THE DOLLY'S BRAE AFFAIR.
February 19th.—Stanley brought on the Dolly's Braeaffair last night in a long, clever, and artful speech, delivered in his best style. But it was the speech of a clevernisi priusadvocate, and consisted principally of an ingenious dissection of Berwick's report and the evidence, and a bitter attack upon him. The useless and unmeaning character of this display was very apparent when he announced his intention of doing nothing, and asking no opinion of the House. Clarendon rose after him. He made a very good case, his points told remarkably well, and, on the whole, he acquitted himself successfully, and to the satisfaction of his friends; but, coming after Stanley's practised and brilliant declamation, his style appeared tame and feeble. It was easy to see that he was no debater, and that his parliamentary inexperience diminished his force and efficacy. For a little while I was in great alarm for him, and thought he was going to break down; but he recovered, and got through his speech very well. If he had had more artistic power, he would have made his excellent materials much more effective than they were. In such hands as Stanley's they would have been crushing; they would have been very powerful if Lord Lansdowne had had them; but as it was, it was well enough. There was no personality introduced into the debate; the rival speeches were very civil and complimentary to each other; and Roden, throughout his dull and inaudible harangue, called Clarendon his noble friend, to which Clarendon of course responded in his short second speech. Before it began Stanley and Clarendon rushed to each other across the House, and shook hands very cordially, like a couple of boxers before setting to.
February 20th.—Clarendon called on me yesterday, very happy at his success the night before. There is a pretty general opinion that he made out a very good case, and that Stanley's was a failure. The latter made one or two great mistakes, and was detected in one very discreditable attempt. He quoted from an Act of Parliament, reading an extract from it, but stopping short at that part of the clause which would have upset his own argument. By a great piece of good luck, the Chancellor Brady had anticipated the possibilityof this Act being alluded to, and had sent it over to Clarendon, pointing out this clause, and Clarendon only received it two hours before the debate came on.
Clarendon told me he expected the Encumbered Estates Act would prove the regeneration of Ireland, and that this measure was entirely done by himself. When he was here last year he saw Peel, who said he would give up his own scheme if Clarendon could accomplish something of this kind. Clarendon spoke to John Russell about it, who said legal reforms were impossible; the lawyers never would carry them out. Clarendon replied, 'Only lend me your Solicitor-General, and I will do it all.' Romilly went over to Dublin, the Chancellor was cajoled, the Irish Attorney-and Solicitor-General were frightened into acquiescence, and Romilly drew the Bill with their concurrence, which was passed last Session, and is now working with extraordinary effect. The Lord-Lieutenancy is to be abolished on January 1, 1851, and the Bill to be brought in this Session. Clarendon will then be Secretary of State for Ireland.
We had some talk about our foreign affairs, especially Greece, of which he had himself only heard a little. I had heard that Palmerston had been making some fresh proposal to the Cabinet, at which they had kicked, and I now learned what it was. So little disposed is he, notwithstanding all the feelings and opinions that have been manifested, to recede, that he proposed that instructions should be sent to Wyse to insist that the French Minister at Athens (or agent of thebons offices, whoever he may be) should be obliged to require of the Greek Government an immediate compliance with the whole of our demands. This the Cabinet refused to do, but Lord Lansdowne owned to Clarendon that he was by no means sure that they were apprised of all the instructions that had been sent, or that this requisition might not have gone out, though the Cabinet had refused its consent to it. Clarendon told Lord Lansdowne that he hoped he was not insensible to the state of public opinion on this matter, and he said he was fully aware of it.
SIR ROBERT PEEL ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
February 22nd.—On Wednesday, as I was crossing the Park, I fell in with Sir Robert Peel, and turned back with him to Charles Wood's, where he was going, after which we went towards his home, and walked up and down behind Whitehall for half an hour or more, talking of all sorts of things. He began about the Roden affair, on which he thought there was no case against Clarendon, but that he might have made more clearly known to Lord Roden his dislike to the procession, and considering the friendly terms they had been on, that there was some want of courtesy in making no communication to him before the notice of dismissal, particularly after Roden had offered to resign if it would be of any use to him that he should do so. I explained all these matters to him, and showed him that Clarendon had said and done all he could, and that no blame attached to him. He said he had known nothing of the matter but what Jocelyn had told him.
