Chapter XII (1)

Lord Clarendon's favourable View of the Peace--General Evans' Proposal to embark after the Battle of Inkerman--Sir E. Lyons defends Lord Raglan--Peace concluded--Sir J. Graham's gloomy View of Affairs--Edward Ellice's Plan--Favourable Reception of the Peace--A Lull in Politics--A Sabbatarian Question--The Trial of Palmer for Murder--Defeat of the Opposition--Danger of War with the United States--Ristori as an Actress--Defeat of the Appellate Jurisdiction Bill--Return of the Guards--Baron Parke on the Life Peerage--Close of the Session--O'Donnell and Espartero in Spain--Chances of War--Coronation of the Czar--Apathy of the Nation--Expense of the Coronation at Moscow--Interference at Naples--Foreign Relations--Progress of Democracy in England--Russia, France, England, and Naples--Russian Intrigues with France--The Bolgrad Question--The Quarrel with Naples--The Formation of Lord Palmerston's Government in 1855--Death of Sir John Jervis--Sir Alexander Cockburn's Appointment--James Wortley Solicitor-General--Conference on the Treaty of Paris--Low Church Bishops--Leadership of the Opposition--Coolness in Paris--Dictatorial Policy to Brazil.

[Sidenote: RETURN TO ENGLAND.]

_London, March 21st, Good Friday._--I left Paris on Wednesday morning with Mr. and Mrs. Reeve, dined at Boulogne, crossed over in the evening, and arrived in London yesterday morning at eleven o'clock. When near Folkestone we were caught in a fog, lost our way, and were very near having to anchor and pass the night at sea. After a vast deal of whistling and bellowing, stopping and going on, the fog cleared a little, lights became visible, and we entered the harbour with no other inconvenience than having made a long _détour_, and being an hour later than our proper time. I regretted leaving Paris, where I was treated with so much affection and hospitality, and on the whole very well amused. On Monday, I dined with the Duchesse de Mouchy; on Tuesday night Clarendon came after dinner to see me before my departure, and we had some talk about the peace and the terms. He spoke very cheerfully about it and seems not at all dissatisfied, nor to feel any alarm about its reception. As it is, without at all acknowledging that he has made any sacrifices, he considers that the influence he has acquired for England, particularly with Austria and Turkey, is far more valuable than any items of concession from Russia would have been. Buol told him that he was now quite convinced that England was the Power to which Austria must really look with confidence and reliance on her honour and friendship, and the Turk was still more warm and vehement in assurances of the same kind. This was elicited from the Austrians by the fact of England having supported the condition of the Bessarabian cession, while France took part with Russia and threw Austria over. Moreover, Clarendon does not, like Cowley, complain of the Emperor Napoleon, but speaks with great satisfaction of His Majesty's conduct to him, and the renewed cordiality with which he has recently expressed himself towards England, and for the maintenance of his alliance with us. In short, he evidently thinks, and not without reason, that he will return, having obtained a sufficiently good peace, and having placed England in a very fine position. He said that he had been able to accomplish his task by being ready to incur responsibility at home, and by being able to act unfettered, and taking on himself to disregard any instructions or recommendations from home that he did not approve of. Yesterday I saw George Lewis and had a talk with him and his wife about Clarendon and the peace. He said he thought the peace quite sufficient, and he did not understand what it was Cowley found fault with, nor why he is dissatisfied. He denies that we have given up anything that it would have been just and reasonable to stand out upon, and will not hear of taking an apologetic tone, but that Clarendon should defend the peace on its own merits. He thinks it will be well enough received in the House of Commons and by the country, and he is in good spirits about the Government. He says Palmerston has been moderate and reasonable, and that he is not aware of Clarendon's having been harassed with any instructions, but left entirely to his own discretion. They all think he has done exceedingly well.

[Sidenote: SIR EDMUND LYONS' NARRATIVE.]

_March 29th._--I went to Hatchford on Saturday last; on Wednesday to Althorp. I met Sir Edmund Lyons at Hatchford, who talked incessantly about the incidents of the war and the conduct of the people concerned in it, and very interesting his talk was, for besides having been one of the most conspicuous and important actors in it, he was completely in the confidence of the Commanders-in-Chief, and consulted by them on every occasion and with regard to all operations. He told us what had passed between Evans and Raglan and between Evans and himself on a most important occasion, to this effect: Evans went to Raglan immediately after the battle of Inkerman, and proposed to him to embark the army immediately, leaving their guns, and (Lyons says he is almost certain) their sick and wounded to the enemy. Raglan said, 'But you forget the French: would you have us abandon them to their fate?' He replied, 'You are Commander-in-Chief of the _English_ army, and it is your business to provide for _its_ safety....' Raglan would not hear of the proposal. Almost immediately after Evans met Sir Edmund Lyons and told him what had passed with Raglan, and urged him to suggest the same course. Lyons made the same observation about the French that Raglan had done, and said one of two things would happen: either the French would take Sebastopol alone, when we should be covered with shame and dishonour; or they would fail and probably suffer some great disaster. The expression of _'perfide Albion'_ had long been current in France, and then indeed it would be well deserved and would become a perpetual term of reproach against us. These rebuffs did not prevent Evans going on board ship and there giving out that the army would in a few days be obliged to embark, and Captain Dacres came to Lyons and told him he heard this was going to happen. Lyons asked him where he had heard this, and he said Evans had announced it, and talked of it unreservedly as certain to happen. Lyons said, 'It is false; the army will not go away, and Sebastopol will be taken. It is very mischievous that such reports should circulate, and I order you not to allow such a thing to be said by anybody on board your ship, and to contradict it in the most positive manner.'

