IV.
Chamberlain had written on May 4th to Mrs. Pattison: "The charmed circle has been broken and a new departure made, which is an event in English political history." But although the circle was broken, only one man had found his way to the innermost ring; and in the composition of the Ministry the Radicals were overwhelmingly outnumbered. Such a situation did not lead to the stability of the Government, and by his reluctance in the admission of Radicalism to office Mr. Gladstone had created difficulties for himself. In the House his personal authority was overridden in a matter which came up at once.
"In the morning of May 3rd I received a note from Lord Frederick Cavendish, the Secretary of the Treasury, asking me to be at the House at two, as there would be trouble about Bradlaugh"s application to affirm instead of take the oath. It had been decided by the Cabinet that "Freddy" Cavendish, [Footnote: Lord F. Cavendish was Financial Secretary to the Treasury.] who was leader of the House in the absence of the Ministers who had gone for re-election, should move for a Committee, and I spoke in support of that view."
Sir Charles never took part again in any debate upon this once famous struggle. He supported Mr. Gladstone"s view in favour of allowing affirmation, but he did so without heartiness, disliking "the trade of living on blatant atheism," and finding in himself tendencies which led him to fear that he was "clerically minded." He had always an extreme dislike of talk or writing that offended legitimate susceptibilities.
The completion of the Ministry inevitably left some personal claims unsettled.
"On May 1st I had John Morley to dinner to meet Chamberlain, who was still staying with me. We talked over the men who had been left out.
Edmond Fitzmaurice was one, but Mr. Gladstone did not care about having brothers. [Footnote: Mr. Gladstone was believed in 1868 to have declined to have Lord Clarendon and his brother, Mr. Charles Villiers, both in the Cabinet. See _Life of Granville,_ vol. i., p. 537. In the new Government Lord Lansdowne was Under-Secretary for India, but resigned in the course of the year on the Irish Land Question.] At Chamberlain"s wish Courtney had been offered the Secretaryship of the Board of Trade, which, however, he declined. He would have taken the place of Judge Advocate General, but it was not offered to him.
Chamberlain told us that the Cabinet were unanimous for getting rid of Layard, the Amba.s.sador at Constantinople, but that the Queen was trying hard to keep him. The result of this difference of opinion ultimately was that Goschen went to Constantinople on a special emba.s.sy, without salary, and keeping his place in the House of Commons, and that Layard continued to draw the salary without doing any work."
A large section of the Liberal Press was at this period very independent, and helped to frustrate Mr. Gladstone"s determination to exclude Radicals from office.
Sir Charles"s relations with Mr. Hill, then editor of the _Daily News,_ were close, as also was the alliance between the two Radical Ministers and Mr. John Morley, who had just then become editor of the _Pall Mall Gazette_.
"On May 14th John Morley asked me to see him to give him information as to the general position of foreign affairs, and I consented to do so. "It would be worth silver and gold and jewels," he said, "if I could have ten minutes with you about three times a week.""
Chamberlain gave him the same privilege concerning domestic policy--a privilege "which he used so well that no complaint ever arose in regard to it." Chamberlain was much in touch with "Escott of the _Standard_ and the _World_."
It was suggested at the dinner of May 1st that Mr. Courtney might succeed Sir H. Drummond Wolff on the Commission for Reforms, appointed under Article XXIII. of the Treaty of Berlin, for the European provinces of Turkey and Crete; but this too Mr. Courtney declined, and the place was eventually filled by Lord E. Fitzmaurice. Mr. Trevelyan was not included in the Ministry. [Footnote: See the _Life of Goschen_, by the Hon. Arthur Elliot, vol. i., pp. 215, 216; T. E. Holland, _The European Concert in the Eastern Question_, pp. 291, 292; also _Turkey_, No. 15 (1880). Lord E.
Fitzmaurice was subsequently appointed British Plenipotentiary, under Articles LIV. and LV. of the Treaty of Berlin, to the Conference in regard to the navigation of the Danube. Both Mr. Courtney and Mr. Trevelyan joined the Ministry later.]
At the moment Conservative society was inclined to regard the new Ministry with suspicious wonder, and Sir Charles tells how, on May 5th, a week after taking office, when he and Chamberlain were dining with the Prince of Wales--
"most of the Cabinet were present with their wives; also the new Viceroy of India (Lord Ripon), and Rosebery and his wife. When the Duke of Cambridge came in, following the Prince and Princess, after shaking hands with those he knew, he stood staring about, whereupon Harcourt, nudging Chamberlain and myself, said, "He is looking for Bradlaugh.""
New men were coming to the front; a new political era had begun, and to the Radicals the situation was summed up by the House of Commons" jest which stated that B.C. now meant "Before Chamberlain," and A.D. "Anno Dilke."
The break with the past was real and important: 1880 is a marking date in the political history of Great Britain, and the change was due to the Radical combination.
CHAPTER XXI
AT THE FOREIGN OFFICE
I.
In "a memorandum of later years," quoted by his biographer, Mr. Gladstone defined his own understanding of "the special commission under which the Government had taken office" in 1880. "It related to the foreign policy of the country, the whole spirit and effect of which we were to reconstruct."