He then spoke of foreign affairs, and did not spare Palmerston. He reviewed the general course of our proceedings, and especially the Greek affair, which he thought very bad; but what was still worse, was our having sent our fleet into the Dardanelles, having no right to do so, and then asserting we were driven there by stress of weather, which was a pretence and a falsehood. This was very disgraceful, and the use to which our fleet had been put very shameful. That Palmerston had met with nothing but failures from Lisbon, where he first sent the fleet, and where his enemy Cabral had been ever since in power down to the present occasion. Brunnow had spoken to him the other day, and talked very good sense. He said the Emperor of Russia would not quarrel on this matter, not having done so on our fleet going to the Dardanelles; he would not on account of two uninhabited islets, but he would feel it. He alluded to the Emperor's sarcastic remark on the story of our fleet being compelled to take shelter in the Dardanelles; that 'he had always understood our fleets were most ably and powerfully manned, their tactics very superior, and that Sir William Parker was a very skilful officer; butthathisfleet, though lying in that sea for many months, had never found itself under any such necessity.' Brunnow said it was a great pity that somebody could not represent to Palmerston the impolicy of the course he had been pursuing all over Europe; that it was evident his real motive and intention in the Greek affair had been to bring about a revolution there, and that he had expected, when his fleet appeared, there would be a rising against Otho, who would be expelled; that when Europe was only just emerging from a state of general revolution, and order was only lately restored, what folly it was to provoke a fresh revolution, and to reopen an important question, the settlement of which might lead to the greatest difficulties! Brunnow always defends Palmerston, and affects to make light of all theaccidentsthat arise, but he speaks his real sentiments to Peel and Aberdeen. Peel said he had seen a letter from an officer in Parker's fleet, representing that the Admiral was exceedingly disgusted at the business put into his hands. We occupied so much time in discussing Ireland and Greece, that there was none to go into other matters, though I should have liked to hear his opinion of the state and prospects of the country.
Last night I met Clarendon at dinner at Bath House, when I told him what had passed between Peel and me. He told me also that Roden had behaved shabbily to him, when he quoted in the House of Lords the letter he had written, offering to resign the magistracy, but concealing the latter part of the same letter in which he said that he hoped he would not accept it if he thought it would be any triumph to the Catholics, for they had now got them down, and they should be able to keep them down. This, Clarendon said, he felt tempted to read himself, as Roden chose to read the first part, but he abstained.
PRINCE ALBERT ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
He then gave me an account of what had passed between the Queen and Prince and himself. He dined at the Palace on Tuesday. I told him they were sure to talk to him on foreign affairs, but he said he should avoid it. However, he could not avoid it. The moment he came into thedrawing-room after dinner the Queen exploded, and went with the utmost vehemence and bitterness into the whole of Palmerston's conduct, all the effects produced all over the world, and all her own feelings and sentiments about it. He could only listen and profess his own almost entire ignorance of the details. After she had done Prince Albert began, but not finding time and opportunity to say all he wished, he asked him to call on him the next day. He went and had a conversation of two hours and a half, in the course of which he went into every detail, and poured forth without stint or reserve all the pent-up indignation, resentment, and bitterness with which the Queen and himself have been boiling for a long time past. He commented on Palmerston's policy and conduct much in the same terms in which the 'Times' does, and as I and others do. But what he enlarged upon with the strongest feeling was the humiliating position in which the Queen was placed in the eyes of the whole world. The remonstrances and complaints, the sentiments and resentments of other Sovereigns—of the King of Naples, and of the Emperor of Russia, for instance—directly affected her dignity as the Sovereign and Representative of this Nation; and the consciousness that these Sovereigns and all the world knew that she utterly disapproved of all that was done in her name, but that she was powerless to prevent it, was inconceivably mortifying and degrading. Prince Albert said he knew well enough the Constitutional position of the Sovereign of this country, and that it was the policy and measures which the nation desired and approved which the Government must carry out; but that the nation disapproved of Palmerston's proceedings, and so did his own colleagues, Lord Lansdowne particularly; yet by their weak connivance he was allowed to set at defiance the Sovereign, the Government, and public opinion, while the Queen could get neither redress nor support from John Russell, and was forced to submit to such degradation. He then mentioned various instances in which the Queen's remonstrances and suggestions had been disregarded. Minutes submitted to her in one form and changed by Palmerston into otherforms; the refusal of Austria to send any Ambassador here, because he could not transact business with her Secretary of State. Clarendon asked him if he had ever endeavoured to influence Palmerston himself, and remonstrated with him on those matters which had justly excited the strong feelings of the Queen and himself. He said that he had done so repeatedly, and for a long time; that he always found him easy, good-humoured, very pleasant to talk to, but that it was utterly impossible to turn him from his purposes, or to place the least reliance on anything he said or engaged to do, and that at length the conviction which had been forced upon him of the uselessness of speaking to him had caused him entirely to leave it off, and for above a year past neither the Queen nor he had ever said one word to him; that it was in vain they had appealed to John Russell. He supposed it was the etiquette for Cabinet Ministers never to admit there was anything censurable in the conduct of each other, for though he was certain many things were done of which John Russell could not approve, and for which he was unable to make any defence, he never would admit that what had been done had been wrong; that the consequence of this had been to impair considerably the relations of confidence and openness which ought to exist between the Queen and her Prime Minister, and to place her in an unsatisfactory positionvis-à-visof him. After dilating at great length on this topic, he said something from which Clarendon inferred that his object was to makehima channel of communication with John Russell, and thus to make their sentiments known to him more clearly and unreservedly than they could do themselves, and he means to tell Lord John all that passed. He said the Prince talked very sensibly and very calmly, very strong, but without excitement of manner. I shall be curious to hear what Lord John says to it all; but though it can hardly fail somewhat to disturb his mind, I don't believe it will make the least alteration in his conduct, or change an iota of the 'unconquerable will and study of revenge' of Palmerston, or prevent his doing just what he pleases in spite of all the world. Peel told me he understoodwe were sending to Leghorn to make demands of some sort there, which he concluded was done to annoy Austria.
