THE MILITIA BILL
Chesham Place,20th February 1852.
(9.15p.m.)
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that Lord Palmerston has just carried his Motion for leaving out the word "Local" in the title of the Bill for the Militia.13
Lord John Russell then declared that he could no longer take charge of the Bill. Lord Palmerston said he was astonished at the Government for giving up the Bill for so slight a cause.
Lord John Russell then said that he considered the vote as tantamount to a resolution of want of confidence, which remark was loudly cheered on the other side.
Sir Benjamin Hall said he wondered the Government did not resign, on which Lord John again explained that when confidence was withdrawn, the consequence was obvious.
Footnote 13: Events in France had revived anxiety as to the national defences, and the Government brought in a Bill for raising a local Militia. To this scheme the Duke of Wellington had been unfavourable, and Lord Palmerston, by a majority of eleven, carried an Amendment in favour of re-organising the "regular" instead of raising a "local" Militia.
THE MINISTRY DEFEATED
Buckingham Palace,21st February 1852.
Lord John Russell came this morning at twelve o'clock to explain that after the vote of yesterday14it was impossible forhim to go on any longer with the Government. He considered it a vote of censure, and an entirely unprecedented case not to allow a Minister of the Crown even to lay his measure on the Table of the House; that he had expected to the last that the respectable part of the House would see all this, but there seemed to have been a pre-arranged determination between Lord Palmerston and the Protectionists to defeat the Government; that the Peelites also had agreed to vote against them. Sir James Graham and Mr Cardwell had stayed away, but Mr Gladstone and Mr S. Herbert had voted against them, the latter even misrepresenting what Lord John had said. No Government could stand against incessant motions of censure upon every imaginable department of the Executive Government. The Prime Minister would either have to take the management of all the departments into his own hands, and to be prepared to defend every item, for which he (Lord John) did not feel the moral and physical power, or he must succumb on those different points which the Opposition with divided labour could single out. Lord Palmerston's conduct was the more reprehensible as he had asked him the day before about his objections to the Bill, and had (he thought) satisfied him that the four points upon which he had insisted were provided for in the Bill.
Footnote 14: On the Militia Bill.
He thought he could not (in answer to the Queen's enquiry) dissolve Parliament, and that Lord Palmerston had no Party. But he supposed Lord Derby was prepared to form a Protection Government. This Government would pass the estimates and the Mutiny Bill, and would then have to proceed to a Dissolution. Lord John had merely seen Lord Lansdowne, who had approved of the course he meant to pursue, though afraid of the imputation that the Government had run away from the Caffre debate. He had summoned the Cabinet, and would report their resolution. Speaking of Lord Palmerston, Lord John said he had heard that Lord Palmerston had said that there was one thing between them which he could not forgive, and that was his reading the Queen's Minute to the House of Commons.
RESIGNATION OF THE MINISTRY
At a quarter past four Lord John came back from the Cabinet, and formally tendered the resignations of himself and colleagues. The Cabinet had been unanimous that there was no other course to pursue, and that it would not be advisable to make use of the Queen's permission to advise a Dissolution. Lord Granville had ascertained through Dr Quin from Lord Lyndhurst that Lord Derby was prepared with an Administration, having obtained Mr Thomas Baring's consent to act as Leader of the House of Commons.
Sir Stratford Canning at Constantinople was supposed to be intended for the Foreign Office. Lord Lyndhurst said, though the materials were there, they were very bad ones, and it was a question whether they would stand long. He himself would keep out of place.
We advised Lord John to keep his Party well under discipline in Opposition, so that whilst there it did not commit errors which would become new difficulties for the future Government. He seemed disinclined for great exertions after the fatigues he had undergone these last years. He said he thought he would not go on with the Reform Bill out of office, as that was a measure which ought to be carried by a Government. If he had again to propose it, he would very likely alter it a little, reverting to his original plan of taking away one Member of the two returned by small boroughs, and giving their seats to some large towns, counties, and corporations like the Universities, etc.
Lord John defers taking his formal leave till a new Administration is formed.
Albert.
LORD DERBY SUMMONED
Buckingham Palace,21st February 1852.
The Queen would wish to see Lord Derby at half-past two to-morrow should he be in Town; if not, on Monday at twelve o'clock.
