The Letters of Queen Victoria Volume Iii Part 88

The Duke of Argyll, Lord Elgin, and Mr Cardwell were absent. I am, Sir, with great respect, your obedient, humble, and faithful Servant,

GRANVILLE.

[Footnote 72: "Pam. asked for fuller powers to act during the recess, which was met by a general a.s.surance of readiness to come up by night trains." Lord Granville to the Duke of Argyll. See the _Life of Lord Granville_, vol. i. p. 358.]

[Pageheading: SARDINIA AND CENTRAL ITALY]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

Balmoral, _5th September 1859_.

Lord John Russell will not be surprised if the despatches of Lord Cowley and drafts by Lord John in answer to them, which the Queen returns to him, have given her much pain. Here we have the very interference with advice to which the Queen had objected when officially brought before her for her sanction, to which the Cabinet objected, and which Lord John Russell agreed to withdraw, carried on by direct communication of the Prime Minister through the French Amba.s.sador with the Emperor; and we have the very effect produced which the Queen dreaded, viz. the French Minister insinuating that we called upon his master to do that which he would consider so dishonourable that he would rather resign than be a party to it! What is the use of the Queen's open and, she fears, sometimes wearisome correspondence, with her Ministers, what the use of long deliberations of the Cabinet, if the very policy can be carried out by indirect means which is set aside officially, and what protection has the Queen against this practice? Lord John Russell's distinction also between his own official and private opinion or advice given to a Foreign Minister is a most dangerous, and, the Queen thinks, untenable theory, open to the same objections, for what he states will have the weight of the official character of the Foreign Secretary, whether stated as his private or his public opinion. His advice to the Marquis d'Azeglio[73] is moreover quite open to the inference drawn by Count Walewski, that it is an encouragement to _Sardinia_, to Military intervention in and occupation of the Duchies, and Lord John Russell's answer hardly meets this point if left as it stands at present; for "the _name_ of the King of Sardinia,... _the chief of a well-disciplined army_," will have little influence unless he is prepared to use that army.

The Queen must ask Lord John to instruct Lord Cowley to state to Count Walewski that no opinions expressed on Foreign Policy are those of "Her Majesty's Government" but those which are given in the official and regular way, and that Her Majesty's Government never thought of advising the French Government to break the solemn engagements into which the Emperor Napoleon entered towards the Emperor of Austria at Villafranca.

The Queen asks Lord John to communicate this letter to Lord Palmerston.

[Footnote 73: Ma.s.simo d'Azeglio, Sardinian Commissioner in the Romagna. He had been Prime Minister of Sardinia from 1849 till 1852, when Cavour, who had been in his ministry, succeeded him.]

[Pageheading: ENGLAND INVOLVED]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BALMORAL, _6th September 1859_.

The Queen returns Lord Palmerston's letter, together with the other papers sent to her, to Lord John. She is glad to find that he thinks that no answer ought to be given to Count Persigny, but she thinks it important that it should be _stated to him that no answer can be given_. Unfortunately, here has been again the Prime Minister declaring that he _quite agrees_ with the French Amba.s.sador, but that the proposal should come officially from France to be placed before the Cabinet. The inference must be that the Cabinet and the Queen will, as a matter of course, agree also, when it is so submitted. Now what is it that Lord Palmerston has approved? A plan for an alliance of England with France for the purpose of _overruling_ Austria, if the Duchies in which she is the heir, and to which the Archdukes were to return in accordance with the stipulations of Villafranca, were given to Sardinia and Austria should object. It is hoped indeed that this will not immediately lead to war with her, but France is to expect that she will not be left to fight single-handed for an object declared to be more English than French! Thus we are dragged step by step into the position of a party in the Italian strife. The Queen thinks it inc.u.mbent upon her not to leave Lord John Russell in ignorance of the fact that _she_ could not approve such a policy reversing our whole position since the commencement of the War.