DEBATE ON THE POOR LAWS.
February 23rd.—The division in the House of Commons on Thursday night was hailed with vociferous cheers by the Protectionists, who considered it a great victory and the harbinger of future success.110Everybody was taken by surprise, for though it was known that the Opposition would muster strong, nobody imagined there would be so small a majority as twenty, the Government expected about forty. Graham spoke very well, and so did Gladstonein reply to him, the part the latter took exciting a considerable sensation. Disraeli was good, both in his opening speech and reply. Graham told me he was much improved, and his taste and tone far better than formerly. Peel was long and heavy, talked of himself too much, and made one of those defences of his former conduct which he might as well let alone, for they are superfluous with one half of the House and country, and useless with the other. He had much better, as Disraeli told him, do like Cosmo de Medici, and leave his character to posterity; he unwisely enough noticed a very warm and unjust attack which Henry Bentinck had made upon him at some public meeting. Henry Bentinck, like a true member of his family and own brother to George, instead of recanting or apologising, insinuated his disbelief in what Peel said, and was as offensive as the clamour and displeasure of the House and his own inarticulateness allowed him to be. In the afternoon yesterday Graham called on me to speak about the Australian Bill which was to have come on next Monday, and on which he said Government would infallibly be beaten, which following up thequasidefeat of Thursday would be very awkward. I suggested, after talking the matter over, that he and Peelmight give them some help, which he said they would do, but must know what Government thereupon meant to do. I undertook to find out, but in the meantime John Russell put off the Bill.
February 28th.—Before Clarendon left town he saw John Russell, and told him all that had passed between him and the Prince, and that he was quite certain it had been said to him for the express purpose of its being repeated to Lord John. He also told him that it was fit he should understand the strong and unusual feeling that existed on this subject, assuring him that he had not met with one single individual of any party or condition who did not regard it with disgust and displeasure. He then adjured him, whatever else he might do, to cultivate betterpersonalfeelings, and more confidential relations with the Queen and Prince, to be more open with them, and to enter into their feelings, and this Lord John, who seems to have taken what he said in very good part, promised he would not fail to do.
GRILLON'S CLUB.
Clarendon had also long conversations with Peel and Graham, who were both very complimentary and satisfactory about his case in the House of Lords, and Peel talked to him a great deal about affairs, both English and Irish. He was as confident as ever in the impossibility of the restoration of Protection, and the disastrous, and in the end abortive, effects of any attempt to do so by a Stanley and Disraeli Government, if by any possibility they could force themselves into office. He is evidently much disgusted with Gladstone and Goulburn, who have given indubitable signs of forsaking him, and advancing towards the Protectionists, and Graham said Stanley would now be able to offer the Queen a list, which would not be an insult. But Gladstone, though he has twice voted with the Opposition, loudly declares that he has not changed an iota of his Free Trade opinions, and has no thoughts of joining the other party, though they think they can have him whenever they may vouchsafe to take him. There is a considerably prevailing opinion of the diminished vigour as well as of the diminished influence of Peel. His speech the other night was labouredand heavy, and not judicious. Then the House was much struck by the unusual spectacle of Peel and Graham both rising to speak together, and both persisting to await the Speaker's call instead of Graham's giving way to Peel, as he would have done formerly. It was probably the first time Peel ever rose in the House of Commons to speak, and had to give way to another speaker. The House called for the one as much as for the other, and Graham made incomparably the best speech of the two. Ever since their large minority, the Protectionists have been in a very rampant and excited state, overflowing with pugnacity and confidence; but they made a great mistake in opposing very furiously and factiously the Irish Voters Bill, and the Government think that night was exceedingly serviceable to them, by rallying back a great many of the Irish Members, who were out of humour, and disposed to go against them in the matter of protection and relief.
I was last night elected at Grillon's Club, much to my surprise, for I did not know I was a candidate.