Buckingham Palace,22nd February 1852.
... Lord Derby said that he could not command a majority in the House of Lords, that he was in a decided minority in the House of Commons, and thought that in the critical circumstances in which the country was placed both at home and abroad, he ought not to ask for a Dissolution. He must then try to strengthen himself particularly in the House of Commons by any means he could. There was one person whom he could not venture to propose for the Foreign Office on account of what had lately passed, and what he might be allowed to call the "well-known personal feelings of the Queen"; but Lord Palmerston was one of the ablest debaters, and might well be offered the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The Queen ... would not, by refusing her consent, throw additional difficulties in Lord Derby's way; she warned him, however, of the dangerous qualities of [Lord Palmerston].
Lord Derby rejoined that he knew them, and thought them pernicious for the conduct of the Foreign Affairs, but at the Exchequer they would have less play; he himself would undertake to control him. His greatest indiscretion—that in the Kossuth affair—must have been with a view to form a Party; that if left excluded from office, he would become more dangerous, and might in fact force himself back at the head of a Party with a claim to the Foreign Office, whilst if he had ever accepted another Office, his pretensions might be considered as waived; he (Lord Derby) did not know in the least whether Lord Palmerston would accept, but in case he did not, the offer would propitiate him, and render the Government in the House of Commons more possible, as it would have anyhow all the talent of the late Government, Peelites and Radicals, to withstand.
To my question whether Lord Derby fancied he would remain Prime Minister any length of time, when once Lord Palmerston had got the lead of the House of Commons, he replied he was not afraid of him; he felt sure he could control him, although he would not have been able to admit him to the Foreign Office on account of the very strong strictures he had passed upon his Foreign Policy at different times—even if the Queen had allowed it.
St James's Square,22nd February 1852.
(Half-past eight.)
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, deems it incumbent upon him to submit to your Majesty without delay that having had an interview this evening with Lord Palmerston, the latter has, although in the most friendly terms, declined accepting the Office, upon the ground of difference of opinion, not on the principle, but on the expediency of the imposition of any duty, under any circumstances, upon foreign corn. This was a point which Lord Derby was willing to have left undecided until the result of a General Election should be known.
Although this refusal may add materially to Lord Derby's difficulties, he cannot regret that the offer has been made, as the proposal must have tended to diminish any feelings of hostility which might have been productive of future embarrassment to your Majesty's service, to whatever hands it may be entrusted....
The above is humbly submitted by your Majesty's most dutiful Servant and Subject,
Derby.
LORD DERBY'S CABINET
Buckingham Palace,23rd February 1852.
Lord Derby reported progress at half-past two, and submitted a list of the principal Officers of the Government which follows, and which the Queen approved.
The Queen allowed Lord Lyndhurst (who has declined office—has been Lord Chancellor three times, and now entered upon his eightieth year) to be offered an Earldom—which he very much desired for the position of his daughters, having no son.
After he had kissed hands upon his entering upon his office, Lord Derby had a further conversation with me on Household appointments. I told him he must now, as Prime Minister, consider himself to a certain degree in the position of the Confessor; that formerly the Lord Chancellor was Keeper of the King's Conscience, the office might be considered to have descended on the Prime Minister. The Queen must then be able to confer with him on personal matters, or I, on her behalf, with the most entire confidence, and that she must be sure that nothing was divulged which passed between them on these matters, and he might repose the same confidence in us. As to the formation of the Household, the Queen made two conditions, viz. that the persons to compose her Court should not be on the verge of bankruptcy, and that their moral character should bear investigation. On the Queen's accession Lord Melbourne had been very careless in his appointments, and great harm had resulted to the Court therefrom. Since her marriage I had insisted upon a closer line being drawn, and though Lord Melbourne had declared "that that damned morality would undo us all," we had found great advantage in it and were determined to adhere to it....
Albert.
Buckingham Palace,23rd February 1852.
My dearest Duchess,—I cannot sayhow deeplygrieved I am to think that the event which has just occurred, and which Lord Derby's acceptance of office has to-day confirmed, will entail your leaving, for a time, my service. It has beenevera real pleasure to me to have you with me; my affection and esteem for you, my dearest Duchess, are great, and webothknow what a kind and true friend we have in you.
