Chapter 2

Bankes said he had attended none of the meetings at Lord Chandos's. He had avoided as much as he could all communication with the Duke of Cumberland. He had fully determined not to take a part with any new Government which might be formed, unless it should clearly appear the King had been unfairly dealt by, or unless there should be an attempt to make peers to carry the Bill. The Duke of Cumberland had always said that he made him his first object, and he had reason to think that he had mentioned him to the King, and had been instrumental in his appointment. The Duke of Cumberland had desired him to come to him (during the Bill), and had apparently intended to name some particular office for him, but seeing his coldness had only sounded him, and had received the answer I have mentioned above.

The Duke of Cumberland had told him it was an understood thing that all were to be restored, and that he saw no reason why he should not take his office again.

_This was ten days ago._

I told him I advised, if he thought it necessary to write to the Duke of Cumberland at all, that he should merely state his intention to take his office back again, refer to his conversation with the Duke himself upon the point, and add _distinctly_ that, taking office, he could no longer have any communication on political matters with a person who had declared his hostility to the Government.

I advised him to send off his own servant on a post-horse at six o'clock to-morrow morning, with a letter to the effect I have stated to the Duke of Cumberland, and whether he received an answer or not, to go to the Duke of Wellington and accept at 12.

I advised him to tell the Duke the whole state of the case, and all he had done.

The Duke of Wellington did not seem by any means well to-day. He was blooded yesterday.

_April 16._

Cabinet at 3. It seems Bankes called on the Duke this morning, but he was engaged. I told him all that passed between Bankes and me last night. If Bankes should go out the Duke means to offer his place to Sir J. Graham.

We met upon foreign affairs. Aberdeen read his instructions to Gordon, who goes to Constantinople. They are unobjectionable.

We then considered what was to be done in consequence of this second violation of their word on the part of the Russians in blockading Candia.

Count Heyden has written two letters to Sir Pulteney Malcolm. In the first he justifies the blockade of Candia on the ground of its being necessary to protect the Morea from the Pacha of Egypt; in the second he rests it on the necessity of blockading the two extremities of Candia for the purpose of watching Constantinople.

We cannot permit the Russians to make fools of us in this way--to promise one thing as parties to the Treaty of London, and to do another as belligerents.

After the Cabinet I asked the Duke whether he still wished me to press Courtney upon the Directors. He said, Yes, he very much wanted his place. I said it had occurred to me that _Herries_ might take the Governorship of Bombay. It did not seem to have occurred to him. He said he thought Herries would not go; but he evidently thought it would be a very good thing if he would.

The Duke said he wanted to have the places of Courtney and Sir G. Hill, and to bring in Lord Chandos and M. Fitzgerald. We mentioned Ashley. I suggested Ashley's going to the Treasury, and Sir J. Graham taking his place. This would, I dare say, be done, if we could get the place at the Treasury.

I have not as yet heard a surmise as to the new Lord Privy Seal.

Lord O'Neil has signed the Duke of Richmond's protest against the Franchise Bill. It is very hostile to the Government, and Lord O'Neil will probably be put out.

The Duke of Richmond has been very imprudent. Had he taken a moderate line he probably might have been Privy Seal. His time is now gone by.

_April 17._

Went by appointment to see Lady Jersey. Found there Duncannon and Lord Sefton. Duncannon talked big about O'Connell's power, and in the same sense in which he talked to Fitzgerald, wishing to induce the Government to let him take his seat. I said we could not. It depended not on us, but upon the law.

Lady Sefton came in afterwards for a few minutes, and Lord Rosslyn. Lady Jersey talked a great deal about the restoration, and feared the Whigs would imagine they were never to come in, and would form a violent opposition. She mentioned Mr. Stanley as being much annoyed, he having made a laudatory speech in favour of Peel.

I told her it would have been very harsh to have eliminated those who had taken office under the idea that the Government was rather against than for the Catholics, certainly _neutral_, and that it was a little unreasonable to expect others to be turned out to make way for new friends.