March 8th.—I dined on Wednesday at Grillon's, and was received with vast civility and cordiality. A large party, much larger than usual—amongst them Harrowby, Granville, Graham, Sir Thomas Fremantle, Rutherford, Pusey, Sir Thomas Acland, &c. Sat next to Graham, and had much talk on affairs. I told him that Labouchere had said to me a day or two before that John Russell was uneasy about the House of Commons, and expected that he should be beaten on more than one item in the financial accounts; that people told him he must expect to be beaten; but he replied that repeated defeats on such details materially impaired his influence and authority in the House, and made it difficult to carry on the business. Graham said this was very true, and that he probably would be beaten. He thought the position of the Government unsatisfactory and precarious; they had got into some scrapes about both Army and Naval estimates, unnecessarily and injudiciously. Then there were the questions of the African squadron and the Greek business behind. Stanley is very bitter and active, andeager to fight. He thinks Gladstone, Goulburn, and Aberdeen would all join Stanley in taking office. I asked him how it was possible. He said the Protectionists would make some concessions, and for various reasons and on different pretexts they would be easily satisfied. He congratulated himself on his foresight in refusing to take office. This Greek question was just one of those cases in which he must have refused to obey the orders of the Foreign Office, very different now from Lord Grey's time. Then when he was First Lord of the Admiralty, he used to be every day at the Foreign Office, and Lord Grey was paramount, allowing nothing to be done without his full knowledge and assent, and constantly altering Palmerston's despatches as a tutor might a boy's exercise. He talked a good deal about the abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland, of which he approves, but said the arrangement of the details, especially about the Chancellor, would be very difficult. Arbuthnot told me the other day that the Protectionists are doing all they can to disgust the Yeomanry with the service, and to induce them to resign, not without success. This is their patriotism.
I met Brunnow a few days ago coming from Palmerston, where he had been (though he did not say so) to present the Emperor's indignant note. He was laughing as he always does when he speaks of Palmerston; said of this affair, 'que c'était une bêtise; qu'il ne pouvait pas faire comprendre à Palmerston l'humiliation de l'affaire.' So far from acknowledging this, or evincing the least sign of regret or shame, when Hume asked him a question in the House the other night, he replied with the utmost effrontery, and with rather more than his usual insolence and audacity. As on every occasion, the House laughed and nobody said a word. All that relates to him, his character, conduct, and career, will hereafter form one of the most curious passages in history and the most astounding and unaccountable.
THE GORHAM JUDGEMENT.
March 9th.—Yesterday judgement was given in Gorham's case at the Council Office. The crowd was enormous, the crush and squeeze awful. I accommodated my friendswith seats in court, and there were Wiseman and Bunsen sitting cheek by jowl, probably the antipodes of theological opinions. The Lords met an hour before. They made some alterations in the judgement, and some judicious omissions. The Bishop of London, after much vacillation, half assenting and half dissenting, being on and off, by turns against Gorham and against the Bishop, disagreeing with everybody and everything, finally sent his determination through Lushington, and announcing (as was said in the judgement) that he could not concur. He did not, however, concur in the statement of Gorham's doctrine as gathered by the Lords, a difference of construction which shows how impossible it would have been to condemn Gorham on the score of heterodox, if not heretical, opinions, when a number of very able men, laymen and clergymen, after careful examination, could not agree what his opinions really were. Knight Bruce dissented altogether, wrote to Lord Langdale to that effect, and declined coming. The Archbishop agreed in both judgement and reasons. There was a preliminary discussion about costs. Langdale, Campbell, and Lushington were for giving Gorham costs in the Court below; Pemberton Leigh was against it; and the three eventually yielded to the one, and it was agreed to say nothing about costs. Langdale read the judgement well, and the people who heard it (at least those I talked to) thought it able and judicious; but of course all the highflyers and Puseyites will be angry and provoked, and talk of schisms and secessions, which will be, I am firmly convinced,bruta fulmina.
Reeve received yesterday afternoon from Paris the Russian Note—not the Note itself, but the whole substance of it, textual evidently, and copied from the note.111
March 19th.—Last Friday Aberdeen and Stanley had determined to bring on the Greek affair in the House of Lords, and Stanley gave notice to Lord Lansdowne he would ask for information. Lord Lansdowne, however, beforeStanley rose, got up and begged he would not discuss a question which was in course of negotiation, and Stanley was obliged to acquiesce. They were both of them provoked and disappointed, but there was no help for it. Stanley then contented himself with asking for the date of the orders to Parker to stop coercive measures, and it turned out that Palmerston had delayed sending them for a week upon miserable pretexts. Lord Lansdowne, as usual, attempted some lame excuses, and there the matter ended.
To-night comes on the question of the African squadron, on which the Government have acted a very unwise part.112They have determined (of course in obedience to Palmerston's will and pleasure) not only to make it a Government question, but to stake their existence on it; and they have been moving heaven and earth to obtain support and avert the defeat with which they were threatened. Their representations and appeals will probably succeed, but I have already seen several people who are excessively disgusted at being compelled to vote against their clear and strong convictions, and support what they think wrong and foolish in order to bolster up the Government and carry them through the difficulty in which they have been involved by their own perverseness and obstinacy.
LORD JOHN THREATENS TO RESIGN.
