ST JAMES"S SQUARE [_11th May_].
(9 P.M., _Tuesday_.)
Lord Derby, with his humble duty, submits to your Majesty the expression of his hope that the discussion, or rather conversation, which has taken place in the House of Lords this evening, may have been not only advantageous to the Government, but beneficial in its results to the public service....
After the discussion, Lord Ellenborough made his statement; and it is only doing bare justice to him to say that he made it in a manner and spirit which was most highly honourable to himself, and was fully appreciated by the House.
Public sympathy was entirely with him, especially when he vindicated the policy which he had a.s.serted, but took upon himself the whole and sole responsibility of having authorised the publication of the despatch--which he vindicated--and announced his own resignation rather than embarra.s.s his colleagues. Lord Grey shortly entered his protest against bringing into discussion the policy of the Proclamation and of the consequent despatch, into which Lord Ellenborough had certainly entered too largely, opposing, very broadly, the principle of confiscation against that of clemency. Lord Derby followed Lord Grey, and after an interruption on a point of form, vindicated the policy advocated in Lord Ellenborough"s despatch, at the same time that he expressed not only his hope, but his belief, that in practice the Governor-General would be found (and more especially judging from the alterations inserted in the last Proclamation of which an unofficial copy has been received) acting on the principles laid down in Lord Ellenborough"s despatch. In the tribute which he felt it his duty to pay to the personal, as well as political, character of Lord Ellenborough, the House concurred with entire unanimity and all did honour to the spirit which induced him to sacrifice his own position to the public service; and to atone, and more than atone, for an act of indiscretion by the frank avowal that he alone was responsible for it. Lord Derby thinks that the step which has been taken may, even probably, prevent the Motions intended to be made on Friday; and if made, will, almost certainly, result in a majority for the Government.
Lord Derby believes that he may possibly be in time to telegraph to Malta early to-morrow, to Lord Canning. In that case he will do himself the honour of submitting to your Majesty a copy of the message[31] sent, though he fears it will be impossible to do so before its despatch. He proposes in substance to say that the publication has been disapproved--that Lord Ellenborough has resigned in consequence--but that your Majesty"s Government adhere in principle to the policy laid down in the despatch of 19th April, and entertain an earnest hope that the Governor-General, judging from the modifications introduced into the amended Proclamation, has, in fact, the intention of acting in the same spirit; but that your Majesty"s Government are still of opinion that confiscation of private property ought to be made the exception, and not the rule, and to be enforced only against those who may stand out after a certain day, or who may be proved to have been guilty of more than ordinary crimes.
Lord Derby hopes that your Majesty will excuse a very hasty sketch of a very large subject.
[Footnote 31: _The Earl of Derby to Lord Lyons._
_12th May 1858._
Send on the following message to Lord Canning by the Indian mail.
The publication of the Secret Despatch of 19th April has been disapproved. Lord Ellenborough has resigned office. His successor has not been appointed. Nevertheless the policy indicated in the above despatch is approved by Her Majesty"s Government. Confiscation of property of private individuals (Talookdars and others) ought to be the exception and not the rule. It ought to be held out as a penalty on those who do not come in by a given day. From your amended Proclamation it is hoped that such is your intention. Let it be clearly understood that it is so. You were quite right in issuing no Proclamation till after a signal success. That once obtained, the more generous the terms, the better. A broad distinction must be drawn between the Talookdars of Oudh and the Sepoys who have been in our service. Confidence is felt in your judgment. You will not err if you lean to the side of humanity, especially as to nations of Oudh.
No private letters have been received from you since the change of Government.]
_Queen Victoria to the Earl of Derby._
_14th May 1858._
The Queen returns the extracts Lord Derby has sent to her. Lord Ellenborough"s despatch,[32] now before her for the first time, is very good and just in principle. But the Queen would be much surprised if it did not entirely coincide with the views of Lord Canning, at least as far as he has. .h.i.therto expressed any in his letters. So are also the sentiments written by Sir J. Lawrence; they contain almost the very expressions frequently used by Lord Canning.