Everything that Lyons said, and it may be added all one hears in every way, tends to the honour and the credit of Raglan, and I am glad to record this because I have always had an impression that much of the difficulty and distress of the army in 1854 was owing to his want of energy and management. He was not a Wellington certainly, and probably he might have done more and better than he did, but he was unquestionably, on the whole, the first man in the army, and if he had not been continually thwarted by the French, would have done more. While many here were crying out for placing our army under the command of French generals, and recalling Raglan (and I must confess I had myself a considerable leaning that way), he was struggling against the shortcomings or the inactivity of Canrobert and Pélissier. Canrobert acknowledged that he had not nerves sufficient for the duties of his station, and he never could be got to agree to adopt the bold offensive movements which Raglan was continually urging upon him, especially after the battle of Inkerman, when Raglan entreated him to follow up the discomfited Russians, his whole army being ready and not above 1,500 of them having been engaged. With Pélissier, Raglan had very little to do, for his death occurred soon after Pélissier took the command.

[Sidenote: LYONS DEFENDS LORD RAGLAN.]

Lyons gave us an interesting account of Raglan's last illness. He seemed to have no idea that he was in serious danger, nor had the people about him. At last, when he was so rapidly sinking that the doctors saw his end was approaching, and it was deemed necessary to apprise him thereof, he would not believe it, and he insisted to his aide-de-camp who told him of his state that he was better, and he fell into a state of insensibility without ever having been conscious of his dying condition. One of the best authenticated charges against Raglan was that of his not showing himself to his soldiers, and it was said many believed that he had quitted the camp; at last this idea became so prevalent that his own staff felt the necessity of something being said to him about it, but none dared, for it seems they were all exceedingly afraid of him. At last they asked Lyons if he would speak to him and tell him what was said. Lyons said he had no scruple or difficulty in so doing, and told him plainly the truth. Raglan not only took it in good part, but thanked him very much, and said his reason for not riding round all the divisions was that he could not prevent the soldiers turning out to salute him, and he could not bear to see this ceremony done by the men who had been all night in the trenches or otherwise exposed to fatigue, and that this was the sole reason why he had abstained, but henceforward he would make a point of riding round every day, and so he ever after did; so that the main fact as reported by 'correspondents' was not devoid of truth. I wish I could recollect all the various anecdotes Lyons told us, but I neglected to put them down at the time, and now they have faded from my memory. He discussed the qualities of the English generals with reference to the command of the army after Raglan's death. He never had well understood why it was that Colin Campbell was always considered out of the question, and his own opinion seemed to be that he was the fittest man. The French thought so, and one of the alleged reasons against him, viz., that he could not speak French, was certainly not true. Simpson was very reluctant to take the command at first, and wrote home to say so, but after he had received certain flattering encouragements his opposition waxed fainter, and by the time it was taken from him he became anxious to retain it. Raglan was not at all annoyed at Simpson's being sent there, and did what he pleased with him. Simpson never attempted to interfere with him or to control him in any way, but on the contrary was entirely subservient to Raglan.

_April 1st._--News of peace reached London on Sunday evening, and was received joyfully by the populace, not from any desire to see an end of the war, but merely because it is a great event to make a noise about. The newspapers have been reasonable enough, except the 'Sun,' which appeared in deep mourning and with a violent tirade against peace.

[Sidenote: SIR JAMES GRAHAM ON THE STATE OF PARTIES.]