March 20th.—John Russell convoked a meeting in Downing Street yesterday, and made them a speech which gave equal offence in manner and in matter. He told them if he was beaten on Hutt's motion he should resign. Palmerston made another speech, and announced the same intention. The people came away furious and indignant, and several came into my room complaining of the hardship of being compelled to vote against their conscientious opinions on such a question, and on the unjustifiable conduct of the Government in threatening to resign at it.It seems to me that John Russell is demented at taking this violent course in reference to so unpopular a question, and one so entirely fallen into disrepute. He has given deep offence and prepared great difficulties for himself hereafter. Baring Wall told me he sent Labouchere to him the night before to remonstrate, but he made no impression, and his reply was too ridiculous; that he could not abandon the course pursued byMr. Foxand all the great men of the time, who had striven to put down slavery. He succeeded in cajoling or frightening people into submission, and after a debate in which few people spoke, and Palmerston not at all, leaving it all to Lord John, Hutt's motion was rejected by a majority of seventy. A great many were absent, not expecting a division, most of whom would have voted with Hutt. I never saw anything like the surprise of some people and the indignation of others at the course which John Russell took.
April 23rd.—More than a month without a single line. The Government are supposed to have been going on badly, having been left in minorities on several occasions, but it is of no real consequence. The most serious affair was the Stamp Bill, but it has been partly compromised and partly patched up, and Charles Wood does not seem to care.113I saw him the other day, when he said that he thought they should not be placed in any more difficulties, for some were ashamed and some were sorry for having deserted the Government already. They have made up their minds not to stand repetitions of this fast and loose treatment on the part of their friends andsoi-disantsupporters. Wood is uneasy about the continued low price of corn, and owned to me that it has continued much longer and had fallen lower than he had ever contemplated or at all liked. All the accounts represent that the farmers are behaving well, paying their rents, and employing the people; but there is a strong feeling of dissatisfaction and disaffection amongst them.
The Greek affair has dragged on, and wears rather asinister appearance. Drouyn de Lhuys114fell in with Reeve on Sunday, took him into his house, and opened to him largely and bitterly on the subject. Yesterday Reeve dined with him, when he again renewed the discussion—two remarkable conversations. He complained in strong terms of Palmerston's conduct, said that France had exerted herself with great sincerity to arrange the affair, but had been met in no corresponding spirit here. He intimated that his Government would publish to the whole world what had taken place, and that the matter was assuming a very grave character towards both Russia and France. Instructions had, indeed, gone out to Athens, agreed upon between Palmerston and himself, but he seemed to regard it as very doubtful whether they would arrive in time—that is, before Gros had returned home and Parker resumed hostilities. He repeated what Van de Weyer had said of the 'universal execration' in which we were held, and that no country could excite such a feeling with impunity. It is pretty clear that if this matter is not now settled there will be an explosion on the subject at Paris, and some very disagreeable passages between us and both France and Russia. My own conviction has all along been that Palmerston never intended anything but to hoodwink his colleagues, bamboozle the French, and gain time. By accepting the French mediation he prevented all discussion in Parliament; and as he took care to furnish no instructions to Wyse such as might enable him and Gros to come to terms, the affair could not fail to drag on, and every day that it did so was fraught with disastrous consequences to the Greeks. This was what he wanted; not to back out of it as decently as he could have done, not to defer to the wishes, opinions, and good offices of France, but by obstinacy and deceit to gain all his ends—to terrify and bully Greece into complete surrender, baffle Russia, and make France ridiculous. Drouyn de Lhuys toldReeve that he and Brunnow were in constant communication and acting in concert, the latter as usual doing all in his power to pacify the Emperor at Petersburg, and to get Palmerston to be reasonable here.
LORD CHIEF JUSTICE CAMPBELL.
April 28th.—Charles Wood has got into a scrape with his Stamps Bill, not being able to frame his measure so as to work satisfactorily. Financial blunders are always injurious, and affect the credit and authority of a Chancellor of the Exchequer; but it does not really signify, for the Government cannot be shaken. John Russell made a slashing attack in reply on Disraeli on Friday, well enough done, with spirit and effect.
On Wednesday, Campbell gave judgement in the Court of Queen's Bench in the Gorham case, on the rule moved for by Sir Fitzroy Kelly. The rule was refused unanimously. Campbell's judgement was very good, and much admired; he is doing exceedingly well in his Court.115Martin told me he never heard anything better than the way in which he disposed of a variety of cases, motions for rules mostly, which were before him on Monday last. Baron Parke, too, who did not smile on the appointment, said he was doing very well. He is not popular, and he is wanting in taste and refinement, but he is an able lawyer; and already he appears to great advantage in contrast with the dignified incompetence of Denman, who was an honourable, high-minded gentleman, but no lawyer, and one of the feeblest Chief Justices who ever presided over the Court of Queen's Bench.
