The Letters of Queen Victoria Volume Iii Part 89

Your Majesty is pleased to observe upon the danger and inconvenience of private communications with Foreign Ministers, and to add that your Majesty must insist upon this being distinctly guarded against.

Viscount [Palmerston] would be very desirous of knowing the precise meaning of those last words. If your Majesty means that what is to be guarded against is any attempt to induce a Foreign Sovereign to break his word, Viscount Palmerston cordially subscribes to that opinion, and maintains that he has not done so in the past, and declares that he has no intention of doing so in the future. But if your Majesty's meaning is that Viscount Palmerston is to be debarred from communicating with Foreign Ministers except for the purpose of informing them officially of formal decisions of the British Government, Viscount Palmerston would beg humbly and respectfully to represent to your Majesty that such a curtailment of the proper and const.i.tutional functions of the office which he holds would render it impossible for him to serve your Majesty consistently with his own honour or with advantage to the public interest.

[Footnote 75: Lord Palmerston then gives a very long and detailed account of his position.]

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN'S OPINION]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

BALMORAL, _11th September 1859_.

Lord Palmerston has written (on the 8th) a long letter to the Queen, which, besides giving his private opinion on the politics of Italy, which were not disputed, purports to show that when a principle of policy had been adopted by the Cabinet and sanctioned by the Sovereign, the Foreign Secretary ought not to be impeded in carrying out the details, either by objections raised to them by the Sovereign, or by making them dependent on the meetings of Cabinets, difficult to obtain at this time of year. Now the question raised by the Queen was _just the reverse_. The principle adopted by the Cabinet and sanctioned by the Queen was: not to interfere by active advice with the peace to be made at Zurich; the Foreign Secretary had submitted a draft which had appeared to the Queen to be in contradiction to this principle, which, upon the Sovereign's objection, he withdrew; the Cabinet was summoned and rejected a similar draft submitted to them, and the Queen then complained that the very same advice should have been given by the Prime Minister in an indirect way to which the Sovereign and Cabinet could not agree openly. Lord Palmerston's letter was not communicated to the Queen until it had been alluded to in a public despatch, and Count Walewski had insinuated to our Amba.s.sador that, rather than be a party to a line of conduct, which he would look upon as dishonourable for his master, he would resign office. What the Queen has asked for is: an intimation to the French Government that private communications like that of Lord Palmerston to M. de Persigny must not be looked upon as the official expression of the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, and that we disclaim ever having intended to induce the Emperor to break his engagements made at Villafranca, whatever they may have been. The Queen does not conceive that Lord Palmerston can object to this course, nor does he attempt to do so in his letter.

_P.S._--Since writing the above the Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter of the 9th. As she has just written at length, she does not conceive that it would be necessary to make any further observations in reply, except to a distinct question put by him in the latter part of his letter, viz. what the Queen wishes to have "distinctly guarded against."

It is the danger and inconvenience of private communications with Foreign Ministers, without a distinct understanding that they are strictly private, and not to be treated as conveying the opinions of Her Majesty's Government, where the sanction of the Crown and adhesion of the Cabinet have not been obtained. Lord John Russell has now expressed this in a paragraph in one of his drafts to Lord Cowley, which he will send to Lord Palmerston.

As a proof of the necessity of such caution, the Queen, has only to refer to the public use made of Lord Palmerston's private letter to Count Persigny, and the use made to our prejudice by the Emperor Napoleon at the time of the armistice at Villafranca of a private communication with Count Persigny, which was represented to imply a.s.sent to certain conditions of peace by England, with a desire of pressing them on Austria, when no opinion had been expressed by the Government to justify such an inference.

[Pageheading: ST JUAN]

_The Duke of Newcastle to Queen Victoria._

DOWNING STREET, _26th September 1859_.

The Duke of Newcastle presents his humble duty to your Majesty.

Your Majesty will receive from Sir George Lewis full information of the serious intelligence which has been received to-day from Washington and Vancouver Island respecting the Military occupation by United States troops of the island of St Juan,[76] and of the view taken of it by your Majesty's Government.

