This page contains affiliate links. As Amazon Associates we earn from qualifying purchases.
Buy it on Amazon FREE Audible 30 days

Like you, I am uneasy at the existing relations of France and England, though I fully believe that the two Governments are respectively animated by the most conciliatory intentions. In my opinion, the blame rests on what is now called ‘the colonial policy,’ which consists in scattering our forces to the four corners of the world, while Continental Europe is armed to the teeth and does not afford us a single ally. But even this policy might be followed without causing any difficulty with England, if there was a readiness to anticipate it by frank explanations. The world is big enough for it. Unfortunately, since the Egyptian business–which might easily have been the opportunity for a friendly agreement, but which we have made such a mess of–all these questions are confused and taken amiss….

Je termine en vous renouvelant encore tous mes remerciments, et en vous priant de me croire votre bien affectionné,


The Journal then has:–

_July 24th_.–Great dinner at the Granvilles’ to receive Waddington [Footnote: M. Waddington had a career that has perhaps no parallel. The son of an Englishman settled in France, he was educated at Rugby and at Trinity College, Cambridge; and was second classic, Chancellor’s medallist, and No. 6 in the University boat in 1849. Having elected to be a Frenchman, he travelled in Asia Minor, and achieved a reputation as an archaeologist and numismatist. After the fall of the Empire he entered into public life; was foreign minister and the representative of France at Berlin in 1878; was prime minister and the representative of France at the Coronation of the Tsar in 1881, and was French ambassador in London from 1883 to 1893. He died in 1894 at the age of 68.] [the new French Ambassador]. I was introduced to Count Herbert Bismarck. Sat by Errington. Forty-two people there at several tables.

_26th_.–To Foxholes.

_September 10th_.–Left Foxholes for Broglie _viâ_ Havre. Slept at Rouen. 11th, Broglie, by rail to Bernay; at Broglie, Vieil Castel, Laugel, Target, Gavard. Old name of Broglie, Chambrey.

_15th_.–Left Broglie for Val Richer. Drive with De Witt.

_17th_.–Gout coming on in foot. Started for Honfleur and Havre; quite lame. Spent the day on board the Wolf; met Prothero again. Managed to get home on the 18th. Laid up in bed for a week.

_From Lord Granville_

_September 29th_.–The Comte de Paris has a difficult game to play; and the large intelligent family, living in great luxury and consideration, is not the best machine for carrying hopes more or less forlorn; but I expect it would be difficult to find an abler or more judicious pretender. My fear is that–as you say–their way to success lies through some disaster. I do not feel convinced, if an opportunity or a necessity arose, that men like Waddington and Ferry would not be among the first to act as civil Moncks.

In the meantime, we shall know in a very few days whether the wisest among the present ministry will have their way and do the right thing by us in the Madagascar matter. It will take a little longer to settle the Chinese difficulty. This can only be done by great sacrifices on the part of the French. The Chinese will not hurry themselves, and believe they have the French in their pockets.

_From the Comte de Paris_

Château d’Eu, 3 octobre.

Mon cher Monsieur Reeve,–J’ai reçu votre lettre du 4 septembre à mon retour de Frohsdorf, mais j’ai eu tant à faire depuis lors que je n’ai pas, jusqu’à ce jour, trouvé un instant pour vous remercier de la preuve d’amitié et de sympathie que vous m’avez donnée dans ces circonstances si graves pour moi. J’ai eu depuis des nouvelles de votre séjour à Broglie et au Val Richcr par Messieurs Gavard et de Witt, et j’ai bien regretté que les convenances du deuil ne m’aient pas permis de vous demander cette année de venir an Château d’Eu. J’aurais été, en effet, fort heureux de pouvoir causer avec vous de toutes les graves questions qui se posent aujourd’hui devant nous, tant à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur.

Je serai heureux d’en retrouver l’occasion; car, plus les événements rendent ma situation grave et difficile, plus ils grandissent ma responsabilité, plus naturellement je tiens à recueillir les avis d’un observateur éclairé, impartial et bienveillant pour la France. Dans cette situation si nouvelle, et, je puis dire, sans précédents, je tiens à resserrer les liens de mes vieilles amitiés, et je tiens particulièrement à entretenir mes relations avec la société anglaise, ce grand centre intellectuel qui recueille et juge les affaires du monde entier….

Je vous prie d’offrir mes hommages à Madame et à Mademoiselle Reeve et de me croire Votre bien affectionné,


All the Comte de Paris’ earlier letters are signed Louis-Philippe D’Orleans, the capital D’ being a noticeable peculiarity. By the death of the Comte de Chambord at Frohsdorf on August 24th, the Comte de Paris had become the head of the Bourbons, [Footnote: Always excepting the impossible Don Carlos.] and linked the Legitimists and Orleanists in the person of one capable man. At the same time he changed his signature, as now claiming the throne by hereditary right. Among the Orleanists, however, there were many–including the Duc d’Aumale–who considered the change ill-judged, as implying that his grandfather, Louis Philippe, was a usurper–as, of course, he was, if the will of the people is to count for nothing. [Footnote: Cf. _Le Duc d’Aumale_, par Ernest Daudet, pp. 334-5.] Among the Legitimists, on the other hand, there were many who protested that under no circumstances could they accept one of the line of Philippe Égalité as their lawful sovereign. Still, for the next two or three years, it seemed not impossible that the Comte de Paris might be called to the throne by a constitutional reaction and a popular vote. He does not seem to have had any wish to head or stir up a revolution of force and bloodshed.

The Journal records:–

_October 29th_.–To Oxford. Dined at the Deanery. Jowett, Duke of Buckingham, Max Müller, Brodrick. 31st, dined at All Souls. Sir William Anson. November 1st, lunched with Max Müller.

_From M. B. St.-Hilaire_

_November 21st_.–I notice that to you, as to me, the situation of France appears very sad. I conceive that it is a source of alarm to all Europe. We are falling lower and lower towards the Radicals and the Extreme Left. If that party should come into power, it would be a very serious threat to the peace of the world. From the weakness of our Government, everything is to be feared; and as this weakness must become greater, there does not seem any remedy in the near future. Notwithstanding our wealth, our finances are in a bad state, and it is on that side that the inevitable storm will burst. To ward it off an entire change of conduct would be necessary; and at the present time we have no one strong enough to guide our policy in the right direction.

_To Mrs. Parker_

_Foxholes, December 18th_.–If anyone is to write Lord Westbury’s Life, yours is the pen to do it. Nobody expects a daughter to be impartial, or wishes it. I will see what letters I can find, and will write again when I have looked over my packets of letters.

This promise was afterwards fulfilled. Lord Westbury’s letters were sent to Mrs. Parker, and several of them, with some of Reeve’s, were incorporated in the ‘Life of Lord Westbury’ (2 vols. 8vo. 1888), by Mr. T. A. Nash, whom Mrs. Parker afterwards married.

Early in January 1884, Mrs. Reeve went to Paris, on a visit to Lady Metcalfe–one of Mr. Dempster’s nieces. On the 16th Reeve joined her there. Among other entries, the Journal notes a breakfast at Chantilly on the 27th–‘château finished, galleries splendid’–and on the 30th, dinner at the Embassy. They returned to London on the 31st. A few dinners in town are noted, and a visit to Covent Garden on March 5th, to see Salvini in ‘King Lear.’ To Foxholes on April 9th.

This meagre chronicle of course gives no idea of Reeve’s intellectual activity at the time, which was really very great. With his official duties, the conduct of the ‘Review,’ an extensive correspondence, and, at this time, the preparation of the second part of the ‘Greville Memoirs,’ with dinner parties or receptions three or four times a week, it would seem as if Reeve’s days must have consisted of an abnormal number of hours. And effectively they did; for, though on pleasure–at proper seasons–Reeve might be bent, he had always a frugal mind as to the disposal of time. Most, if not all, of his correspondence, much even of his more serious work, was got through in spare half-hours at the Council Office; and when at home, in his study in the house in Rutland Gate, it was a standing rule that he was not to be disturbed. The study was a cosy room on the ground floor, built out at the back, and so removed from all noise of passing to and fro. It had no outlook to distract the attention, and no man was ever less addicted to day-dreaming. To work whilst he worked and play whilst he played was the golden rule which enabled Reeve for over fifty years to get through as much hard work as a successful lawyer, to do as much hard writing as a successful novelist, to hunt, shoot, or travel whenever opportunity offered, and to be one of the best known figures in the world of London society.

_From the Duke of Argyll_

_March 8th_.–Many thanks for your letter. I am pleased to know that the scientists find my science accurate. Writers in the interest of religion have generally, of late, been disposed to make as much as possible of the distinction between man and nature. The speciality of my book [Footnote: _The Unity of Nature._ There is an article on it in the April number of the Review.] is, on the contrary, to maintain the unity, as really essential to all belief, thus going back to the paths of Butler.

_From M. B. St.-Hilaire_

_Paris, 15 avril._–Cher Monsieur Reeve,–J’étais bien sûr de vous faire plaisir en vous envoyant les discours prononcés sur la tombe de M. Mignet. Celui de M. Martha est le plus remarquable; M. Jules Simon a très bien parlé aussi; mais on peut trouver cependant que M. Martha l’emporte.

Je suis très sensible à votre amicale invitation, et je serai heureux de visiter cet été votre ermitage de Foxholes. Nos vacances commenceront probablement en août, et je réglerai mes mouvements sur les vôtres.

Je vous remercie de votre bienveillance pour l’Histoire des Animaux; je ne crois pas que nulle part le génie d’Aristote se soit montré plus grand, plus scientifique et, l’on peut ajouter, plus moderne. Entre lui et Linné, Buffon et Cuvier, il n’y a rien. L’histoire de la science a beaucoup à profiter de cet exemple frappant.

Je suis absolument de votre avis sur le rôle de l’Angleterre en Égypte; vous n’avez qu’à faire ce que nous avons fait à Tunis, où les choses marchent à souhait. C’est l’intérêt de votre grand pays, en même temps que l’intérêt de la civilisation et de l’humanité. Les affaires égyptiennes ne peuvent rester dans l’état où elles sont; et il faut les régler au plus vite, pour l’honneur de tout le monde.

Je présente mes hommages bien respectueux a Madame Reeve, en attendant le petit voyage a Foxholes vers l’automne. Votre bien dévoué,


And here the Journal notes:–

April 16th.–Edward Cheney died, aetat. 82.

From Dr. Vaughan [Footnote: Then Master of the Temple; he died November 15, 1897, aged 81.]

The Deanery, Llandaff: April 19th.

Dear Mr. Reeve,–I am grateful to you for your kind letter. I will try to remember to make the reference with which you furnish me when I am again at the Athenaeum.

The year 1185 is always in my recollection as the date of the consecration of the Round Church by the Patriarch Heraclius. I am already in communication with Dr. Hopkins about the musical part of its celebration, on or about the day (I think February 10) next year. And there must be a sermon about it on the nearest Sunday. So you see how exactly your thoughts and mine agree on the subject.

Ever truly yours,


The other part of the church was consecrated on Ascension Day 1240. Who will be Master when _that_ seventh centenary comes round?

_From the Duke of Argyll_

Argyll Lodge, Kensington: April 19th.

My Dear Mr. Reeve,[Footnote: Written in pencil.]–I am laid up with a very sudden and sharp attack of the enemy; but I must write a line from bed to say how _more_ than satisfied I am by the article in the Review, which goes straight to the main points of my Essay, and which distinguishes exactly those which best deserve notice. I am the more grateful as all the others I have seen–whether laudatory or not–have all been the production of ignorant men who did not see, or of learned men who did not wish to see, any of the specialties of the book.

