"In the evening of November 15th there dined with me John Morley, Lord Arthur Russell, and Gibson, afterwards Lord Ashbourne, Huxley, the Rector of Lincoln, and some others; and, thanks to Gibson, who was very lively, the conversation was better than such things often are.
He was deep in the secrets of Randolph Churchill...
"I was asked from 24th to 27th to stay with the Duke and d.u.c.h.ess of Edinburgh at Eastwell Park, but was also asked to Sandringham.
"The Princess of Wales told me a story of the Shah which had amused her. Walking with her at the State Ball, he had clutched her arm, and with much excitement asked about the Highland costume which he had seen for the first time. Having thus got the word "ecossais" into his head, and afterwards seeing Beust with his legs in pink silk stockings, he again clutched her, and exclaimed: "Trop nu--plus nu qu"ecossais.""
II.
The business of the autumn Session was limited, by agreement, to determining the new "Rules of Procedure."
"On Friday, October 20th, there was a Cabinet which decided to stick to our first resolution on procedure--that is on the closure--without change; or, in other words, to closure by a bare majority."
When the matter came to a vote in the House, the Government were saved from defeat by the support of Mr. Parnell and his adherents, who were determined not to have closure by a two-thirds majority, which could in practice be used only against a small group.
"On Monday, October 23rd, the Cabinet considered the principle of delegation of duties from Parliament itself to Grand Committees, to be proposed in the procedure resolutions."
This was the beginning of what is now the ordinary procedure in all Bills, except those of the first importance. It was introduced expressly as an experiment on six months" trial; and it appears that it was not adopted without much opposition in the Cabinet, for the Memoir records:
"On November 21st Hartington and Harcourt tried hard to induce Mr.
Gladstone to drop his idea of Grand Committees, and I noted in my diary: "If they are dropped now they are dead for ever--that is, for a year at least. "Ever" in politics means one year.""
On November 13th Lord Randolph Churchill, in a discourse upon the right to make motions for adjournment, contrived, by way of happy ill.u.s.tration, to refer to the "Kilmainham Treaty." The phrase in itself was a red rag to Mr. Gladstone, but Lord Randolph added to the provocation by describing it as "a most disgraceful transaction, so obnoxious that its precise terms had never been made known." Mr. Gladstone charged fiercely at the lure, denied that there had been any "treaty," and challenged the Opposition to move for a Committee of Inquiry.
On November 14th, between two meetings at Lord Granville"s house, at which "Kimberley, Northbrook, Carlingford, and Childers were present with myself, there was a discussion at lunch as to Mr. Gladstone"s promise of a Committee on the Kilmainham Treaty, at which all his colleagues of the Cabinet were furious."
On November 16th:
"a Cabinet was suddenly called for this afternoon to consider Mr.
Gladstone"s extraordinary blunder in granting a Committee on the Treaty of Kilmainham. The whole of his colleagues had been against him when he had previously wished to do it, and now he had done it without asking one of them. Grosvenor, the Whip, thought it would upset the Government. Mr. Gladstone expressed his regret to his colleagues that he had been carried away by his temper. Harcourt said that no two of the witnesses would give the same account of the transaction, and that while Mr. Gladstone might force Chamberlain, as his subordinate, to make a clean breast of it, it was hard on Parnell.
"There was later in the day a private conversation between Chamberlain and Harcourt and Grosvenor as to the Kilmainham Committee, Chamberlain declaring that if called before a Committee he must read all the letters, and Harcourt saying that if they were read he should resign."
When the Session opened on October 27th, the Memoir indicates that the Prime Minister"s retirement was expected.
On November 4th there was a dinner at 76, Sloane Street, at which Mr.
Gladstone, Lord Granville, the Dean of Westminster, Mr. Balfour, and others, came to meet the Duc de Broglie. In the course of the evening,
"Mr. Gladstone told me that he had finally decided not to meet Parliament again in February. The gossip was that Hartington was to be Prime Minister, that Fawcett would resign if not put into the Cabinet, and Chamberlain and I had agreed to insist on county franchise "(which meant a very large extension of the suffrage)," and to withdraw our opposition to Goschen, it being understood that he gave way on county franchise. It was far from certain that Mr. Gladstone meant Hartington to be leader on his retirement. The d.u.c.h.ess of Manchester had told me just before my dinner on Sat.u.r.day, November 4th, that Mr. Gladstone had written to Lord Granville to tell him he should not meet Parliament again, saying that he wrote to him as he had been leader when the party had been in Opposition. The letter had been shown to Hartington, who was much irritated at the phrase. The letter was also sent on to the Queen, and the d.u.c.h.ess thought that the Queen had said in reply that if Mr. Gladstone resigned she should send not for Lord Granville, but for Hartington.