I think that I may rely on your returning to me on a future occasion whenever that may be, and that I shall frequentlyhave the pleasure of seeing you, even when you are no longer attached to my person.
I shall hope to see you soon. The Levée remains fixed for Thursday, and the transfer of the Officers of the new Government does not take place till Friday.
With the Prince's kindest remembrance, and ours to the Duke and Constance. Believe me always, yours affectionately,
Victoria R.
Buckingham Palace,24th February 1852.
Dearest Uncle,—Great and notverypleasant events have happened since I wrote last to you. I know that Van de Weyer has informed you of everything, of the really (till the last day) unexpected defeat, and of Lord Derby's assumption of office, with a very sorry Cabinet. I believe, however, that it is quite necessary they should have a trial, and then have done with it. Provided the country remains quiet, and they are prudent in their Foreign Policy, I shall take the trial as patiently as I can....
Alas! your confidence in our excellent Lord Granville is no longer of any avail, though I hope ere long he will be at the Foreign Office again,15and I cannot say that his successor,16who has never been in office (as indeed is the case with almost all the new Ministers), inspires me with confidence. I see that Louis Napoleon has again seized one of the adherents, or rathermore one of the men of business, of the poor Orleans....
There are some terrible stories from Madrid of people having told the poor Queen that the King had arranged this attack on her person, and that she was anxious to abdicate.17If you should hear anything of this kind, be kind enough to tell me of it. With Albert's love (he is well fagged with business), ever your devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Footnote 15: Lord Granville held the Foreign Secretaryship in 1870-1874, and again in 1880-1885.
Footnote 16: Lord Malmesbury.
Footnote 17: The Queen was stabbed by a priest when returning from church.
LORD MALMESBURY
Buckingham Palace,24th February 1852.
The Queen thinks that it would be of the highest importance that not only Lord Malmesbury (as is always usual) shouldreceive the necessary information from Lord Granville, but that Lord Derby should see him and hear from him the state of all the critical questions now pending on Foreign Affairs. Lord Granville has made himself master in a very short time of all the very intricate subjects with which his Office has to deal, and she must here bear testimony to the extreme discretion, good sense, and calmness with which he has conducted the very responsible and difficult post of Foreign Secretary.
NEW APPOINTMENTS
St James's Square,25th February 1852.(5p.m.)
Sir,—I have delayed longer than I could have wished acknowledging the letter which I had the honour to receive from your Royal Highness last night, in hopes that by this time I should have been enabled to solve the difficulties connected with the Household Appointments; but I regret to say they are rather increased than otherwise. I will not trouble your Royal Highness now with any details; but if I might be honoured with an audience at any hour after the Levée to-morrow, I shall perhaps be able to make a more satisfactory report, and at all events to explain the state of affairs more fully.
In the meantime, it may save Her Majesty some trouble if I request that your Royal Highness will have the goodness to lay before Her Majesty the enclosed list of Appointments which, subject to Her Majesty's approval, I have arranged in the course of this day. The Admiralty List found its way most improperly into some of the morning papers before I was even aware that the Duke of Northumberland had finally obtained the assent of the Officers whom he had selected.
As it is possible that the Queen may not be acquainted with the name of Colonel Dunne, I have the honour of enclosing a letter respecting him which I have received from Lord Fitzroy Somerset, since I had intimated to him my intention of submitting his name to Her Majesty, and which is highly satisfactory.
I must beg your Royal Highness to offer to the Queen my most humble and grateful acknowledgment of the kindness which Her Majesty has evinced in endeavouring to facilitate the progress of the Household arrangements.
I have the honour to be, Sir, Your Royal Highness's most obedient Servant,
Derby.
LOUIS NAPOLEON
Thursday,26th February 1852.
Lord Derby came to Albert at half-past three, and Albert called me in at a little after four....
Lord Derby told us he meant to proceed as speedily as possible with the defences of the country, and that his plan for the Militia entirely coincided with Albert's plan (viz. he (Albert) wrote on the subject to the Duke of Wellington, whodid notlike it),19and meant to try and avoid all the objections. On his observing that no one had entirely understood the Government Bill, I said that the Government had not even been allowed to bring it in, which was a most unfair proceeding; upon which Lord Derby reiterated his professions of this being no preconcerted plan of his Party's, but that it was "symptomatic"; he, however, was obliged to own that it was rather hard and not quite fair on the late Government.
