THE SUGAR DUTIES
Wilton Crescent,4th May 1841.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that Lord Stanley yesterday postponed his Bill for a fortnight, which at this period of the year is equivalent to its abandonment.
On the other hand, Lord Sandon gave a notice for Friday for a Resolution on Sugar Duties.
If, as is probable, this Motion is made as a party movement, it is probable that, with the addition of those on the Ministerial side who have an interest in the West Indies, the Motion will be successful.
The whole scheme of finance for the year will thus be overturned.
The Tory party seem to expect a dissolution of Parliament, but your Majesty's advisers will hardly be able to recommend to your Majesty such a step.
The cry against the Poor Law is sure to be taken up by the worst politicians of the Tory party, and, as at Nottingham, may be successful against that most useful law.
The friends of Government who represent counties will be taunted with the proposal to alter the Corn Law.
Bribery is sure to be resorted to beyond anything yet seen.
A defeat of the Ministry on a dissolution would be final and irreparable.
On the other hand, their successors in the Government would have to provide for the excess in the expenditure pledged against the best measures that could be resorted to for the purpose. It would be a difficulty of their own seeking, and their want of candour and justice to their opponents would be the cause of their own embarrassments.
The moment is a very important one, and the consequences of the vote of Friday, or probably Monday, cannot fail to be serious.
A MINISTERIAL CRISIS
Windsor Castle,4th May 1841.
Lord Melbourne came down from town after the House of Lords. I went with him to his room for an hour after the Queen had retired. He said the main struggle would take place on the Sugar Duties on Friday. His impression was that the Government would be beat, and he must then decide whether to go out or dissolve. He leaned to the former. I said, "I trusted he would not dissolve unless he thought there was some prospect of increasing his strength, and begged him to remember what was done would not be considered the act of the Government but that of himself and the Queen, and that he individually would be held as the responsible person."
He said he had not written to the Queen to prepare H.M. for coming events and the course that it would be incumbent upon her to take, for he felt it extremely difficult and delicate, especially as to the use she should make of the Prince, and of her mode of communication when she required it with Lord Melbourne. He thought she ought never to ask his advice direct, but if she required his opinion there would be no objection to her obtaining it through the Prince.
He said H.M. had relied so implicitly upon him upon all affairs, that he felt that she required in this emergency advice upon almost every subject. That he would tell H.M. that she must carefully abstain from playing the same part she did, again, on Sir R. Peel's attempt to form a Ministry, for that nothing but the forbearance of the Tories had enabled himself and his colleagues to support H.M. at that time. He feared Peel's doggedness and pertinacity might make him insist, as a point of honour, on having all discretion granted to him in regard to the removal of Ladies. I told him of the Prince's suggestion that before the Queen saw Sir R. Peel some negotiation might be entered into with Sir Robert, so that the subject might be avoided by mutual consent, the terms of which might be that Sir Robert should give up his demand to extort the principle. The Queen, on the other hand, should require the resignation of those Ladies objected to by Sir Robert. Lord Melbourne said, however, that the Prince must not have personal communication with Sir Robert on this subject, but he thought that I might through the medium of a common friend.
LORD MELBOURNE'S ADVICE
Windsor Castle,5th May 1841.
Saw Lord Melbourne after his interview this morning with the Queen. He says Her Majesty was perfectly calm and reasonable, and seemed quite prepared for the resignation of the Government. He said she was prepared to give way upon the Ladies if required, but much wished that that point might be previously settled by negotiation with Sir R. Peel, to avoid any discussion or difference. Lord Melbourne thinks I might do this. He would also like Peel to be cautioned not to press Her Majesty to decide hastily, but to give Her Majesty time, and that he should feel that if he acted fairly he would be met in the same spirit by the Queen.
With regard to future communication with Lord Melbourne, the Queen said she did not mean that a change should exclude her from Lord Melbourne's society, and when Lord Melbourne said that in society Her Majesty could not procure Lord Melbourne's opinion upon any subject, and suggested that that should be obtained through the Prince, Her Majesty said that that could pass in writing under cover to me, but that she must communicate direct.