"On Monday, November 6th, I heard more about the proposed resignation of Mr. Gladstone. He had declared that he would not take a peerage, but had promised not to attend the House of Commons, and I thought that Hartington would make his going to the Lords, or at least leaving the Commons, a condition. I pressed for the inclusion of Courtney in the Cabinet in the event of any change."
Although one of Mr. Gladstone"s junior colleagues from 1880 onwards, Sir Charles Dilke had been frequently in disagreement with him, and in 1882 had refused to accept the Irish Secretaryship. Yet it was to Sir Charles that Mr. Gladstone in 1882 was beginning to look as his ultimate successor in the lead of the House of Commons. A pa.s.sage in Lord Acton"s correspondence shows how Mr. Gladstone"s mind was working at this time. A breakfast-table discussion between Miss Gladstone and her father is noted by her, at which, on the a.s.sumption of Mr. Gladstone"s retirement and the removal of Lord Hartington to the House of Lords, the names of possible successors to the leadership of the House of Commons were discussed. The Chief"s estimate of Dilke was thus given:
"The future leader of H. of C. was a great puzzle and difficulty. Sir Charles Dilke would probably be the man best fitted for it; he had shown much capacity for learning and unlearning, but he would require Cabinet training first." [Footnote: _Letters of Lord Acton_, p. 90.]
It followed, then, that if Mr. Gladstone seriously contemplated resignation, he was bound to insure that Sir Charles got without more delay the "Cabinet training." It was absurd that the Minister in whom Mr.
Gladstone saw the likeliest future leader of the House of Commons should be kept technically, and to some extent really, outside the inner circle of confidence and responsibility.
By the middle of November the hint of Mr. Gladstone"s retirement had leaked out, and conjecture was busy with reconstruction of the Cabinet.
Apart from the question of the Prime Minister"s position, speculation was kept active by the fact that since Mr. Bright"s retirement in June no appointment had been made to the Chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster, that office having no very urgent or definite duties. There was also the widespread feeling that Sir Charles Dilke"s admission to the Cabinet was overdue, and men guessed rightly at the cause of the delay. Meanwhile the leaders of the party were considering how far these causes still operated.
On November 16th Sir Charles was approached by the Chief Whip.
"Lord R. Grosvenor, after the Cabinet, came to me, and asked me if I thought that the Queen was now willing to have me in the Cabinet. I said that so far as I knew the trouble was at an end. He replied that he had had two accounts of it. Harcourt told him that both the Prince of Wales and Prince Leopold had said that she had made up her mind to take me; but Hartington said that she had told him a different story.
I said I did not know which was right; but that she could take me or leave me, for not another word would I say.
"Sunday, November 19th, I spent at Cuffnells, Lyndhurst--the home of "Alice in Wonderland," Mrs. Hargreaves, Dean Liddel"s daughter--with the Harcourts, and Harcourt told me that he believed in Mr.
Gladstone"s retirement."
In the last days of November Sir Charles was at Sandringham with Mr.
Chamberlain.
"Chamberlain told me that Lord Hartington and Lord Granville were going to insist with Mr. Gladstone that he should stay as nominal Prime Minister, Hartington taking the Exchequer and dividing the lead of the House with him, and Rosebery and I being put into the Cabinet.
"On December 1st there was a Cabinet, before which Lord Granville told me that I was to be put into the Cabinet at once if the Queen consented. When they met at two o"clock the Cabinet were told of this and strict secrecy sworn, but two of them immediately came and told me that it was settled I was to be Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster."
The Chancellorship of the Duchy presented itself to Sir Charles Dilke as a kind of roving commission to help other Ministers with the detail of measures. But the Queen took the view that this place was a "peculiarly personal one," and should be held by someone whom she considered a "moderate" politician, and who need not be in the Cabinet. On December 4th
"the Queen, who had been informed that she was still a free agent with regard to me, had hesitated with regard to the Duchy of Lancaster, which had, of course, been conditionally accepted by me on the understanding that I was to be man-of-all-work in the Cabinet. It was understood on this day that Childers was to be Chancellor of the Exchequer if his health allowed it, and a delay was granted for his decision or that of his doctors; and it was understood that Lord Derby was to come in in Childers" place. Evelyn Ashley was suggested for my place; and Edmond Fitzmaurice, Henry Brand, or Brett for Ashley"s"
(that of Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade).
