.

ALBERT.

[Pageheading: LORD ROKEBY]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Hardinge._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _10th December 1854._

The Queen is glad to hear of Lord Rokeby's readiness to go out, as she is sure that he will prove himself an efficient officer in command of that noble Brigade of Guards.[71]

The Queen must repeat again her opinion relative to General Bentinck. She thinks that he ought to go out again, and that, if a division were offered to him, he would not hesitate (when he has recruited his health) to go out. For the sake of example it would be most desirable, for there evidently is an inclination to ask for leave to go home, which would be very detrimental to the Army.

[Footnote 71: Lord Rokeby had on the previous evening been
offered and had accepted the command.]

[Pageheading: LORD JOHN RUSSELL]

_The Earl of Aberdeen to Queen Victoria._

LONDON, _16th December 1854._

Lord Aberdeen presents his humble duty to your Majesty. The Cabinet met to-day, and discussed various measures, with a view to their introduction into Parliament during the course of the ensuing Session. In this discussion Lord John Russell took an active part, and must have greatly astonished his colleagues, after their knowledge of all that had recently passed. Lord Aberdeen had been previously made aware, although not by himself, of the change which had taken place in Lord John's intentions. After the meeting of the Cabinet, Lord John came to Lord Aberdeen, and spoke of the affair of Mr Kennedy,[72] but did not seem disposed to advert to any other subject. Lord Aberdeen therefore took an opportunity of referring to the correspondence which had taken place, and the notice which had been given by Lord John. Without any embarrassment, or apparent sense of inconsistency, he at once admitted that he had changed his intention, and attributed it chiefly to a conversation yesterday with Lord Panmure, who, although a great military reformer, had convinced him that the present was not a fitting time for his proposed changes.

Lord Aberdeen had not seen any member of the Cabinet this evening since the meeting terminated, and does not know how they may be affected by this change. Some, he feels sure, will be disappointed; but, on the whole, he feels disposed to be well satisfied. It is true that there can be no security for a single week; and it is impossible to escape from a sense of self-degradation by submitting to such an unprecedented state of relations amongst colleagues; but the scandal of a rupture would be so great, and the evils which might ensue so incalculable, that Lord Aberdeen is sincerely convinced it will be most advantageous for your Majesty's service, and for the public, to endeavour, by a conciliatory and prudent course of conduct, to preserve tranquillity and union as long as possible. This does not exclude the necessity of firmness; and in the present case Lord Aberdeen has yielded nothing whatever, but he has received Lord John's change without resentment or displeasure.

[Footnote 72: Mr Kennedy (who was remotely connected by
marriage with Lord John) had been removed by Mr Gladstone from
an office he held. Lord John took it up as a family matter.]

[Pageheading: THE SCUTARI HOSPITAL]

_The Duke of Newcastle to Queen Victoria._

WAR DEPARTMENT, _22nd December 1854._

... The Duke of Newcastle assures your Majesty that the condition of the Hospital at Scutari, and the entire want of all method and arrangement in everything which concerns the comfort of the Army, are subjects of constant and most painful anxiety to him, and he wishes most earnestly that he could see his way clearly to an early and complete remedy.[73]

Nothing can be more just than are all your Majesty's comments upon the state of facts exhibited by these letters, and the Duke of Newcastle has repeatedly, during the last two months, written in the strongest terms respecting them--but hitherto without avail, and with little other result than a denial of charges, the truth of which must now be considered to be substantiated.