Windsor Castle, 7th February 1854.
The Queen must apologise for having kept the enclosed papers so long, and in now sending them back she does so without feeling sure in her mind that she could with safety sanction Mr Gladstone's new and important proposal.9 The change it implies will be very great in principle and irretrievable, and the Queen must say that Lord John Russell's apprehensions as to the spirit it is likely to engender amongst the future civil servants of the Crown have excited a similar feeling in her mind. Where is moreover the application of the principle of public competition to stop, if once established? and must not those offices which are to be exempted from it necessarily degrade the persons appointed to them in public estimation?
Footnote 9: Mr Gladstone had written on the 26th of January on the subject of competitive examinations for the Civil Service; in reply to the Queen's letter, he referred to the discontent existing in the Service with the system of appointment by favour, and of promotion by seniority alone.
Admiralty, 9th February 1854.
Sir James Graham, with humble duty, begs to lay before your Majesty certain important considerations which were discussed at the Cabinet yesterday with respect to the selection of a Commander-in-Chief for the Fleet about to be appointed for Service in the Baltic.10...
Lord Dundonald11 is seventy-nine years of age; and though his energies and faculties are unbroken, and though, with his accustomed courage, he volunteers for the Service, yet, on the whole, there is reason to apprehend that he might deeply commit the Force under his command in some desperate enterprise, where the chances of success would not countervail the risk of failure and of the fatal consequences, which might ensue. Age has not abated the adventurous spirit of this gallant officer, which no authority could restrain; and being uncontrollable it might lead to most unfortunate results. The Cabinet, on the most careful review of the entire question, decided that the appointment of Lord Dundonald was not expedient....
Sir Charles Napier is an excellent seaman, and combines boldness with discretion.12 He has served in large squadrons, and he has commanded them. As a Second, he may not have been submissive; as a Chief, he has been successful in command. His appointment will give confidence both to officers and men; and his name is not unknown both to enemies and allies. If he has the faults of his family, he is not without their virtues; courage, genius, love of country are not wanting; and the weighty responsibilities of high command, without oppressing him, would give steadiness to his demeanour.
He behaved ill to Lord John Russell and to Sir Francis Baring; and on shore he has given just cause of complaint; but at sea and in command he is a different person; and Lord John Russell in the Cabinet yesterday, regardless of all former displeasure, pronounced an opinion favourable to the appointment of Sir Charles Napier. Lord Aberdeen, also, together with the entire Cabinet, came to the same conclusion; and Sir James Graham on their behalf, and in concurrence with his own opinion, ventures to ask the permission of your Majesty to appoint Sir Charles Napier to this important Naval command.13
The above is humbly submitted by your Majesty's dutiful Subject and Servant,
Footnote 10: War had not yet been declared, but the Russian Ambassador left London on the 7th of February, and Sir Hamilton Seymour was recalled from St Petersburg on the same day.
Footnote 11: This was the Lord Cochrane who had been unjustly convicted in 1814, under the direction of Lord Ellenborough, Chief Justice, of conspiracy to defraud. His naval honours were restored to him in 1832. He is said to have stipulated, on this occasion, that he should be allowed to destroy Cronstadt by a chemical process invented by himself.
Footnote 12: He had had a long naval career. In 1833 he commanded the Portuguese Fleet for Donna Maria, and won a small engagement against Dom Miguel. He was "not submissive" at Beyrout, where, having command of the land forces, and being told to retire and hand over the command, he advanced and won a victory, resulting in the evacuation of the city. He also disobeyed orders at Acre.
Footnote 13: The inadequate results of an appointment which promised so well are described in Parker's Sir James Graham, vol. ii. pp. 229 et seq.
Buckingham Palace, 17th February 1854.
The Queen has received Mr Gladstone's letter and memorandum, and had heard from the Prince the further explanation of the grounds upon which he, Mr Gladstone, thinks the new regulations respecting the Civil Service necessary. The Queen, although not without considerable misgivings, sanctions the proposed plan, trusting that Mr Gladstone will do what he can, in the arrangements of the details of it, to guard against the dangers, which she has pointed out in her former letter and through the Prince when he saw Mr Gladstone. A check, for instance, would be necessary upon the admission of candidates to compete for employment, securing that they should be otherwise eligible, besides the display of knowledge which they may exhibit under examination. Without this a young man might be very ineligible, and still after having been proclaimed to the world as first in ability, it would require very strong evidence of misconduct to justify his exclusion by the Government.
