The Letters of Queen Victoria Volume Iii Part 81

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _1st June 1859_.

The Queen takes objection to the wording of the two paragraphs[41]

about the war and our armaments. As it stands, it conveys the impression of a determination on the Queen's part of maintaining a neutrality--_a tout prix_--whatever circ.u.mstances may arise, which would do harm abroad, and be inconvenient at home.[42] What the Queen may express is her wish to remain neutral, and her hope that circ.u.mstances will allow her to do so. The paragraph about the Navy[43] as it stands makes our position still more humble, as it contains a public apology for arming, and yet betrays fear of our being attacked by France.

The Queen suggests two amended forms for these pa.s.sages, in which she has taken pains to preserve Lord Derby's words as far as is possible, with an avoidance of the objections before stated.

"Those endeavours have unhappily failed, and war has been declared between France and Sardinia on one side, and Austria on the other.

I continue to receive at the same time a.s.surances of friendship from both contending parties. It being my anxious desire to preserve to my people the blessing of uninterrupted peace, I trust in G.o.d's a.s.sistance to enable me to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality."

"Considering, however, the present state of Europe, and the complications which a war, carried on by some of its great Powers, may produce, I have deemed it necessary, for the security of my dominions and the honour of my Crown, to increase my Naval Forces to an amount exceeding that which has been sanctioned by Parliament."

[Footnote 41: In the Speech to be delivered by the Queen at the opening of Parliament on the 7th of June.]

[Footnote 42: The pa.s.sage originally ran: "Receiving a.s.surances of friendship from both the contending parties, I intend to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality, and I hope, with G.o.d's a.s.sistance, to preserve to my people the blessing of continued peace."]

[Footnote 43: The pa.s.sage originally ran: "I have, however, deemed it necessary, in the present state of Europe, with no object of aggression, but for the security of my dominions, and for the honour of my Crown, to increase my Naval Forces to an amount exceeding that which has been sanctioned by Parliament."]

[Pageheader: THE QUESTION OF NEUTRALITY]

[Pageheader: THE NAVY]

[Pageheading: LORD DERBY'S CRITICISMS]

_The Earl of Derby to Queen Victoria._

DOWNING STREET, _2nd June 1859_.

Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty that he has most anxiously, and with every desire to meet your Majesty's wishes, reflected upon the effect of the alterations suggested by your Majesty in the proposed Speech from the Throne. He has considered the consequences involved so serious that he has thought it right to confer upon the subject with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as Leader of the House of Commons; and it is a duty which he owes to your Majesty not to withhold the expression of their clear and unhesitating conviction. Lord Derby trusts that your Majesty will forgive the frankness with which, in the accompanying observations, he feels it necessary to submit to your Majesty the grounds for the view which they are compelled to take.

The first paragraph to which your Majesty takes exception is that which intimates your Majesty's "intention" to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality, and "hope" to be enabled to preserve peace. Your Majesty apprehends that this may be interpreted into a determination to preserve neutrality _a tout prix_; but Lord Derby would venture to observe that such an inference is negatived by the subsequent words, which only imply a "hope" of preserving peace. With the cessation of that hope, neutrality would necessarily terminate. But as matters stand at present, Lord Derby is warranted in a.s.suring your Majesty that if there is one subject on which more than another the mind of the country is unanimous, it is that of an entire abstinence from partic.i.p.ation in the struggle now going on in Italy. He collects this from the language of politicians of almost every cla.s.s, from all the public papers, from Addresses and Memorials which he receives every day--some urging, and some congratulating him upon the adoption of a perfectly neutral policy. The sympathies of the country are neither with France nor with Austria, but were it not for the intervention of France, they would be general in favour of Italy. The charge now made against your Majesty's servants, by the opposition Press, as the _Morning Post_ and _Daily News_, is that their neutrality covers such wishes and designs in favour of Austria; and any word in your Majesty's Speech which should imply a doubt of the continuance of strict impartiality, would, undoubtedly, provoke a hostile Amendment, which might very possibly be carried in the Sardinian sense, and which, if so carried, would place your Majesty in the painful position of having to select an Administration, pledged against the interests of Austria and of Germany. Lord Derby says nothing of the personal results to your Majesty's present servants, because, in such cases, personal considerations ought not to be allowed to prevail; and it is in the interest of the country only, and even of the very cause which your Majesty desires to uphold, that he earnestly trusts that your Majesty will not require any alteration in this part of the Speech.