Sir Charles"s views as to the need for this had long been before the public, and he threw all his energies into the task of helping to achieve it.
"The Liberals, having come into office after violent denunciation of the whole foreign and colonial policy of their predecessors, had a general wish to reverse it in all parts of the world, and to dismiss the agents by whom it had been carried out. They were especially violent against Lytton in India, Layard at Constantinople, and Frere in South Africa."
Questions of the Indian frontier and Africa lay outside the immediate sphere of the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, yet he was constantly consulted upon both of them, and had his full part in defending the reversal of Lord Lytton"s policy by the new Viceroy, Lord Ripon, who restored, or perhaps established, the unity of Afghanistan.
In the matter of South Africa, the Boer leaders wrote at once to express their confidence that the new Government would consist of "men who look out for the honour and glory of England, not by acts of injustice and crushing force, but by the way of justice and good faith." They were answered by promises of local self-government, but such promises had been made to them before, and the retention of Sir Bartle Frere no doubt seemed a bad omen. So, at all events, it was regarded by the Radical party. On May 24th--
"I found that Courtney and my brother, with Dr. Cameron and Jesse Collings, were getting up an attempt to coerce the Colonial Office and Mr. Gladstone by preparing a list of between one and two hundred members who would vote with Wilfrid Lawson for a censure on the Government for not recalling Frere. Childers had found that it would be easy to recall him, for Frere had said that he would only go out for two years, and the two years were over. No doubt Frere, while blameworthy for the Zulu War, was not responsible for the Transvaal business, which had been done by Shepstone and Lord Carnarvon before he went out; but with our people he received the whole discredit for all that went wrong in South Africa, and it was impossible to wonder at this when one recalled the language that he habitually made use of....
"Frere was protected by Mr. Gladstone, and allowed to remain, a mistake for which we very gravely suffered. As this matter became of great importance in 1899, I ought to add that Lord Granville backed Mr. Gladstone in abstaining from rescinding the annexation of the Transvaal, on the ground that as we were retiring from Kandahar we had better not also retire from Pretoria."
When, a few months later, the Boer rising followed, Dilke, with three other Radical Ministers, Bright, Chamberlain, and Courtney, refused to defend the Government"s action even by a silent vote. "Everything went as badly as possible in South Africa, and Lord Kimberley" (the Colonial Secretary) "must share the blame with Mr. Gladstone."
The third instance in which the recall of a man was demanded by Liberal opinion as essential to the reversal of a policy touched matters in whose development Sir Charles had a considerable part to play:
"_May 20th._--One of our first troubles in debate was with regard to Layard"s position at Constantinople, we being attacked by our own people on May 20th, who were more Gladstonian than Mr. Gladstone, as to the public insults which Layard had heaped upon him. Mr. Gladstone discussed with me what he was to say, and I have his note which, in addition to the statement about Layard, contains the curiously large one, "Statements made in Opposition not to be taken too literally when in office.""
Next day Mr. Gladstone wrote: "Thank you for the wonderful despatch you kindly made in obtaining for me the particulars about Layard"s appointment."
The new Under-Secretary writes of these early days and first impressions:
"The general opinion of the party was that a Liberal policy was being pursued in foreign affairs, and that we had in the Foreign Office carried out that which the country intended us to do. We were able to bring about joint action on the part of Europe, and by means of it to settle the Greek and Montenegrin questions; and Goschen"s presence at Constantinople was useful, inasmuch as he fully shared the views of the Liberal party upon foreign affairs, although he differed from them in domestic matters. On the other hand, the party were frightened about India, for, although Lord Lytton had been removed, the Government refused to make any sign as to the immediate evacuation of Kandahar, and, as a matter of fact, it was a long time before the Queen"s resistance upon this point could be overcome. She no doubt felt more able to stand out against Hartington, whom she liked, than against Lord Granville." [Footnote: See _Life of Granville_, vol. ii., p. 5.]
Lord Lytton"s policy is thus described:
"The _Allgemeine Zeitung_ for one of the last days of February contained a remarkable disclosure of the Government scheme for the settlement of Afghan affairs, which, so far as I know, did not appear in the English newspapers. It was quoted from some Indian paper, and revealed the fact that Persia was to occupy Herat, Kabul and Kandahar being capitals of two separate States. I did not at the time believe that it was possible that the Government should have absolutely reversed the past British policy by proposing the cession of Herat to Persia, but when I came into office at the end of April I made immediate inquiry into the subject, and found that it was true, and that they had done so. It was afterwards admitted."
This proposal, however, had been declined by Persia. Before the fall of the Beaconsfield Ministry--
"The Amir of Afghanistan had written to tell us that he must be the friend of Russia, though he would be our friend too. We had replied (that is to say, the outgoing Government had replied) that Russia had sworn to us to have no dealings with Afghanistan, but that we should in any case evacuate his country in October without conditions, although he must respect our hold on Kandahar. Persia, it was clear from Lytton"s despatches, had acted under Russian influence when declining Herat on our conditions."