I am better, but unfit for any work.

Yours very truly,


_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_Foxholes, April 20th_.–Much obliged to you for the Beaconsfield book, [Footnote: The _Beaconsfield Birthday-Book_.] which is very pretty. I hope you will sell as many as there are bunches of primroses in Covent Garden Market. The extent of Lord Beaconsfield’s popularity is really curious. Yet this is the man whom Gladstone hunted to death and called a fiend!!

And the Journal for the summer runs:–

At Foxholes all May.

_June 26th_.–Marriage of Hallam Tennyson and Miss Boyle in Henry VII.’s Chapel.

_July 12th_.–Dinner at Sir Henry Maine’s. The Actons, Lindleys, Evelyn Barings, Brookfield, Venables–interesting party.

_16th_.–Duchess of Argyll’s garden party.

_17th_.–The great Canadian case between the Provinces of Ontario and Manitoba was argued for six days before the Judicial Committee.

_24th_.–To Foxholes. On August 11th we went to Strode, to see Mr. Gollop, aetat. 93. 15th, back to Foxholes.

* * * * *

At this time, on behalf of Sir Henry Taylor, Reeve had been conducting a negotiation with Longmans for the publication of Taylor’s Autobiography, and an agreement had been come to which was to take effect after Taylor’s death.

_From Sir Henry Taylor_

Bournemouth, August 26th.

My dear Mr. Reeve,–Thanks for your very kind letter. I am so glad you can take a favourable view of my autobiography.

I am rather surprised myself that there is nothing in it of Mrs. Austin and Lucy. I was intimately acquainted with them, and I may perhaps find something said of them in letters, as I proceed with the task of sorting my correspondence. Of Mr. Austin I saw very little. He led such a secluded life. But one could not see him at all without knowing something of the intellect which lay hidden in him for so many years.

As to the date of publication, I shall leave the necessary instructions. I wish the work to be published as soon as possible after my death.

Believe me, yours sincerely,


_From the Comte de Paris_

Château d’Eu, 17 septembre.

Mon cher Monsieur Reeve,–Je ne veux pas tarder un instant à vous remercier de votre lettre du 14, et des félicitations que vous m’adressez à l’occasion de la naissance de mon fils Ferdinand…. Grâces à Dieu, tout s’est passé aussi bien que possible et, depuis l’événement, la mère et l’enfant vont à merveille. Je vous remercie bien cordialement des voeux que vous formez pour celui-ci. Je connais de longue date les sentiments qui vous inspirent, et vous savez tout le prix que j’y attache.

Vous avez raison de dire que l’avenir se montre assez sombre pour toutes les nations de l’Europe. Les opérations de l’Amiral Courbet au Tonkin et en Chine montrent que notre marine se maintient à la hauteur de sa vieille réputation; elle le doit aux traditions, à l’esprit de corps, aux sentiments de respect pour les chefs qui s’est conservé chez elle tandis qu’il disparaissait ou s’affaiblissait partout ailleurs. Mais cette démonstration nous coûte bien cher. La guerre avec la Chine nous alarme, parce qu’il n’y a pas de guerre plus difficile à terminer que celle-là. La politique coloniale est un luxe que nous aurions pu nous donner dans un autre temps, mais que ne nous convient pas dans notre situation européenne. Elle a de plus été conduite d’une façon irrégulière, l’action au Tonkin succédant à l’inaction en Egypte. Cette affaire d’Egypte aurait pu servir de base à une entente avec l’Angleterre. Au lieu de cela on n’a pas voulu l’aider, puis on a boudé parce qu’elle agissait seule, et lorsque les difficultés ont commencé pour elle, on n’a su ni s’entendre absolument pour agir en commun, ni s’effacer derrière l’Europe pour ne pas assumer la responsabilité de l’echec de la conférence. Bien des gens croient ici que toute cette politique a eu pour but de sauver le ministère Gladstone. Cela n’en valait pas la peine. Il en est résulté de l’aigreur dans les journaux. Mais cette aigreur sent bien un peu le fonds des reptiles, et personne n’a sérieusement envie de chercher querelle à la perfide Albion.

Ceux qui admirent ses institutions et qui croient que leur pondération est la garantie du plus précieux de tous les biens–la liberté, se préoccupent vivement des tendances jacobines de notre ami Gladstone. L’extension du suffrage est logique, l’anéantissement de la chambre des Lords est logique. Mais les meilleures institutions ne sont pas les plus logiques. À force de logique on tend à remplacer le gouvernement pondéré de l’Angleterre par ce que nous appelons le gouvernement conventionnel, c’est à dire le despotisme d’une Assemblée unique appuyée sur la brutale loi du nombre. Que Dieu vous garde d’un tel avenir. C’est le voeu d’un ami sincère de vos institutions.

Ce qui préoccupe ici bien plus, et à bon titre, que les aventures coloniales, c’est la situation économique. La France s’appauvrit parce qu’elle perd en impôts improductifs une partie de son épargne, parce que ses fils travaillent moins, dépensent plus et boivent davantage, parce qu’ils demandent des salaires trop élevés, et parce que la concurrence allemande, américaine, italienne, anglaise, nous ferme peu à peu tous les marchés, et enfin parce que le phylloxera ruine la moitié du pays. Le courant protectionniste se prononce avec une force irrésistible en ce moment.

Je vous prie d’offrir mes hommages à Madame et à Mademoiselle Reeve, et de me croire Votre bien affectionné,


_From M. B. St.-Hilaire_

Paris, 19 octobre.

Cher Monsieur Reeve,–J’ai reçu le numéro de la _Revue d’Edimbourg_, et je vous en remercie. Le rédacteur de l’article a été plein de bienveillance à mon égard, et je vous prie de lui faire savoir que je suis fort touché de l’appréciation qu’il veut bien faire de mes travaux. Je profiterai de ses justes critiques pour mes autres traductions; mais il est un point où je ne suis pas tout à fait d’accord avec lui. Je ne trouve pas qu’il tienne assez compte à Aristote d’avoir commencé la science, et de l’avoir fondée. Les débuts sont toujours excessivement difficiles, et il ne serait pas équitable de demander à ces temps reculés de savoir tout ce que nous savons aujourd’hui. Nous devons toujours nous dire que dans deux mille ans d’ici on en saura beaucoup plus que nous, tout savants que nous sommes. Ceci doit nous engager à être reconnaissants et modestes.

Je vais mettre sous presse le Traité des Parties des Animaux en deux volumes, et je prépare celui de la Génération, qui, sans doute, en aura trois.

J’espère que vous vous portez bien, ainsi que Madame Henry Reeve; je lui présente mes respects et mes amitiés, avec tons mes voeux pour sa santé et pour la vôtre.

Votre bien dévoué,


The Journal here has:–

_October 28th_.–Dinner of The Club to Lord Dufferin before his departure for India.

_November 14th_.–Dinner at Lady Molesworth’s to the Waddingtons.

_December 3rd_.–Small dinner at Lord Cork’s, with Gladstone and Sir H. James.

_From Sir Henry Taylor_

Bournemouth, December 10th.

Dear Mr. Reeve,–It has come into the head of my family, and through theirs into mine, that there is no particular reason why my Autobiography should not be published now, instead of posthumously, and that there are some motives for giving a preference to present publication. The agreement with Messrs. Longman which you brought about has been, perhaps, a sort of suggestion of this change of purpose; so I write to mention it. The work was written with more unreserve than would be natural to a man who hears what he says, and some erasures will be required; but a man in his eighty-fifth year is, in some respects, as good as dead, or, at all events, as deaf: so there need not be much alteration. I hope you will not disapprove.

Believe me, yours very sincerely,


On December 17th the Reeves went to Foxholes, where they spent Christmas, ushered in the New Year, and returned to London on January 15th, 1885. The entries in the Journal are for the most part trivial, though politically the year was one of extreme interest and excitement, much of which is reflected in the correspondence.

_From the Comte de Paris_

6 _janvier_.–J’ai été vivement touché de la lettre que vous m’avez écrite, des voeux que vous m’adressez au moment où nous entrons dans une année qui semble nous réserver bien des surprises. L’avenir est plein d’incertitudes et de dangers. Je n’ai pas besoin de vous dire que j’observe avec une sérieuse inquiétude l’état des relations entre l’Angleterre et la France, non que je croie même à la possibilité d’un conflit qui répugnerait également à tous les membres des deux nations voisines, mais parce qu’une hostilité diplomatique seule serait déjà un grand malheur pour l’une et pour l’autre…. Vous avez raison de croire que le désir universel de la paix prévaudra sur les périls de la situation internationale. Ce désir est bien puissant en France, et les aventures de l’extrême Orient, dans lesquelles on nous a lancés si mal à propos, ne font que lui donner l’occasion de se manifester.

Ces aventures ne font pas diversion à la crise si grave qui éprouve notre industrie et notre agriculture. Les causes de cette crise sont multiples. Quelques-unes sont communes à toute l’Europe, d’autres le sont aux quelques nations qui avaient le monopole de certaines industries, et le perdent, grâce aux facilités actuelles des transports. Il en est une, malheureusement très-active, qui nous est propre; c’est la tendance des ouvriers depuis l’établissement de la Rèpublique à chercher l’amélioration de leur sort, moins dans l’accroissement de leur salaire que dans la diminution de leur travail. Cette funeste tendance leur a été inspirée par les flatteries de tous ceux qui briguent leurs suffrages, et leur rappellent que toute législation émane d’eux. Le pays produit moins, et par conséquent s’appauvrit. L’imprévoyance de nos gouvernants a aggravé la crise. Aujourd’hui un cri puissant s’élève en faveur des droits protecteurs, même sur le blé. Il est probable qu’on en fera assez pour inquiéter les consommateurs des villes, pas assez pour satisfaire l’agriculture…. Si Mademoiselle Reeve voulait faire de jolies pêches de truites, c’est le 1er juin qu’elle devrait venir à Eu.

_From the Duke of Argyll_

_Inveraray, February 13th_.–The Nile affair is too miserable. No possible issue can be otherwise than a misfortune. The despatch in which the Government asked Gordon to advise them how to relieve him–in April last, when he was closely beleaguered–reads like a horrible joke now.

A horrible joke indeed:–for on February 5th news had come of the fall of Khartoum and the death of Gordon. On the 26th a vote of censure on the Government was carried in the House of Lords by 189 to 63; but a similar motion in the Commons was rejected by 302 to 288. The Government majority had fallen from 56 to 14.

On March 8th a special service was held in the Temple Church to commemorate the completion of the seventh century since its consecration. [Footnote: See _ante_, p. 322.] The Master preached the sermon on the text Psalm xc. 1–‘Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.’ [Footnote: The _Times_ of March 9th gave a pretty full abstract of the sermon.] Reeve, who was present, considered it one of Dr. Vaughan’s happiest efforts, and wrote to say how greatly he had been pleased by it. Vaughan’s acknowledgement of the kindly feeling which dictated the letter has otherwise no particular interest.

_From Sir Alfred Lyall_ [Footnote: At that time lieutenant-governor of the North-West Provinces.]