_April 3rd._--Yesterday I met Graham at the Council Office, where he had come to attend a committee. Since the formation of Aberdeen's Government three years ago I have hardly ever seen him, and have never had any conversation with him. Yesterday he sat down and began talking over the state of affairs generally, and the prospects of the country, which he considers very gloomy and full of danger, more particularly from the outrageous license of the press, which has now arrived at a pitch perfectly intolerable, but which it is impossible to check or control. Then the total destruction of parties and of party ties and connexions, to say nothing of the antipathies and disagreements of such public men as these are. He says there is not one man in the House of Commons who has ten followers, neither Gladstone, nor Disraeli, nor Palmerston. The Government goes on because there is no organized opposition prepared and able to take its place, and the Government receives a sufficiency of independent support, because all feel that the business of the country must be carried on, and hitherto Palmerston has been supported as a War Minister, and the best man to carry on the war; but Graham is very doubtful what will happen when the discussions on the peace and all matters relating to the war are over, and other questions (principally of domestic policy) come into play. Palmerston, always sanguine, fancies he can stand, but it is very doubtful, for he is not backed by a party constituting a majority; the Treasury Bench is very weak, and Palmerston himself a poor and inefficient conductor of the Government in the House. John Russell has taken up the question of education, which he hopes to render popular, and through it means again to recover his former influence and authority. He said that John Russell is (in spite of all that happened last year) more looked up to by the Whig party than Palmerston, and that they would rather have him for their leader, as, notwithstanding the faults he has committed, he is by far the ablest man, has a much greater grasp of intellect, more foresight, and is much more of a statesman, and has fixed principles. Palmerston (Graham thinks) has a passionate love of office and power, and will cling to it with tenacity to the last, and never resign it but on compulsion, not caring with whom he acts, nor on what principles. This, I think, is partly true and partly false. I do not think he cares whom he acts with, but I do not believe he is quite indifferent as to the principles. He says Lewis has done well, and is liked in the House of Commons, and Gladstone likes him and gives him a cordial support; that Baines is a good man, and those two are the most respected and considered of all the men on the Treasury Bench, the House accepting their sterling qualities in place of greater brilliancy such as Gladstone can command; that Gladstone is certainly the ablest man there, though it is still doubtful whether his talents are equal to such an emergency as the present to master public opinion, enlist it on his side, and to administer the Government on certain principles of administrative reform, which Graham himself considers necessary. His religious opinions, in which he is zealous and sincere, enter so largely into his political conduct as to form a very serious obstacle to his success, for they are abhorrent to the majority of this Protestant country, and (I was rather surprised to hear him say) Graham thinks approach very nearly to Rome. Gladstone would have nothing to do with any Government unless he were leader in the House of Commons, and when that Government is formed, there should be previously a clear and distinct understanding on what principles it was founded and what their course of action should be. His tone is now that of disclaiming party connexions, and being ready to join with any men who are able and willing to combine in carrying out such measures as are indispensably necessary for the good government of the country, such a system as he briefly shadowed out in his speech at the Mansion House the other day. Graham's idea is, that in the event of this Government breaking down, the best chance of another being formed would be by Clarendon undertaking it, whom on the whole he regards as the man best fitted by his experience and ability to be at the head of affairs; that he and Gladstone might be brought together, but would Lord John consent to go to the Lords, and to serve under Clarendon as President of the Council and Head of the Education Department? This opens questions full of doubt and difficulty. Derby, he thinks, has no desire to form another Government, and would prefer to go on as he is now, leader of a large party of Peers who are willing to follow him and to make the House of Lords one of the scenes and instruments of his amusements as usual, provided it supplies him with occupation and excitement, indifferent to the consequences and to the mischief he may do. Disraeli appears to be endeavouring to approach Gladstone, and a confederacy between those two and young Stanley by no means an improbability. What Stanley is disposed to do and capable of doing is still an enigma, and although his speeches are not devoid of matter, they are without a particle of the spirit and stirring eloquence of his father.

The change which has taken place in the country presents to Graham a most alarming prospect. Hitherto it has been governed by parties, and patronage has been the great instrument of keeping parties together; whereas Sir Robert Peel has destroyed party, which had now entirely ceased to exist; and between the press, the public opinion which the press had made, and the views of certain people in Parliament, of whom Gladstone is the most eminent and strenuous, patronage was either destroyed or going rapidly to destruction. The only hope of escaping from great perils was in that broad stratum of good sense and firmness which still existed in the country, and of which manifestations had been recently given. He admires the resolute and unflinching spirit with which the war had been entered into, carried on, and the country was quite willing to persist in; and not less the sensible and reasonable manner in which the peace, by which they were mortified and disappointed, had been acquiesced in, for he says that it is beyond all question that there is throughout the country a strong feeling of mortification and regret that we have not played a more brilliant part, and that our share of glory has been less than that of our ally, and there would have been a general feeling of exultation and satisfaction if we had fought another campaign in order to end the war with greater _éclat_. But this sentiment has been sufficiently mastered by prudent considerations and a just appreciation of the circumstances of Europe generally, and of our relations with other Powers, to check all ebullitions of mortified pride, and to induce a prudent reserve and acquiesce in the management of the Government, and in a spirit like this there appears some hope for the future. We had a very long talk about these and other matters, the substance of which I record as it recurs to my mind.

[Sidenote: EDWARD ELLICE ON THE STATE OF PARTIES.]

A day or two before I met Ellice at Hillingdon, where we interchanged our thoughts, and a good deal that he said was much in Graham's sense: that this Government could not stand but by being remodelled, and his notion is that half of it should be got rid of, the Peelites taken in, and Lord John to go to the House of Lords as President of the Council, Granville taking Cowley's place as ambassador at Paris, and Cowley replacing Stratford Canning at Constantinople. _À propos_ of Stratford Canning, Graham thinks the Opposition will attack the Government and not the ambassador on the case of Kars, and that it is not impossible they may carry a vote of censure against them, which I told him I did not believe was possible, or that they could be able to carry any resolution affecting the Government so much as to compel their resignation, and I suggested to him how fatal this would be to his scheme of reorganizing a Government under Clarendon, as such censure would more especially touch him, and this would make it impossible for the Queen to entrust the formation of another Government to his hands.

