The Letters of Queen Victoria Volume Ii Part 61

Mr Roebuck's Motion: That the principles on which the Foreign Policy of Her Majesty's Government has been regulated have been such as were calculated to maintain the honour and dignity of this country, and in times of unexampled difficulty to preserve peace between England and the various nations of the world.

[Pageheading: HOLSTEIN AND GERMANY]

_Queen Victoria to Viscount Palmerston._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _22nd June 1850._

The Queen has received Lord Palmerston's letter of yesterday, but cannot say that his arguments in support of his former opinion, that the Germanic Confederation should be omitted from amongst the Powers who are to be invited to sign a protocol, the object of which is to decide upon the fate of Holstein, have proved successful in convincing her of the propriety of this course. As Holstein belongs to the Germanic Confederation and is only accidentally connected with Denmark through its Sovereign, a Protocol to ensure the integrity of the Danish Monarchy is a direct attack upon Germany, if carried out without her knowledge and consent; and it is an act repugnant to all feelings of justice and morality for third parties to dispose of other people's property, which no diplomatic etiquette about the difficulty of finding a proper representative for Germany could justify. The mode of representation might safely be left to the Confederation itself.

It is not surprising to the Queen that Austria and Prussia should complain of Lord Palmerston's agreeing with Sweden, Russia, Denmark, and France upon the Protocol before giving Prussia and Austria any notice of it.

[Pageheading: THE PROTOCOL]

_Viscount Palmerston to Lord John Russell._

CARLTON GARDENS, _23rd June 1850._

MY DEAR JOHN RUSSELL,--The Queen has entirely misconceived the object and effect of the proposed Protocol. It does not "decide upon the fate of Holstein," nor is it "an attack upon Germany." In fact, the Protocol is to _decide_ nothing; it is to be merely a record of the wishes and opinions of the Power whose representatives are to sign it....[19]

How does any part of this decide the fate of Holstein or attack Germany?

Is not the Queen requiring that I should be Minister, not indeed for Austria, Russia, or France, but for the Germanic Confederation?

Why should we take up the cudgels for Germany, when we are inviting Austria and Prussia, the two leading powers of Germany, and who would of course put in a claim for the Confederation if they thought it necessary, which, however, for the reasons above stated, they surely would not?...

As to my having _agreed_ with Sweden, Russia, Denmark, and France before communicating with Prussia and Austria, that is not the course which things have taken. Brunnow proposed the Protocol to me, and I have been in discussion with him about it. It is _he_ who has communicated it to the French Amba.s.sador, to Reventlow, and to Rehausen; I sent it privately several weeks ago to Westmorland, that he might show it confidentially to Schleinitz, but telling Westmorland that it was not a thing settled, but only a proposal by Russia, and that, at all events, some part of the wording would be altered. I have no doubt that Brunnow has also shown it to Koller; but I could not send it officially to Berlin or Vienna till Brunnow had agreed to such a wording as I could recommend the Government to adopt, nor until I received the Queen's sanction to do so.

The only thing that occurs to me as practicable would be to say to Austria and Prussia that if, in signing the Protocol, they could add that they signed also in the name of the Confederation, we should be glad to have the additional weight of that authority, but that could not be made a _sine qua non_, any more than the signature of Austria and Prussia themselves, for I think that the Protocol ought to be signed by as many of the proposed Powers as may choose to agree to it, bearing always in mind that it is only a record of opinions and wishes, and does not decide or pretend to decide anything practically.

Yours sincerely,

PALMERSTON.

[Footnote 19: The Protocol was to record the desirability of the following points:--(1) that the several states which const.i.tuted the Danish Monarchy should remain united, and that the Danish Crown should be settled in such manner that it should go with the Duchy of Holstein; (2) that the signatory Powers, when the peace should have been concluded, should concert measures for the purpose of giving to the results an additional pledge of stability, by a general European acknowledgment.]

[Pageheading: THE QUEEN'S OPINION]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _25th June 1850._

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter enclosing those of Lord Palmerston and Lord Lansdowne. The _misconception_ on the Queen's part, which Lord Palmerston alleges to exist, consists in her taking the essence of the arrangement for the mere words. Lord Palmerston pretends that the Protocol "does not decide upon the fate of Holstein nor attack Germany." However, the only object of the Protocol is the fate of Holstein, which is decided upon--

(1.) By a declaration of the importance to the interests of Europe to uphold the integrity of the Danish Monarchy (which has no meaning, if it does not mean that Holstein is to remain with it).

(2.) By an approval of the efforts of the King of Denmark to keep it with Denmark, by adapting the law of succession to that of Holstein.

(3.) By an engagement on the part of the Powers to use their "_soins_"

to get the const.i.tutional position of Holstein settled in a peace according to the Malmoe preliminaries, of which it was one of the conditions that the question of the succession was to be left untouched.

(4.) To seal the whole arrangement by an act of European acknowledgment.

If the declarations of importance, the approval, the "_soins_" and the acknowledgments of _all_ the great Powers of Europe are to decide nothing, then Lord Palmerston is quite right; if they decide anything, it is the fate of Holstein.

Whether this will be an attack upon Germany or not will be easily deduced from the fact that the attempt on the part of Denmark to incorporate into her polity the Duchy of Schleswig was declared by the Diet in 1846 to be a declaration of war against Germany merely on account of its intimate connection with the Duchy of Holstein.

The Queen does not wish her Minister to be Minister for Germany, but merely to treat that country with the same consideration which is due to every country on whose interests we mean to decide.

The Queen would wish her correspondence upon this subject to be brought before the Cabinet, and will abide by their deliberate opinion.

_Queen Victoria to the King of the Belgians._

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, _25th June 1850._

MY DEAREST UNCLE,--Charles will have told you how kindly and amiably the Prince of Prussia has come here, travelling night and day from St Petersburg, in order to be in time for the christening of our little _Arthur_.[20] I wish you could (and you will, for he intends stopping at Brussels) hear him speak, for he is so straightforward, conciliatory, and yet firm of purpose; I have a great esteem and respect for him. The poor King of Prussia is recovered,[21] and has been received with great enthusiasm on the first occasion of his first reappearance in public.

We are in a _crisis_, no one knowing how this debate upon this most unfortunate Greek business will end. It is most unfortunate, for whatever way it ends, it must do great harm.

I must now conclude, for I am quite overpowered by the heat. Ever your truly devoted Niece,

VICTORIA R.

[Footnote 20: The present Duke of Connaught, born on the 1st of May, the birthday of the Duke of Wellington, who was one of the sponsors, and after whom he was named.]

[Footnote 21: From an attempt to a.s.sa.s.sinate him.]

[Pageheading: THE DON PACIFICO DEBATE]

_Lord John Russell to Queen Victoria._

CHESHAM PLACE, _26th June 1850._

Lord John Russell presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has the honour to report that in the debate of last night Viscount Palmerston defended the whole Foreign Policy of the Government in a speech of four hours and three quarters.[22] This speech was one of the most masterly ever delivered, going through the details of transactions in the various parts of the world, and appealing from time to time to great principles of justice and of freedom.