I then explained to him the arrangement respecting the drafts from the Foreign Office going first to him before they came to me, and wished this should be continued, which he promised should be done, as well as that all important Colonial despatches should be sent to me. Touched upon the various critical questions on the Continent.... Lord Derby said that all Louis Napoleon's views were contained in his bookIdées Napoléonienneswritten in '39, for that he was more a man of "Idées fixes" than any one; and in this book he spoke of gaining territory bydiplomacyand not by war. Lord Derby gave us a note from Louis Napoleon to Lord Malmesbury, congratulating him on his appointment, professing the most friendly and pacific intentions, and hoping the Cowleys would (as they do) remain at Paris.
Victoria R.
Footnote 18: Extract from Her Majesty'sJournal.
Footnote 19: This Memorandum is given in chap. xlv. of theLife of the Prince Consort.
FAREWELL AUDIENCES
Buckingham Palace,27th February 1852.
To-day the formal change of Government took place. The old Ministers who had Seals to give up assembled at half-past eleven, and had their Audiences in the following order:
Sir George Greywas very much overcome; promised at our request to do what he could to keep his friends moderate and united. Spoke well of his successor, Mr Walpole, and assured the Queen that he left the country in a most quiet and contented state.
Lord Greywas sorry that the resignation had taken place before the Caffre Debate, in which he had hoped to make a triumphant defence; he was sure it must have come to this from the way in which Lord John had managed matters. He had never had his measures thoroughly considered when he brought them forward. He (Lord Grey) had had to remonstrate very strongly about this Militia Bill, which had not even been laid, printed, before the Cabinet, and had not been discussed at all; he himself had objected to the greater part of it, and had always expected to have an opportunity of making his opinion heard; instead of spending Christmas at Woburn he ought to have digested his measures; this was not fair to his colleagues, and he could never have the same confidence in Lord John as before. We urged him to forget what had passed and to do the best for the future; that it was important the Party should be kept together and should unite if possible with the Peelites, so that the Queen might hope to get a strong Government. Lord Grey thought there was little chance of this. The next Government could never be as moderate again as this had been; this he had always dreaded, and was the reason why he lamented that Lord John had failed in his negotiation with the Peelites this winter, upon Lord Palmerston's dismissal; but the fact was Lord John had never wished it to succeed, and it had been unfair that he had not stated to them (the Peelites) that all his colleagues were ready to give up their places.
Lord Granvillehad seen Lord Malmesbury several times, who appeared to him to take pains about informing himself on the state of Foreign Affairs, but seemed inclined to be ambitious of acquiring the merit of being exclusivelyEnglishin his policy; this was quite right, but might be carried too far; however, Lord Malmesbury was cautious and moderate.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer(Sir Charles Wood) was not surprised at the fate of the Government, although they had not expected to be defeated on the Militia Bill; in fact, a division had hardly been looked for, as Lord John had talked the day before with Lord Palmerston, and satisfied him that all his objections should be provided against in the Bill. He thought it was better, however, that the Caffre Debate had not been waited for, which must have been a personal and very acrimonious one. He thought Lord Grey had not been very discreet in his language to the Queen on Lord John. Sir J. Graham had been in a difficulty with his own Party, and therefore had not wished to encourage Lord John's negotiation with the Peelites. He promised that, for his part, he would do all hecould to keep his Party from doing anything violent, but that he was afraid many others would be so, and that he and Lord Grey had in vain tried to persuade Mr Cobden to remain quiet.
Lord Derby had then an Audience to explain what should be done at the Council. He regretted the Duchess of Northumberland's declining to be Mistress of the Robes, on account of ill-health, which had been communicated to the Queen by her father, Lord Westminster. He proposed the Duchess of Argyll, whom the Queen allowed to be sounded (though feeling certain, that, considering the Liberal views of her husband, she will not accept it), and sanctioned his sounding also the Duchess of Athole, whom the Queen wished to make the offer to, in case the Duchess of Argyll declined. Lord Derby stated the difficulty he was in with Sir A. B., whose wife had never been received at Court or in society, although she had run away with him when he was still at school, and was nearly seventy years old. The Queen said it would not do to receive her now at Court, although society might do in that respect what it pleased; it was a principle at Court not to receive ladies whose characters are under a stigma.