_April 7th._--Since my conversation with Graham, I have learnt from the Duke of Bedford that Lord John is not very much disinclined to go to the House of Lords, particularly as his position in reference to his seat for the City is so embarrassing. The Dissenters, always unreasonable and ungrateful, will not forgive his speech upon Church Rates the other night, and his general popularity is gone. Then it is probably a consideration with him to secure to his family the settlement his brother will make on him if he takes the peerage.

_London, May 4th._--For nearly a month I have let this journal fall into arrear, during which period the most interesting occurrences have been the return of Clarendon, the publication of the conditions of peace with the accompanying protocols, and the debate upon Kars. With regard to the peace, Clarendon comes very well out of his mission, and no fault is found with the peace. The Kars debate was a great error on the part of the Opposition, and ended with a great triumph for the Government. Just before it, Palmerston called a meeting of his supporters, where he harangued them with great success, and managed to rally them round him with more of zeal and cordiality than they have hitherto shown. His position is certainly improved, and according to present appearances he will get through the session without much difficulty. All agree that he has been doing well in the House of Commons; his assiduity, his punctual attendance, and his popular manners make him agreeable to the House, and he has exhibited greater facility and resource in dealing with all sorts of miscellaneous subjects than anybody gave him credit for. There is not the smallest danger of the peace proving dangerous to him, and it is evident that the House of Commons, however independent and undisciplined it may be, will not allow him to be placed in any danger, and is determined not to have any change of Government at present. The Peelites and John Russell supported him and had nothing else to do, for they are neither of them in a condition to attempt to play a game of their own.

_May 14th._--Every day my disinclination to continue this work (which is neither a journal nor anything else) increases, but I have at the same time a reluctance to discontinue entirely an occupation which has engaged me for forty years, and in which I may still find from time to time something to record which may hereafter be deemed worth reading, and so at long intervals, and for short periods, I resume my reluctant pen.

We are now in the Whitsuntide holidays, in a profound political and parliamentary calm, the Government perfectly secure, Palmerston very popular, the Opposition disheartened and disunited, and having managed their matters as awkwardly and stupidly as possible, attacking the Government on questions and points on which the assailants were sure to be beaten, and strengthening instead of weakening it by their abortive attempts. There was great difference of opinion amongst them about fighting battles, on Kars, and on the peace; Lyndhurst and Derby were against, Disraeli was for. Roebuck, whom I fell in with on Sunday in a railway train, told me that if they had laid hold of the one point of the protocol in the Belgian press, and worked this well, they might have put the Government in a minority, but they missed this obvious opportunity.[1] I called on Lyndhurst yesterday, who said they had unaccountably overlooked this plausible topic. He is going to make a speech on Italy when Parliament meets, and we agreed entirely that either too much or too little was done at Paris on this question, and that either it ought not to have been entertained and discussed at all, or some more decided measures ought to have been adopted with regard to it. To stir up such delicate questions, and leave them in their present unhappy condition, is an egregious error.

[Sidenote: A SABBATARIAN QUESTION.]

The questions of war and of peace having now ceased to interest and excite the public mind, a religious question has sprung up to take their place for the moment, which though not at present of much importance, will in all probability lead to more serious consequences hereafter. Sir Benjamin Hall having bethought himself of providing innocent amusement for the Londoners on Sunday, established a Sunday playing of military bands in Kensington Gardens and in the other parks and gardens about the metropolis, which has been carried on, with the sanction of the Government, with great success for several Sundays. Some murmurs were heard from the puritanical and Sabbatarian party, but Palmerston having declared himself favourable to the practice in the House of Commons, the opposition appeared to cease. The puritans, however, continued to agitate against it in meetings and in the press, though the best part of the latter was favourable to the bands, and at last, when a motion in Parliament was threatened to insist on the discontinuance of the music, the Cabinet thought it necessary to reconsider the subject. They were informed that if the Government resisted the motion they would be beaten, and moreover that no man could support them in opposition to it without great danger of losing his seat at the next election. It is stated that the Sabbatarians are so united and numerous, and their organisation so complete, that all over the country they would be able to influence and probably carry any election, and that this influence would be brought to bear against every man who maintained by his vote this 'desecration of the Sabbath.' Accordingly it was resolved by the Cabinet to give way, and the only question was how to do so with anything like consistency and dignity. The Archbishop of Canterbury was made the '_Deus ex machinâ_' to effect this object. He was made to write a letter to the Premier representing the feelings of the people and begging the bands might be silenced. To this Palmerston wrote a reply in which he repeated his own opinion in favour of the music, but that in deference to the public sentiment he would put an end to their playing. All this has excited a good deal of interest and discussion. For the present, the only question is whether the angry public will not vent its indignation and resentment to-morrow in acts of uproar and violence; but though these acts will not be serious or lasting if they do take place, it may be expected that the Sabbatarians will not rest satisfied with their triumph, but will endeavour to make fresh encroachments on our free will and our habits and pursuits, and that fresh and more serious contests will arise out of this beginning.