The Queen, he says, leans to sending for the Duke of Wellington. Lord Melbourne advised that Her Majesty should make up her mind at once to send for Sir Robert. He told me that it would not be without precedent to send for both at once; this it appears to me would obviate every objection. The Queen, he thinks, has a perfect right to exercise her judgment upon the selection of all persons recommended to Her Majesty for Household appointments, both as to liking, but chiefly as to their character and as to the character of the husband or wife of the person selected. He would advise the Queen to adopt the course which King William did with Lord Melbourne in 1835, viz. desiring Lord Melbourne, before His Majesty approved of any appointments, to send a list of those proposed even to the members of every Board, and the King having them all before him expressed his objections to certain persons, which Lord Melbourne yielded to.
Told Lord Melbourne that the Prince wished him to impress upon the Queen's mind not to act upon the approaching crisis without the Prince, because she would not be able to go through difficulties by herself, and the Prince would not be able to help her when he was ignorant of the considerations which had influenced her actions. He would wish Lord Melbourne when with the Queen to call in the Prince, in order that they might both be set right upon Lord Melbourne's opinions, that hemight express in the presence of each other his views, in order that he should not convey different impressions by speaking to them separately, so thattheymight act in concert.
The Prince says the Queen always sees what is right at a glance, but if her feelings run contrary she avoids the Prince's arguments, which she feels sure agree with her own, and seeks arguments to support her wishes against her convictions from other people.
DISSOLUTION OR RESIGNATION
South Street,7th May 1841.
Lord Melbourne presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and laments much the prospect that lies before us, more especially as it is so repugnant to your Majesty's feelings. Your Majesty has often observed that these events must come in the course of affairs at some moment or another, but Lord Melbourne knows not whether it is much consolation to reflect that what is very disagreeable is also natural and unavoidable. Lord Melbourne feels certain that your Majesty will consider the situation calmly and impartially, will do that which shall appear the best for your own interests and those of the country, which are identical.
Everything shall be done that can be; the questions which may arise shall be considered well, and upon as full information as can be obtained. But Lord Melbourne has little to add to what he wrote to your Majesty yesterday. So many interests are affected by this Sugar question, the West Indian, the East Indian, the opponents of Slavery and others, that no small number of our supporters will be induced either to stay away or to vote against us, and this must place us in a minority upon the main points of our Budget. In this we can hardly acquiesce, nor can we adopt a different policy and propose other taxes, when in our opinion the necessary revenue can be raised without imposing them. This state of things imposes upon us the alternative of dissolution or of resignation, and to try the former without succeeding in it would be to place both your Majesty and ourselves in a worse situation than that in which we are at present.
South Street,8th May 1841.
Lord Melbourne presents his humble duty to your Majesty. We have been considering this question of dissolution at theCabinet, and we have had before us a general statement of the public returns for England and Wales. It is not very favourable, but Lord Melbourne fears that it is more favourable than the reality would prove. The Chancellor,23Palmerston, and Hobhouse are strongly for dissolution, but the opinion of the majority is the other way, and in that opinion Lord Melbourne is strongly inclined to agree.
Lord Melbourne will have the honour of waiting upon your Majesty to-morrow at three.
Footnote 23: The Earl of Cottenham.
H.M. Queen Victoria, 1841.H.M. Queen Victoria, 1841.From the drawing by E. F. T., after H. E. Dawe, at Buckingham PalaceTo face p.272,Vol. I
H.M. Queen Victoria, 1841.
From the drawing by E. F. T., after H. E. Dawe, at Buckingham Palace
To face p.272,Vol. I
SIR ROBERT PEEL
9th May 1841.
Told Sir Robert that I had wished to have sought him through the medium of a common friend, which would have given him a greater confidence than I had now a right to expect at his hands, but I felt upon so delicate a mission it was safer, and would be more in accordance with his wishes, to come direct.