_April 18._

The Duke thinks he could not offer the Privy Seal to Lord Grey, but he would be conciliated by having a friend--that is, Rosslyn--in. If we could get Lord Beresford out, Lord Rosslyn would go to the Ordnance.

The Duke says the King would make it a point of honour to resist the introduction of Lord Grey, though in reality he was in communication with Lord Grey in 1820-21, after the Queen's trial, and then intended to bring him in and to turn out the then Ministers for the Milan Commission, he having been himself at the bottom of that Commission. The Duke, the only member of the Cabinet who was not mixed up with the Milan Commission, induced the King to give up his idea of making a change.

Bankes received a letter from the Duke of Cumberland, very long, and against his acceptance of office; but he begged Bankes to go down to see him and talk it over. He did so. Bankes told him he would not accept if he on consideration objected, but he was determined not to join any other Government. The Duke of Cumberland spoke of himself as having been ill-used by the Duke of Wellington. This was explained. The conference ended by the Duke of Cumberland's acquiescing entirely in Bankes's acceptance of office. Bankes saw the Duke of Wellington and detailed the whole to him.

_April 21._

Called on Sir H. Hardinge at Richmond. He told me the Duke had at first great reluctance to have anything to do with the Whigs. By his account he must have principally contributed to lead the Duke to adopt that view which he has now of admitting Rosslyn, &c.

_April 22._

The Duke of Norfolk called, and, not finding me, left a note begging me to ascertain privately from the Duke of Wellington whether the King would be pleased if the English Catholics presented an address to him thanking him for the Relief Bill.

Received a letter from the Duke of Wellington expressing a decided opinion against any address from the Roman Catholics. He says, 'Everything has been done that is possible to efface all distinctions between the King's subjects on the score of religion, and this with a view to the general benefit, and not to that of a particular body. I confess I shall think that this measure has failed in attaining its object if there should be any general act of a particular body.

'In respect to the King himself I am certain that the most agreeable thing to him would be that all should remain quiet.

'We must have no distinct body of Roman Catholics except in the churches and in affairs of religion. The less we act inconsistently with the principle the better.'

I so entirely agree in opinion with the Duke of Wellington that, having for my own amusement written an address for the Roman Catholics in the event of their making any to the King, the first sentence I imagined was this: 'The Roman Catholics of England approach your Majesty for the last time as a body distinct from the rest of your Majesty's subjects.'

_April 25._

I had a good deal of conversation as to the next Director. There are three city men candidates, but none are good--Lyall, Ellice, and Douglas.

Of Ellice no one knows anything. He is brother to the Ellice who married Lord Grey's sister. Lyall is, or was, Chairman of the Committee of Shipowners. Douglas is brother to Lord Queensbury. They say his is not a very good house.

_April 28._

Read the correspondence between the Duke and Lord Anglesey. Then read a memorandum of the Duke's in reply to one of Hardinge's on the subject of the discipline of the British army. Hardinge wished to introduce the Prussian [Footnote: Which did not include capital punishment. See _Wellington Correspondence_, vol. v. p. 932.] discipline into ours. The Duke shows that with our discipline we have more men fit for duty in proportion to our numbers than the Prussians in the proportion of two to one. That in Prussia the army is everything. There is no other profession. All are soldiers--the officer lives much with his men--they are always in masses, always in fertile countries.

In our service the worst men in the community enter the army. The officers are gentlemen. They cannot mix with the men. Without discipline our army would be inferior to others. It is not even now the favourite profession. There is much jealousy of it. It is not popular with the common people. It is difficult to find recruits even in times of distress.

I was in an army, the Duke concludes, which cannot be governed on the Prussian principle. You cannot treat the English soldier as a man of honour.

The Duke had been with the King, who was in very good humour. He had not, however, got to close quarters with him as to the changes.

_April 29._

Cabinet at 12. A letter has been received from Lord Heytesbury, from which it is clear that Russia will very soon resume altogether the exercise of her belligerent rights in the Mediterranean.