Footnote 1: [An attempt had been made at the Congress of Paris by Count Walewski to bring forward some measure or resolution reflecting on the independence of the press in Belgium. It led to nothing, but Lord Clarendon was accused of not having protested against it with sufficient energy.]

_May 28th (day of the Derby)._--Yesterday on Epsom racecourse arrived the news of Palmer's being found guilty of the murder of Cook. This case and the trial have excited an interest almost unprecedented, unlike anything since the case of Thurtell about twenty years ago or more. People who never heard of either of the men took the deepest interest in it, the women particularly, though there was nothing peculiar in it or of a nature to excite them particularly. The trial lasted a fortnight, all the details of it were read with the greatest avidity, half the town went one day or other to hear it, and the anxiety that the man should be convicted was passionate. Cockburn gained great applause by the manner in which he conducted the prosecution.

[Sidenote: DEFEAT OF THE OPPOSITION.]

This trial has proved more attractive and interesting than anything in the political world, though there has been a pitched battle in the Lords on the question of Maritime Law and Right of Search given up in the recent Treaty. Derby made a violent onslaught on the Government, and was at first very confident of a majority. He soon found these hopes were fallacious, when he got angry and was more violent than he has ever been before this session. The Government got a majority of above fifty, which puts an end to any further contest there. The Government have now nothing to fear, the Opposition are routed and dispirited, and one can see nothing to alter the present state of affairs. The minor questions which have occupied attention are settling quietly. The Chelsea Commission is over, and the result will be harmless, on the whole rather good than bad, because it will prove that the violent attacks on the military authorities during the war have been exaggerated and in many cases unfounded. A sort of compromise has been made about the Wensleydale peerage, not a very happy one, and it remains to be seen whether the House of Commons is sufficiently acquiescent as to sanction it by agreeing to the 12,000_l._ a year to be paid to two new judges and peers for life. The Government have virtually abandoned the principle they contended for, and have yielded to the adverse vote and Committee. When they appeal to Parliament and limit the number of life peerages, they abandon the prerogative of the Crown.

_June 1st._--The state of affairs with America becomes more and more alarming.[1] Grey told me the other night that he had had a long conversation with Dallas, whose tone was anything but reassuring as to the prospect of peace; and yesterday I met Thackeray, who is just returned from the United States. He thinks there is every probability of the quarrel leading to war, for there is a very hostile spirit, constantly increasing, throughout the States, and an evident desire to quarrel with us. He says he has never met with a single man who is not persuaded that they are entirely in the right and we in the wrong, and they are equally persuaded if war ensues that they will give us a great thrashing; they don't care for the consequences, their riches are immense, and 200,000 men would appear in arms at a moment's notice. Here, however, though there is a great deal of anxiety, there is still a very general belief that war cannot take place on grounds so trifling between two countries which have so great and so equal an interest in remaining at peace with each other. But in a country where the statesmen, if there are any, have so little influence, and where the national policy is subject to the passions and caprices of an ignorant and unreasoning mob, there is no security that good sense and moderation will prevail. Many imagine that matters will proceed to the length of a diplomatic rupture, that Crampton will be sent away and Dallas retire in consequence, and that then by degrees the present heat will cool down, and matters be amicably arranged without a shot being fired. I feel no such confidence, for if diplomatic intercourse ceases numerous causes of complaint will arise, and as there will be no means left for mutual and friendly explanation and adjustment, such causes will be constantly exaggerated and inflamed into an irreconcileable quarrel. Matters cannot long go on as they now are without the public here becoming excited and angry, and the press on both sides insolent, violent, and provoking, and at last, going on from one step to another, we shall find ourselves drifted into this odious and on both parts suicidal contest, for there is not a blow we can strike at America and her interests that will not recoil on us and our own. It has often been remarked that civil wars are of all wars the most furious, and a war between America and England would have all the characteristics of a civil and an international contest; nor, though I have no doubt that America is in the wrong, can I persuade myself that we are entirely in the right on either of the principal points in dispute. We have reason to congratulate ourselves that the Russian war is over, for if it had gone on and all our ships had been in the Baltic, and all our soldiers in the Crimea, nothing would have prevented the Americans from seizing the opportunity of our hands being full to bring their dispute with us to a crisis.

Footnote 1: [In consequence of the dispute with the American Government on the subject of Foreign Enlistment, Mr. Crampton, the British Minister, was ordered to leave Washington on May 28th. He arrived in England on June 15th; but Lord Palmerston stated in the House of Commons that the dismissal of Mr. Crampton did not break off diplomatic relations with the United States, as Mr. Dallas remained in this country. It is remarkable that within a few months or even weeks two British Ministers received their passports from foreign governments and were sent away--a very uncommon occurrence!]

[Sidenote: MADAME RISTORI.]

_June 7th._--I went last night to see the celebrated Ristori in a very bad play called 'Medea,' being a translation into Italian from a French tragedy by a M. Legouvé. This play was written for Madame Rachel, who refused to act the part, which refusal led to a lawsuit, in which the actress was (I think) defeated. Ristori is certainly a fine actress, but she did not appear to me equal to Pasta in the same part, or to other great actresses I have seen. However, my inability to hear well and want of familiarity with Italian acting and imperfect knowledge of the language disqualify me from being a competent judge.