_March 31st_.–When we closed in 1881 the second act of the Affghan drama, I calculated on an interval of at least five years; and I thought that if we could get a joint commission to settle some boundary that Russia could provisionally agree to, the interval might be longer. But the Boundary Commission, which I first pressed for in 1881, has propelled, instead of delaying, the crisis. I suppose our Egyptian entanglement seemed to Russia to offer an irresistible opportunity; at any rate, the Russians have some reason for precipitating the issue between us, and at this moment we may be on the verge of a war. It is very curious to find ourselves so close to the collision that we have been so long trying to fend off, and to realise that a land invasion of India by a European Power, which has been the nightmare of Anglo-Indian statesmen since Bonaparte seized Egypt in 1798, is now no longer a matter of remote speculation. The Russian menace is, however, already producing one result that I had always anticipated; it is evoking among all substantial classes of Indians a strong desire to support the British Government in India. You may remember that in my paper of January 1884 I wrote that the natives would, in times of rumoured invasion, hold by any Power that could keep the gates of India against Central Asia; and this is now strongly showing itself. The adventurous classes are ready to enlist and follow our colours; the propertied classes look to us as the representatives of order and security; the educated classes depend wholly upon our system; if the Russians calculate on any serious rising against us in India, they will be mistaken. Of course a series of reverses would change the whole face of affairs…. We are very fortunate in having Lord Dufferin here at this time. Everyone likes him, and has confidence in him. He is clearly a Viceroy who listens to everyone, but makes up his own mind independently. And Lady Dufferin charms us all….

The Mahdi’s fortunes do not interest India. The talk in some of the papers about the necessity of smashing him, in order to avert the risk of some general Mahomedan uprising, is futile and imaginative. The Indians think the English rather mad to go crusading against him in the Soudan, and they may soon get irritated at the waste of Indian lives at Suakin, when we want our best men on the N.W. frontier; but, for the rest, they do not concern themselves about remote Arab tribes. Of course everyone sees that the English Government has now an excellent pretext for getting partially out of a hopeless mess by transferring most of our English troops from the Red Sea to the Punjab.

* * * * *

On April 9th news reached London that on March 30th the Russians, under General Komaroff, had attacked and carried the Affghan positions at Penjdeh, concerning which negotiations were going on. As our Government was pledged meanwhile to the support of the Amir, this action of Komaroff’s was held to be a very aggravated insult to England. Explanations were demanded, but preparations for war were hurried on, and on April 27th, after an impassioned speech by Mr. Gladstone, a vote of credit for eleven millions was passed almost by acclamation. The negotiations, however, were continued; explanations were given: the Russians kept Penjdeh; the Affghans had lost their territory, their guns, and 500 men; and Mr. Gladstone expressed himself satisfied. Four days afterwards, May 8th, the Government was defeated on the budget, and resigned a few days later, the Marquis of Salisbury forming the new ministry.

_From Sir Alfred Lyall_

_June 5th_.–Probably you know more in England than we do in India of the course of negotiations with Russia, It seems just now more smooth than satisfactory. I fear we have lost credit in India over that unlucky Penjdeh business. One would fancy that our representatives on the spot might have been wary enough to discern that where the Russians and the Affghans were drawing close to each other, there lay the risk and the strain of the situation. I have a very moderate trust in our ally the Amir, though he is a very able, if unscrupulous, ruler. I hope fervently he has sense enough not to use those breech-loaders we are sending in such quantities, and that he won’t repeat the Penjdeh blunder by provoking some collision with the Russians on his border….

India is very quiet. The Russian scare of the spring has turned rather to our advantage, as I always prophesied it would, by bringing home to the natives their dependence on England for protection from foreign invasion.

_From Sir Henry Taylor_

_Bournemouth, July 14th_.–I have just read the excellent article in the ‘Edinburgh Review’ on my Autobiography; and as there is no amount of kindness on your part which I cannot believe in, I am disposed to think that it is you who have written it. [Footnote: It was written by Reeve.] Whoever it is, I should like him to know that I am very thankful.

_From Sir Alfred Lyall_

_August 1st_–India is now perfectly quiet; but the new generation of hungry, ambitious, English-speaking natives are persuading themselves that they can have all the benefits of English rule without the burden of English officialism. If they are encouraged and supported by the English _Demos_, there will be confusion before long.

* * * * *

On August 14th Parliament was prorogued, with the clear understanding that the dissolution would follow. This, however, was put off for three months, during which time the country was turned upside down by the excitement of the electoral campaign and the unbridled license which many of the most distinguished candidates permitted themselves; rank Socialism, the abolition of property, ‘three acres and a cow,’ being freely spoken of by the irresponsible, and hinted at, in no obscure language, by some who had borne office in the Gladstone ministry. By a curious coincidence, the French elections were nearly synchronous with ours, and the results were keenly watched by one, at least, of Reeve’s correspondents. But of all this excitement and agitation the Journal has no trace. The only entries of any interest are:–

Foxholes: very hot: no rain for two months.

_August 22nd_.–Excursion to Studland with the Denisons, Lord Canterbury, and Prothero.

_26th_.–To Malvern with Hopie; 27th, Worcester; 28th, Tewkesbury; 29th, Hereford Cathedral; then Boss, Monmouth, and Chepstow.

_September 1st_.–Chepstow Castle, Tintern Abbey, then to Clifton across the Severn. 2nd, rain, so returned to Foxholes.

_From the Comte de Paris_

18 _septembre_.–Je m’empresse de vous remercier de votre lettre du 15, qui m’est parvenue hier. Vous savez avec quel plaisir je reçois toujours de vos nouvelles, avec quel intérêt je lis toujours vos appreciations sur la situation de nos deux pays. Malgré de bien grandes différences dans l’état politique, qui sont tout à l’avantage du vôtre, et dans l’état social, qui le sont peut-étre moins, ces deux situations ne sont pas sans analogies. Les modérés, de part et d’autre, comme vous le dites, semblent être peu écoutés, et cependant je suis persuadé que leurs vues finiront par l’emporter des deux côtés du détroit, parce que, sous une surface agitée en apparence, aucune passion violente ne bouillonne dans l’une ou l’autre des deux nations. Vous avez devant vous le grand inconnu de la nouvelle loi électorale; dangereux, parce que l’omnipotence de la Chambre des Communes, favorable au gouvernement parlementaire lorsque cette Chambre se recrutait exclusivement dans la haute classe et en avait l’esprit, pourra être un instrument redoutable pour la liberté et pour toute l’organisation sociale le jour où MM. Chamberlain, Parnell et Bradlaugh auront chacun un parti derrière eux. Heureusement pour vous, l’institution monarchique vous permettra de traverser la crise qu’entraînera la modification de la composition et de l’esprit de la Chambre des Communes. Grâce à cette institution, l’esprit politique du pays pourra rétablir l’équilibre entre les pouvoirs publics. En France, l’expérience de la République démocratique et pacifique s’est faite dans les conditions les plus favorables, et a échoué. Elle n’est ni conservatrice ni réformatrice. Tout en restant bourgeoise, elle est pardessus tout prodigue. Les classes qui payent l’impôt sont parfaitement édifiées sur son compte; celles qui nele payent pas, et qui votent cependant, sont frappées indirectement par l’appauvrissement national et commencent à s’étonner que la République, dont le nom les flatte encore, réponde si mal à leur attente. La République reste bourgeoise parce que le suffrage universel est trop défiant pour chercher des représentants dans le sein de la classe la plus nombreuse. Mais il n’est pas difficile dans les choix qu’il fait dans les rangs d’une classe plus élevée. Le niveau intellectuel et moral des Assemblées qu’il élit s’abaisse à chaque renouvellement. C’est un fait qu’il faudra accepter désormais comme inévitable, et dont il faudra tenir compte dans l’avenir. La République est essentiellement prodigue parce que, toute la machine gouvernementale reposant sur l’élection, les ministres sont obligés de donner aux deputés des places innombrables pour satisfaire la foule encore plus nombreuse de leurs agents électoraux, et de permettre des travaux, des dépenses exagérés dans chaque arrondissement, ici pour favoriser le député républicain, là pour nuire au député conservateur. C’est par là qu’elle périra, parce que le mal est sans remède et s’aggrave chaque jour. Loi générale d’ailleurs. C’est par les finances que périssent les gouvernements définitivement condamnés: témoin l’ancien regime. Cette mort-là est sans résurrection.

Le caractère nouveau de la période électorale qui s’est ouverte pratiquement depuis quelques mois est le réveil des Conservateurs. Ils comprennent enfin qu’ils peuvent et doivent lutter pour défendre la société menacée, les richesses nationales compromises. Ils apportent à cette lutte une ardeur tout à fait nouvelle. Depuis deux ans [Footnote: Since the death of the Comte de Chambord.] je me suis efforcé de faire comprendre à nos amis que la politique avait sub les mêèmes transformations que la guerre; que, pour gagner la victoire sur le terrain politique, il ne fallait rien laisser au hasard, rien confier aux petites coteries; qu’il fallait agir avec de gros bataillons, et que, pour les mouvoir il fallait un système de mobilisation aussi parfait que celui de l’armée allemande. Ces conseils ont été suivis, et les monarchistes se sont préparés à entreprendre la lutte électorale avec une organisation de comités de départeméent, d’arrondissement et de canton, appuyés le plus souvent sur des réunions plénières qui marquent un grand changement dans la vie politique du parti conservateur. Cette organisation se perfectionnera dans les élections mêmes. Elle doit donner un jour, et par l’élection et par l’action plus puissante encore de l’opinion publique, le pouvoir à ceux qui l’auront constituée et qui sauront s’en servir.

A la veille des elections… tandis que tous les autres partis faisaient faire leur programme par un petit comité parisien, craignant qu’une grande réunion ne trahît leurs divisions, les monarchistes ont envoyé des quatre coins de la France des délégués qui, tous animés du même esprit, ont adopté par acclamation le programme soumis à leur approbation. Je dois même dire que nous avons tous été frappés de leur extrême modération. Pas une voix ne s’est élevée pour réclamer en faveur d’un ton plus aggressif. Le programme, retouché sur place par une commission de neuf membres, avait, vous le pensez bien, été soigneusement préparé d’avance; toutes les expressions en avaient été pesées. Aussi suis-je heureux qu’il ait eu l’approbation d’un aussi bon juge que vous.

21 _septembre_.–Depuis gue je vous al écrit, j’ai lu le grand manifeste de M. Gladstone. De celui-là, on ne peut pas dire qu’il brille par la modération. Il y a des phrases redoutables et effrayantes à l’adresse de la richesse et de la propriété, base de la société. Jamais je n’aurais cru le Gladstone que j’ai connu capable de parler de la Chambre des pairs comme il le fait. Et cependant, une profonde modification dans la composition de la Chambre Haute ne sera-t-elle pas un jour le salut de la cause et des intérêts conservateurs en Angleterre? Si cette Chambre se retrempe au moins partiellement dans l’élection, elle y trouvera, peut-être, une force capable de lui assurer dans le gouvernement une part au moins égale à celle de la Chambre des Communes, au moment où celle-ci baissera en valeur morale proportionnellement à l’extension du suffrage….

En ce moment, il serait bien désirable, également en France et en Angleterre, de voir les modérés de nuances diverses se rapprocher, pour former un véritable parti conservateur: chez vous, anciens whigs et anciens tories; chez nous, les centres droits et les centres gauches. Mais c’est entre ceux qui sont le plus rapprochés en politique que le souvenir des luttes passées laisse les plus profondes rancunes.

* * * * *

The Journal notes:–

_October 12th_–Went to town for the Riel [Footnote: Louis Riel had stirred up a rebellion in Manitoba, had been captured, tried, and sentenced to death. He appealed, and the case thus came before the Judicial Committee. On October 22nd the appeal was dismissed, and on November 16th Riel was duly hanged at Regina.] case. Dined with Captain Bridge [Footnote: Now Rear-Admiral Bridge, lately commander-in-chief on the Australian station.] at the United Service Club.

_14th_.–Second part of ‘Greville’ published; 2,700 copies subscribed.