We may at last expect the Greek question to be settled, I suppose. The decision and alacrity of Palmerston last Saturday week form a curious contrast with his dilatory motions a few weeks ago. Then he could not manage to frame an instruction and despatch it in less than a week or more; but when matters were getting serious, and he foundthat he must finish the affair, he was quick enough. On Saturday morning he received the despatches announcing the difficulties at Athens. He sent for Drouyn de Lhuys, concerted with him what was to be done, wrote his instructions, laid them before the Cabinet, got all the forms through, and sent them off the same evening. The plain meaning of all this is that in the first instance his object was delay, and in the second his object was expedition.
POLICY OF THE ORLEANS FAMILY.
May 14th.—I have written nothing here for many weeks, but no great loss, for I have not had much to say, if anything. I am tempted to resume my pen to record rather a curious event. I have heard this morning of a mission from Paris to Louis Philippe, and the result of it. The leaders of the Conservative party there, all except Thiers, have come to a resolution that the only chance of restoring the Monarchy is by a reconciliation of the elder and the Orleans branches, by the recognition of Henri V., and by persuading Louis Philippe and his family to accept this solution of the dynastic question. They have accordingly sent over M. Malac to Claremont to communicate their sentiments to the King. He was authorised to tell him that the Legitimists were willing to acknowledge his title and his reign, and even the benefits that France had derived from his government. The King entered into the subject with great frankness, treating with indifference the offers which were personal to himself, saying he had no need of any recognition of his reign, of which history would bear sufficient record. He, however, acquiesced in the views of the party who sent M. Malac, and declared himself ready to agree to their terms, but he said that the women of his family would be the most strenuous opponents of such a compromise. He assembled a sort ofconseil de famille, consisting of the Queen and the Princes (not the Duchess of Orleans), and laid before them the proposal that had been made to him. The Queen declared against it, the Princes were all for it, and finally the Queen said she would defer to the opinion of the King. He then proposed to the Ambassador to go and talk to the Duchess of Orleans, from whom the greatest obstacleswere to be expected. He declined to speak to her on the subject, but said he would go and see her, which he did. She received him, talked of all other subjects, but not a word about the succession. On repeating to His Majesty what had passed, he said he would send for her and talk to her, and after having done so, he desired M. Malac to return and she would enter on the affair. He went to her again and spoke to her with great frankness, representing that the Orleans party was by far the weakest in France, and that her religion would always make the people more or less, and the clergy entirely, hostile to her. She was much startled and discomposed at hearing language to which she seemed not to have been accustomed; but though she did not avow it she was not unmoved by his representations. He described various other meetings and conversations which had occurred in which the Queen of the Belgians took part (strongly adverse to the proposal), and finally he departed, without indeed any formal acceptance of the overtures, but carrying back such expressions of opinion and disposition on the part of the family as amounted to a virtual acceptance, and leave no doubt that the bargain will be concluded. It is not intended to draw up any compact, nor to take any immediate steps in consequence. They have no intention of waging war with the Republic, and only contemplate waiting for the course of events in the hope that the evils of the country will eventually drive the masses to seek a remedy for them in the restoration of the Monarchy, and for this contingency to be prepared by merging the differences of the two branches and uniting the strength of both to re-establish the principle. It was Reeve who told me all this, having had it from M. Malac himself. He also brought over a letter from Guizot to Reeve in which Guizot alluded rather mysteriously to another combination that was possible, and that would be auxiliary to this scheme. This is a transaction with the President and Changarnier. Both of the latter are aware that Louis Napoleon has no chance of perpetuating his own power either as President or Emperor.116He is overwhelmedwith debts which he cannot pay, and the whole of his private fortune is sunk. In no case, therefore, could he retire to any other country, and he may naturally be willing to make terms for himself which, in the event of the Monarchy being restored, would place him in a position of ease and comfort. Besides his own political nullity, his familyentouragepresents an inseparable bar to the revival of the Empire in his person. He is, indeed, himself by far the best of his family, being well-meaning and a gentleman; but all the rest are only a worthless set ofcanaille, altogether destitute of merit, and without a title to public consideration and respect.
RECALL OF THE FRENCH AMBASSADOR.