The American horizon is rather less dark. Nothing is yet known as to Crampton's dismissal, and Dallas does not believe it. The Danish Minister at Washington writes over here that he thinks the clouds will disperse and there will be no serious quarrel.

_London, July 12th._--After the lapse of a month and more, during which I could not bring myself to record anything, or to comment upon passing events, I am at last roused from my apathy, and am induced to take up my pen and say a word upon the defeat of the Appellate Jurisdiction Bill in the House of Commons the other night, which gave me the greatest satisfaction, because I regard it as a just punishment for the stupid obstinacy with which the Government have blundered on from one fault to another throughout this whole business. It has been a complete comedy of errors, and every one who has taken a part in it has been in the wrong. I told Granville how it would be in the first instance, and urged him, after the House of Lords had refused to let in Parke as a life peer, to accept the defeat quietly by making him an hereditary peer and thus give the go-by to the main question. This nothing would induce them to do, and they fancied that they could avoid the mortification of appearing to knock under, and save their own consistency, by the contrivance of this bill. Every mischief that it was possible to do they have managed to accomplish, and the leaders of the opposite parties, who all felt themselves in a scrape, came to a sort of compromise in the Lords' Committee, the result of which was this unpopular bill. Amongst them they have assailed the prerogative of the Crown, they have damaged the judicial authority of the House of Lords, they have deeply offended many of their own friends by tendering to them such a measure, and they have behaved most unkindly and unhandsomely to Baron Parke, who thinks he has great reason to complain.

I have been at Knowsley for the last three days, and so missed the march of the Guards into London on Wednesday. Lord Hardinge was struck down by paralysis as he was speaking to the Queen at Aldershot on Tuesday last. It is supposed that the Duke of Cambridge will succeed him, and that Jim Macdonald will be his Military Secretary. The American question is still undecided, but everybody appears to be very easy about it.

[Sidenote: BARON PARKE ON THE LIFE PEERAGE.]

_July 20th._--I met Baron Parke the other day, who talked over his affair, complained of the treatment he had received from the Government, but said he gathered from what the Chancellor had said to him that they meant now to make him an hereditary peer, declared there was not a shadow of doubt about the legality, and that Campbell had as little doubt as he himself had, but finding the measure was unpopular with certain lawyers, he had suddenly turned against his own recorded opinion and opposed it. The Baron said the Government were greatly to blame for not having ventilated the question, and ascertained whether they could carry it or not, and if he had had an idea of all the bother it had made, he never would have had anything to do with it. George Lewis told me that the life peerage had never been brought before the Cabinet, and he knew nothing of it till he saw it in the Gazette, nor did Clarendon; in fact it was confined to the Chancellor, Granville, and Palmerston. They none of them, however, know with whom it originated. Now that the measure turns out to be so unpopular and is so scouted, and the transaction has been attended with so many blunders and defeats, no one is willing to accept the responsibility of it, or to acknowledge having had anything to do with it. It is strange that Palmerston should ever have consented to it, but he knew nothing and cared nothing about it; he was probably assured it would go down without any difficulty, and in this _poco curante_ way he suffered himself to be committed to it, not seeing the storm it would cause. He allowed Granville to manage it all his own way, and at last he had the good luck to be beaten upon it in the House of Commons, for the scrape would have been more serious if he had earned it there. These last days of the session have been as usual marked by the withdrawal and abandonment of various bills that were for the most part introduced at the beginning of it, and which were found to be quite worthless, especially the Law Reform Bill.

_London, July 27th._--Parliament has finished its debates, and will be prorogued on Tuesday. Dizzy wound up by a 'review of the session,' a species of entertainment which used to be given annually some years ago by Lord Lyndhurst with great skill and effect, but which on the present occasion, and in Disraeli's hands, was singularly inopportune and ineffective. Lord Wensleydale has at last taken his seat as an hereditary Peer; the Government, after various abortive attempts to wriggle out of their absurd position, having done at last what they ought to have done at first--knocked under and endured what could not be cured. The Government go into summer and winter quarters in a very healthy and prosperous state, with nothing apparently to apprehend, and with every probability of meeting Parliament next year in the same condition, and, barring accidents, going through next session as successfully as they have gone through this.