Sir J. Login,[33] who holds the same opinion, and has great Indian experience, does not find any fault with the Proclamation, however seemingly it may sound at variance with these opinions, and this on account of the peculiar position of affairs in Oudh. It is a great pity that Lord Ellenborough, with his knowledge, experience, activity, and cleverness, should be so entirely unable to submit to general rules of conduct. The Queen has been for some time much alarmed at his writing letters of his own to all the most important Indian Chiefs and Kings explaining his policy. All this renders the position of a Governor-General almost untenable, and that of the Government at home very hazardous.
[Footnote 32: This was a later despatch of Lord Ellenborough"s, also in reference to the pacification of Oudh, and not shown to the Cabinet before it was sent.]
[Footnote 33: See _ante_, 23rd September, 1857, note 41.]
[Pageheading: LORD ABERDEEN CONSULTED]
[Pageheading: PREROGATIVE OF DISSOLUTION]
[Pageheading: STATE OF PARTIES]
_Memorandum by Sir Charles Phipps._
[_Undated._ ? _15th May 1858._]
Upon being admitted to Lord Aberdeen, I informed him that the Queen and Prince were anxious to hear his opinion upon the present most unfortunate state of affairs, but that, knowing how easily every event was perverted in such times as the present, Her Majesty and His Royal Highness had thought that it might have been subject to misapprehension had he been known to have been at Buckingham Palace, and that I had been therefore directed to call upon him, with a view of obtaining his opinion and advice upon certain important points.
The first was the question of a Dissolution of Parliament in the event of the Government being defeated upon the question which was at present pending. I told him that I was permitted to communicate to him in the strictest confidence, that in a late Audience which Lord Derby had with the Queen, he had asked her permission to be allowed to announce that, in the event of an adverse majority, he had Her Majesty"s sanction to a Dissolution of Parliament.
That the Queen had declined to give such sanction, or even such a pledge, and equally guarded herself against being supposed to have made up her mind to refuse her sanction to a Dissolution, had told Lord Derby that she could not then make any prospective decision upon the subject. I told him that in point of fact Her Majesty was disinclined to grant to Lord Derby her authority for a Dissolution, but that the Queen had at once refused to grant to Lord Derby her sanction for making the announcement he wished, as she considered that it would be a very unconst.i.tutional threat for him to hold over the head of the Parliament, with her authority, by way of bia.s.sing their decision.
Lord Aberdeen interrupted me by saying that the Queen had done quite right--that he never heard of such a request being made, or authority for such an announcement being sought--and he could not at all understand Lord Derby making such an application. He knew that the Government had threatened a Dissolution, that he thought that they had a perfect right to do so, but that they would have been quite wrong in joining the Queen"s name with it.
He said that he had never entertained the slightest doubt that if the Minister advised the Queen to dissolve, she would, as a matter of course, do so. The Minister who advised the Dissolution took upon himself the heavy responsibility of doing so, but that the Sovereign was bound to suppose that the person whom she had appointed as a Minister was a gentleman and an honest man, and that he would not advise Her Majesty to take such a step unless he thought that it was for the good of the country. There was no doubt of the power and prerogative of the Sovereign to refuse a Dissolution--it was one of the very few acts which the Queen of England could do without responsible advice at the moment; but even in this case whoever was sent for to succeed, must, with his appointment, a.s.sume the responsibility of this act, and be prepared to defend it in Parliament.
He could not remember a single instance in which the undoubted power of the Sovereign had been exercised upon this point, and the advice of the Minister to dissolve Parliament had been rejected--for it was to be remembered that Lord Derby would be still at this time her Minister--and that the result of such refusal would be that the Queen would take upon herself the act of dismissing Lord Derby from office, instead of his resigning from being unable longer to carry on the Government.
The Queen had during her reign, and throughout the numerous changes of Government, maintained an una.s.sailable position of const.i.tutional impartiality, and he had no hesitation in saying that he thought it would be more right, and certainly more safe, for her to follow the usual course, than to take this dangerous time for exercising an unusual and, he believed he might say, an unprecedented, course, though the power to exercise the authority was undoubted.