* * * * *

In comparison with the tremendous excitement caused by the publication of the first part of the Greville Memoirs, the second part attracted little notice, although large sales testified to the interest it raised. Reeve mentions 2,700 as the number of copies subscribed for: but the first edition of 4,000 was exhausted almost immediately, and a second large edition was sold out within a few months.

_To Lord Derby_

_Foxholes, October 28th_–I am much obliged to you for your note. We might elect three new members of The Club, because there remain two vacancies caused by the honorary list, besides the death of Houghton. I should very much like to see Edward Stanhope and Harry Holland in The Club. They are among the most rising men of the day–accomplished and agreeable–and their fathers were respectively two of our most faithful members. We should, I think, choose men from the younger generation, for many of us are frightfully old. It is more difficult to point out eligible men in the literary or scientific world. To say the truth, there is a remarkable dearth of distinguished authors. Violent politicians are objectionable.

I am very much gratified by what you say of the new volumes of Greville’s Journals. Your estimate of their value exactly coincides with my own. I am happy to say that I have not yet heard that anyone is annoyed or offended. I sent a copy to Henry Ponsonby, who laid it before the Queen, but I have not heard what sentence Her Majesty has passed upon me.

There is a great deal of political noise, but very little light. In the south of England I think the Conservatives will carry a good many seats. If I were to venture on a prognostic, I should say that the opposition will have a majority in Great Britain, though by no means so large a one as the Radicals expect. The effect of this would be that the Irish can turn the scale, and I think Mr. Parnell would refuse, for the present, to turn out the present Government in order to bring in Mr. Gladstone. In that case, the existence of the present ministry may be prolonged for some time, but it would be on sufferance and by Irish support. On the other hand, if a Liberal Government were formed, it could only exist with the support of the Irish vote. Eventually, I hope, this anomalous state of things may bring the moderate men of both the British parties together, and throw both extremes into opposition. That, I am convinced, is the real wish of the country, and the obstacles to such a combination are chiefly personal. I fancy the next parliaments will be very impracticable and probably shortlived.

_From the Comte de Paris_

22 _novembre._–Je vous remercie de ce que vous me dites à propos des Mémoires de M. Greville. [Footnote: Sc. that there were passages in it not complimentary to the Orleans family.]

Je comprends parfaitement que vous ne pouviez supprimer certains passages dont vous ne voulez cependant pas assumer la solidarité. Ces passages ne m’empêcheront pas de lire avec intérêt la suite des oeuvres de cet observateur peu bien-veillant, mais fin et spirituel.

Ne croyez pas que je vous écrive avec d’autre pensée que de faire part de mes vues à un êtranger qui connaît, comprend et aime la France.

On November 18th Parliament was dissolved by proclamation and the elections were held from the 23rd to December 18th. In the English towns, where the elections were first held, the Conservatives had a large majority, and it seemed as if they were going to sweep the board. In the counties, however, the ‘three acres and a cow’ was taken by the ignorant rustics, just admitted to the franchise, as a splendid reality, and their votes went strongly in favour of the Liberals, or rather–as it would be more correct to say–the Radicals. Mr. Gladstone had appealed to the country to give him a working majority. He had, in fact, a majority of eighty-four over the Conservatives; but the Irish, or so-called Nationalist, party numbered eighty-six; and as these were bound by their bond of union to oppose the Government, whatever it was, they had to be counted with the Conservatives as soon as the Conservative Government had fallen. And the comparison of the numbers showed that it must fall as soon as Parliament met. As Reeve had forecast, neither party could form an effective administration without the support of the Nationalists, a position which seemed for the moment to render them the arbiters of the nation’s destiny.

_From Count Vitzthum_

Paris, December 1st.

Dear Mr. Reeve,–Many thanks for your kind letter. You will find me here in my winter quarters until the end of May, then from June to the end of October at Baden-Baden, where we have built a villa. I would always be happy to see you and talk over old times.

I have just finished reading the third volume of Greville’s Memoirs and have been very much struck by your notes, without which some passages would not have been intelligible. Old Greville was a portrait-painter rather in Rembrandt’s style. In putting together all he says of Palmerston, Peel, and the Duke of Wellington, very remarkable full-length portraits would come out. He seems rather partial for John Russell.

My little book makes more noise in Germany than I expected. W. Oncken, the celebrated historian of Austria and Prussia in 1813, will review it for the ‘Allgemeine Zeitung,’ and the Vienna press has been unexpectedly favourable. An English friend of mine wants to translate it. I think it would be ‘love’s labour lost;’ for everybody who cares for such trifles and photographs taken on the spot understands German nowadays in England, and will prefer the original. Still, if you thought it worth your while to send a short notice to the ‘Times,’ it would be a favour. My old friend Delane is no more, else I should have asked him. Cotta writes me that he has secured the English copyright, and sent some copies to the principal Reviews and the ‘Times.’ Believe me, very faithfully yours,


_From the Comte de Paris_

Château d’Eu, 9 décembre.

Mon cher Monsieur Reeve,–Un de mes amis va partir pour la Belgique. Je tiens à en profiter pour lui confier une lettre à votre adresse, qu’il mettra à la poste chez nos voisins. En effet, je connais par expérience I’indiscrétion dont la poste française a pris la mauvaise habitude sous l’Empire, habitude qu’elle n’a pas perdue sous la République. J’ai hâte de vous remercier de votre lettre du lr qui m’a vivement intéressé. J’ai été un peu confus d’apprendre l’usage que vous aviez fait de la mienne, car je l’avais écrite au courant de la plume, et uniquement pour me donner le plaisir de causer avec vous. Mais, puisque vous l’avez trouvée bonne à montrer, je m’en rapporte à votre amitié, et j’espère qu’elle n’a pas été trop indulgente. Je suis d’ailleurs fort heureux d’avoir quelquefois, par votre intermédiaire, des relations avec Lord Salisbury, pour le caractère et le talent duquel j’ai toujours eu une si haute estime, et que j’aime d’ailleurs toujours à considérer comme mon proche voisin de campagne.

The success of the Conservatives in the towns, their defeat in the country, is the very opposite of what is taking place here; so that we foreigners must exercise great reserve in giving an opinion on the political situation created in England by these last elections. It is, however, evident that there, as everywhere else, the old parties are in process of disintegration, and that, in a new social state, in presence of new problems, a new distribution of parties is called for. In the history of all nations there are periods when the need of political progress renders it necessary for the reformers to remain long in power; and if from time to time they yield it to their adversaries, it should only be for long enough to recover breath in climbing the long ascent. On the other hand, there are also periods when the wearied people long for repose; when progress no longer aims at completeness, but at change; when reforms are mere Utopian fancies or appeals to evil passions; and when the partisans of the _status quo_ ought to have the direction of affairs for as long a time as possible. I believe that we are now entering on one of these periods. But it becomes the duty of the Conservatives to defend existing institutions by taking the initiative in such modifications as may be necessary. This is what, with a true political insight, they have always done in England. The vote of the counties does not affect the justice of your appreciation of the general character of the elections. It is not a return to the old Tory party, but rather the condemnation of the Radical programme; and from this point of view they have an international importance which nothing can weaken. All the same, this vote of the counties seems to me to render absolutely necessary the modification of parties which the complete success of the Ministry would have postponed. After the redistribution of seats, there is need of a redistribution of persons and of political groupings. Either Parliament will be controlled by the Irish Nationalists, and Ireland by Mr. Parnell, or, in opposition to the Nationalists and the Radicals, there will be formed a Government which will be Conservative in its respect for the great social institutions, in its antagonism to the levelling and centralising spirit, and withal Liberal in the manner in which it will handle the agrarian question.

Judging by what I see here, where over three millions of rural proprietors are ‘a tower of strength’ for the Conservatives, I am persuaded that in England also the Conservatives have no greater interest–after the defeat of the socialist and revolutionary plans of Mr. Chamberlain–than to work vigorously at the formation of a numerous class of small landowners. _Mutatis mutandis_, we have here also the corresponding phenomenon of the transformation of parties. We are unquestionably entering on a period of lassitude. The Conservatives have gained one hundred and twenty seats at the last elections, for four principal reasons, all of which spring from the faults of their adversaries.

1. The Tonkin expedition.

2. The waste of the national and municipal finances.

3. The aggravation of the agricultural and industrial crises by the gross errors in the conclusion of treaties of commerce and the establishment of transit tariffs.

4. The war on the clergy, foreshadowing the separation of Church and State.

To these particular reasons must be added the general dissatisfaction with an administration at once weak and corrupt, which is not in accord with those instincts which a thousand years of monarchy have impressed on our manners and tone of thought.

The moderate Republicans have been beaten because they allied themselves with the Radicals, and because they themselves have not shown the governing qualities which could gain the confidence of the country. If the check has not been still greater, it is because the country has a horror of all change; because the interest of the Government is exceedingly strong; because the electors do not care to vote for the opposition candidate, who cannot do anything for them; and lastly, because, at the second _tour de scrutin_, the Government, in the most shameless manner, brought pressure to bear on all who are directly or indirectly dependent on it, the number of whom is very great.

We have then two hundred Conservatives deputies, who represent three and a half millions of electors. Three-fourths of these are Monarchists more or less avowed; one-fourth represents the Bonapartist element, and among these last are many with whom I have well-established personal relations. It is not, however, the part of this large minority to set forth any opinions as to the form of the Government, nor even to cause obstruction; still less to ally itself with the Radicals for the vain satisfaction of overturning the Ministry. Its aim must always be to promote the passing of Conservative laws, and by every possible means to oppose such Radical measures as will be proposed to the Chamber. It is for this that it has been elected. If it fulfils its task aright, when the dissolution comes–and this cannot be far off–it will reap the fruits of its policy. It will have merited the country’s confidence, which the Radicals will have lost; and, notwithstanding the pressure, perhaps even the violence of the Government, the current of public opinion will be so strong that it will send a Conservative majority to the Palais Bourbon. Under the influence of this current we may hope to see the collective or individual conversion of the moderate Republicans, which must lead to the reconstruction of the Conservative party and to placing the direction of it in the hands of the Monarchists. For, though by temperament these moderate Republicans ought to be the last to come to us, the Radical danger must bring them; they are bound to come; their place is marked in our ranks. They will never go to Bonapartism: on the contrary, they will one day enable us to rid ourselves of the _intransigeunt_ element which forms a disturbing minority in the party.

This will be the work of to-morrow. To-day, the principal task which I recommend to my friends is the reconstitution, or rather the creation, of the ‘active list’ of the Conservative array. We have the model in Belgium. People are beginning to understand that the Conservatives cannot remain for ever on the sufferance of the Government. No Government shall he stable but that which they can support. For this they must form a compact and well-organised party. Encouraged by the results of the elections, every one has set to work with new ardour. My only trouble at present is the utter inexperience of the Conservative minority. It is made up of men almost all of whom are new to Parliament, are unacquainted with each other, and as yet are without a leader. I reckon, however, that such blunders as it may commit will be balanced and amended by those of its opponents.

Je tennine sur cette pensée consolante, et je vous prie de me croire.

Votre bien affectionné,


It is interesting to compare with this another view of the French elections and of the probable course of events, taken from a very different standpoint.

_From the Due de Broglie_

8 _novembre_.–Vous avez vu le rèsultat de nos élections, qui ont été plus heureuses pour la cause générale du parti conservateur que pour ce qui me regarde particulièrement. Si nous ne vivions pas dans un temps oú toutes les prévisions sont trompées par une certaine inertie générale qui amortit toutes les passions et ralentit le cours naturel des événements, je croirais qu’une crise violente est assez prochaine, les éléments extrêmes se trouvant réums et rapprochés dans l’Assemblée nouvelle, de manière à former un mélange explosible comme la chimie redoute d’en amener. De part ni d’autre, d’ailleurs, il n’y a d’homme en état de diriger les événements; ils iront done probablement tout seuls, commes des chevaux qui n’ont pas de cocher, ce qui est le moyen à peu près sûr d’aller dans le fossé.