The Queen must leave it to Lord John to consider how far it would be fair to his colleagues in the Cabinet to leave them unacquainted with the various private steps lately taken, which must seriously affect their free consideration of the important question upon which they have hitherto pledged themselves to a distinct principle.

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

BALMORAL, _6th September 1859_.

The Queen returns to Lord Palmerston his correspondence with M. de Persigny. Lord John Russell will have sent him her letter to him on this subject. She has nothing to add, but to repeat her conviction of the great danger and inconvenience arising out of such private communications, and the apprehension she must naturally feel that the attempt to convince the Emperor Napoleon that it would be for his interest to break his word to the Emperor of Austria should reflect upon the honour of the Queen's Government. She must insist upon this being distinctly guarded against.

[Pageheading: LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S CRITICISMS]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

ABERGELDIE, _7th September 1859_.

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he cannot refrain from making some remarks on your Majesty's letter of yesterday.

Lord Palmerston appears to have answered M. de Persigny by saying that he personally agreed with him, but that the proposition he had sketched must come from the French Government; that it must come from them officially, and it would then have to be maturely considered by the Cabinet.

Lord John Russell sees nothing to object to in this language. It might be embarra.s.sing to Lord Palmerston if such a proposition were to come from France, and were to be rejected by the Cabinet. But Lord Palmerston could easily explain the matter to M. de Persigny. Lord Palmerston does not appear to have committed your Majesty, or Lord John Russell, or the Cabinet in any way.

On the other hand, your Majesty cannot mean that the Cabinet is to be precluded from maturely considering any proposition which may come officially from France.

Lord John Russell feels, on his own part, that he must offer to your Majesty such advice as he thinks best adapted to secure the interests and dignity of your Majesty and the country. He will be held by Parliament responsible for that advice. It will be always in your Majesty's power to reject it altogether.

Lord John Russell is of opinion that there never was a time when it was less expedient to fetter this country by prospective engagements.

But it does not follow that the policy pursued last autumn and winter, and which ended in a war in Italy, would be the best course in any future contingency. Should another war arise it will be very difficult for Great Britain to remain neutral. For this reason it is desirable to prevent such a war, if possible. It was difficult last winter, and may be still more difficult this winter. For the present there is no better course than to keep this country free from engagements. After the peace of Zurich is made, or not made, we shall see our way better.

Lord John Russell has never concealed his opinions from his colleagues. He even warned them that France might make such a proposition as M. de Persigny now contemplates.

The enclosed letter from Lord Palmerston and Mr Fane's[74] despatch will show the feelings which exist between Austria and Prussia. The Emperor Napoleon does not appear to have satisfied Prince Metternich.

His object evidently is to gain time.

[Footnote 74: Julian Henry Fane, son of the eleventh Earl of Westmorland, and Secretary of Emba.s.sy at Vienna.]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BALMORAL, _7th September 1859_.

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter. She can ask for nothing better than "that we should be kept from any engagements," and she never could have intended to convey the impression that she wished to "see the Cabinet precluded from taking into consideration any proposal France might make." What she objects to is binding beforehand the Government by expressions of opinion of its leading members to the French Government, and thus _bringing about_ those French proposals which it will be most embarra.s.sing to the Cabinet either to reject or adopt. It is absolutely necessary, therefore, that the French Government should be told that the opinions given were private opinions not binding the Government. Lord John has not yet sent to the Queen drafts in conformity with her wishes expressed in her letter of the day before yesterday.

[Pageheading: LETTERS TO FOREIGN SOVEREIGNS]

_Viscount Palmerston to Queen Victoria._

BROADLANDS, _9th September 1859_.

Viscount Palmerston presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has had the honour to receive your Majesty's communication of the 6th of this month; and although he had the honour of addressing your Majesty yesterday afternoon, he deems it his duty to submit some observations upon this communication.

Your Majesty states that Viscount Palmerston in his letter to Count Persigny endeavoured to persuade the Emperor of the French to break his word to the Emperor of Austria, but Viscount Palmerston must beg very respectfully but entirely to deny that accusation....[75]