Nesselrode communicated to him the blockade of Candia. Lord Heytesbury only observed that 'it was a resumption of belligerent rights.' This Count Nesselrode did not deny, and he said they could not long remain in the false position in which they now were in the Mediterranean.

Count Heyden at the end of January blockaded Candia on pretexts arising out of the state of Greece. In three weeks from that time he rested his interception of the Egyptian vessels near Candia on the necessary exercise of his rights as a belligerent. Lièven, when first spoken to, disavowed Heyden. He now changes his tone, and it is evident that Russia now for the second time breaks her word. The French do not behave much better. They have 6,000 men in the Morea, and mean to keep them there notwithstanding their engagement to withdraw their troops as soon as the Egyptians were embarked. To be sure, they say if we insist upon it they will withdraw them.

I have always been for getting out of the treaty. We have been dragged along very unwillingly--we have been subjected to much humiliation. We seem to me to have gained nothing by all our compliances. We have been led on from the violation of one principle to that of another. Our position has discouraged Turkey. We have been made the tools of Russia, and have been duped with our eyes open. I think the sooner we get out of this false position the better, and there is no time so favourable for us to hold strong language as this, when by the settlement of the Catholic question we are really strengthened, and when all foreign Powers believe we are yet more strengthened than we are. The Duke is certainly for getting out. He has long wished it.

A paper of Peel's was read suggesting the difficulties in which we should still be placed by our moral obligation towards the Greeks, and by our reasonable fear that on the principles of the Greek Treaty, to which we have unfortunately given our adhesion, Russia and France may combine and make a partition treaty. My expectation is that Russia and France would soon quarrel, and I think I could before now have made them jealous of each other, but we have done nothing.

After much conversation, V. Fitzgerald agreeing with me and the others saying nothing, it was determined to insist upon the freedom of communication with Candia under the protocol, to insist upon the Greeks withdrawing from their advanced position near Prevesa _under the protocol_, and to insist likewise upon the withdrawing of the French troops from the Morea, according to the engagement.

I am not satisfied with this. Every part of our diplomacy has been unfortunate. We have succeeded in nothing. I predicted if we became engaged in the war, it would be ultimately on a little point and not upon a great one. Our diplomacy cannot be defended. It is our weak point.

House. All the Catholics there. Every good old name in England.

The Duke of Norfolk is much pleased with the Duke of Wellington's answer to his enquiry as to the propriety of addressing the King. I am going to send him the Duke's original letter as a _record_.

The King certainly received the Protestant peers, and particularly those who had been at Windsor, with great favour, and so the Bishop of Durham. The Duke of Cumberland stood at the King's left hand, and quizzed the people as they passed. He seemed _rayonnant_.

After dinner I had some conversation with Loch, the Chairman, as to governing India in the King's name. He does not positively object. I think I shall be able to carry that point. I consider it to be of the most essential importance.

_April 30._

Cabinet at 12. Determined to fund eight millions of Exchequer Bills. No taxes to be taken off or imposed. We had some conversation as to the East Retford question. V. Fitzgerald communicated a proposal from Littleton to propose the adjournment of all discussion upon the subject till next year, as it is evident nothing can be done this year. Littleton proposed this because he wished to disappoint the mischievous designs of some people. (Palmerston particularly.)

It was determined to adhere to the line taken by the Government last year-- namely, to that of throwing East Retford into the hundred. The Duke was decidedly of opinion that whatever we did we should do from ourselves, and certainly not act in concert with an enemy. The Tories look to our conduct upon this question as the touchstone.

Drawing-room. The King, as yesterday, very civil to the Brunswickers and taking no notice of our friends. He took particular notice of the Brazilians. Madame de Lièven is endeavouring to form a Government with the Duke of Cumberland, the Ultra-Tories, the Canningites, and some Whigs.