We now proceeded to the Council, which was attended only by three Councillors, the other seventeen having all had to be sworn in as Privy Councillors first.20
Footnote 20:SeeDisraeli'sEndymion(chap. c.) for a graphic description of this remarkable scene.
After the Council Lord Hardinge was called to the Queen, and explained that he accepted the Ordnance only on the condition that he was not to be expected to give a vote which would reverse the policy of Sir R. Peel, to which he had hitherto adhered. He had thought it his duty, however, not to refuse his services to the Crown after the many marks of favour he had received from the Queen.
LORD DERBY'S PROGRAMME
Lord Derby then had an Audience to explain what he intended to state in Parliament this evening as the programme of his Ministerial Policy. It was very fluent and very able, but so completely the same as the Speech which he has since delivered, that I must refer to its account in the reports. When he came to the passage regarding the Church, the Queen expressed to him her sense of the importance not to havePuseyitesorRomanisersrecommended for appointments in the Church as bishops or clergymen. Lord Derby declared himselfLORD DERBY AND THE CHURCHas decidedly hostile to the Puseyite tendency, and ready to watch over the Protestant character of the Church. He said he did not pretend to give a decided opinion on so difficult anddelicate a point, but it had struck him that although nobody could think in earnest of reviving the old Convocation, yet the disputes in the Church perhaps could be most readily settled by some Assembly representing the laity as well as the clergy. I expressed it as my opinion that some such plan would succeed, provided the Church Constitution was built up from the bottom, giving the Vestries a legislative character in the parishes leading up to Diocesan Assemblies, and finally to a general one.
On Education he spoke very liberally, but seemed inclined to support the views of the bishops against the so-called "management clauses" of the Privy Council, viz. not to allow grants to schools even if the parish should prefer the bishops' inspection to the Privy Council inspection.
Albert.
St James's Square,27th February 1852.
(Half-past sevenp.m.)
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, hastens to acquaint your Majesty, having just returned from the House of Lords, that his statement, going over the topics the substance of which he had the honour of submitting to your Majesty was, as far as he could judge, favourably received. Earl Grey attempted to provoke a Corn Law discussion, but the feeling of the House was against the premature introduction of so complicated and exciting a topic. Lord Aberdeen, dissenting from any alteration of commercial policy, entirely concurred in Lord Derby's views of Foreign Affairs, and of the course to be adopted in dealing with Foreign Nations. Lord Derby did not omit to lay stress upon "the strict adherence, in letter and in spirit, to the obligations of Treaties," which was well received.
Laeken,5th March 1852.
My dearest Victoria,—I have to offer my affectionate thanks for a most gracious and long letter of the 2nd.
Within these days we have not had anything very important, but, generally speaking, there has been, at least in appearance, a quieter disposition in the ruling power at Paris. We are here in the awkward position of persons in hot climates, who find themselves in company, for instance in their beds, with asnake; they mustnot move, because that irritatesthe creature, but they can hardly remain as they are, without a fair chance of being bitten.... Your devoted Uncle,
Leopold R.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Osborne,9th March 1852.
My dearest Uncle,—Your dear letter of the 5th reached me just after we arrived here, at our sweet, peaceful little abode.
It seems that Louis Napoleon's mind is chiefly engrossed with measures for the interior of France, and that the serious question of Switzerland is becoming less menacing. On the other hand, Austria behaves with a hostility, and I must say folly, which prevents all attempts at reconciliation. All the admirers of Austria consider Prince Schwartzenberg21a madman, and the Emperor Nicholas said that he was "Lord Palmerston in a white uniform." What a calamity this is at the present moment!
We have a most talented, capable, and courageous Prime Minister, but all his people have no experience—have never been inany sortof office before!
On Friday the House of Commons meets again, and I doubt not great violence will be displayed.
With every kind love to my dear Cousins, ever your very devoted Niece,
Victoria R.
Footnote 21: Prime Minister of Austria. He died in the April following.
Buckingham Palace,10th March 1852.
Colonel Phipps' humble duty to your Majesty.