That the Prince had sent me to him, with the object of removing difficulties upon his coming into office.
That Her Majesty was anxious that the question of the removal of the Ladies of the Bedchamber should not be revived, and would wish that in any personal communication with Sir Robert this question might be avoided.
That it might be arranged that if Sir Robert would not insist upon carrying out his principle, Her Majesty might procure the resignation of any Ladies whom Sir Robert might object to; that I thought there might be a disposition to yield to the removal of the Mistress of the Robes, Lady Normanby, and the Duchess of Bedford, as being connected with leading political persons in Government.
Endeavoured to impress upon Sir Robert that if he acts fairly and kindly towards the Queen, he will be met in the same spirit.
Sir Robert said he had considered the probable object of my interview, and thought, from my former position with Lord Melbourne, that Lord Melbourne would be aware of my coming. He must be assured of this before he could speak confidentially to me.
Upon this I admitted that Lord Melbourne had knowledge of my intention, but that I was not authorised to say that he had.
Sir Robert said, "I shall put aside all form, and treat you frankly and confidentially. You may depend upon every word you say being held as sacred. No part, without further permission, shall be mentioned even to the Duke, much less to any of my other colleagues.
"I would waive every pretension to office, I declare to God! sooner than that my acceptance of it should be attended with any personal humiliation to the Queen."
He thought that giving in the names of those Ladies whom he considered obnoxious was an offensive course towards the Queen.
For the sake of office, which he did not covet, he could not concede any constitutional principle, but it was not necessary that that principle should be mooted.
"It would be repulsive to my feelings that Her Majesty should part with any of her Ladies, as theresult of a forced stipulation on my part; in a party sense it would doubtless be advantageous to me to say that I had demanded from the Queen, and the Queen had conceded to me the appointments of these three Ladies."
The mode he would like, and which he considered as least objectionable for Her Majesty, was for Her Majesty to say to him, "There is no occasion to revive this constitutional question, as those ladies immediately connected with prominent members of the Administration have sent in their resignation."
The vacancies existing before Sir Robert Peel sees Her Majesty, there is no necessity for discussion.
On the one hand, by this means, there was less appearance of insult to the Queen, and on the other, there was no appearance of concession of principle upon his.
Sir Robert was ready to make any personal sacrifice for Her Majesty's comfort, except that of his honour. "Can the Queen for an instant suppose that I would permit my party to urge me on to insist upon anything incompatible with Her Majesty's dignity, which it would be my great aim and honour to defend?"
[This was his indignant reply to my remark upon the rumours that his party would press him to coerce and subdue Her Majesty.]
Sir Robert thinks it better for the Queen to avoid anything in the shape of a stipulation. He would like what he would have done upon a former occasion (and upon which, on the honour of a gentleman, his views had undergone no change) to be taken as a test of what he would be ready to concede to.
Nothing but misconception, he said, could in his opinion have led to failure before. "Had the Queen told me" (after the question was mooted, which it never need have been) "that those three ladies immediately connected with the Government had tendered their resignation, I should have been perfectly satisfied, and should have consulted the Queen's feelings in replacing them."
Sir Robert said this conversation shall remain sacred, and to all effect, as if it had never happened, until he saw me again to-morrow morning.
There is nothing said, he added, which in any way pledges or compromises the Queen, the Prince, or Lord Melbourne.
Footnote 24: See Parker'sSir Robert Peel, vol. ii. p. 455,et seq., where Peel's memorandum of the interview is set out.
SIR ROBERT PEEL
10th May 1841.
Peel said: "It is essential to my position with the Queen that Her Majesty should understand that I have the feelings of a gentleman, and where my duty does not interfere, I cannot act against her wishes. Her Majesty doubtless knows how pressed I am as the head of a powerful party, but the impression I wish to create in Her Majesty's mind is, that I am bound to defend her against their encroachments."