The King is very Russian. I believe all this will end in nothing. The Chancellor thinks they may try to make a change when Parliament is up, and so have six months before them. They may think of it; but the only object of such a Government would be _revenge._ They cannot repeal the Relief Bill, nor do they wish to pursue a different line of policy either at home or abroad.

The foreigners think that having settled the Catholic question we are ready to draw the sword, and find a field of battle wherever we can. This the Russians are afraid of, and hence arises in some degree their wish to overthrow the Duke's Government; but the real foundation of all the Russian intrigues is Madame de Lièven's hatred for the Duke, and her rage at feeling she has overreached herself.

_May 1._

Sir Thomas Tyrwhitt was with the King for two hours to-day, the Duke of Cumberland being in the room and the King in bed. The King is very much out of humour, and abused everything and everybody. He is very angry at ladies being admitted to the House of Lords, and particularly at their going in such numbers the day the Duke of Norfolk took his seat. The Duke of Cumberland has sworn he will not leave England till he has turned out the present Ministers. He is the only colonel of the Horse Guards who ever does duty--Lord Cathcart being absent and Lord Harrington incapable. When he last got the gold stick from Lord Harrington he swore he would never let it out of his hands. As gold stick he ordered the gates of the Horse Guards to be closed the day of the Drawing-room, and thus obliged all the Ministers who dressed in Downing Street to go all round.

He told Clanwilliam to-day with great satisfaction that the King never could again be on good terms with his Ministers.

No arrangement is yet made with the Master of the Rolls. Everything waits for the legal promotions. The King will be delighted with Scarlett [Footnote: Sir James Scarlett, afterwards Lord Abinger.] as Attorney- General, and the Chancellor tells me Bickersteth is to be Solicitor. I recollect hearing of him at Cambridge. He is a very clever man and a good speaker. Tindal is of course to be Master of the Rolls. I am most anxious to give up the Privy Seal to Rosslyn.

_May 3._

Cabinet at 2. Decided the Government was to take the same line exactly this year as to East Retford (that is, as to giving the two members to the Hundred) that it took last year. However, as it is impossible to get any Bill through the Lords this year, Peel will be very willing to accede to any proposition for postponing the whole question till next session.

On the question of Irish Education and on that of the grant to Maynooth, the vote will be as before--it being said that the state of the session and the circumstances of the present period make it advisable that the question of any change should be deferred. Indeed, Ministers have not had time to consider it.

Many of Lord Anglesey's letters to Peel and of Peel's answers were read. We have a very strong case against him on his letter to Dr. Curtis, which by a letter from Dr. Curtis to the Duke we know Lord Anglesey directed Dr. Murray to publish if it could be done with Curtis's consent, and which Dr. Murray did publish without obtaining such consent.

Curtis's letter is dated January 2.

Lord Anglesey wrote to Curtis for the Duke's letter and his answer, and had them two days before December 23, the date of his letter to Curtis.

Peel thinks the East Indian Committee should not be refused. It is better for the East Indian Company that it should be granted than refused. I entirely coincide with him.

_May 4._

Coal Committee at 12. Met Lord Bathhurst, with whom I had some conversation as to the Duke's reading letters in answer to Lord Anglesey. He begged me to go to the Duke, and try to induce him not to do so. I found the Duke agreeing with me entirely as to the danger of the president, and disposed to read only what might be absolutely necessary.

Lord Anglesey brought forward his motion for 'the letter of recall.'

The Duke answered him, and so well that even Lord Holland could not say one word. So the thing ended.

The Duke had been assured by the King, and within the last fortnight the King had given the same assurance to Aberdeen, that Lord Anglesey had not _permission_ to read confidential letters.

Lord Anglesey stated that he had the King's permission.

The Duke certainly seemed to contradict him.

Lord Londonderry threw a note over to me suggesting that the contradiction was so direct there might be an awkward explanation out of doors unless the thing were softened down.

I mentioned this to Lord Bathurst. He thought not.