He has this day visited the Marionette Theatre, and feels quite certain not only that it would not be a suitable theatre for your Majesty to visit, but that your Majesty would derive no amusement from it.
The mechanism of the puppets is only passable, and the matter of the entertainment stupid and tiresome, consisting in a great part of worn-out old English songs, such as "The death of Nelson"! Colonel Phipps considers "Punch" a much more amusing performance. Lady Mount Edgecumbe, who was in a box there, would probably give your Majesty an account of it....
The report in London is, that Lord John Russell is to recommend moderation at the meeting at his house to-morrow. Hehas, very foolishly, subjected himself to another rebuff from Lord Palmerston by inviting him to attend that meeting, which Lord Palmerston has peremptorily refused. Since that, however, Lady Palmerston has called upon Lady John with a view to apersonal—not political—reconciliation. Lady Palmerston, as Colonel Phipps hears, still persists in the unfounded accusation against Lord John of having quoted your Majesty's Minute in the House of Commons without giving Lord Palmerston notice of his intention.22
Footnote 22: Palmerston, however, admitted the contrary (Life of the Prince Consort, vol. ii. chap. xliv.).
DEMOCRACY
Laeken,12th March 1852.
My dearest Victoria,—I have to thank you for a most kind letter from peaceful Osborne, which must doubly appear so to you now, after all the troubles of the recent Ministerial arrangements. I am glad that you are struck with the good qualities of your new Premier. I am sure his great wish will be to make the best possible Minister of the Crown. His task will be very difficult. "Bread, cheap bread," "the poor oppressed by thearistocratie," etc.—a whole vocabulary of exciting words of that kind will be put forward to inflame the popular mind; and of all the Sovereigns, the Sovereign "People" is certainly one of the most fanciful and fickle. Our neighbour in France shows this more than any other on the whole globe; the Nation there isstilltheSovereign, and this renders the President absolute, because he is the representative of the supreme will of thesupreme Nation, sending us constantly some new exiles here, which is very unpleasant. We are going on very gently, merely putting those means of defence a little in order, which ought by rights always to be so, if it was not for the ultra-unwise economy of Parliaments and Chambers. Without, at least, comparative security by means of well-regulated measures of defence, no country, be it great or small, can be considered as possessing National Independence. I must say that in Austria, at least Schwartzenberg, they are very much intoxicated. I hope they will grow sober again soon. It was very kind of you to have visited the poor Orleans Family. Rarely one has seen a family so struck in their affections, fortunes, happiness; and it is a sad case. Those unfortunate Spanish marriages have much contributed to it; even angelic Louise had been caught byl'honneur de la maison de Bourbon.... Your devoted Uncle,
Leopold R.
THE NEW MILITIA BILL
Osborne,12th March 1852.
The Queen must now answer Lord Derby on the questions which form the subjects of his three last communications.
With regard to the Militia Bill, she must admit that her suggestions are liable to the objections pointed out by Lord Derby, although they would offer advantages in other respects. The Queen will therefore sanction the measure as proposed, and now further explained by Lord Derby.
The despatches transmitted from the Foreign Office referring to the Swiss question23could not fail to give the Queen as much satisfaction as they did to Lord Derby, as they show indications of a more conciliatory intention,for the presentat least. As Switzerland has yielded, France and Austria ought to be satisfied, and the Queen only hopes we may not see them pushing their demands further after a short interval!
The probability of a war with the Burmese is a sad prospect. The Queen thinks, however, that the view taken by Lord Dalhousie of the proceedings at Rangoon, and of the steps now to be taken to preserve peace, is very judicious, and fully concurs with the letter sent out by the Secret Committee. She now returns it, together with the despatch.
The despatches from Prince Schwartzenberg to Count Buol are satisfactory in one sense, as showing a readiness to return to the English Alliance, but unfortunately only under the supposition that we would make war upon liberty together; they exhibit a profound ignorance of this country.24The Queen is quite sure that Lord Derby will know how to accept all that is favourable in the Austrian overtures without letting it be supposed that we could for a moment think of joining in the policy pursued at this moment by the great Continental Powers. As Lord Derby's speech has been referred to by Prince Schwartzenberg, it would furnish the best text for the answer. The President seems really to have been seriously ill.
Footnote 23: The French had been pressing the Swiss Government to expel refugees, and Austria supported the French President.