HOUSEHOLD APPOINTMENTS
In regard to Household appointments the holders of which are not in Parliament, he had not considered the question, but in the meantime he would in no way commit himself to anyone, or to any understanding upon the subject, without previous communication. He had no personal objects to serve, and the Queen's wishes would always be consulted.
He again repeated, that if the Queen's personal feelings would suffer less by forming an Administration to his exclusion, he should not be offended. Private life satisfied him, and he had no ambition beyond it.
Lord Melbourne might rest assured thathefully appreciated his aim, that his only object was to do that which was most for Her Majesty's advantage, and no human being should know that he was privy to this overture. Lord Melbourne might depend upon his honour. If Lord Melbourne was pressed to a dissolution he should still feel the same impression of Lord Melbourne's conduct, that it was honourable and straightforward.
He wished the Prince to send him a list of those Ladies whom it would be agreeable to Her Majesty to have in herHousehold. Sir Robert must propose it to the Ladies, but will be entirely guided by Her Majesty's wishes. There should be no appearance that Her Majesty has any understanding, as he was bound to his party to make it appear that the appointments emanated from himself.25
Footnote 25: There was a further interview on the following day at which various detailed points were arranged.
11th May 1841.
The Queen considers it her right (and is aware that her predecessors were peculiarly tenacious of this right) to appoint her Household. She, however, gives up the great officers of State and those of her Lords-in-Waiting, Equerries, and Grooms-in-Waiting, who arein Parliament, to the appointment of the Prime Minister, subject to her approval.
The Queen hasalwaysappointed herLadies of the Bedchamber herself, but has generally mentioned their names to the Prime Minister before appointing them, in order to leave him room for objection in case he should deem their appointment injurious to his Government, when the Queen would probably not appoint the Lady.
The Maids of Honour and Women of the Bedchamber are of course not included amongst those who are mentioned to the Prime Minister before their appointment, but are at once appointed by the Queen.
PRESSURE OF BUSINESS
Wednesday, 12th May 1841.
"At seven minutes to five Lord Melbourne came to me and stayed till half-past five. He gave me the copies of Anson's conversations with Peel. Lord Melbourne then gave me a letter from the Chancellor to read, strongly advocating a dissolution, and wishing that there should be a division also on Lord John Russell's amendment.26
"Lord Melbourne left the letter with me. The first part of the letter, relative to Lord John's amendment, we think good, but the other part we can't quite agree in. 'There is to be a Cabinet to-morrow to consider what is to be done,' said Lord Melbourne, 'for the Chancellor's opinion must be considered.There is a preferment amongst our people for dissolution,' Lord M. added. The feeling in the country good. I asked Lord M., 'Must they resign directly, the next day, after the division (if they intended resigning)?' 'Why,' he said, 'it was awkwardnotto do so if Parliament was sitting; if the division were only to take place on Friday, then they needn't announce it till Monday,' which we hope will be the case, as we agreed it wouldn't do for me to have a ball the day Lord M. had resigned, and before I had sent for anybody else, and therefore I hoped that it could be managed that the division did not take place till Friday. Lord M. said that in case they resigned, he wished Vernon Smith27to be made a Privy Councillor; the only addition to the Peers he mentioned the other day he wished to make is Surrey;28we agreed that too many Peers was always a bad thing."
Footnote 26: To Lord Sandon's resolution on the Sugar Duties.
Footnote 27: Robert Vernon Smith (1800-1873), Under-Secretary for War and the Colonies, afterwards Lord Lyveden.
Footnote 28: The Earl of Surrey (1791-1856) was now M.P. for West Sussex, and Treasurer of the Household, and was afterwards thirteenth Duke of Norfolk.
11th May 1841.