May 17th.—This has been a day of agitation. On Wednesday night all London was excited by the announcement at Devonshire House (where there was a great rout) that Drouyn de Lhuys had been recalled and was gone to Paris, and that neither Brunnow nor Cetto had been present at Palmerston's birthday dinner. Everybody was talking yesterday in the two Houses of these things and of the cause of them, which of course had to do with Greece. Questions were put to Lord Lansdowne and to Palmerston, when both of them said that the French Government had desired the presence of Drouyn de Lhuys at Paris in order to explain matters, and they both said what was tantamount to a denial of his having been recalled. At the very moment that they were making these statements in Parliament, the French Minister for Foreign Affairs was reading in the tribune of the National Assembly the formal letter of recall which had been sent to their Ambassador, which he was instructed to communicate, and which he read to Palmerston on the preceding day, and he was at the same time explaining that the Ambassador had been recalled on account of the manner in which the English Government had behaved to that of France, which rendered it incompatible with the dignity ofthe Republic to leave any longer an Ambassador in London. The report of what had passed appeared in all the papers this morning, and Brougham again addressed an interpellation to Lord Lansdowne on the subject, while a Member did the same to John Russell in the House of Commons, Palmerston not having chosen to be present. Both made what must be called shuffling, prevaricating answers, endeavouring by some clumsy and sophistical pretences to make out that the letter of recall was not a letter of recall. All this is very pitiable. After a series of blunders and a long course of impolitic and unjustifiable acts, Palmerston has contrived to involve us in aquasiquarrel with France, and to break up in the most wanton manner, and for the most ridiculous object, the good understanding which existed between the two countries. His colleagues, as usual, find themselves deeply plunged in the scrape into which they have permitted him to drag them, and obliged, as a hundred times heretofore, to make common cause with him, and to swallow all the dirt which he crams down their throats. While I am writing this they have brought me the newspaper with the report of what passed in Parliament, and Lord Lansdowne's and John Russell's replies, and it really is melancholy to see two such men reduced to such discreditable shifts, trying to evade giving direct answers to plain questions, attempting to mislead without doing so, and only exposing themselves. I see already that the friends and adherents of Government are sadly perplexed and annoyed. Lord Eddisbury, who sat next Lord Lansdowne in the House of Lords and prompted him, told Granville 'he thought Palmerston could not have told his colleagues everything that had passed.' As to those colleagues, they deserve every mortification that can befall them, and are entitled to no pity. They have gone on submitting to all Palmerston's insolence and vagaries with full knowledge of having been repeatedly deceived by him, and not one of them has had spirit enough to cast off this disgraceful yoke. Instead of forcing him to show some regard to truth, he has broken them in to back his falsehoods, andone of the worst consequences that has been produced by his unfortunate administration is that the confidence and implicit reliance which ought to be placed on all that a Minister says in Parliament, can no longer be felt.
This is the greatest scrape into which Palmerston has ever got, and it will be curious enough too how he gets out of it. Our Government stands charged by that of France with breach of faith and violation of compact. We shall see whether he denies the facts. If he makes one statement, and Drouyn de Lhuys another, there can be no doubt which will be best entitled to credit. The latter had no motive to deceive his own Government, or to do anything but report faithfully what passed between Palmerston and himself.
REMONSTRANCE OF RUSSIA.
May 19th.—There is the devil to pay about this Greek affair, and at last there seems a tolerable chance of Palmerston coming to grief: 'Tant va la cruche à l'eau,' &c. Yesterday morning the Duke of Bedford came here and gave me an account of the state of affairs. It seems Brunnow had written a long letter to John Russell, couched in very temperate terms, but setting forth all his complaints of Palmerston's behaviour, and especially of the language of that part of the press which was avowedly under his control and direction, in reference to Russia, and he asked Lord John to call upon him, he being confined with a cold. Lord John sent this letter to Palmerston, accompanied with one from himself, in which he said that he (Palmerston) well knew how much he disliked such articles and such use of the press, and a good deal more indicative of displeasure. Palmerston wrote an answer defending himself, and the very same evening there appeared in the 'Globe' another article not less offensive than the preceding ones, greatly to the indignation of Lord John. He called on Brunnow, who repeated what he had before said in his letter, and announced that he must go away, for he would not stay here to be on bad terms with Palmerston, and it was impossible for him to remain on good terms. Meanwhile, Lord John had seen Drouyn de Lhuys before his departure, and from him helearnt what (according to his version) had passed between himself and Palmerston, that is, about the pledge which Drouyn de Lhuys affirmed Palmerston had given him that hostilities should not be renewed. The statement of Drouyn de Lhuys did not correspond with the accounts which Palmerston had given his colleagues of what had passed, and Lord John at once saw that there was no avoiding the unpleasant dilemma of the two Governments being at issue on a matter of fact which involved the good faith of ours. All this, together with what had already passed, had raised Lord John's resentment and disgust to a high pitch, and the Duke said that Lord John had at last resolved not to stand it any longer, although (he added) he could not feel complete confidence in his firmness and resolution after all he had seen on various occasions.
Lord John said that the first thing to be done was to settle this matter as they best might; that they must support Palmerston's assertions, to which they were bound to give credit; but that when this business was concluded, in about a month perhaps, he would bring matters to a crisis, that is, announce to Palmerston that he could not go on in the Foreign Office. Lord John is at present very angry, and therefore very stout, but I never can feel sure of him. He is to see the Queen on Tuesday, who will of course be boiling over with indignation, and if she finds Lord John at last disposed to take her views of the matter, the affair may possibly be settled between them.