Downing Street, 17th February 1854.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to acknowledge your Majesty's gracious letter.
He takes blame to himself for having caused your Majesty trouble by omitting to include in his short memorandum an explanation of the phrase "qualified persons."
Experience at the universities and public schools of this country has shown that in a large majority of cases the test of open examination is also an effectual test of character; as, except in very remarkable cases, the previous industry and self-denial, which proficiency evinces, are rarely separated from general habits of virtue.
But he humbly assures your Majesty that the utmost pains will be taken to provide not only for the majority but for all cases, by the strictest enquiries of which the case will admit; and he has the most confident belief that the securities for character under the system, although they cannot be unerring, will be stronger and more trustworthy than any of which the present method of appointment is susceptible.
Buckingham Palace, 21st February 1854.
My dearest Uncle,— ... War is, I fear, quite inevitable. You will have seen that the Emperor Nicholas has not given a favourable answer to our Brother Napoleon (which I hear has disappointed him extremely, as he expected very great results from it); and the last proposals or attempts made by Buol14 it is to be hoped will not be accepted by Russia, for France and England could not accept them; but if Austria and Prussia go with us—as we hope they will—the War will only be a local one. Our beautiful Guards sail to-morrow. Albert inspected them yesterday. George is quite delighted to have a division....
I must now conclude, with Albert's affectionate love. Believe me always, your devoted Niece,
Footnote 14: Austrian Premier and Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Buckingham Palace, 24th February 1854.
The Queen must write to Lord Aberdeen on a subject which at this moment appears to her of paramount importance—viz., the augmentation of the Army. The ten thousand men by which it has been ordered to be augmented can hardly be considered to have brought it up to more than an improved Peace establishment, such as we have often had during profound peace in Europe; but even these ten thousand men are not yet obtained. We have nearly pledged ourselves to sending twenty-five thousand men to the East, and this pledge will have to be redeemed. To keep even such a force up in the field will require a strong, available reserve at home, of which we shall be quite denuded. But we are going to make war upon Russia! encouraging Austria and Prussia to do so likewise, whereby we assume a moral obligation not to leave them without assistance. We engage in a War which may assume in its course a totally different character from that of its beginning. Who can say it is impossible that our own shores may be threatened by powers now in alliance with us? We are powerless for offence or defence without a trained Army; to obtain this will require considerable time. The Queen must, therefore, urge Lord Aberdeen to consider with the Cabinet whether it will not be essential to augment the Army at once, and by at least thirty thousand men. Considerations of home policy make this also advisable; the country is eager for War at this moment, and ready to grant men and money. It will be a great facility hereafter to have obtained what is most needed at first. If the force should finally not be wanted, retrenchments may very easily be made. The Crown should at least have the power of raising the men without the necessity for further application to Parliament.
London, 26th February 1854.
Lord Aberdeen, with his humble duty, begs to inform your Majesty that another Cabinet was held to-day, in order to consider the draft of a letter which it is proposed that Lord Clarendon should address to Count Nesselrode, and in which he should summon the Russian Government to evacuate the Principalities. The messenger will be directed to wait six days for an answer, and the British Government will consider the refusal or the silence of Count Nesselrode as equivalent to a declaration of War, and proceed to act accordingly.15
An assurance has been received, in general terms, of the intention of Austria to support this demand; and a telegraphic message has been sent to Vienna with a desire to know whether the Austrian Government will join in this summons, or in what manner support will be given.16 No answer has yet been received, and Lord Aberdeen would think it right not to make the summons until Austria has declared her intention; but the Cabinet appears to desire that the letter should be sent to-morrow evening.
The period fixed for the complete evacuation of the Principalities is the 30th of April.
As it cannot be supposed that the Emperor of Russia will listen to such a demand as this, immediate hostilities must be expected, with all their consequences.
Footnote 15: This summons to evacuate the Principalities, and an ultimatum to a similar purport from Paris, were delivered to the Czar on the 14th of March; on their receipt the Czar intimated that he did not think it fitting (convenable) that he should make any reply. His decision was known in London on the 24th.