... I am sure you will forgive my writing a very short letter to-day, but I am so harassed and occupied with business that I cannot find time to write letters. You will, I am sure,feelfor me; the probability of parting from so kind and excellent a being as Lord Melbourne as aMinister(for afriendhe willalwaysremain) is very,verypainful, even if one feels it will not probably be for long; to take it philosophically is my great wish, andquietlyI certainly shall, but one cannot helpfeelingsof affection and gratitude. Albert is the greatest possible comfort to me in every way, and my position is much more independent than it was before.
I am glad you see the French feeling in the right light. I rejoice that the christening, etc., went off so well. Believe me, ever, your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
QUESTION OF DISSOLUTION
Thursday, 13th May 1841.
"Saw Lord Melbourne at a little past four.
"... 'We have had a Cabinet,' Lord Melbourne said, 'and we have been considering the question of dissolution and what is the best course to be pursued; if we were to dissolve,John Russell,' he said, 'would pursue quite a different course; he would then announce the Sugar Duties at once. I (Lord Melbourne) said, that I had been considering well the whole question, and the Chancellor's letter, but that altogether I did not think it advisable to have recourse to a dissolution—and I think the greater part lean towards that opinion; but therearea few who are very much for a dissolution—the Chancellor and Hobhouse very much so, and Palmerston. They have, however, not quite finally decided the matter. I understand the debate will certainly go over to-night,' he said, 'and that they would have time on Saturday and Sunday to consider about Lord John's amendment.'"
Saturday, 15th May 1841.
"Lord Melbourne came to me at twenty minutes past one, and we talked about this question of dissolution. 'We shall have a long debate upon it this morning at the Cabinet,' Lord Melbourne said. 'The worst thing is, that if we carry the Sugar Duties, we must dissolve. If we were to dissolve,' he continued, 'and were to have the parties equal as they are now, it would be very bad; if wewereto have amajority, it would be a great thing;butif we were to have a minority it would be still worse.... We know that Charles I. and Charles II., and even Cromwell, appealed to the country, and had a Parliament returned into their very teeth' (so strong an Opposition), 'and that produced deposition, and convulsion, and bloodshed and death; but since then the Crown has always had a majority returned in favour of it. Even Queen Anne,' he continued, 'who removed Marlborough in the midst of his most glorious victories and dissolved Parliament, had an immense majority, though her measures were miserable; William IV.,' he said, 'even though he had a majority against him which prevented him from keeping his Ministers, had a much stronger feeling for him in that Parliament, than he ever had before. But I am afraid,' he added, 'that for the first time the Crown would have an Opposition returned smack against it; and that would be an affront to which I am very unwilling to expose the Crown.' This is very true."
KING LEOPOLD'S SYMPATHY
Tuileries,14th May 1841.
My dearest Victoria,—I am deeply grateful for your kind letter, which reached me this morning. Letters from henceought not to be longer on their way than, at the longest, forty hours; forty-eight is the maximum. I fear that they are delayed at the Foreign Office; here it cannot be, as for instance these lines go this evening.
I can easily understand that the present crisis must have something very painful for you, and you will do well for your health and comfort to try to take it as philosophically as possible; it is a part of the Constitutional system which is for the Sovereign very hard to get over.
Nous savons tous des paroles sur cet air, as the French say. I was convinced that Lord Melbourne's right and good feeling would make him pause before he proposed to you a dissolution. A general election in England, when great passions must be roused or created to render it efficacious for one party or another, is a dangerous experiment, always calculated to shake the foundations on which have hitherto reposed the great elements of the political power of the country. Albert will be a great comfort to you, and to hear it from yourself has given me the sincerest delight. His judgment is good, and he is mild and safe in his opinions; they deserve your serious attention; young as he is, I have really often been quite surprised how quick and correct his judgment is....
TORY DISSENSIONS
Wilton Crescent,16th May 1841.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to state that the general effect of last week's debate29has been greatly in favour of the measures of your Majesty's Ministers.
The speeches of Mr Labouchere, Sir George Grey, and Lord Howick, with the powerful argument of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Friday night, have not been met by any corresponding ability on the other side.