Under Lord Ripon, the policy of breaking up Afghanistan disappeared. But although there was a clear intention to abandon all claim to remain in Kandahar, yet the difficulty which attends any retrogressive movement in Central Asia was at this moment intensified, because Russia was threatening to advance on Merv, only 250 miles from Herat; and it seemed as if the Tsar"s troops might occupy one Afghan stronghold at the moment when the Queen"s forces withdrew from another.
"Lord Granville showed me, 15th May, some notes of language which he intended to hold to Russia as to Central Asia, very strong indeed upon the question of Merv; but the Cabinet afterwards took all this out, not a single man being found in the Cabinet to back up Lord Granville upon this question."
In the succeeding months Sir Charles maintained a steady correspondence with the new Viceroy, Lord Ripon, who described his task as a hard one.
"But I will do my best to perform it faithfully, and trust to you to back me up." In it appears the reason for Lord Ripon"s unwilling acceptance of Abdurrahman, whom he called "the most Russian of the candidates" for the Afghan throne, but also the inevitable choice. If Lord Ripon broke with him, no hope appeared of establishing "even a semblance of order" before the Indian Government withdrew the troops, "as," said the Viceroy, "we _must_, because the service in Afghanistan, especially in winter, is so unpopular with the native troops as to be a serious difficulty if it should continue long. I hate the idea of leaving the Afghans a prey to anarchy, created to some extent, at all events, by our policy, and I shall do all I can to avoid it."
The Eastern Question was still dominant. The Treaty of Berlin had left three sources of discontent in the region affected by its provisions. In Bulgaria, Turkey complained that the Bulgarians had not fulfilled their promise to disarm and to raze fortifications. In Greece, evasive negotiations concerning the promised "rectification of the frontier" were being deliberately spun out. On the Montenegrin border, territory surrendered and evacuated by the Turks had immediately been occupied by Mohammedan Albanians before the Montenegrin troops could reach it.
"On my first examination of the papers at the Foreign Office, I found that the black spot was Montenegro; the Roman Catholic Albanians on the frontier and the Mahomedan Albanians being equally determined not to become Montenegrin, and the Montenegrins insisting either on the line of the Treaty, which would give them some Mahomedan, or on the lines of the "Corti compromise," which would give them some Roman Catholic Albanian subjects." [Footnote: The "Corti compromise" was so named after the Italian Amba.s.sador at Constantinople, who advocated a frontier line more favourable to Turkey than those previously proposed (Sir Edward Hertslet"s _Map of Europe by Treaty_, vol. iv.).]
Immediate steps were taken to remove the menace to European tranquillity which arose from what the Austrian Amba.s.sador called "the Porte"s long delays and tergiversation."
"_May 1st._--Pressure at Constantinople had begun this day, the Cabinet having on the previous day approved an excellent and firm despatch from Lord Granville to Layard, really written from the first word to the last by Tenterden, containing the phrase, "While Her Majesty"s Government wish to abstain from anything like menace, any intimation they give will be adhered to to the letter." The weak point about the despatch, however, was that the Russians had written us a despatch in the same sense, and that it might have been made to appear that we were only acting under Russian dictation. At the same time the despatch returned to the position of the circular bearing Lord Salisbury"s name, which I have called the April 1st (1878) Circular, and set up that Concert of Europe which was destined to be kept together until the Greek and Montenegrin frontier questions had been settled....
"On May 3rd the Cabinet again considered our circular despatch (calling on the Powers to address an identic and simultaneous note to the Porte to fulfil its Treaty obligations as regards Greece, Montenegro, and Armenia) in its final form.... On May 4th I lunched with Lord Granville, and found that it was finally settled that Goschen would go as Amba.s.sador to Constantinople and Edmond Fitzmaurice in Wolff"s place."
Meanwhile France was vigorously backing the new policy. Lord Granville was deeply engaged in trying to unite Germany with the Powers in carrying out concerted action, which was constantly evaded by Bismarck.
"_May 7th_.--On this day I had an opportunity of reading quietly a curious despatch of Odo Russell, dated April 29th, recounting the views of Prince Bismarck, who seemed to me to have been laughing at him. The Prince "is even more willing to give his support to any combined policy of England and France, as for instance in Egypt, because he looks upon an Anglo-French alliance as the basis of peace and order in Europe." [Footnote: This despatch is to be found in the _Life of Granville_, vol. ii., p. 211, where the date is given as May 1st.]
"On Sunday, May 9th, I had to dinner Leon Say, the new French Amba.s.sador; Montebello, his first secretary, afterwards Amba.s.sador at Constantinople; Lord Lyons and his secretary Sheffield; Lord Tenterden, my colleague at the Foreign Office; my secretary Murray; Harcourt, and C. E. D. Black, who the week afterwards became Harcourt"s secretary on my recommendation. Leon Say brought with him from the French "bag" Gambetta"s answer to my letter. Gambetta informed me that the French Government were unanimous in throwing over Waddington"s compromise and giving Greece all that she had been intended to have; and Gambetta was in favour, and said that his Prime Minister" (M. de Freycinet) "was in favour, of taking active steps to prevent further delay on the part of Turkey." [Footnote: