The Letters of Queen Victoria Volume Iii Part 76

She would consider it dangerous to the maintenance of India, to the dependence of the Indian Empire on the mother country, and to her Throne in these realms.

Such an Army would be freed from the proper control of the const.i.tutional monarchy. It would be removed from the direct command of the Crown, and entirely independent of Parliament. It would throw an unconst.i.tutional amount of power and patronage into the hands of the Indian Council and Government; it would be raised and maintained in antagonism to the Regular Army of the Crown; and professional jealousy, and personal and private interests, would needs drive it into a position of permanent hostility towards that Army.

This hostility has been already strongly marked in the proceedings of the Commission itself.

Its detrimental effects would not be confined to India alone, but would form a most dangerous obstacle to the maintenance of the government of the Regular Army by the Queen. Already, during the Crimean War, most of the blows levelled at the Army and the prerogative of the Crown were directed by Indian officers, of whom, in future, a vast number would be at home, without employment or recognised position, in compact organisation, and moved by a unity of feeling.

There may be points of detail, admitting differences of opinion as to the relative advantages of a purely local or general Military Force for India; but these are mere trifles, which sink into insignificance in the Queen's estimation, when she has to consider the duty which she owes to her Crown and her Country.

The Queen hopes Lord Derby will not consider that she intends, by this letter, unduly to influence his free consideration and decision as to the advice he may think it his duty to offer, but merely to guard against his being taken by surprise, and to prevent, if possible, an unseemly public difference between herself and Lord Stanley. She is impelled to the apprehension that such may arise from the manner in which, since the first transfer of the Indian Government to the Crown, every act of Lord Stanley has uniformly tended to place the Queen in a position which would render her helpless and powerless in resisting a scheme which certain persons, imbued with the old Indian traditions, would appear to wish to force upon the Crown.

The Queen does not expect an answer to this letter from Lord Derby, and asks him to treat it as strictly confidential.

The Queen sees that Lord Stanley means to make a statement on Monday on the Indian Finances. She trusts that there will be nothing said in that statement to prejudge the Army Question.

_Decipher from Lord Cowley._

PARIS, _6th February 1859_.

(1 A.M. _Received_ 4 A.M.)

A great change for the better. The Queen's letter has produced an excellent effect, as also the Debates in Parliament.[11] The Emperor has expressed himself ready to subscribe to every word of Lord Derby's speech.

[Footnote 11: Parliament was opened by the Queen in person on the 3rd; the ensuing debates, and especially the speeches of the Liberal leaders, showed that, however much the English nation, as a whole, might sympathise with Italian aspirations for the expulsion of the Austrians from Lombardy, they would regard unfavourably a war commenced in defiance of Treaty obligations.]

[Pageheading: THE INDIAN ARMY]

_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._

ST JAMES'S SQUARE, _6th February 1859_.

Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty his respectful acknowledgment of the explicitness with which the letter he had the honour of receiving last night conveys to him the intimation of your Majesty's views upon the important subject of the Indian Army.

He cannot, however, disguise from your Majesty the deep pain which that communication has occasioned him; first, that your Majesty should think that Lord Stanley has so far mistaken his duty as systematically to place your Majesty in a false position; and next because unless Lord Derby misconceives the purport of your Majesty's letter, he fears that it may leave him no alternative but that of humbly entreating to be relieved from a responsibility which nothing should have induced him to undertake but a sense of duty to your Majesty, and the conviction that he might rely with confidence upon your Majesty's continued support. It would ill become Lord Derby to attempt to argue a question on which your Majesty has expressed so strong a determination; he has studiously avoided taking any step which might prejudge a question so important as the organisation of your Majesty's Forces in India. He has awaited the report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the subject, and though aware of the wide difference of opinion which prevailed, has desired impartially to weigh and examine the arguments adduced on both sides, and he has in the meantime refused to give his sanction to a proposition, earnestly pressed upon the Government by Lord Canning, for immediately raising additional regiments for Indian Service. But the announcement of your Majesty's determination (if he rightly understands it), under no circ.u.mstances to continue an European Army in India, under terms of service different from those of the Line, paid out of Indian Revenues, and officered by men educated for that especial service, and looking to India for their whole career, places Lord Derby in a position of no little embarra.s.sment; for notwithstanding the gracious intimation that your Majesty does not desire unduly to influence his judgment as to the advice which he may tender, it amounts to a distinct warning that if tendered in a particular direction it has no chance of being accepted by your Majesty. Nor, with that knowledge on his part not shared by his colleagues, can he freely discuss with them the course which they may consider it their duty to pursue.