In fact the Opposition seem to have concealed their own views of policy, and to have imagined that the Anti-Slavery feeling would carry them through successfully. But this expectation has been entirely disappointed; debate has unmasked the hollow pretence of humanity, and the meetings at Exeter Hall and in the country have completely counteracted the impressions which Dr Lushington's speech30had produced.
Lancashire, Cheshire, and the West Riding of Yorkshire have been roused to strong excitement by the prospect of areduction of the duty on corn. Several of the large towns have expressed their opinions without distinction of party.
These symptoms are said to have created some dissensions among the opponents of your Majesty's present Government.
Sir Robert Peel, Lord Stanley, and nearly all the eminent leaders of the party, profess their adherence to the principles of Mr Huskisson.31On the other hand, the Duke of Buckingham,32with many Lords and Commoners, is opposed to any relaxation of the present Corn Laws. This difference must ultimately produce serious consequences, and it is possible they may break out before the present debate is ended.
One consequence of the propositions of the Ministry is the weakening of the power of the Chartists, who have relied on the misrepresentation that neither Whigs nor Tories would ever do anything for the improvement of the condition of the working classes.
All these circumstances have a bearing on the question of a dissolution of Parliament, and are to be weighed against the risks and inconveniences of so bold a measure.
Footnote 29: On Lord Sandon's resolution.
Footnote 30: Against the Budget, on the ground that it tended to encourage slavery.
Footnote 31: Which were opposed to Protection and the Navigation Laws.
Footnote 32: Richard Plantagenet (1797-1861), second Duke of the 1822 creation, M.P. for Bucks 1818-1839, and author of the "Chandos clause," became Lord Privy Seal this year, but resigned shortly after. He dissipated his property, and had to sell the contents of Stowe.
THE QUEEN'S JOURNAL
Monday, 17th May 1841.
"Lord Melbourne came to me at twenty minutes to three. There were nonewnews. He gave me a letter from the Duke of Roxburgh,33saying he could not support Government on the Corn Laws, and writing an unnecessarily cold letter. Lord Melbourne fears this would lose Roxburgh in case of an election. A great many of the friends of the Government, however, are against any alteration in the Corn Laws. Talked of the excellent accounts from the country with which the papers are full, and I said I couldn't help thinking the Government would gain by a dissolution, and the feeling in the country so strong, and daily increasing. They would lose the counties, Lord Melbourne thinks, and the question is whether their successes in the manufacturing towns would be sufficient to counterbalance that. The debate may last longer, Lord Melbourne says, as J. Russell says he will continue it as long as their friends wish it. Many of their friends would be very angry if wedid not dissolve, Lord Melbourne says. 'I say always,' said Lord Melbourne, 'that your Majesty will be in such a much worse position' (if a majority should be returned against us), 'but they say not, for that the others would dissolve.' I said that if that was so wemust dissolve, for then that it would come to just the same thing, and that that changed my opinion very much. 'You would like us then to make the attempt?' Lord Melbourne asked. I said 'Almost.' I asked if he really thought they would dissolve. 'I've great reason to believe they would,' he replied. 'Hardinge34told Vivian35"we shall preventyourdissolving, butwe shalldissolve."' ... I asked did Lord Melbourne think they (the Conservatives) would remain in long, and Melbourne said: 'One can't tell beforehand what may happen, but you would find their divisions and dissensions amongst themselves sufficient to prevent their staying in long.' ...
"Saw Lord John Russell, who didn't feel certain if the debate would end to-night. Talked of the very good feeling in the country. He said he understood Sir Edward Knatchbull36was exceedingly displeased at what Peel had said concerning Free Trade, and said in that case Peel would be as bad as the present Government. He thinks the Tories, if in power, might try and collect the Sugar duties without Law, which would do them a great deal of harm and be exceedingly unpopular. He doesnotthink the Tories intendcertainlyto dissolve. He thinks they would not dissolve now, and that they would hereafter get so entangled by their own dissensions, as to render it unfavourable to them."