There is, at this moment, in the country, a great jealousy and suspicion of France, and of her ulterior designs--as indicated by the demand of means of defence, the formation of Volunteer Corps, etc.--but it is neutralised, partly by sympathy for Italy, partly by suspicions, industriously circulated, of the pro-Austrian tendencies of the present Government. It is very important that the language of the Speech should be so decided as to negative this impression, and Lord Derby cannot but feel that if neutrality be spoken of not as a thing decided upon, but which, it is hoped, may be maintained, such language will be taken to intimate the expectation of the Government that it may, at no distant time, be departed from. In Lord Derby's humble opinion Peace should be spoken of as subject to doubt, because, out of the present struggle, complications may arise which may necessarily involve us in war; but neutrality, as between the present belligerents, should be a matter open to no doubt or question. If there be no attempt made to run counter to public opinion, and Austria should sustain serious reverses, the jealousy of France will increase, and the feeling of the country will support your Majesty in a war, should such arise, against her aggression; but if the slightest pretext be afforded for doubting the _bona fide_ character of British neutrality, or the firm determination to maintain it, an anti-German feeling will be excited, which will be fatal to the Administration, and seriously embarra.s.sing to your Majesty.

The same observations apply, with hardly less force, to part of the Amendment suggested by your Majesty to the paragraph regarding the Navy. With submission to your Majesty, Lord Derby can hardly look upon it as humiliating to a great country, in announcing a large increase of its Naval Force, to disclaim any object of aggression. These words, however, might, if your Majesty were so pleased, be omitted, though Lord Derby cannot go so far as to say that in his humble judgment the omission would be an improvement; but he trusts that your Majesty will be satisfied with a general reference to the "state of Europe" without speaking of the "complications which a war carried on by some of the Great Powers may produce." These words would infallibly lead to a demand for explanation, and for a statement of the nature of the "complications" which the Government foresaw as likely to lead to war.

In humbly tendering to your Majesty his most earnest advice that your Majesty will not insist on the proposed Amendments in his Draft Speech, he believes that he may a.s.sure your Majesty that he is expressing the unanimous opinion of his Colleagues. Of their sentiments your Majesty may judge by the fact that in the original draft he had spoken of your Majesty's "intention" to preserve peace "as long as it might be possible"; but by universal concurrence these latter words were struck out, and the "hope" was, instead of them, subst.i.tuted for the "intention." Should your Majesty, however, be pleased so to order, Lord Derby will immediately submit the question to the consideration of his Colleagues, in order that your Majesty may be put, in the most authentic form, in possession of their views.

He a.s.sures your Majesty that nothing can be more repugnant to his feelings than to appear to offer objections to any suggestions emanating from your Majesty; and he has only been induced to do so upon the present occasion by the deep conviction which he entertains of the danger attending the course proposed, and the serious embarra.s.sments which it would cause your Majesty. He regrets more especially having been compelled to take this step at a moment when your Majesty's thoughts are very differently engaged, and when it may be doubly irksome to have matters of public business pressed upon your Majesty's consideration.

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

DERBY.

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _3rd June 1859_.

The Queen has received Lord Derby's answer to her observations on the proposed Speech. There is in fact no difference of opinion between her and Lord Derby; the latter only keeps in view the effect which certain words will have in Parliament and upon the country, whilst she looks to the effect they will produce upon the European conflict. If the Queen were not obliged to speak, both positions might be well reconciled; but if what she is going to declare from the Throne is to allay suspicions purposely raised by the Opposition against the Government that they intended to take part at some moment or other in the war, and is to give absolute security to the country against this contingency, this will be the very thing France would wish to bring about in order to ensure to her the fullest liberty in prosecuting her schemes for disturbing and altering the territorial state of Europe.