On December 7th it was settled that
"Hartington was to go to the War Office if the doctors p.r.o.nounced Childers well enough to take the Exchequer, and this would leave the Under-Secretaryships for the Colonies and India, as well as for Foreign Affairs, open between Fitzmaurice, Ashley, Brand, and Brett.
"Harcourt wrote on the 7th about Mr. Gladstone: "The resignation project is for the present adjourned _sine die_."
"On Sat.u.r.day, December 9th, Childers came to me from Mr. Gladstone to ask if I objected (as we had settled that it would be improper for me to invite a contest in Chelsea on the old register in the last month of the year) to letting my appointment be known before it was made, and I consented, although this would have had the effect, in the event of opposition, of giving me a twenty days" fight instead of one of only seventeen."
Mr. Gladstone now put forward a different proposal:
"On Monday, the 11th, I saw the Prince of Wales with regard to my appointment. On the same day Mr. Gladstone had some trouble with the Queen about the Primacy, as he told me on December 12th.... On the 12th I wrote to Chamberlain that Austin Lee had told me that the Queen had some days earlier told our friend Prince Leopold that she was willing that I should be in the Cabinet, but not in the Duchy, and it was this that she had said to Mr. Gladstone on the 11th about which he sent for me on the 12th. He said that he thought it would be possible to get over this objection in time, but that there was another possibility about which he asked me to write to Chamberlain, but not as from him. I wrote: "Would you take the Duchy and let me go to the Board of Trade, you keeping your Bills? This would be unpleasant to you personally, I feel sure, unless for my sake, though the Duchy is of superior rank. It would, of course, be a temporary stopgap, as there must be other changes soon. It is not necessary that you should do it, else I know that you would do it for me. So that please feel you are really free. I told Mr. Gladstone that I could only put it to you in such a way as to leave you free. You had better perhaps write your answer so that I can show it him, though I suppose he will suppose himself not to have seen it!""
On December 13th the Prince of Wales sent for Sir Charles to advise his pressing this course on Mr. Chamberlain. But on that same day Mr.
Chamberlain replied from Highbury:
"MY DEAR DILKE,
"Your letter has spoilt my breakfast. The change will be loathsome to me for more than one reason, and will give rise to all sorts of disagreeable commentaries. But if it is the only way out of the difficulty, I will do what I am sure you would have done in my place-- accept the transfer. I enclose a note to this effect which you can show to Mr. G. Consider, however, if there is any alternative. I regard your _immediate_ admission to the Cabinet as imperative, and therefore if this can only be secured by my taking the Duchy, _cadit quaestio_, and I shall never say another word on the subject. Two other courses are possible, though I fear unlikely to be accepted: (1) Mr. Gladstone might tell the Queen that I share the opinions you have expressed with regard to the dowries, and intend to make common cause with you--that if your appointment is refused I shall leave the Government, and that the effect will be to alienate the Radical Party from the Ministry and the Crown, and to give prominence to a question which it would be more prudent to allow to slumber. I think the Queen would give way. If not we should both go out. We should stand very well with our party, and in a year or two we could make our own terms.
Personally I would rather go out than take the Duchy.... (2) Has the matter been mentioned to Dodson? He _might_ like an office with less work, [Footnote: Mr. Dodson was President of the Local Government Board.] and he _might_ be influenced by the nominally superior rank.... Now you have my whole mind. I would gladly avoid the sacrifice, but if your inclusion in the Cabinet depends upon it, I will make it freely and with pleasure for your sake."
"The result was that Dodson "put himself in Mr. Gladstone"s hands."
There was, however, an interval of ten days, during which things went backwards and forwards much."
The probability of the Queen"s refusal to accept Mr. Chamberlain for the Duchy made his threat of resignation more serious, and a letter came to Sir Charles from Mr. Francis Knollys deprecating this vehemently on behalf of the Prince of Wales. Its last sentence is worth quoting, as it endorsed what was known to be Dilke"s own special wish:
"What he would like to see would be Lord Northbrook at the India Office and you at the Admiralty."