Christmas and the early days of the New Year were passed at Foxholes. On January 15th the Reeves returned to Rutland Gate. Parliament met on the 21st, and, as had been foreseen, the Government was defeated on an amendment to the Address. Lord Salisbury’s resignation was announced on February 1st, and, on the 3rd, Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet was formed, Sir William Harcourt being Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Rosebery Foreign Secretary, and Mr. John Morley Secretary for Ireland. Sir Henry James, now Lord James of Hereford, declined the office of Lord Chancellor; Lord Hartington, the present Duke of Devonshire, declined office of any sort in a Ministry whose policy, as yet but dimly shown, was generally understood to be on the lines of advanced Radicalism. For his part, Reeve abhorred Radicalism. He had never approved of Gladstone as a politician, and now less than ever. He looked on him as a danger to the Empire, to be fought against, to be resisted, to be crushed. Nor was he singular in this. It is customary to speak of the extraordinary influence which Gladstone exercised. It was this influence, directed by sentiment or by vanity, which constituted the danger. There were many who believed the country to be on the eve of a violent, perhaps a sanguinary, revolution, fomented and abetted by Mr. Gladstone; and this belief was strengthened when, on February 8th, an East-end mob, meeting in Trafalgar Square, was allowed, without opposition, to march by Pall Mall, St. James’ Street and Piccadilly, to Hyde Park, breaking the windows and plundering the shops on the way. When to this supposed revolutionary tendency of the new Ministry was added their avowed intention to bring in a measure for the pacification of Ireland, which–in the absence of details–was believed to mean the disintegration of the kingdom, the feeling of alarm, which must be very well remembered by many who read these pages, can be easily understood.

_From Lord Ebury_ [Footnote: Lord Ebury died at the age of 92, in 1893.]

Moor Park, January 4th, 1886.

Dear Reeve,–Allow me to wish you and Mrs. Reeve a happy New Year, and to say how much I have been interested in the second part of our common friend’s Memoirs, which–if you care to know it–pleased me more than the first; but the most characteristic passage of the writer, and which made me laugh aloud, is the three pages in which he vents all his wrath against the public for their approbation of Lady Blessington as an authoress, and the pedestal upon which they placed her. I was glad to read the editor’s note, which completed the page. When once he got into that sort of mood, and perhaps was influenced by a touch of gout, and let himself go, it was very funny to listen to him; and really he was a good-natured man. I wonder what he would have said of Parnell and his ragged regiment, and the G. O. M.[Footnote: As even in twelve years the name has become quite obsolete, it may be as well to note that Mr. Gladstone was generally designated by these letters, said by his friends and admirers to stand for Grand Old Man.] as he now appears. What in the world are we to do? The ‘Times’ is working most patriotically; but why, in the world, did it or he not find out earlier what the G. O. M. really was and is?…

With my best regards to Mrs. Reeve,

I remain, yours very truly,


_From the Comte de Paris_

_8 janvier_.–Je vous remercie bien sincèrement des bons voeux que vous m’adressez pour la nouvelle aimée. Comme vous le dites fort bien, il y a des bonheurs que la politique ne peut pas empoisonner, et ce sont les plus solides.

L’année 1886, je le crois comme vous, nous réserve des surprises plus dramatiques que celle don’t nous venons de voir la fin. En France, ce renouvellement de l’année nous donne un Président renommé mais non rajeuni, un Ministère reconstitué mais non raffermi … En Angleterre, Gladstone et les Irlandais vous auront pour une fois rendu service s’ils forcent à s’unir les conservateurs, aujourd’hui séparés par d’anciennes divisions en whigs et en tories. Ce jour-la vous pourrez de nonveau avoir un gouvcrnement fort et national.

_From Lord Ebury_

_February 13th_–I cannot recollect anything about Charles Greville’s pamphlet on Ireland, though I imagine I must have read it at the time. Can one get it now to look at it? or are things so much changed by the march of events since that its interest has passed away? I re-read Gustave de Beaumont’s marvellous work, with which no doubt you are acquainted. I confess it rather staggered me when it first came out; and how the prophecies it contained are accomplished, almost to the letter! I remember calling the old Duke’s attention to it; especially to that strange phrase-speaking of the then Irish landowners–‘C’est une mauvaise aristocratic; il faut la détruire.’ Was it ever reviewed in the ‘Edinburgh’?

When will this horrible Government be overthrown?

_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_Rutland Gate, March 29th_–From what I learned yesterday as to the probable course of proceeding in the House of Commons, I am strongly of opinion that it will be necessary to accelerate the publication of the ‘Review’ by two days, instead of postponing it, as we had proposed to do. The ‘Review’ would be of use in the debate which will then be going on, and will probably be noticed; whereas, after the division on leave to bring in the Bill, it would be less opportune. The article on Ireland is complete, and it would be premature to speculate on the details of an unknown measure.

The ‘Review’ was published on April 13th, and, as Reeve had expected, the article on ‘England’s Duty to Ireland’ was in everyone’s mouth. It was a powerful appeal to the Liberals, as distinct from the Gladstonians, which may even now be read with advantage as a lucid exposition of the principles of the Union.

_From Lord Ebury_

_April 14th_.–Thank you for so speedily answering my question: also for pointing my attention to the concluding article of the ‘Edinburgh’–just published–written by yourself. I have just finished its perusal, and am very much pleased with it. No doubt you have had a certain advantage in seeing what has been already said upon this insane proposition of Gladstone’s; but I have hitherto seen nothing which so completely exposes the dangers that threaten us, and gives so much historical information to guide opinion upon the subject; and you have put forward a subject which to my astonishment has not (or scarcely) been noticed at all. I mean the danger to the throne of England. I see you dismiss with scarcely a remark–which, indeed, in your province, would have been injudicious–the responsibility of those, our grandees–I won’t mention names–who have assisted in giving the G. O. M. power to do the almost irreparable mischief he has perpetrated.

The Journal here has:–

_April 17th_.–To Foxholes. On the 29th, Unionist meeting at Christchurch; Lord Malmesbury in the chair. I read an address [which was printed and circulated as a leaflet]. This was one of the first Unionist meetings in England.

_May 3rd_.–To Portsmouth, on a visit to Captain Bridge, on board the ‘Colossus.’

On May 10th Gladstone, in moving the second reading of his ‘Home Rule’ Bill, seemed to accept the truth of the maxim that ‘Speech is given to man to conceal his thoughts,’ and led someone–commonly believed to be Mr. Labouchere, who made no attempt to hide his own opinions–to say, ‘How is it possible to play with an old sinner who has got an ace up each sleeve, and says God Almighty put them there?’ What Gladstone wanted to do was, in fact, never exactly known; all that could be made out was that he was prepared to grant whatever the Irish Nationalist party demanded. It was for Mr. Parnell to speak; for him to obey. Such an attitude was revolting to a very great many of the Liberal party. They maintained–they rightly maintained–that the name ‘Liberal’ belonged to principles, not to men; and that those who sacrificed their principles to follow the lead of one man, even of Gladstone’s eminence, ceased to be Liberals, and could only be called Gladstonians. The Bill was discussed for many days, and on June 7th it was negatived by the House of Commons in the fullest division ever known; the numbers being:

_Against the Bill. For the Bill._

Conservatives. . . . 250 Gladstonians. . . . 230 Liberals. . . . . . 93 Nationalists. . . . 83 ___ ___
343 313

Majority against the Bill, 30.

Reeve was triumphant, and wrote to Mr. T. Norton Longman the next day, ‘What a triumphant division! What a defeat for the G. O. M.! Even he must believe this. I think his colleagues will hardly agree to dissolve. If they do, they will be annihilated.’

They did, and they were. The General Election held in July fully ratified the vote of the House on June 7th, and left the Gladstonians and Parnellites combined in a minority of 115.

_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_C. O., June 23rd_.–Sir Francis Doyle’s Epilogue [Footnote: The last chapter of Doyle’s _Reminiscences and Opinions_ (8vo. 1886). It is more than ‘invective;’ it contains much sound argument and admirable illustration.] is a powerful piece of invective; but it is essentially addressed to Gladstone’s public career and conduct, and if he likes to publish it, I see no objection. Doyle was at Eton with Gladstone, and is one of his oldest and most intimate friends–or rather, _was so_. What he has written is not stronger than what George Anthony Denison has published on Gladstone, he too being a friend of forty years. I do not remember another instance in which a man’s best and earliest friends have turned upon him, to unmask him, and that without any motive of personal resentment. It is the noble motive which led Brutus to strike Caesar.

If this is to appear, it should be published _immediately_, as it relates to the affairs of the day.

_C. O., July 21st_.–I think Gladstone has fulfilled all my predictions and completed the ruin of the Liberal party and his own. The net result is that he has brought in the Tories for several years.

Whilst this tremendous storm was raging in the political world in England, France also had been much excited. The letters of the Comte de Paris have shown that he was, in point of fact, conducting an intrigue for the subversion of the republic, the re-establishment of the monarchy; and it is not surprising that the Government, more or less cognisant of what was going on, struck in defence of the constitution under which they ruled. Their action was said to be illegal; but in time of war the laws depend on, are upheld by, and interpreted by the greater force; and on June 23rd the Comte de Paris, with his family, was ordered to quit France, and the Orleanist princes, including the Duc d’Aumale, were deprived of their rank in the army, their names being erased from the army list. On June 29th Reeve noted in his Journal, ‘To Tunbridge Wells, to see the Comte de Paris, exiled the week before;’ but that is all; the home interest was too absorbing, though even of that the only trace in the Journal is on July 5th, ‘Unionist meeting at Tuckton. I took the chair. Election.’

_To Lord Derby_

_C. O., July 10th_.–I am much obliged to you for the copy of your excellent speech. In this remarkable debate _coram populo_, it seems to me that the defeat of the Home Rulers in argument has been even more complete than their rout at the polling booths. The people have shown more serious intelligence than I had given them credit for. I saw this even in our Hampshire bumpkins.

On July 20th the Gladstonian Ministry resigned, and before the end of the month the new ministry was formed under Lord Salisbury as premier and first lord of the treasury. The Journal is occupied with personal and family affairs of special interest.

_July 25th_.–To Antwerp by the ‘Baron Osy.’ Forty-seven Americans on board. Aix very dull. Back to London on August 11th.

_August 18th_.–Letter from Hopie announcing her intended marriage.

_September 6th_.–Hopie married at Kirklands to Thomas Ogilvie of Chesters.

Chesters is in the immediate neighbourhood of Kirklands, and the friendship between Miss Reeve and Mr. Ogilvie was of many years’ standing, though the determination to marry was rather sudden, and the engagement very short. Mr. Ogilvie was a man of good family and property, and though several years older than his bride, Reeve appears to have been very well satisfied; his relations with his son-in-law were always cordial, though the distance at which they lived restricted the intercourse, and the formed habits of both prevented anything like intimacy.

Amidst the political excitement and the family interest of the summer, the following comes in almost like the Fool in ‘King Lear’ or Caleb Balderstone in the ‘Bride of Lammermoor.’ It refers to a proposition–surely one of the strangest ever submitted to a publisher–which, in ordinary course, had been sent to Reeve for an opinion. And this is what Reeve wrote:–

_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_Foxholes, August 24th_.–Your correspondent is the coolest fellow I ever heard of. He not only proposes to complete Macaulay’s ‘Lays’ by some new ones, but to re-edit and correct the original Lays, which, he says, ‘are very irregular.’ His own verses have not a spark of poetry or fire in them; they are mere trash, and he is an impertinent fellow.