However, when he replied, Lord Anglesey treated the contradiction as absolute, and Lord Bathurst told the Duke he must give some explanation, which the Duke did, saying he did not mean to accuse Lord Anglesey of declaring he had the King's permission when he had not, but only that he had reason to think he had not. In fact, the King, as we always thought, told the Duke one thing and Lord Anglesey another; and the only result of the debate is that the King is proved to have told a lie.

Lord Wharncliffe, who overtook me as I was riding home, considered Lord Anglesey to be blown out of water.

At Lady Brownlow's ball I talked with Lord Farnborough, Longford, and Beresford. All thought the reading of the letters should have been stopped, and that the Duke did wrong to read anything. We could not stop the reading of the letters when the King's permission to read them was stated distinctly by Lord Anglesey. The misery is that we have a lying master.

_May 5._

I called at the Treasury and saw the Duke. On the subject of what took place yesterday he said, that having received the King's commands to declare Lord Anglesey had not his permission to read the letters, he could not do otherwise than make the observations he did. The gravamen of the charge against Lord Anglesey as arising out of those letters is that in the last he declares his intention of using them as public documents; and this being the ground upon which the King had acquiesced in his being relieved, for the King to have afterwards permitted the reading of those letters would have been a withdrawal of confidence from his Ministers.

I met Lord Ravensworth and talked to him upon the subject. He seemed to be in a sort of alarm as to what took place yesterday. This is superfluous. The Duke's explanation that he did not mean to say Lord Anglesey had reason to think he was permitted to read those letters was quite sufficient. The Duke added that he had understood the contrary.

Lord Ravensworth seemed to think his Royal master came the worst off--which is true.

He told me the Duke of Cumberland had been abusing every one at Lady Brownlow's last night, and had declared, as he has before, that he would not go away till he had us out.

Lord Anglesey is reported to be very ill to-day.

_May 6._

Cabinet dinner at Sir G. Murray's. The Duke saw the King to-day. He was in good humour, and said the Duke was quite right in declaring Lord Anglesey had not his permission to read the letters. It seems the King said the same thing in the Duke of Cumberland's presence on Monday at dinner, and this made the Duke so very angry that evening.

We had a very good division last night on the Retford question. Almost all the Brunswickers voted with us--none against us.

In fact the Government is very strong.

There are disturbances at Manchester, which look rather serious.

_May 7._

Nothing in the House.

The meeting respecting the statue to the Duke of Wellington seems to have finished in detestable taste. Hunt proposing a vote of thanks to Lord Anglesey and O'Connell, and _Lord Darnley!_ speaking for it. Both these said the Catholic Bill arose out of Lord Anglesey's Government. Lord Darnley repeated the same thing to me to-day in the House. I told him the contrary was the fact. That Lord Anglesey had placed the carrying of the question in peril--that without his recall it could hardly have been carried.

There have been serious disturbances at Manchester. The bakers' shops have been broken open and robbed, and money extorted by fear. This arises out of real distress; but it seems, as might be expected, that notorious thieves lead on the mobs.

_May 8._

The disturbances at Manchester have more the character of robbery than of riot. Baker's shops have been broken open and pillaged, and money has been extorted.

At Rochdale an attack was made on the military. They behaved with extreme forbearance; but at last fired, and killed and wounded many.

_May 9._

Dined at the Trinity House. Hardinge, whom I met there, told me Wood had been asked by Lord Mansfield to go to the Pitt dinner on the 28th. Wood said he did not know whether the Ministers would go or not. Lord Mansfield said, 'Why, you must know, it is understood that as soon as Parliament is up the Government will be changed. At this dinner we shall make such a display of Protestant force as will enable the King to take us as his Ministers.'

It is surprising to me that any able man as Lord Mansfield is should be so deluded by the lies of the Duke of Cumberland. The country is not agitated, it is not dissatisfied. It would repudiate, as an act of the basest treachery, such conduct towards a Government which had been permitted to carry a great measure, and which was displaced solely on grounds of personal pique.

Manchester and its neighbourhood more quiet.