Footnote 16: The attitude of Austria caused great perplexity. Count Orloff had gone to Vienna to obtain a pledge of neutrality in the event of war, but refused to give the Emperor Francis Joseph satisfactory assurances as to the Czar's future policy, and, in particular, as to the evacuation of the Principalities at the close of the war. The Austrian Government accordingly announced its intention of acting as circumstances might dictate, but subsequently limited the assistance which it now expressed itself willing to give to England and France in insisting upon the evacuation, to diplomatic support.
Buckingham Palace, 26th February 1854.
The Queen has received Lord Aberdeen's letter of this day.
To be able to form a judgment on the important question to which it refers, the Queen would require to be furnished with the exact terms of "the general assurance" which Austria has given with respect to it. The Queen, however, does not doubt for a moment that the gain of a day or two in making the summons to Russia could not be compared to the advantage of being able to make the summons conjointly with Austria. She must therefore wish that the answer to the telegraphic message should be awaited before the messenger is sent off.
Buckingham Palace, 28th February 1854.
My dearest Uncle,— ... The news from Austria are quite excellent, and much more than we had any reason to expect. It will make a great difference in the nature and duration of the War. Our summons to Russia went last night viâ Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, and if they are received either with silence, or the Emperor refuses to evacuate the Principalities—War will be considered as declared. The French send a similar summons. The messenger is to wait six days for an answer, but no longer.
The last battalion of the Guards (Scots Fusiliers) embarked to-day. They passed through the courtyard here at seven o'clock this morning. We stood on the balcony to see them—the morning fine, the sun rising over the towers of old Westminster Abbey—and an immense crowd collected to see these fine men, and cheering them immensely as they with difficulty marched along. They formed line, presented arms, and then cheered us very heartily, and went off cheering. It was a touching and beautiful sight; many sorrowing friends were there, and one saw the shake of many a hand. My best wishes and prayers will be with them all....
[Undated.]
The Queen was rather annoyed at the manner in which Lord Clarendon pressed the Duke of Cambridge's going to the Tuileries last night.17 She thought it an immense boon upon her part to allow the Duke of Cambridge to go to Paris—and instead of its being considered as such by Lord Clarendon and Count Walewski, the Queen was told it would offend the Emperor if the Duke did not go to the Tuileries also. The Queen observed that it was unnecessary and unusual for the Duke, or any Prince almost, to live at the Palace of the Sovereign, unless he was a very particular friend or near relation. The Duke of Genoa had refused going there, though he had received other civilities here; in the same manner no Prince comes to this Palace unless he is a very near relation or particular friend. To this Lord Clarendon replied that it was "because the Emperor wished it," which rather shocked the Queen, and she spoke strongly to him upon the subject. The result was that the Queen said she would speak to the Duke of Cambridge about it, and see, as the Emperor made so great a point of it, and Lord Clarendon considered that the Alliance depended upon it, what he would do....
The Queen must and will protest, for she cannot mix up personal friendship with a political Alliance. The former is the result of the experience of years of mutual friendship, and cannot be carried by storm....
There would be nothing unusual in apartments being offered to the Duke of Cambridge, and declined by him. This was done by the King of the Belgians only last summer at Berlin and Vienna, without anybody's construing it into an affront. The Queen adds a list of the Royal personages who have been in England and never resided at the Palace. Lord Aberdeen may show this letter to Lord Clarendon.
Footnote 17: The Duke was going to the Crimea, and it was arranged that he should stop at Paris on the way.
Buckingham Palace, 1st March 1854.
The Queen has to acknowledge Lord John Russell's letter of this morning. Much as she must regret the postponement of the second reading of the Reform Bill, she must admit its wisdom under the present peculiar circumstances;18 but she doubts the advantage of naming a precise day after Easter on which it is to come on. Considering the importance to the country of preserving the present Government and of not allowing it to be beat on so vital a question, the opportunity should not be lost of ascertaining the state of feeling both in the House of Commons and in the country after the reassembling of Parliament, before the Government decide on entering upon the struggle which the carrying through of the measure might entail. It is quite impossible now to conjecture with certainty what that state of feeling and the general political circumstances at home and abroad may be at that time. Possibly the country may be more eager then for the measure—or the War may disincline it altogether towards it.
The Queen seizes this opportunity of expressing her sense of the imperative importance of the Cabinet being united and of one mind at this moment, and not to let it appear that there are differences of opinion within it. The knowledge that there are such is a cause of great anxiety to the Queen, at a time when she is to enter upon a European War, of which nobody can confidently predict the extent.