Here the Journal has:–

_September 7th_.–Went to Exeter with Christine; 8th, to Chagford and Dartmoor; 10th, back to Foxholes.

_29th_.–To Holyhead and Penrhos with Christine. Bad weather at Penrhos; gout in hand came on.

_October 2nd_.–To Knowsley; Lord Lyons there.

_6th_.–To London and Foxholes. Christine went on to Chesters. On the 20th, Mrs. Ogilvie came from Scotland. November 2nd, James Watney died.

_From Count Vitzthum_

Paris, November 7th.

Dear Mr. Reeve,–I beg you to accept kindly a copy of my memoirs ‘St. Petersburg and London,’ 1852-1864, which Cotta will send you from the author. Please to remember, if you find time to read these two little volumes, that it is a German book, written for Germans, by one who is neither Whig, nor Tory, nor Red; who is very fond of Old England,, but has nothing to do with your party feelings and prejudices. I see men and things, not from the English, but from the European standpoint, and leave it, as far as possible, to the leading men of the day to tell their own tale. If you find time, read the book and tell me what you think of it.

Yours very truly,


_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

C.O., _November 12th_.–My old friend, Count Vitzthum, formerly Saxon Minister in London, has sent me his ‘Reminiscences of St. Petersburg and London from 1852 to 1864’ in German, 2 vols. This is a book of extraordinary interest to the English public, full of conversations and confidential details of Prince Albert, Lord Palmerston, Lord Clarendon, Disraeli, &c.–quite a contemporary political history, as amusing and interesting as Greville himself. Vitzthum knew this country well, and all its society.

I shall write on Monday [15th] to thank him for the book, and I propose to ask him whether he has made any arrangements for the translation of it. I am not much in favour of translations; but this book is of such peculiar and exciting interest that I should strongly recommend you to secure it if possible. I think the Taylors, who did Luther, would undertake the translation.

I think this an important affair.

_November 15th_.–I am afraid you are out of town, but it is of great importance to come to an immediate decision about Count Vitzthum’s book. It is a work of the greatest possible interest and importance, and contains many entirely new facts and anecdotes as to contemporary history. You will perceive this from the enclosed notice of the book which appeared last week in the ‘Daily News.’ [Footnote: November 6th, ‘From our Berlin Correspondent,’ a notice mostly made up of extracts from the book, then described as ‘just about’ to be published by Cotta of Stuttgart.]

The Queen has seen the sheets and approved them.

The result of this notice was that three English publishers at once applied to Cotta for the right of translation; but the Count has retained that in his own hands, and he says that, if _you_ will publish the translation on suitable terms, and if _I_ will edit the translation with my name, and write a preface to it, he will make an arrangement with us. This I am ready to do, and I shall tell him so to-day. There is not a moment to lose; and as you appear not to be in town, I must act myself in the matter. I want to know as soon as possible what terms you would offer. I think the Count would accept either a sum down or a share of the profits; you might propose either alternative. The Taylors would execute the translation promptly and the book would appear in May. I do not suppose that you will hesitate to agree to so important a proposal; but if it does not please you, I am certain that Murray or Macmillan would jump at it.

_C.O., November 17th._–Max Müller has written to Count Vitzthum, to make exactly the same suggestion I have done. He highly applauds the book and recommends the Count to make arrangements with _you_ for the translation. I have seen Fairfax Taylor. He will undertake to complete the translation by the 15th or 20th of February. The printing can go on when he has got some copy in hand, and the book can be brought out early in April, which is a very good time. I have given him my copy of the first volume to begin upon. Pray get another copy of the book.

_November 18th._–Count Vitzthum accepts your proposal. He asks me whether he should write to you; but that is unnecessary. _Four_ other English publishers have applied to him for the right of translation.

_November 23rd._–It will be necessary that the translation of Vitzthum’s book should be set up in slips, in order that he and I may have an opportunity of adding notes or making omissions.

At this time the question of having him elected as a foreign member of the Institute was mooted by Reeve’s friends in Paris. It is to this that the following letters refer. Though not successful on this occasion, because–as Reeve was afterwards told–two out of the six foreign members were already English, they carried their point some eighteen months later, on an English vacancy.

_From M. Jules Simon_

Paris, 18 décembre.

Cher Monsieur,–J’ai en effet exprimé à notre ami commun, M. Gavard, le désir que j’éprouve de vous attacher plus complètement à notre Académie. C’est line opération assez difficile, car les associés étrangers pouvant être choisis indistinctement dans tous les peuples du monde, il y a rarement disette de candidats. A chaque vacance, une commission est nominée au scrutin. Elle présente trois noms à l’Académie, qui consacre une séance à les discuter, et vote dans la séance suivante. Nous devons élire tout à l’heure le successeur de Ranke. Parmi les deux noms qui ne sortiront pas de l’urne, il y en a un qui pourra bien réussir quand on élira le successeur de Minghetti. En général on est porté deux ou trois fois avant de passer. Vos amis s’occuperont d’abord de vous faire figurer sur la liste. Il faut pour cela qu’un d’entre eux ait la liste exacte de vos écrits, et de tous les titres que l’on peut invoquer en votre faveur. Les débats ne sont pas publics; les candidats n’écrivent pas de demande; celui qui les propose parle en son propre noni, ct est même censé les proposer à leur insu. Enfin, le public ne connaît que le nom de l’élu. Je crois que vous avez envoyé a M. Barthélemy St.-Hilaire les renseignements nécessaires. Si cela n’est pas fait, faites-le, je vous prie, sans délai. Vous pouvez, si vous le préférez, les envoyer à M. Gavard, qui me les remettra, ou m’écrire directement. Je vous prie, cher monsieur, de croire à mes sentiments cordialement dévoués.


_From M. Leon Say_

Paris, 25 décembre.

Mon bien Cher M. Reeve,–Je ferai naturellement tous mes efforts pour vous rapprocher encore plus de l’Institut, et vous y donner un rang digne de vous; mais je ne dois pas vous laisser ignorer qu’il y aura lutte. Je ne sais s’il vous conviendra que votre nom soit discuté. Pour vous éclairer sur ce point, je vous envoie à titre confidentiel un billet que me fait parvenir M. Aucoc pour faire suite à un entretien que j’ai eu avec lui.

Je vous prie de croire à mes sentiments les plus distingués et les plus affectueux.


Jules Simon m’a promis une note qui me servirait à soutenir vos titres, et me permettrait de dire aux Français de ma section, passablement ignorants de l’étranger, avec exactitude ce que vous avez fait.

Meantime the Journal notes:–

_December 7th._–Meeting of the Liberal-Unionist party. On the 11th, dinner at home. Duc d’Aumale, Froude, Carnarvon, Lady Stanley, Colonel Knollys, F. Villiers, Lady Metcalfe, Newton.

_19th_–Dined at the Duc d’Aumale’s, who had bought Moncorvo House in Ennismore Gardens. Comte and Comtesse de Paris, Haussonville, Ségur, Target, Audiffret, Leighton.

_December 21st_.–To Timsbury. 24th, to Foxholes. The Ogilvies there.

1887. _January 3rd_.–Came to London. 10th, dinner at Pender’s to meet Stanley, the African traveller, before he went to find Emin Bey.

_19th_.–The third part of Greville published, 3,007 copies subscribed.

Among the many letters which the publication of these last volumes of the ‘Greville Memoirs’ brought him, the following from Sir Arthur Gordon [Footnote: Fourth son of the Earl of Aberdeen.]–now Lord Stanmore, and then Governor of Ceylon–have a peculiar interest from their exact criticism of a point of detail with which the writer was personally acquainted at first hand:–

Queen’s House, Colombo, June 18th.

My dear Mr. Reeve,–I have very long delayed answering your last letter, in the hope that, when I did so, I might at the same time be able to send you my notes on the two last volumes of ‘Greville.’ But these notes will be numerous, and my time is scant for such work. On one point, the ‘graspingness’ alleged to have been shown by the Peclites after the formation of the Government in December 1852, and its modification to satisfy their exigencies, I have felt constrained to address the ‘Times.’ [Footnote: June 13th. The letter is reprinted in the Appenduxm _post_, p. 411.] The truth happens to have been exactly the other way, and Greville’s notes are only the echo of the grumblings of the disappointed Whig placemen who talked to him. It is decidedly unjust not only to my father, Graham, and Gladstone, who are indirectly charged with this trafficking, but to the Duke of Newcastle and Herbert also, who more directly are so.

I have, of course, read the volumes with great interest, but have had my suspicions greatly heightened that whatever may have been the case before–say 1841, the confidences Mr. Greville received in the later years of his life were not unfrequently only half-confidences, for the sake of obtaining his opinion on some collateral point, or of flattering or pleasing him by the show of confidence. There are, of course, many matters treated of in these volumes as to which I have no personal or private information, and I have no reason to question what he says about them; but I have some inclination to doubt, even as to these; for I find that as regards almost every transaction of which I do happen to know the whole history, he knows a good deal about it, but not _all_ about it. He was kept specially in the dark about the real history of Lord Palmerston’s resignation in 1853 which is all the odder because he very nearly found it out. Hardly anybody does know what lay behind, though the difference about Reform was a very real one, so far as it went, and quite sufficient to justify–at all events, ostensibly–Lord P.’s virtual dismissal. Again, on another occasion, I see Mr. G.’s special friend, Lord Clarendon–I will not say, deliberately deceived him, but, certainly with full knowledge –allowed him to deceive himself on the strength of a half-confidence. [Footnote: A politic reticence, that has been called ‘an economy of truth.’]

I am more disappointed than I can say to find that M. de Sainte-Aulaire’s elaborate Memoirs have been ‘used up’ for that stupid book of Victor de Nouvion’s, [Footnote: Histoire du Règne de Louis Philippe (4 tom 8vo. 1857-61)], if–as I suppose-that is the book you refer to. I thought it had never got beyond the first two volumes, and have never seen any more of it. I am vexed that M. de Sainte-Aulaire’s elaborate Memoirs should have been utilised for such a book; generally, because I know M. de Sainte-Aulaire contemplated their publication, and because they deserved to appear in a separate form; and, personally and specially, because, of course, his accounts of his intercourse with my father, and the elaborate study of his character which he had written, are thus lost….

Yours ever faithfully,


_To Sir Arthur Gordon_

_C.O., June 13th_.–I have just read in the ‘Times’ of this morning your interesting letter on the formation of Lord Aberdeen’s ministry. I have no doubt you are quite right. It _was_ John Russell and the Whigs who were rapacious for office–much more than the Peelites. John Russell, I know, kept Cardwell out of the Cabinet. You observe that Greville only notes what Lord Clarendon told him; and I have no doubt that Clarendon was rather out of humour with arrangements which were personally disagreeable to himself. But that again was John Russell’s fault, because he insisted on taking the Foreign Office _pro tem_. I shall probably publish another complete edition of Greville next year, and I think it would be well to insert in a note the whole of your letter, or at least the greater part of it. [Footnote: See Appendix, post, p. 411.] If you have any other criticisms to make, they would be valuable to me. I have availed myself of those you were so good as to send me on the second series.

You are aware that Mme. de Jarnac is dead. I do not know who has her husband’s papers; but the Comte de Paris is here, and as I frequently see him, I will take an early opportunity of asking him whether he can give me any information about Lord Aberdeen’s letters. M. Thureau’s ‘Histoire de la Monarchic de Juillet’ is a remarkable book, because he has access to original sources and quotes largely from them, especially from the Memoirs of M. de Sainte-Aulaire which are still in MS. [Footnote: And _still_ so in 1898.] They appear to be extremely interesting.