Footnote 33: James, sixth Duke. The Duchess was afterwards a Lady of the Bedchamber.
Footnote 34: Sir Henry Hardinge (1785-1856) had been Secretary at War, and Chief Secretary for Ireland, under former Tory Governments.
Footnote 35: Master-General of the Ordnance.
Footnote 36: M.P. for East Kent. He became Paymaster-General in Peel's Cabinet.
18th May 1841.
... I was sure you would feel for me. Since last Monday, the 10th, we have lived in the daily expectation of a final event taking place, and the debatestillcontinues, and it is not certain whether it will even finish to-night, this being the eighth night, it having begun on Friday the 7th, two Saturdays and two Sundays having intervened! Our plans are so unsettled that I can tell you nothing, only that you may depend upon it nothing will be done without having been duly, properly, and maturely weighed. Lord Melbourne's conduct is as usualperfect; fair, calm, and totally disinterested, and I am certain that in whatever position he isyouwill treat himjustas you have always done.
My dearest Angel is indeed a great comfort to me. He takes the greatest interest in what goes on, feeling with and for me, and yet abstaining as he ought from biassing me either way, though we talk much on the subject, and his judgment is, as you say, good and mild....
P.S.—Pray let me hear soonwhenyou come. You, I know, like me to tell you what I hear, and for me to be frank with you. I therefore tell you that it is believed by some people here, and even by some in the Government, thatyouwish my Government to beout. Now, I never for an instant can believe such an assertion, as I know your liberal feelings, and your interest in my welfare and in that of the country too well to think you could wish for such a thing, and I immediately said I was sure this was not so; but I think you would do well to say to Seymour something which might imply interest in my present Government.
I know you will understand my anxiety on your account, lest such a mischievous report should be believed. It comes, you see, from the idea that your feelings are very French.
THE CORN LAWS
Tuesday, 18th May 1841.
"Saw Lord Melbourne.37He said Lord John Russell had been to see him, and, 'He now wishes us not to resign, but to give notice immediately of a Motion on the Corn Laws. This, he thinks, will make the others propose a vote of confidence, or make them oppose the Sugar Duties, which, he thinks, will be better for us to resign upon, and when it would be clear to our people that we couldn't dissolve. Everybody says it would be a very bad thing for us to resign now, upon such a question as this, and we must consider the party a little.' I said, of course, this would be agreeable to me as it gave us another chance. I said it would be awkward if they resigned Thursday, on account of the Birthday. Lord Melbourne said I could wait a day and only send for Peel on Saturday, that that wouldn't signify to Peel, as he could come down to Claremont.... I asked, in case they meant to bring on this Corn Law question, when would they do so. 'Perhaps about the 30th,'Lord Melbourne said. It would be a more dangerous question, but it would make them (the Tories) show their colours, which is a great advantage. He said they prevented Sir Edward Knatchbull from speaking last night."
Footnote 37: After eight days' discussions of Lord Sandon's Motion, the Ministers were defeated by 317 to 281.
RESIGNATION POSTPONED
Wednesday, 19th May.
"At twenty minutes to one came Lord Melbourne.... I returned him Lord John Russell's letter, and talked of it, and of John Russell's saying the division and Peel's speech made it absolutely necessary to decideto-daywhether toresignordissolve. I asked what Peel had said in his speech about the Corn Laws. 'I'll tell you, Ma'am, what he said,' Lord Melbourne replied, 'that he was for a sliding duty and not for a fixed duty; but he did not pledge himself as to what rate of duty it should be. I must say,' Lord Melbourne continued, 'I am still against dissolution. I don't think our chances of success are sufficient.' I replied that I couldn't quite believe that, but that I might be wrong. Lord John is for dissolving. 'Youwish it?' I said I always did. Talked of the feeling in the City and in the country being so good. Lord Melbourne don't think so much of the feeling in the country. Talked of the majority of thirty-six having not been more than they expected.... Lord Melbourne said people thought the debate was lengthened to please me. I said not at all, but that it was more convenient for me. Anyhow I need do nothing till Saturday. The House of Commons was adjourned to the next day, and the House of Lords to Monday. 'Mr Baring says,' he said, 'if there was only a majority one way or another, it would be better than this state of complete equality.'