Footnote 18: See the Queen's letter of the 4th of March, post.
Buckingham Palace, 2nd February (? March) 1854.
In returning these letters to Lord Aberdeen the Queen must express to him that there are hints in them which give her great uneasiness. The stability of this Government is not only of paramount importance at the commencement of the War, but throughout it; the moment for negotiation may arrive much sooner than we now expect—and then, more than now even, the Government ought to be composed of the ablest and most moderate men which this Country can produce.
Buckingham Palace, 4th March 1854.
The Queen thanks Lord John Russell for his letter received this morning. She has read the proceedings in the House of Commons with much interest.19 She was particularly pleased with Lord John's second speech, in which he affirmed the principle that public men ought not to oppose the regard for personal honour or reputation to the well-understood interests of the Country. Indeed, the Queen cannot conceive the possibility of their collision, as an exclusive regard for the well-understood interests of the Country must always redound to the honour and reputation of a Statesman.
Footnote 19: Lord John Russell had announced the decision of the Government to postpone till the 27th of April the second reading of the Reform Bill, and, in reply to some sarcastic comments from Mr Disraeli, stated that he would be ashamed of himself if he preferred anything connected with his own personal reputation to the interest of the country. He added that the security of the country depended upon its confidence in the character of public men.
Osborne, 14th March 1854.
My dearest Uncle,—Your kind letter of the 9th arrived here on Saturday just when we returned from a splendid and never-to-be-forgotten sight—the sailing of our noble Fleet for the Baltic;20 the Navy and Nation were particularly pleased at my leading them out, as they call it, which in fact was the case, as, in our little Fairy we went on and lay to, to see them all come out, which (the wind being fair) they did, with sails set, each passing us close by, and giving us three hearty cheers, as I think none but British tars can give. Gloriously they bore along, followed by the prayers and good wishes of all. You should read the account in yesterday's Times. Another sailing squadron goes to-morrow. The Captains and Admirals all took leave on board, and seemed much impressed with the solemnity of the moment.... Ever your truly devoted Niece,
Footnote 20: The Fleet, under Sir Charles Napier, had been assembled at Spithead.
Osborne, 17th March 1854.
Dear Sir and Brother,—General Count von der Gröben has brought me the official letter of your Majesty, as well as the confidential one,21 and I send your kind messenger back, with these two answers to you. He will be able to tell you, orally, what I can express only imperfectly in writing, how deep my pain is, after our going so far, faithfully, hand in hand, to see you, at this weighty moment, separating yourself from us. My pain is still further increased by the fact that I cannot even conceive the grounds which move your Majesty to take this step.
The most recent Russian proposals came as an answer to the last attempt for an understanding which the Powers believed could be arrived at honourably, and they have been rejected by the Vienna Conference, not because they were not in accordance with the literal wording of the programme, but because they were contrary to the intention of it. Your Majesty's Ambassador has taken part in this Conference and its decision, and when your Majesty now says: "The task of Diplomacy ceases at the exact point where that of the Sovereigns emphatically begins"; I am unable to assent to such a definition. For what my Ambassador does, he does in my name, and I feel myself not only bound in honour thereby, but also placed under an obligation to take upon myself the consequences which the step which he is directed to take may lead to.
The dreadful and incalculable consequences of a War weigh upon my heart not less than on your Majesty's. I also know that the Emperor of Russia does not wish for it. He, none the less, demands from the Porte things which all the Powers of Europe—among them, yourself—have solemnly declared to be incompatible with the independence of the Porte, and the European balance of power. In view of this declaration and of the presence of the Russian Army of invasion in the Principalities, the Powers could not but be ready to confirm their word by action. If "the Turk" now goes into the background, and if the approaching War appears to you as a "War of tendency" this is the case only because the very motives which may induce the Emperor to insist on his demands—in defiance of the opposition of the whole of Europe, and with the danger of a War that may devastate the world, do betray a distinct tendency, and because the grave consequences of the War must appear much more momentous than the original ostensible cause of it, which at first appeared only as the request for a key to the back door of a mosque.