_August 4th._--I was at Goodwood all last week; the Prince of Prussia came there. Not a word of news; the Queen still engaged in reviewing the troops, and complimentary _fêtes_ are still going on to Sir W. Williams of Kars, and Charles Wyndham 'the hero of the Redan.' The disturbances in Spain seem to be over, and O'Donnell remains victorious. My first impression was (the common one) that Espartero had been ousted by an intrigue, and that it was a reactionary _coup d'état_, but I now hear that it is no such thing, and that we ought to desire the success of the present Government. Espartero and O'Donnell could not agree, as was not unlikely in a coalition Government the two chiefs of which were men of such different opinions and antecedents. After many abortive attempts to reconcile their differences, it was agreed that a Council of Ministers should be held which the Queen herself should preside over, and when a final attempt should be made. A long discussion took place, and the Queen did all she could to reconcile the two generals, and to enable the Government to go on unchanged. Finding it impossible to effect this, she ended by saying, 'Well, gentlemen, since I cannot prevail on you to go on together, I must needs choose between you, and as I think Marshal O'Donnell will be the best able to carry on the Government, I appoint him.' Then the National Guards began an insurrection which was put down, but no violent measures seem to have been adopted, and O'Donnell has declared that Spain can only be successfully governed on constitutional principles, and that he means to retain the Cortes in its integrity. How far his acts will correspond with his professions remains to be seen. Narvaez was recommended to go to France, and Queen Christina appears not to have been allowed to return to Spain, which are good signs. It is a good thing for Spain that Espartero should have retired, for though probably the honestest Spaniard, he is at the same time the weakest and the most wanting in moral courage and decision.

[Sidenote: CHANCES OF WAR.]

History is full of examples of the slight and accidental causes on which the greatest events turn, and of such examples the last war seems very full. Charles Wyndham told me that nothing but a very thick fog which happened on the morning of Inkerman prevented the English army being swept from their position and totally discomfited. The Russians could see nothing, lost their own way, and mistook the position of the British troops. Had the weather been clear so that they had been able to execute their plans, we could not have resisted them; a defeat instead of the victory we gained would have changed the destiny of the world, and have produced effects which it is impossible to contemplate or calculate.

On the other hand, nothing but miscalculation and bad management prevented the capture of Sebastopol immediately after Alma. My nephew is just returned from a voyage with Lord Lyons to the Crimea, where he went all over the scenes of the late contest, all the positions, and the ruins of Sebastopol as well as the northern forts. He was well treated by the Russians, who showed him everything, and talked over the events of the war with great frankness. They told him that if the allies had marched at once after the battle on the north side, no resistance could have been made, and the other side must have fallen. We had long known that the north side would have fallen if we had attacked it at once. Frank asked the Russian officer whether there was any bad feeling on the part of the Russian army towards the French or English, and he said none whatever, but a great deal towards the Austrians, and that they desired nothing more than an opportunity of fighting them. He also said that they had been misled by our newspapers, from which they obtained all their information, and thinking that the announcements there of an intended invasion of the Crimea were made for the purpose of deceiving them, they had withdrawn a great many troops from the Crimea, so that while Sebastopol had been emptied of the garrison to increase the army of Menschikoff, the Russians had not more than 30,000 or 35,000 men at the Alma.

_Hillingdon, August 17th._--It is impossible to find anything of the least interest to write about, and my journal is in danger of dying of starvation or of atrophy. The causes of discontent we have had with Russia are disappearing, and the Emperor's coronation will not be clouded by fresh _doléances_ on our part. Bulwer is just gone to the Principalities, where the commissioners are to endeavour to ascertain what are the wishes of the people as to the union. France and England are in favour of it, Turkey and Austria against it, while Russia professes to be indifferent and neutral. Spain is settling down into submission to the Government of O'Donnell. Naples is relieved from her fears of English intervention, and there seems some chance that she may relax the rigour of her Government now that she may do so _salvo honore_ and not under compulsion. This country is profoundly tranquil and generally prosperous; everybody seems satisfied with Palmerston and his administration. I myself, who for so many years regarded him politically with the greatest aversion and distrust, have come to think him the best minister we can have, and to wish him well.

[Sidenote: THE CORONATION AT MOSCOW.]

_September 15th._--Another month has passed away, and still I have had nothing to record. The coronation at Moscow appears to have gone off with great _éclat_, and to have been a spectacle of extraordinary magnificence, the prodigious cost of which betrays no sign of exhaustion or impoverishment by the late war.[1] We were probably mistaken, as we were in so many other things, in fancying that the power and resources of Russia were very greatly impaired, but during the war, whatever we wished we were ready to believe.

The state of affairs at home and abroad is curious: abroad there is uneasiness and uncertainty as to the future, the elements of future disturbances being in a sort of abeyance; at home the fever and excitement which prevailed during the war having been succeeded by a torpor and an apathy such as I never remember to have seen before. All party politics seem to be extinct, the country cares about nobody, desires no changes, and only wishes to go on and prosper. There is not a public man to whom public opinion turns, and no great questions are afloat to agitate and divide the country, or around the standards of which different opinions, principles, or passions can flock. Palmerston may remain minister as long as he lives, if he does not commit any gross faults either of commission or of omission, or unless something may occur, which nobody can foresee or imagine, to rouse the nation from its apathy.

Footnote 1: [The Emperor Alexander II. of Russia was crowned with great pomp in Moscow on September 7; the ceremony was attended by special ambassadors from all the great Powers; Lord Granville, accompanied by Lady Granville and a brilliant suite, was the representative of Great Britain on this occasion.]