He said that he did not conceive that any reasons of expediency as to public business, or the possible effects of frequent general elections, would be sufficient grounds for refusing a Dissolution (and reasons would have to be given by the new Minister in Parliament), and, as he conceived, the only possible ground that could be maintained as foundation for such an exercise of authority would be the fearful danger to the existence of our power in India, which might arise from the intemperate discussion upon every hustings of the proceedings of the Government with respect to that country--as the question proposed to the country would certainly be considered to be severity or mercy to the people of India.
Upon the second point, as to a successor to Lord Derby in the event of his resignation, he said that the Queen would, he thought, have no alternative but to send for Lord Palmerston. The only other person who could be suggested would be Lord John Russell, and he was neither the mover of the Resolutions which displaced the Government, nor the ostensible head of the Opposition, which the late meeting at Cambridge House pointed out Lord Palmerston to be. That he was not very fond of Lord Palmerston, though he had forgiven him all, and he had had _much_ to forgive; and that in the last few days it had appeared that he had less following than Lord John; but the Queen could not act upon such daily changing circ.u.mstances, and it was evident that Lord Palmerston was the ostensible man for the Queen to send for.
Lord Aberdeen seemed very low upon the state of public affairs. He said that the extreme Liberals were the only Party that appeared to gain strength. Not only was the Whig Party divided within itself, hated by the Radicals, and having a very doubtful support from the independent Liberals, but even the little band called the Peelites had entirely crumbled to pieces. In the House of Lords, whilst the Duke of Newcastle voted with the Opposition, he (Lord Aberdeen) had purposely abstained from voting, whilst, in the House of Commons, Cardwell moved the Resolution, and Mr Sidney Herbert would, he believed, vote for it; Gladstone would speak on the other side, and Sir J. Graham would also vote with the Government.
He concluded by saying that if the majority against the Government was a very large one, he thought that Lord Derby ought not to ask to dissolve; but that he knew that the members of the Government had said that the present Parliament was elected upon a momentary Palmerstonian cry, and was quite an exceptional case, and that they would not consent to be driven from office upon its verdict.
[Pageheading: THE QUEEN AND DISSOLUTION]
_Memorandum by the Prince Albert._
BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _16th May 1858_.
We saw Lord Derby after church. He brought interesting letters from Lord Canning to Lord Ellenborough, of which copies follow here. It is evident that Lord Canning thinks that he is taking a most merciful course, and expects pacification from his "Proclamation," attributing the slow coming in of the chiefs to the Proclamation not being yet sufficiently known.
Lord Ellenborough"s, and indeed the Government"s, hearts, must have had curious sensations in reading Lord Canning"s frank declaration, that he did not mean to resign on hearing of the formation of the Tory Government unless told to do so, and he had no fears that he would be treated in a way implying want of confidence to make him resign, feeling safe as to that in Lord Ellenborough"s hands!
Lord Derby spoke much of the Debate, which he expects to go on for another week. He expects to be beaten by from 15 to 35 votes under present circ.u.mstances, but thinks still that he could be saved if it were known that the Queen had not refused a Dissolution, which was stoutly maintained by Lord Palmerston"s friends. He begged again to be empowered to contradict the a.s.sertion. The Queen maintained that it would be quite unconst.i.tutional to threaten Parliament, and to use her name for that purpose. Lord Derby quite agreed, and disclaimed any such intention, but said there were modes of letting the fact be known without any risk. We agreed that we could not enter into such details.
The Queen allowed him (Lord Derby) to know that a Dissolution would not be refused to him, and trusted that her honour would be safe in his hands as to the use he made of that knowledge. He seemed greatly relieved, and stated that had he had to resign, he would have withdrawn from public business, and the Conservative Party would have been entirely, and he feared for ever, broken up. On a Dissolution he felt certain of a large gain, as the country was in fact tired of the "Whig Family Clique"; the Radicals, like Mr Milner Gibson, Bright, etc., would willingly support a Conservative Government.
ALBERT.
[Pageheading: COLLAPSE OF THE ATTACK]
_Mr Disraeli to Queen Victoria._[34]