Your Majesty asks me "to examine the question in a spirit of love for peace, and even now to build a bridge for the Imperial honour." Ah, my dear Sir and Brother, all the inventive gifts, all the architecture of diplomacy and of goodwill, have been uselessly wasted during these last nine months in this bridge-building! The Projets de Notes, de Conventions, de Protocoles, etc., etc., have proceeded, by the dozen, from the Chancelleries of the different Powers, and one might call the ink wasted on them another Black Sea. But everything has been shipwrecked against the self-will of your honourable brother-in-law.
If now your Majesty informs me "that now you mean to persist in complete neutrality," and if, on this occasion, you refer us to your Nation, who are said to exclaim with sound common sense: "Acts of violence have been done by the Turks, the Turk has good friends in large numbers, and the Emperor has done us no harm"—I do not understand you. Certainly I should understand this language if I heard it from the Kings of Hanover or of Saxony. But I have, hitherto, looked upon Prussia as one of the Great Powers which, since the peace of 1815, have been guarantors of treaties, guardians of civilisation, defenders of the right, the real arbiters of the Nations; and for my part I have felt the divine responsibility of this sacred office, without undervaluing at the same time the heavy obligation, not unconnected with danger, which it imposes on me. If you, dear Sir and Brother, abdicate these obligations, you have also abdicated that position for Prussia. And should such an example find imitators, then the civilisation of Europe would be delivered up to the play of winds; right will then no longer find a champion, the oppressed will find no longer an umpire.
Let not your Majesty believe that what has been said in this letter is aimed at persuading you to change your resolves; it flows from the affectionate heart of a sister, who could not pardon herself, were she not, at so weighty a moment, to let you see into her inmost soul. So little is it my intention to desire to win you over to our view, that nothing has grieved me more than the suspicion, expressed in your name by General von der Gröben, that England had desired to seduce you from your purpose by opening a prospect of advantages to be gained. The baselessness of such a supposition is evident from the Treaty itself which had been offered to you, and whose most important clause consisted in the promise of the contracting parties, not to desire in any case to derive from the War any advantage for themselves.
Your Majesty could not have given a more powerful proof of your unselfishness than by the very fact of attaching your signature to this Treaty.
To come to a close. You suppose that War may already have been declared; you express, however, at the same time, the hope that it may not already have actually broken out. I cannot unfortunately hold out any hope that the sentence will be followed by any stay of execution. Shakespeare's words:
"Beware
Of entrance to a quarrel; but, being in,
Bear it that the opposer may beware of thee,"
are deeply engraved on the hearts of all Englishmen. Sad that they are to find an application at this crisis, in a nation with whom previously nothing prevailed but friendship and affection! And how much more melancholy must be the present emotions of your Majesty's heart and mind to see such words applied to a beloved brother-in-law, whom yet—however much you love him—your conscience cannot absolve from the crime of having brought upon the world wilfully and frivolously such awful misery!
May the Almighty take you under His protection!
With Albert's most cordial compliments, and our united greetings to the dear Queen, I remain, my much honoured Sir and Brother, your Majesty's faithful Sister and Friend,
Footnote 21: The Prussian Court considered itself under no obligation to engage in the impending struggle, till its own interests became directly involved; it would not (said Baron Manteuffel, President of the Ministry, on the 18th of March) take part, for the protection of the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, "in a conflict, the full scope of which cannot yet be apprehended, and the original subject matter of which does not affect the interests of our fatherland."
Footnote 22: The King afterwards agreed to the proposed protocol for the preservation of the integrity of Turkey, which was signed at Vienna on the 7th of April.
1st April 1854.
The Queen rejoices to see the Debate was favourable in the House of Lords, and that it was concluded in the House of Commons.23
She is rather startled at seeing Lord Aberdeen's answer to Lord Roden upon the subject of a day of humiliation, as he has never mentioned the subject to her, and it is one upon which she feels strongly. The only thing the Queen ever heard about it was from the Duke of Newcastle, who suggested the possibility of an appropriate prayer being introduced into the Liturgy, in which the Queen quite agreed; but he was strongly against a day of humiliation, in which the Queen also entirely agreed, as she thinks we have recourse to them far too often, and they thereby lose their effect. The Queen therefore hopes that this will be reconsidered carefully, and a prayer substituted for the day of humiliation. Were the services selected for these days of a different kind to what they are—the Queen would feel less strongly about it; but they always select chapters from the Old Testament and Psalms which are so totally inapplicable that it does away with all the effect it ought to have. Moreover, really to say (as we probably should) that the great sinfulness of the nation has brought about this War, when it is the selfishness and ambition of one man and his servants who have brought this about, while our conduct has been throughout actuated by unselfishness and honesty, would be too manifestly repulsive to the feelings of every one, and would be a mere act of hypocrisy. Let there be a prayer expressive of our great thankfulness for the benefits we have enjoyed, and for the immense prosperity of this country, and entreating God's help and protection in the coming struggle. In this the Queen would join heart and soul. If there is to be a day set apart, let it be for prayer in this sense.