The Duke of Newcastle begs leave to receive your Majesty's instructions upon the acceptance of an offer made by Lord Clarendon whilst on a visit at Clumber last week. Lord Clarendon received not long ago a private letter from the President of the United States. He proposes that in answering this letter he should express his concern at these untoward events, and particularly at their occurrence at a time when, if not speedily settled, they would prevent the fulfilment of a project which he had reason to think had been in contemplation--a visit to Washington by the Prince of Wales on his return from Canada.

Lord Clarendon expresses his belief that nothing would so much gratify Mr Buchanan as a visit from His Royal Highness to the United States during his Presidency....

Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell see no objection to such a letter from Lord Clarendon, which, whilst it would carry weight as coming from one occupying so high a position in this country, would bear no official character; but as the name of the Prince of Wales would be used, however hypothetically, such a letter would not be written by Lord Clarendon or accepted by the Government without your Majesty's sanction.

The Duke of Newcastle therefore requests to be favoured with your Majesty's commands that he may communicate them to Lord Clarendon.

[Footnote 76: A dispute had arisen out of the Oregon affair (see _ante_, vol. ii., Introductory Notes to Chapters XIV, and XV), concerning the rival claims of this country and the United States to the small island of St Juan, situated between Vancouver Island and the State of Washington, which is adjacent to the Canadian frontier.]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._[77]

WINDSOR CASTLE, _1st December 1859_.

The Queen returns Lord Cowley's interesting letter. She trusts that it will be made quite clear to the Emperor that he has no chance of getting us to join him in the war with Austria, which he may be tempted or driven to renew. This alternative constantly recurs to his mind....

[Footnote 77: On the 10th of November the Treaty of Zurich, embodying the terms arranged at Villafranca, had been signed, and a Congress was determined upon, to settle Italian affairs.]

[Pageheading: ENGLAND AND FRANCE]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

FOREIGN OFFICE, _1st December 1859_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he has written to Lord Cowley, according to your Majesty's gracious permission. The question of supporting the Emperor of the French, if Austria should attempt force to impose a government in Italy against the popular will, must be judged of according to the circ.u.mstances, should they arise. Lord John Russell is certainly not prepared to say that a case may not arise when the interests of Great Britain might require that she should give material support to the Emperor of the French. But he considers such a case as very improbable, and that the fear of such an alliance will prevent Austria from disturbing the peace of Europe.

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _2nd December 1859_.

The Queen was extremely sorry to find from Lord John Russell's letter of yesterday that he contemplates the possibility of our joining France in a fresh Italian war or demonstration of war against Austria, which the Queen had put entirely out of the question. If the Emperor of the French were allowed to believe in such a possibility, he would have it in his power to bring it about, or obtain a just cause of complaint against us, if we abandoned him. It would be just as dangerous and unfair towards the Emperor to mislead him in this respect as it would be for the Queen to conceal from Lord John that under no pretence will she depart from her position of neutrality in the Italian quarrel, and inflict upon her country and Europe the calamity of war on that account.

[Pageheading: SIR JAMES HUDSON]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _6th December 1859_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter recommending Sir James Hudson[78] as the Second Representative at the Congress of Paris. The Queen must decline sanctioning this selection. Lord John Russell has in his last letters avowed his conviction that England cannot again remain neutral in an Italian war, and his opinion that she ought to support France and Sardinia by arms if Austria were to attempt to recover her supremacy by force. Lord Cowley wrote on the 29th ult. that Prince Metternich declared that Austria kept her Army ready because she could not permit either the military occupation of the Duchies by Sardinia or their annexation to that kingdom. Lord Palmerston sent to the Queen yesterday evening the copy of a letter he wrote to Count Persigny urging the Emperor Napoleon by every argument he can find to consent to this annexation, even to the length of a.s.suring him that such a state would always be obliged to lean on France.

The Queen cannot help drawing her conclusions from these facts, and feels more than ever the great responsibility resting on her, to preserve to her people the blessings of peace. She wishes this letter to be communicated to Lord Palmerston and to the Cabinet.

The Queen approves of Lord Cowley as her First Representative at the Congress.

[Footnote 78: Sir James Hudson, Minister at Turin, had been a sympathiser in the policy of Cavour, to an extent almost incompatible with his position as a British representative.]