_September 21st._--The old Crimean correspondent of the 'Times' has despatched a very interesting and graphic account of the coronation at Moscow, and Granville writes word that whereas he had estimated the cost of it at a million sterling, he was now led to believe it would be not much less than three. The coronation of George IV. cost 240,000_l._, which was considered an enormous sum and a monstrous extravagance. Our two last coronations cost from 30,000_l._ to 50,000_l._

The quarrel with the King of Naples appears to be coming to a crisis, and though it will not produce any serious consequences now, the precedent of interference we are establishing may have very important ones at some future time, and though philanthropy may make us rejoice at some coercion being applied to put an end to such a cruel and oppressive government as that of King Bomba (as they call Ferdinand), it may be doubted whether it would not be sounder policy to abstain from interference with what only indirectly and remotely concerns us, and from enforcing a better and more humane system of government in a country where the people do not seem to care much about its tyranny and inhumanity. And then there is the great objection of dictating to and interfering with weak governments while we do not venture to deal in the same way with the equally flagrant abominations of stronger ones, to say nothing of a host of difficulties and objections which suggest themselves as possible, if not probable, results of our interference. It will afford to other Powers an excuse if not a right to interfere in like manner, whenever they require a pretext, and they consider it their interest to do so; and if such cases occur, the peace of the world will be largely endangered. As it is, I strongly suspect (for I know nothing) that the agreement on the Neapolitan question between France and ourselves is by no means cordial and complete. Mrs. Craven writes me word she has been in a house in the country with Walewski, who talked very openly (and no doubt imprudently) to her, telling her that Palmerston was very difficult to go on with. I know not what Palmerston has been doing, nor what his present policy may be, but I thought he had either abandoned or greatly modified that old policy of meddling and bullying to which he used to be so addicted, and at all events that while the foreign policy of England is directed by Clarendon, we should abstain from anything very arbitrary and violent. It is, however, whispered that Walewski is no longer in the good graces of the Emperor, and what I heard long ago about Her Majesty's opinion of him renders it not unlikely.

_September 23rd._--All the little I hear tends to confirm the notion that there is an antagonism growing up between French and English policy, and that France and Russia are becoming more and more intimate every day. The points of the Treaty on which there are still some differences, and on which we appear to be making a great fuss, the French seem to care very little about, perhaps being rather disposed to side with Russia. These differences are very inconsiderable in themselves, but if they lead to coolness and estrangement between us and the French, and to an alliance between France and Russia, they may hereafter be very important.

Nothing can be more perplexed and unintelligible (at least to those who are not behind the curtain) than the international relations of the Great Powers and of their dispositions towards the smaller ones, and in such a chaos no little tact, discretion, and firmness are required to shape our foreign policy.

[Sidenote: M. GUIZOT ON DEMOCRACY IN ENGLAND.]

_September 25th._--The void which the march of events fails to fill up cannot be better occupied than by the following extract from Guizot's notice on Sir Robert Peel in the _'Revue des Deux-Mondes'_ (1856). He is speaking of democracy in England:--_'M. de Talleyrand disait dans la Chambre des Pairs, il y a quelqu'un qui a plus d'esprit que Napoléon ou que Voltaire, c'est tout le monde. On peut dire aujourd'hui même à propos de L'Angleterre il y a quelqu'un qui a plus de pouvoir que la couronne, plus de pouvoir que l'aristocratie, c'est tout le monde, et tout le monde c'est la démocratie. Où commence-t-elle? où finit-elle? à quels signes visibles se distingue-t-elle des autres éléments de la société? Personne ne pourrait le dire, mais peu importe: pour être difficile à définir, le fait n'en est ni moins certain, ni moins puissant, les éléments les plus divers entrent dans la composition de la démocratie moderne, des classes riches et des classes pauvres, des classes savantes et des classes ignorantes, des maîtres et des ouvriers, des conservateurs et des novateurs, des amis du pouvoir et des enthousiastes de liberté, bien des aristocrates mêmes, détachés de leur origine par leurs moeurs, par leur aversion des gênes et des devoirs que l'aristocratie impose. Et la position de la démocratie anglaise n'est pas moins changée que sa composition; elle ne se borne pas comme jadis à défendre au besoin ses libertés, elle regarde les affaires publiques comme les siennes, surveille assidûment ceux qui les font, et si elle ne gouverne pas l'état, elle domine le gouvernement.'_ All this seems to me perfectly true, and the best definition of the English democracy, its nature, and its position that could possibly be given, and that the nature of things admits of. Guizot evidently saw clearly a truth which might be elaborated into a very interesting essay, and which has often suggested itself to me, namely, that without any violence or ostensible disturbances or any change in external forms, this country has undergone as great a revolution as France itself, or any of the continental nations which have been torn to pieces by civil discords and contests. If we compare the condition of England at any two not very distant periods, and the manner in which power and influence have been distributed at one and at the other, this will be very apparent, and nobody can doubt that this process is still going on. We are, as Guizot says, _'dans une époque de transition ... sous l'empire des principes et des sentiments encore confus, perplexes et obscurs, mais essentiellement démocratiques, qui fermentent en Europe depuis quinze siècles et y remportent de nos jours des victoires dont personne ne saurait dire encore quel sera le vrai et dernier résultat.'_

[Sidenote: THE QUARREL WITH NAPLES.]