Footnote 24: Lord Derby had urged that a more conciliatory message should accompany Lord Granville's last despatch, which, because of its unfriendly tone, Count Buol had delayed sending on to Vienna. The precise language (he said) must depend on what information Count Buol could supply.
Osborne,14th March 1852.
The Queen has received this morning Lord Derby's letter respecting the St Albans' Disfranchisement Bill, and is glad tohear that Lord Derby means to take up this Bill as dropped by the late Government. Whether the mode of transferring these seats proposed by Lord Derby will meet with as little opposition in Parliament as he anticipates, the Queen is not able to form a correct judgment of. It may be liable to the imputation of being intended to add to the power of the landed interest. This might not be at all objectionable in itself, but it may be doubtful how far the House of Commons may be disposed to concur in it at the present moment. This will be for Lord Derby to consider, but the Queen will not withhold her sanction from the measure.
She knows that Lord John Russell meant to give the vacant seats to Birkenhead. Are not there two seats still vacant from the Disfranchisement of Sudbury? and would it not be better (if so) to dispose of all four at the same time? There is an impression also gaining ground that, with a view to prevent the Franchise being given exclusively toNumbers, to the detriment ofInterests, it might be desirable to give new seats to certain corporate bodies, such as the Scotch Universities, the Temple and Lincoln's Inn, the East India Company, etc., etc.25
Footnote 25: The Government eventually proposed that the four seats taken from St Albans and Sudbury should be assigned to South Lancashire and the West Riding; but, on the ground that a Ministry on sufferance should confine itself to necessary legislation, Mr Gladstone induced the House by a great majority to shelve the proposal.
MR DISRAELI
House of Commons,15th March 1852.
(Monday night.)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his humble duty to your Majesty, informs your Majesty of what occurred in the House of Commons this evening.
Mr Villiers opened the proceedings, terse and elaborate, but not in his happiest style. He called upon the House to contrast the state of the country at the beginning of the year and at the present moment. But he could not induce the House to believe that "all now was distrust and alarm."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, declined to bring forward in the present Parliament any proposition to change our commercial system, and would not pledge himself to propose in a future Parliament any duty on corn. He said a duty on corn was a measure, not a principle, and that if preferable measures for the redress of agricultural grievances than a five-shilling duty on corn (mentioned by Mr Villiers) could be devised, he should adopt them—a declaration received with universal favour on the Government side.
Lord John Russell replied to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in consequence of some notice by the former of the strange construction of a new Opposition to force a Dissolution of Parliament by a Minister who, three weeks ago, had declared such Dissolution inexpedient. It was not a successful speech.
THE OPPOSITION
The great speech on the Opposition side was that of Sir James Graham: elaborate, malignant, mischievous. His position was this: that Lord Derby, as a man of honour, was bound to propose taxes on food, and that if he did so, revolution was inevitable.
Mr Gladstone and Lord Palmerston both spoke in the same vein, the necessity of immediate Dissolution after the passing of the "necessary" measures; but the question soon arose, What is "necessary"?
Lord Palmerston thought the Militia Bill "necessary," upon which the League26immediately rose and denied that conclusion.
There seemed in the House a great reluctance to avoid a violent course, but a very general wish, on the Opposition side, for as speedy a Dissolution as public necessity would permit.
The evening, however, was not disadvantageous to the Government. All which is most humbly submitted to your Majesty, by your Majesty's most dutiful Subject and Servant,
B. Disraeli.
Footnote 26: The members belonging to the Manchester School of Politics.
THE QUESTION OF DISSOLUTION
Osborne,17th March 1852.
My dearest Uncle,—I delayed writing till to-day as I wished to see the papers first, and be able to give you an account of the first Debate in the two Houses. They are not satisfactory, because both Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli refuse to give a straightforward answer as to their policy, the uncertainty as to which will do serious harm.27The Opposition are very determined, andwithright, to insist on this being given, and on as early a Dissolution as possible. The Government will be forced to do this, but it is very unwise, after allthisagitation for the last five years and a half,not[to] come forward manfully and to state what they intend to do. We tried to impress Lord Derby with the necessity of this course, and I hoped we had succeeded, but his speech has not been what it ought to have been in this respect.