"At twenty minutes past four Lord Melbourne returned. 'Well, Ma'am,' he said, 'we've considered this question, and both the sides of it well, and at last we voted upon it; and there were—the Lord Chancellor for dissolution, Lord Minto38for it, Lord Normanby against it, but greatly modified; Lord John for, Lord Palmerston for, Lord Clarendon for, Lord Morpeth for, Lord Lansdowne for, Labouchere for, Hobhouse for, Duncannon39for, Baring for, Macaulay for; and under those circumstances of course I felt I could not but go with them.40Lord Melbourne was much affected in saying all this. 'So weshall go on, bring on the Sugar Duties, and then, if things are in a pretty good state, dissolve. I hope you approve?' I said I did highly ... and that I felt so happy to keep him longer. 'You are aware we may have a majority against us?' he said; he means in our election. The Sugar Duties would probably take a fortnight or three weeks to pass, and they would dissolve in June and meet again in October. He thought they must."
Footnote 38: Lord Minto was First Lord of the Admiralty.
Footnote 39: Then First Commissioner of Land Revenue.
Footnote 40: See Sir John Hobhouse's account of this Cabinet meeting,Edinburgh Review, vol. 133, p. 336.
THE QUEEN AND THE CHURCH
21st May 1841.
Lord Melbourne thinks that what your Majesty proposes to say will do very well, but it is thought best to say "Church as Reformed" at the Reformation.
If your Majesty could say this, it would be well:
"I am very grateful for your congratulations on the return of this day. I am happy to take this opportunity of again expressing to you my firm determination to maintain the Church of England as settled at the Reformation, and my firm belief in her Articles and Creeds, as hitherto understood and interpreted by her soundest divines."
Nothing could go off better than the dinner. Everybody was much pleased with the Prince.
Lord Melbourne is not conscious of having slept.41
Footnote 41: It seems that some one had told the Queen that Lord Melbourne had fallen asleep at dinner.
FEELING IN FRANCE
Brussels,20th May 1841.
My dearest Victoria,—I receive this very moment your dear letter of the 18th, and without loss of time I begin my answer here, though the messenger can only go to-morrow. I cannotsufficientlyexpress to you mygratitudefor the frankness with which you have written to me—and let me entreat you, whenever you have anythingsur le cœur, todo the same. I shall begin with your postscript concerning the idea that I wished your present Ministers to retire, because they had become disagreeable to France. The people whoavancent quelque chose de la sorteprobably have some ill-natured motive which it is not always easy to guess; perhaps in the present instance does it mean, let us say,that?whatever opinion he may then express we can easily counteract it, representing itas the result ofstrong partiality to France. Let us therefore examine what France has to gain in a change of Administration. Certainly your present Ministers arenotmuch lovednowin France, not so much in consequence of the political events of last year themselves, than for themannerin which they came to pass. Nevertheless, when I was at Paris, King and Council were decided to sign the treaty with the four other Powers, which would put an end to theisolement, though many people are stoutlyfor the isolement. There end the relations which will exist for some time between the two countries—they will be ondecentterms; that is all I wish for the present, and it is matter of moonshine who your Ministers are. No doubt, formerly there existed such a predilection in favour of Lord Grey's42Administration and those who continued it, that the coming in of the Tories would have been considered as a great public calamity; but even now, though this affection is gone, the Tories will also be looked on with some suspicion. Lord Melbourne's Administration has had the great merit of being liberal, and at the same time prudent, conservative in the good sense of the word, preserving what was good. Monarchy, by an adherence to this system, was very safe, and the popular liberal cry needless.
Footnote 42: 1830-1834.