Lord Derby humbly trusts, therefore, that your Majesty will be graciously pleased, so far as the members of the Government are concerned, to absolve him from the obligation of secrecy, and to allow him to place before them a state of things which may lead to the most serious results, so far as their power of serving your Majesty is concerned.

Lord Derby will give Lord Stanley a caution not to say anything in his statement of Indian Finance which may prejudge the question of a single or separate armies; but he hardly thinks the caution necessary, as European troops, whether in one Service or in two, will equally be chargeable to the revenues of India, which will only be affected by the proportion which the whole of the European may bear to the whole of the native forces.

Lord Derby hopes that he may be permitted to offer his humble congratulations to your Majesty on the very favourable reports received from Paris by telegraph, and upon the highly satisfactory effects produced by your Majesty's private letter to the Emperor.

The above is humbly submitted by your Majesty's most dutiful Servant and Subject,

DERBY.

[Pageheading: INDIVISIBILITY OF ARMY]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _7th February 1859_.

The Queen is very sorry to learn from Lord Derby's letter, received last evening, that her communication to him on the Indian Army question had caused him deep pain. She had long hesitated whether she should write it, from a fear that its purport and motive might possibly be misunderstood; but feeling that there ought to exist nothing but the most unreserved and entire confidence between herself and her Prime Minister, she thought it inc.u.mbent upon her to let Lord Derby see exactly what was pa.s.sing in her mind.

If, notwithstanding the Queen's expressed hope that Lord Derby might not consider the communication as intended unduly to influence his free consideration of the important subject, he should feel that its possession, without being at liberty to communicate it to his colleagues, does so in effect, she would ask him to return it to her, and to consider it as not having been written. If he should think, however, that a communication of the Queen's views to the Cabinet is due to them, she is quite prepared to make one. In that case it would naturally have to be differently worded, would omit every reference to Lord Stanley, and might go more into detail.

The Queen cannot close this letter without correcting some misapprehensions into which Lord Derby seems to have fallen. It was not the Queen's intention to impute any motives of systematic action to Lord Stanley; she referred simply to facts and steps, known as well to Lord Derby as to herself, which "uniformly tended" to place her in a powerless position with regard to the Army question.

The Queen protested against "the _creation_ of a British Army distinct (in its existence and const.i.tutional position) from that of the Crown," and not against the "_continuance_ of an European Army, under terms of service different from the Line, paid out of Indian Revenues, and officered by men educated for that special service, and looking to India for their whole career." In fact, she does not understand what meaning Lord Derby attaches to the words "terms of service." Every force kept in India, however const.i.tuted, would be paid out of Indian Revenues. _This_ would therefore not form the distinction, and Lord Derby cannot intend to convey that on these revenues one set of Englishmen can have a greater claim than another; nor does she see why English officers, commanding English soldiers and charged with the maintenance of _their_ discipline and efficiency, should for that object require to be specially and differently educated, and be restricted to look to India for their whole career. Officers attached to native troops are in a different position.

[Pageheading: MISAPPREHENSION REMOVED]

_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._

ST JAMES'S SQUARE, _7th February 1859_.

Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty his grateful acknowledgments for your Majesty's most gracious note received this evening, the contents, and still more the tenor of which have relieved him from the painful apprehension that he might be called upon to choose between a strong sense of public duty, and, on the other side, his deep devotion to your Majesty's service, and his grat.i.tude for the favourable consideration which his imperfect attempts to discharge his public duty had always received at your Majesty's hand. The explanation, with which he has now been honoured, of your Majesty's views has entirely dispelled those apprehensions, and he feels that he has only to thank your Majesty for the gracious explanation, with which he has been honoured, of your Majesty's motives in addressing to him the letter which certainly caused him "deep pain."...[12]

[Footnote 12: Lord Derby then proceeded to deal at some length with the status of the troops in India, concluding with the opinion that the local forces in India should never exceed those sent from home as part of the Regular Army, subject to the ordinary routine of service.]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _8th February 1859_.

The Queen has received Lord Derby's letter of yesterday, and is pleased to find that he now appreciates the motives which dictated her first letter. It needs no a.s.surance on her side that she never doubted those which actuate Lord Derby. The Queen will, in compliance with his request, defer any further notice of the subject until the Commissioners shall have made their report; it would not be fair, however, to Lord Derby, not to add that she fears from his explanation that he has not now correctly estimated the nature of the Queen's objection, which is not to a variety of forces, terms of service, local or general employment, etc., etc., etc., established in one Army, but to the principle of _two_ British Armies.

[Pageheading: THE EMPEROR'S SPEECH]

_Queen Victoria to General Peel._[13]