We are getting on here pretty well. If the Whigs had joined the Government, there might have been a scramble for office, as there was in 1853; for the Whigs are now in the same position as the Peelites were at that time–officers without an army. It is much more to the credit of my friends to give a disinterested support to Lord Salisbury; and this alliance gives a sufficiently Liberal colour to the measures of the administration. There is every appearance that the Unionists will hold together. Mr. Gladstone continues to be in a state of hallucination and excitement which exceeds belief. It is a case of moral and political suicide. The crisis will probably end by the death of Mr. Parnell, the falling [off] of the American subscriptions, and the extinction of Mr. Gladstone; but in the meantime they have totally ruined Ireland.

_From Sir Arthur Gordon_

_August 30th_.–Your letter of June 13th must have crossed one from me, in which I explained to you why I had written to the ‘Times’ about the formation of the Government of 1853 instead of merely sending my observations to you as a note for future use. I need not say that I am much flattered by your proposal to insert the letter–or part of it–in a note to a future edition of Mr. Greville’s Memoirs… I am struck very much by what I think I mentioned once before–the frequency with which Mr. Greville’s friends gave him what may be called ‘a three-quarters knowledge’ of pending affairs. They told him a great deal, but frequently not _all_. In the affairs with which I am really acquainted, there is almost always something–and that an important something–which does not appear in his notes… I have specially noticed this with regard to Lord Palmerston’s ‘resignation’ in 1853, It is the more remarkable, because it is apparent from various passages that he ‘burnt’–as they say in a game of hide and seek–but never actually quite caught the true facts. I have never known a secret better guarded than the fact–which, after a lapse of four and thirty years, one may, I think, mention–that Lord P.’s resignation on that occasion was _not_ voluntary, and that he was, in fact, extruded. [Footnote: In a later letter, June 5th, 1888, Sir Arthur Gordon wrote:–‘He had given great offence to the Queen; and his colleagues–at least, his most important colleagues–distrusted his action in reference to pending negotiations, Lord Clarendon especially resenting the intrigues he believed he was carrying on. Things being in this state, he announced his hostility to Reform, and it was determined to take advantage of this announcement to remove him; and removed he would have been, but for the two causes I have noted.’] But, to be sure, half the Cabinet did not know this; and it was their ignorance, coupled with Newcastle’s and Gladstone’s dislike of Lord John, that brought him back again.

I must get M. Thureau’s ‘Histoire de la Monarchic de Juillet,’ of which I never even heard. It is dreadful to reflect how utterly behindhand one gets in all things, literary, artistic, and political, through long sojourns out of Europe. But I do hope there is some prospect of M. de Sainte-Aulaire’s Memoirs themselves being published at full length. I know it was M. de Sainte-Aulaire’s wish and deliberate intention that they should be given to the world, and he took much trouble with them.

_From the Duke of Argyll_

Inveraray, January 22nd.

My dear Mr. Reeve,–I have been longer in getting the book off my hands than I had hoped. It is now in the press, and Douglas talks of getting it out about February 10th or a little later…. There is a good deal in the book which, in one sense, may be called ‘padding,’ because I have endeavoured to relieve the very dry subject of Tenures and Agricultural Improvement with historical episodes, with pictures of manners, and even with personal anecdote. But I think there is a considerable bulk of new matter, or at least of old matter put in new points of view, and every part is written with an aim to establish the principles which _we_ think ‘sound’ on Law, on Property, and on Union. Your new Greville seems to be very interesting.

Yours very sincerely,


_From M. B. St.-Hilaire_

_Paris_, 29 _janvier_.–Je vous remercie de la peine que vous voulez bien prendre, et j’ai profité des corrections que vous avez bien voulu m’indiquer. J’avais déjá profité des deux articles de la ‘Revue d’Edimbourg’ sur les chemins de fer russes en Asie et sur l’armée indienne.

I have no wish to appear more royalist than the king himself; but I cannot feel so sure as you do about the security of India. The Russians are already threatening it, and I do not think they are near stopping. The base of their operations will be in the Caucasus, where they already have very considerable forces. It is true that their finances are in bad order; but this may perhaps be an additional motive to them to undertake a war of conquest. I agree with you, however, that before the attack on India will come the attack on Constantinople, the consequences of which will be very great. On the other hand, the railway connecting Candahar with the Indus will certainly be a great obstacle to the advance of the Russians on Cabul. In all this I see many of the elements of catastrophes which the next generation will witness. I hope I may be out of this world before they come.

_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_Foxholes_, _April 17th_.–I see the ‘Athenaeum’ complains that I did not correct all Vitzthum’s mistakes and rearrange his book; but that is more than I undertook to do. We did correct a good many mistakes, natural enough in a foreigner; but I do not hold myself responsible for his facts or his opinions.

_April 22nd_.–I know more about M. Barthélemy St.-Hilaire’s book on India than any other Englishman, for I revised and corrected the proof-sheets for him. A French writer on the subject was sure to make blunders. The book is most valuable to _foreigners_, for it is a perfectly fair account of the British administration of India; but it would be entirely useless in this country, inasmuch as it is a mere compilation from well-known English documents. I think, therefore, that a translation into English would be a work of supererogation and a failure.


_April 30th_.–Dined at the Royal Academy dinner.

_May 9th_.–Great Unionist meeting at Winchester.

_28th_.–Barthélemy St.-Hilaire came to Foxholes on a visit.

_June 10th_.–Dined with the Duc d’Aumale, Moncorvo House. Electric light.

_15th_.–Dined at the Middle Temple. Grand day; Prince of Wales in the chair.

_18th_.–Dined with the Lord Mayor. Literature, Science, and Art.

_21st_.–Celebration of the Jubilee. Splendid day.

_July 3rd_.–Went to Eastbourne.

_7th_.–Dined at East Sheen with the Comte de Paris. Duc and Duchesse of Braganza there. Duke of St. Albans, Arran and daughter, Duc de la Tremoille–twenty.

_18th_.–Duc d’Aumale’s evening party; very brilliant.

_25th_.–To Ostend and Brussels. 26th, to Cologne. Great heat.

_27th_.–To Wiesbaden. Lady Dartrey died while I was at Wiesbaden. I took leave of her on her death-bed just before I started. It was the loss of a most kind, faithful, and affectionate friend.

_August 5th_.–Ill in the night; incipient fever. 6th, to Cologne. 7th, to Aix, very unwell. 9th, got back to London by Ostend-Dover.

_From Captain Bridge, R.N._

H.M.S. ‘Colossus,’ Gibraltar, August 3rd.

Dear Mr. Reeve,–The Naval Review and the ensuing operations have not, I hope, given you such a surfeit of naval affairs as to indispose you to hear a little of the recent cruise of the Mediterranean squadron. We left Malta, under the command of the Duke of Edinburgh, in May, and visited several ports on the coast of Italy. During H.R.H.’s absence in England, when attending the Jubilee, we stayed at the convenient harbour of Aranci Bay in the island of Sardinia. There we carried out a series of instructive torpedo and under-water mining exercises. After leaving Sardinia, we called at several Spanish ports–Barcelona, Valencia, Cartagena and Malaga–eventually reaching this place last Friday evening.

The effect of our visits to both Italy and Spain has been–especially in the case of the latter country–remarkably gratifying. The presence of a son of the Queen was evidently taken as a compliment by Italians and Spaniards of all classes. Barcelona, Cartagena, and Malaga are notoriously anti-monarchical in sentiment. Yet in every one H.R.H. had a most flattering reception. The enthusiasm of the populace at Cartagena was fully equal to any shown by an English crowd for any popular royal personage. People may say what they like, but the advantages to the country of having a prince in the position held by the Duke are considerable. The friendliness of the Italians is striking; and I am confident the feelings of Spaniards of all classes are more favourable to England than they have been for half a century. We hear now that we are to go on to Cadiz, where a maritime exhibition is to be opened this month; and it is understood that this extension of our cruise is at the request of the Spaniards themselves. I have visited Spanish ports often before now, and never noticed any friendliness towards us. Should the necessity of looking for allies arise, it is nearly certain that both Italy and Spain would be disposed to range themselves on our side. It will be a pity if diplomatic bungling occurs to alter this satisfactory condition of things….

Pray give my kind remembrances to Mrs. Reeve.

Yours sincerely,


It has been seen that for some years back Reeve had been occasionally thinking of retiring from his post of Registrar. The near completion of fifty years’ service revived the notion, and his illness at Wiesbaden, following an earlier attack in April, confirmed it. When his mind was once made up, the rest was a matter of detail. The Journal notes:–

_August 10th_.–Taxed costs and wound up business at the Council Office for the last time again; but went there again on October 11th.

_12th_.–To Foxholes, where fever and bad fit of gout came on; I was very unwell till September 3rd.

_21st_.–My dog Sylvia [Footnote: A collie, so called after her donor, M. Sylvain van de Weyer. A brother of hers belonged to the Queen.] died. A fond and faithful companion of sixteen years.

_September 5th_.–Mr. G. H. Dorrell came as my secretary, and I dictated an article on foreign affairs.

_From Mr. C. L. Peel_ [Footnote: Clerk of the Council in succession to Sir Arthur Helps. Now Sir Charles Peel.]

56 Eccleston Square, October 5th.

My Dear Reeve,–I was so taken aback by your announcement to-day, that I really could not find words in which to express the sincere regret with which I heard it. You are so thoroughly identified in my mind with the Council Office, and I am so much indebted to you for advice and assistance during the last twelve years, that I shall feel quite lost when I can no longer rely upon the experience, judgement, and kindness which have hitherto been available to me in any difficulty.

I only trust that by relieving yourself in good time from the ties of office, you may enjoy a long spell of happy and active retirement, which you have so well earned, and into which you will be followed by the best wishes of all you leave behind. Believe me always,

Yours most sincerely,


It appears from the Journal that the resignation was not officially made till some days later.

_October 24th_.–I resigned the Registrarship of the Privy Council, which I had held, as Clerk of Appeals and Registrar, since November 17th, 1837. The rest of the year at Foxholes.

At the sitting of the Judicial Committee on November 2nd, Sir Barnes Peacock formally announced to the Bar the resignation of the Registrar, and after briefly mentioning the dates of his service as Clerk of Appeals since 1837 and Registrar since the creation of the office in 1853, he went on:–

‘It is unnecessary to state to the Bar the manner in which the duties of that office have been performed by Mr. Reeve. He is not present to-day. He has been prevented, I believe, by the state of his health, from travelling to London. Their Lordships are sorry that he is not present, that they might personally bid him farewell. They have given me, as the oldest member of the Judicial Committee now present, the privilege of expressing and recording their deep sense of the loss which must be sustained, both by the Judicial Committee and the public, by being deprived of the valuable services of Mr. Henry Reeve. His long and varied experience, extending over a period of nearly half a century, his extensive knowledge, his great tact and the sound judgement which he brought to bear in the discharge of the duties of his office, render his retirement a serious loss both to the Judicial Committee and to the public. Their Lordships could not allow Mr. Reeve to depart from his office in silence. They trust that he may long enjoy in health and happiness that rest, relaxation, and repose which he has so fully and meritoriously earned, and to which he is so justly entitled. Many men retire from an arduous profession or office, and when they are relieved from the duties which they have for many years been called upon to discharge, sink into a state of _ennui_ and listlessness which are not conducive either to a long life or to health or happiness. But their Lordships feel sure that that will not be the case with Mr. Henry Reeve. His literary and other congenial tastes and pursuits, and his industrious habits, will no doubt supply him with full employment for his still active and vigorous mind. In taking their leave of Mr. Henry Reeve on his departure from office their Lordships will only add, ‘Let honour be where honour is justly deserved.’