Footnote 23: On the 27th of March the Queen announced to Parliament that the negotiations with the Czar had terminated, and that she felt bound "to afford active assistance to her ally, the Sultan." Next day the Declaration of War was issued, containing a narrative of the events which finally led to the rupture. The debates on the Address in answer to the message took place on the 31st of March, Mr Bright, in the Commons, censuring the declaration, and being replied to by Lord Palmerston. The addresses were presented to the Queen on the 3rd of April.
Buckingham Palace, 9th April 1854.
The Queen is anxious to express to Lord John Russell the extreme satisfaction she experiences at the communication Lord Aberdeen yesterday evening made her of the settlement of the Reform Question, viz., of its postponement for the present Session, with the understanding that it is to be brought forward again whenever the state of affairs will admit of its being fairly and calmly considered by Parliament.24 The sacrifice of personal feeling which no doubt this may cost Lord John will, she is certain, be amply compensated by the conviction that he has done so for the interest and tranquillity of his Sovereign and Country, to whom a dissolution of the present Government would have been a source of immense danger and evil.
Footnote 24: From a memorandum, made by Prince Albert, of interviews with Lord Aberdeen, it appears that before the Cabinet of the 8th of April Lord Palmerston declared that under neither present nor any future conditions could he vote for the second reading of the Reform Bill. Lord John thereupon tendered his resignation; this Lord Aberdeen asked him to suspend until after the meeting of the Cabinet.
Pembroke Lodge, 9th April 1854.
Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty; he cannot think it consistent with fairness to conceal from your Majesty the deep feelings of mortification which affect him on reviewing the proceedings of the Cabinet yesterday.25
Lord Aberdeen was the only person who behaved with due regard to the honour of the Administration. The rest appeared ready to sacrifice everything in order to keep the Ministry together; and Lord John Russell feels bound to warn your Majesty that, although he was quite willing to waive the consideration of the Reform Bill for the present Session, he is not ready to consent that it shall be entirely set aside in order to keep together a Ministry whose continuance would be dearly bought at the price of the welfare of the Country, and the consistency of public men. Lord John Russell must reflect further on this subject before he comes to a final determination.
Footnote 25: Lord John Russell's actions at this period of his career seem often incomprehensible; but his private domestic anxieties seem to have weighed him down. Having made the great sacrifice, for an ex-Premier, of taking office under an old opponent, he was now engaged in trying to regain the first place for himself. Lord Aberdeen had always contemplated retiring in his favour, but would not give up the Premiership in the face of the dangers threatening the country. Moreover, he had believed his continuance in office to be a guarantee for peace. Lord John Russell, after accepting the Foreign Office, had then insisted on being a Minister without office; later still, by displacing Mr Strutt and transferring Lord Granville to the Duchy, he himself became Lord President of the Council, an office which no commoner had held since the reign of Henry VIII. By such action, coupled with perpetual threats of resignation, he marred his prospects of succeeding Lord Aberdeen, and, as will be seen, failed in his attempt to construct an Administration when the opportunity was offered him.
Buckingham Palace, 10th April 1854.
The Queen received Lord John Russell's letter last night. She is much grieved that he should be "affected by deep feelings of mortification on reviewing the proceedings of the Cabinet." From all the Queen had heard of the views of the different members of the Cabinet, she believes them to have been fully convinced that the present moment would be inopportune to press the Reform Bill, but quite prepared to take it up again on the first fitting opportunity; she, of course, does not speak of Lord Palmerston.
The Queen would, no more than Lord John, wish to see "the Reform Bill set aside in order to keep together a Ministry," but does not consider the decision of the Cabinet at all to imply this, whatever Lord Palmerston's personal wishes may be, and trusts that the Country will fully understand and appreciate the motives which have guided the Government. Lord Aberdeen and Lord John will always receive every support from the Queen when they shall think it right to propose the re-introduction of the measure.