How is this impression to be avoided? Lord Derby thinks that the expression of "hope" to be able to preserve peace to this country is a sufficient indication that this country reserves to herself still a certain liberty of action; but the Queen would have interpreted it rather as the expression of a hope, that we may not be attacked, particularly when followed by the sentence in which all intention of aggression is disclaimed, and that our armaments are merely meant for defence. The sense would then appear as this: "As the belligerents separately a.s.sure me of their friendship, I am determined to maintain a strict neutrality between them, and hope they may not change their minds, and attack me; I arm, but merely to defend myself if attacked."

This would abdicate on the part of this country her position as one of the arbiters of Europe, declare her indifference to treaties or the balance of power (which are, in fact, of the greatest value to her), and would preclude her from any action to preserve them. The Queen fully enters into the Parliamentary difficulty, and would deprecate nothing more than to expose the Government to a defeat on an Amendment which would lead to the formation of a new Government on the principle of neutrality _a tout prix_ imposed by Parliament on the Crown.

It will be for Lord Derby and his colleagues to consider how far they may be able to avoid this danger without exposing themselves to that pointed out by the Queen. She puts herself entirely in his hands, and had suggested the verbal amendments merely with a view to indicate the nature of the difficulty which had struck her. Whatever decision Lord Derby may on further reflection come to, the Queen is prepared to accept.[44]

[Footnote 44: Ultimately the Cabinet recommended the modification of the declaration of neutrality by the insertion of the words "between them"; so as to run: "I intend to maintain _between them_ a strict and impartial neutrality,"

etc.; and in the second paragraph proposed to omit the words "with no object of aggression, but"--and adopting the form of the Queen's paragraph, but omitting the words referring to possible complications, to leave it thus: "Considering, however, the present state of Europe, I have deemed it necessary for the security of my Dominions," etc.]

[Pageheading: NEGOTIATIONS WITH RUSSIA]

_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Malmesbury._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _5th June 1859_.

The Queen has read Lord Cowley's letter with regret. Nothing could be more dangerous and unwise than at this moment to enter into negotiations with Russia on the best manner of disposing of the Emperor of Austria's dominions. The Queen cannot understand how Lord Cowley can propose anything so indefensible in a moral point of view.

[Pageheading: DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS]

_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._

HOUSE OF COMMONS [? _7th June 1859_.]

(_Tuesday, quarter-past eight o'clock._)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer with his humble duty to your Majesty.

Lord Hartington[45] spoke like a gentleman; was badly seconded.

Chancellor of Exchequer rose immediately at six o'clock, and is just down. The House very full, and very enthusiastic.

The Chancellor of Exchequer presumes to say he thinks he satisfied his friends.[46]

[Footnote 45: Lord Hartington, afterwards eighth Duke of Devonshire, moved an Amendment to the Address, expressing a want of confidence in the Ministry.]

[Footnote 46: He flung his taunts right and left at the now united Opposition, and was especially bitter against Sir James Graham. Referring to the Liberal meeting on the 6th, Mr Disraeli reminded the House that Willis's Rooms had, as Almack's, formerly been maintained by fashionable patronesses.

"The distinguished a.s.semblies that met within those walls were controlled by a due admixture of dowagers and youthful beauties--young reputations and worn celebrities--and it was the object of all social ambition to enter there. Now Willis's Rooms are under the direction of patrons, and there are two of these patrons below the gangway" (indicating Lord John Russell and Mr Sidney Herbert). In regard to its Foreign Policy, he said the Government should not be condemned without direct doc.u.mentary evidence. Lord Malmesbury has since deplored Mr Disraeli's neglect to produce the Blue Book with the correspondence relating to the affairs of Italy and Austria, and stated that, had he laid it on the table, the debate would have ended differently (_Memoirs of an Ex-Minister_, vol. ii.