To this Mr. Aston, Q.C., replied, as the oldest member of the Bar present:–

‘I refrain from attempting to add anything to what your Lordship has said, for fear that the feebleness of my addition might detract from the force of that which your Lordship has expressed. But I cannot help saying that, after having appeared at your Lordships’ Bar in this place for upwards of a quarter of a century, I have myself personally received, and I have seen the members of the Bar who have practised with me always receive, from Mr. Reeve the utmost courtesy, attention, and assistance. We often have, my Lords, in practising before you, a difficult task to discharge. Our clients are not familiar with the practice of your Lordships’ Court, if I may use the term. But on all occasions Mr. Registrar Reeve has given the utmost assistance, and therefore I beg to say, on behalf of the Bar whom I venture to represent, that we cordially endorse all that your Lordship has said, and express our unfeigned regret that we shall no longer have the services of Mr. Reeve in your Lordships’ chamber.’

_To Mr. T. Norton Longman_

_Foxholes, November 4th._–I hope you saw the funeral oration Sir Barnes Peacock pronounced on me in the Privy Council. It is in the outer sheet of the ‘Times’ of Tuesday [Nov. 1st], and perhaps in some other papers; a very kind and handsome tribute; and it is pleasanter to have these things said when one is alive than when one is dead.

The notice in the ‘Times’ brought Reeve many letters from his friends; amongst others, the following:–

_From Lord Ebury_

_November 9th._–I see you are going to desert the Council altogether. I hope you will long enjoy the _otium_ which you have so worthily merited, and will have time to assist in extinguishing Gladstone.

_From the Duc d’Aumale_

_Woodnorton, 15 novembre._–Je regrette d’apprendre que votre santé a été si eprouvée…. Je suis toujours affligée de voir mes amis se retirer de la vie active; mais je comprends les motifs qui vous ont dicté votre demission….

Je suis si honteux de ce qui se passe en France que je n’ose pas vous en parler, et je me borne a vous serrer bien cordialement la main.

The Journal then notes:–

1888.–The year began at Foxholes. The Ogilvies there for three weeks. Came to London on January 3rd.

_February 4th._–Sir Henry Maine died at Cannes. A great loss.

_March 5th._–The railroad from Brockenhurst to Christchurch opened. Went down to the ceremony. Came back at 7 and dined with Millais to meet the Lord Chancellor. Mrs. Procter died.

_9th_–Emperor William of Germany died. Various dinners.

_April 10th._–Gladstone dined at The Club. Froude, Smith, Hewett, and Hooker there.

_27th_–Left London for Basle with Christine at 11 A.M. and arrived there, and thence, at Lucerne, on the 28th at 9 A.M. Capital journey.

From Lucerne they went on to Milan and Bologna and to Florence, which they reached on May 3rd, which they made their headquarters for the next three weeks, seeing all that was interesting in the city and the neighbourhood, and visiting Siena, Chiusi, Perugia, and Assisi. Then to Spezia, Turin, Geneva, and to Paris on the 24th.

Meantime Reeve, having been proposed by St.-Hilaire, supported by the Duc d’Aumale, Jules Simon, and Duruy, as a foreign member of the Institut de France, in succession to Sir Henry Maine, had been elected by a large majority on May 8th. He seems to have received the first news of this from the Duc d’Aumale, who wrote from Palermo on May 10th:–

Mon ancien maître, confrère et ami, Duruy, m’ecrit que vous venez d’etre nommé associé étranger de son Académie par vingt-sept voix. C’est un beau succès dont je veux tout de suite me réjouir avec vous, en attendant que je puisse le faire de vive voix. Je compte être le 20 de ce mois à Bruxelles, et dîner avec le Club quelque jour du mois de juin.

The election had to be approved by the President of the Republic, and the result was not officially communicated till the 19th. It would seem that Reeve did not receive it till his arrival in Paris, and on the next day, May 25th, St.-Hilaire wrote:–

Demain je vous accompagnerai pour votre entrée à l’Académie. Vous verrez que le cérémonial est des plus simples. Je vous présenterai spécialement à M. Franck, qui, sur ma demande, a été votre rapporteur, et qui a parlé de vous en termes excellents.

From the Duc d’Aumale he received, a few days later:–

_Bruxelles, 31 mai._–Je ne doutais pas du bon accueil qui vous serait fait à l’Institut, et je suis ravi d’en recevoir le témoignage par votre lettre. Je voudrais bien pouvoir assister au dîner du Club du 12 juin; mais j’en ai quelque doute, tandis que je crois être certain, _Deo adjuvante_, de pouvoir m’asseoir à notre table fraternelle le mardi 26. Je vous serre affectueusement la main.

On May 28th Reeve returned to London. The entries in the Journal are of little interest, but he noted:–

_June 12th._–At Lady Knutsford’s, evening, met Lord and Lady Lansdowne, just back from Canada.

_15th_.–To Foxholes. The Emperor Fritz of Germany died. During the whole of his short reign, which lasted ninety-nine days, the most bitter quarrels went on about his medical treatment. It was a great tragedy.

_25th_.–To London again. 26th, breakfasted with the Duc d’Aumale, who dined at The Club.

_July 2nd._–To Winchester Quarter Sessions to qualify as J.P. for Hampshire, having been recently appointed by Lord Carnarvon.

_9th_.–Attended Petty Sessions at Christchurch.

_30th_.–Winchester Assizes. On the Grand Jury.

The next letter, from Sir Arthur Gordon, refers to an incident alluded to in the ‘Greville Memoirs,’ [Footnote: Third Part, i. 54-5.] which Reeve had commented on at some length, with a reference to the Memoirs of Lord Malmesbury, published some four years before.

What Lord Malmesbury had said amounted to this–that in 1844, when the Russian Emperor Nicholas was in London, ‘he, Sir Robert Peel (then prime minister) and Lord Aberdeen (then foreign secretary) drew up and _signed_ a memorandum’ to the effect that England ‘would support Russia in her legitimate protectorship of the Greek religion and the Holy Shrines, without consulting France. Lord Malmesbury added that the fact of Lord Aberdeen, one of the signers of this paper, being prime minister in 1853, was taken by Nicholas as a ground for believing that England would not join France to restrain the pretensions of Russia, and therefore, by implication, that Lord Aberdeen’s being prime minister was a–if not the–principal cause of the war. [Footnote: _Lord Malmesbury’s Memoirs of an Ex-Minister_ (1st edit.), i. 402-3.]

The memorandum itself, as printed in the Blue Book, differs essentially, both in matter and form, from Lord Malmesbury’s description of it. It is entitled ‘Memorandum by Count Nesselrode delivered to Her Majesty’s Government and founded on communications received from the Emperor of Russia subsequently to His Imperial Majesty’s visit to England in June 1844.’ [Footnote: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1854, lxxi. 863.] It is unsigned, and from the nature of it must be so; it is in no sense an agreement, but a proposal that England should agree to act in concert with Russia and Austria; and nothing whatever is said about the Greek religion, the Holy Places, or the Russian protectorate. It is of course possible that conversations between Nicholas and Lord Aberdeen, which preceded the drawing up of this memorandum, may have encouraged the one and hampered the other; but of this there is no evidence, and Lord Malmesbury could not possibly know anything about it, though he did know something–very inaccurately it appears–about the memorandum. The discrepancies had, in fact, led Reeve to suppose that Malmesbury’s statement must refer to another memorandum; and thus Lord Stanmore’s letter has a singular historical interest, bearing, as it does, on a point that has been much discussed.

_From Sir Arthur Gordon_

_Queen’s House, Colombo, July 30th_–I am very sorry that I did not contrive to meet you while in England…. I am almost equally sorry–in fact, am equally sorry–that my laziness and procrastination in sending you my notes prevented their being of any use in the revision of the seventh volume [of the Greville Memoirs]. I am the more sorry because I confess I greatly regret that the mare’s-nest of the Russian Memorandum of 1844 should remain unpulled to pieces. You seem half-incredulous as to my explanation, and ask very naturally, If that is all, why should there have been any secrecy about it? The secrecy was due to the form, not the matter. The memorandum was the Emperor’s own account of his conversations with the Duke, Sir R. Peel, and Lord Aberdeen, and a copy of it was sent in a private letter from Count Nesselrode to Lord Aberdeen. It was never in the hands of the ordinary diplomatic agents for official communication to the English Government, nor was it ever treated as an official document. But its importance was too great to allow its being treated as an ordinary private letter, and my father personally handed it to Lord Palmerston when replaced at the F. O. by him. Lord Palmerston delivered it in the same way to Lord Granville, Lord Granville to Lord Malmesbury, Lord Malmesbury to Lord John Russell, and Lord John to Lord Clarendon. In 1853 the Emperor made some reference to this paper which was supposed to make it a public document, and it was then printed and laid before Parliament soon after the beginning of the war. This I assure you is the whole history and mystery of the Russian Memorandum, Lord M. notwithstanding. This is not the only instance in which Lord M. has mixed up, in singular fashion, what he himself knew and what was the club gossip at the time.

The Journal here notes:–

_August 20th._–Drove over to Lytchet Heath, to stay with the Eustace Cecils.

_September 10th._–Joined Mrs. Watney in the ‘Palatine’ yacht at Bournemouth. Crossed to Trouville in the night. Lay in ‘the ditch’ for twenty hours. 12th, Cherbourg. Met the French fleet and saw the arsenal. 13th, back to Southampton and to Foxholes. Pleasant trip; good weather.

_20th_–The Eustace Cecils came: took them to Heron Court. This was the last time Lord Malmesbury saw people there.

_From the Duc d’Aumale_

Woodnorton, 26 septembre.

Très cher ami,–Vous êtes bien heureux de pouvoir aller vous promener à Cherbourg et à Paris. Enfin!

Oui, j’ai reçu un peu de plomb, et même assez près de l’oeil gauche; mais le proverbe dit que ce métal est ami de l’homme. J’en serai quitte pour quelques petites bosses sous la peau, et je vous souhaite de vous porter aussi bien que je le fais en ce moment.

J’irai à Knowsley dans la seconde quinzaine d’octobre; à Sandringham, dans les premiers jours de novembre; puis mes neveux viendront tirer mes faisans. J’espère bien prendre part aux agapes du Club le 27 novembre et 11 décembre, et serai bien heureux de vous revoir un peu. En attendant je vous serre la main, mon cher confrère.


_To Lord Derby_

_Foxholes, October 2nd._–I am amused by the Court quarrel in Germany, though I am afraid the broken heads will not be royal heads. Bismarck will wreak his vengeance on numberless victims. Geffcken is a very old friend of mine, and an occasional contributor to the ‘Edinburgh Review;’ but I am afraid it will go hard with him, for Bismarck regards him as a personal enemy. If the Prince had lived Bismarck could not have remained in office, and the course of affairs might have been materially changed.

* * * * *

On October 25th Reeve, with his wife, crossed over to Paris. He attended the Institut on the 26th, and heard mass at Notre Dame on the 27th; but his principal object seems to have been to consult Dr. Perrin about his eyes, which for some time back had caused him some uneasiness. A literary man of seventy-five is naturally quick to take alarm, and an English oculist had recommended an operation. This Reeve was unwilling to undergo, at any rate without another and entirely independent opinion; and as Dr. Perrin pronounced strongly against it, no operation was performed; and with care and good glasses his eyes continued serviceable to the last. On November 8th the Reeves returned to London, where, as Parliament was sitting, they remained till Christmas; and, according to the Journal:–