Meanwhile no words can describe the universal feeling of reprobation, and almost of shame, with which the replies of Lord Lansdowne and Lord John were heard on Friday night. The morning arrivals from France had clearly shown that Lord Lansdowne in one House, and John Russell in the other, had tried to deceive and mislead by what they had said on Thursday. On Friday Palmerston did not make his appearance; but the figures which Lord Lansdowne cut in the Lords and Lord John in the Commons were most deplorable and humiliating; such shuffling, special pleading, and paltry evasions were never before heard from publicmen of their eminence and character; and of all that has occurred this discreditable exposure appears to many friends of the Government to be the most painful part. It appears inconceivable that any men should make statements the falsehood of which was shown in less than forty-eight hours; but the explanation is this. In the first place, Palmerston gave to his colleagues an imperfect and unfaithful account of Drouyn de Lhuys's communication to him. They were themselves not aware of the whole truth; but besides this Palmerston gave them to understand that Drouyn de Lhuys had carried with him such explanations, verbal and documentary, as would he hoped satisfy his Government, and consequently that the letter of recall might probably be cancelled, and the affair arranged. Hoping therefore for this result, they ventured to deny the recall altogether, but were completely confounded and exposed by the revelations of Lahitte117in the tribune the very same day; and then they had nothing for it but to try and shuffle out of it in the way they tried but miserably failed to do. It would have been far better to have spoken the plain truth, or to have declined to answer till the next day.
THE GREEK DISPUTE.
May 22nd.—I have read the long series of despatches published by the French Government, and the result in my mind is that they do not make out a case of breach of faith against our Government, supposing Palmerston's instructions to Wyse to have been in conformity with what was agreed upon between the two Governments here. This (the most essential) part of the case lies in a narrow compass. It was all along perfectly understood that if Gros threw up his mission, being unable to induce the Greek Government to consent to equitable terms, our Minister was at liberty to recommence the coercive measures without any further reference to his Government; but if the negotiation came to a standstill in consequence of Gros and Wyse not being ableto agree, then the difference between them was to be referred for the decision of the two Governments upon it, and in this case the coercive measures were not to be renewed. The French maintain that the last of these contingencies occurred, Palmerston contends that it was the first. It is possible that Wyse may have received instructions conformable with this arrangement, and that he may have thought that the course which Gros took brought the case within the former category. This may have been an unsound opinion, but if such was the case it exonerates the British Government from the charge of having violated an engagement to that of France. But in order to make this defence valid, it will be necessary to prove that the instructions given to Wyse were such as the French had a right to expect. It does not appear that these instructions were ever imparted to them. These are minute, however important, points; but emerging from the confusion and perplexity of dates and circumstantial details, the question is, what is the general impression as to the whole conduct of the two Governments, more particularly of our own, throughout the transaction. I reserve the consideration of this till I have seen Palmerston's case as set forth in the papers that are to be laid before Parliament, and in the long and able despatch which he is said to have written in explanation and defence of his conduct.
May 25th.—The morning before yesterday the Duke of Bedford came here again. He had seen Lord John since, and heard what passed with the Queen. She was full of this affair, and again urged all her objections to Palmerston. This time she found Lord John better disposed than heretofore, and he is certainly revolving in his mind how the thing can be done. He does not by any means contemplate going out himself, or breaking up the Government. What he looks to is this, that the Queen should take the initiative, and urge Palmerston's removal from the Foreign Office. She is quite ready to do this as soon as she is assured of her wishes being attended to. For various reasons it would not do to put Clarendon in his place. Clarendon would not like it, and it would make Palmerston furious; therefore this is out of thequestion. The only possible arrangement is that Lord John should himself take the Foreign Office, provisionally, and he is quite prepared to take it. I told the Duke I entirely agreed that this was the only feasible arrangement, and I did not apprehend any danger to Lord John, because he would do the business in a very different way, and manage to lighten the burthen both by his mode of transacting it, and by delegating many details to his Under-Secretary, instead of, like Palmerston, doing everything himself. There certainly never appeared to be so good a chance of getting the Foreign Office out of Palmerston's hands as now; but long experience of his boldness and success, and of the pusillanimity and weakness of his colleagues, make me feel very doubtful and uncertain as to the result. If the thing is done, they mean to propose to him to take another office instead; not to turn him out. I don't know how they think of managing this, but he is sure to refuse to give up the Foreign Office and take another instead of it. He would consider this a degradation, and a sort of pleading guilty to the charges that are brought against him. If he will lend himself to this change, so much the better; if he does not go out, the Duke thinks, not without reason, that it will be almost impossible for Clarendon to come into office at present, and that he ought not; his opinions on foreign affairs are so strong, that he could not join the Cabinet while Palmerston was at the Foreign Office without the certainty of either very soon quarrelling with him, or of being obliged to make concessions against his conscience and real opinions, and which would therefore be discreditable to him.