A BOOK OF THE MOMENT

THE LETTERS OF QUEEN VICTORIA

The Letters of Queen Victoria. A Selection from Her Majesty's Correspondence and Journal Between the Years 1862 and 1878. Edited by George Earle Buckle. Second Series. Two Vols. (John 'Murray. £2 12s. 6d. net.)

Tan two new volumes of the Queen's Letters could not be expected to have the charm either of the girlish volumes or of those setting forth the Queen's life in her happiest years, when

she not only held an unrivalled position among the Sovereigns of the world, but inspired the whole British people as the ideal wife and mother. But, though the present volumes may seem' dull in comparison, they are full of historical importance, and throw a very strong light on the Queen's character and mental abilities. All the great affairs of the world and all the great personages of the years between 1862 and 1878 come within the scope of the Letters and Diaries. • What impresses one most is the good sense and good judgment which the Queen displayed in regard to the things of the moment, to the things which came before her in a con- crete shape, and upon which she had to give decisions and pass judgments. Here she seldom failed to hold " the better opinion." When, however, it came to considering abstract problems, or judging and understanding great world move- ments, with origins deep in the past, and tremendous implica- tions for the future, or again to appreciating the characters, abilities, and aspirations of men and nations, she was on less safe ground. In a word, her mind was a practical mind, and she triumphed, not by force of brain power, or of will, or know- ledge, or even experience, but because she was sensible, honest, and sincere, and really wanted to do the right thing and the fair tying. Though in certain ways she was obstinate and pre- judiced, and inclined to show temper in matters which she did not fully understand, she would always in the end listen to reason. Again, she had one or two sound and simple principles of conduct in public affairs to which she adhered with unfal- tering sincerity and devotion. Her love of peace and her de-' termination to do her best to prevent nations and men from quarrelling over trifles was a noble trait. She was brave and 'prepared to fight for the things which she thought essential ; but the notion of making wars of policy or aggression were far from her. Again and again she used her influence to prevent provocative things being said in the name of the nation because particular Ministers were irritable, or wanted to say smart things or to make a fine flourish in the face of Europe and the world. One cannot imagine anyone with less of the spirit of Machiavelli than Queen Victoria. Statecraft, intrigue, the use of threats in order to overawe the other side but not to be acted upon, making mischief between two rival Powers, or leading some foreign nation on against its own interests were things abhorrent to her—so abhorrent, indeed, that she seldom suspected their existence in others. If, however, she did discover them, she was shocked beyond measure. There was nothing hard or cynical in her outlook. Most people have a touch of cynicism in them and are rather proud of it ; but, though the mass of the Queen's letters is so great, and though she is so obviously writing openly in her diary, you search in vain for any trace of this unhallowed note. She was as sincere and straightforward with herself as she was with others—not always so easy to be as it seems. People will pose in front of a cheval glass in a dressing-room who never pose in public. She did not always realize the inner sense of things or pene- trate below the surface, and so she mistook not only motives but acts. But this misunderstanding never came from egotism or spiritual arrogance.

It was often difficult to shake her prejudices, or to persuade her into giving up a cherished principle ; but the difficulty here was due to her sincerity—not to any wish to pose as infallible. In short, though in some ways she looked as if she were a tyrant or a die-lierd, she was nothing of the kind.

Though she probably never thought the matter out—she had no instinct for generalities—she felt instinctively that her business as a Constitutional Monarch was to warn and mode- rate rather than to attempt to stem the tide of public affairs. She could show great verbal indignation when she thought her Ministers did foolish things, or concealed things from her and so forth ; but she never appears to have let her feelings run away with her and make her wish to persecute people who had opposed her. She had, therefore, very few enemies, and the minor animosities she provoked were not lasting.

Proof of how little cynical she was and how genuinely shocked she was by cynicism in others is afforded in what she writes in regard to Bismarck. Though pro-German, she was most anxious that the Prussians in 1870 should show magna- nimity. Take, for example, her telegram to the King of

Prussia of September 19th, 1870 :—

" The Queen asks the King of Prussia as a friend whether, in the interests of suffering humanity, he could so shape his demands as to enable the French to accept them. Tho King and his splendid victorious Army stand so high that the Queen thinks they can afford, on obtaining necessary securities for preventing similar events or attacks, to be generous. The King's name will stand even higher if he makes peace now."

There is a curious comment upon this point in an extract from the Queen's Journal of September 25th. There she describes a talk with Mr. Goschen in regard to Malet's conversation with Bismarck at the Prussian headquarters, which gives, to use the Queen's own words, " a most horrid idea of his character."

" The latter [Bismarck] had said, amongst other things, that all francs-tireura must be hung, for they threw away their arms, when they liked, and fired from hidden places ; that he did not the least care for life as he believed in another world, and that if people lived 4(00) or 500 years, that might be different ! How horrid "

At the same time, the Queen was most anxious not to do any- thing which might look like intervention, or giving unasked- for advice to independent Powers. Here is a very wise passage on this matter :-

" The Queen feels so very strongly the danger to this country of giving advice which will not help the one party, and may turn the very powerful other party, already much (and unjustly) irritated against us, into an inveterate enemy of England, which would be very dangerous and serious. She also feels that, if we offer advice, we shall be asked to give promises for eventual action one way or another, which may be very serious for us and drag us into inter- vention ; for we could not say, if we pressed our advice, that we would on no account act . . "

The Queen's writing was excellent when her mind was made up, and she had really grasped the facts. Again,

it was very good when she was describing what she had seen with her own eyes, as, for example, her picture of the sick-room of the Prince of Wales when he lay between life and death or the attempt on her own life. When, however, she had to deal with something more' abstract, she often showed a very human confusion of mind and her style went all to pieces. Take the characteristic passage in regard to the marriages of the Royal Princesses to subjects. And here I should like to say in parenthesis that the letter in question, besides emphasizing the Queen's style and being most amusing reading in itself, also shows how mistaken people often were as to the true attitude of the Queen on this

matter. It was usually supposed that she made iron class distinctions between those of " the Seed Royal " and people not of the royal caste, and there was a good deal of surly criticism in England in regard to the matter, for there is nothing that the English abhor so strongly and so instinctively as any suggestion that birth can cause an impassable barrier.

King Cophetua is the man for them. As it happened, how- ever, the Queen did not take the German view that any German prince of " equal birth " was a hundred per cent.

better spouse for an English princess than an Englishman. Indeed, she took exactly the opposite view, as will be seen from the following extracts from letters to the Prince of Wales .-

" CLAREMONT, 29th November, 1869 . . . I thank you for your letter received on Saturday. There is nothing about which I am more anxious than that you and I should hold together about so important a subject as this concerning Louise's future. What I am srreconcilably against is the Prussian alliance, and I have every reason to think that you agree with me. That which you object to I fed certain will be for Louise's happiness and for the peace and niet of the family. Times have much changed ; groat foreign alliances are looked on as causes of trouble and anxiety, and are of no good. What could be more painful than the position in which our family were placed during the wars with Denmark, and between Prussia and Austria 1 Every family feeling was rent asunder, and we were powerless. The Prussian marriage, supposing even Louise wished it and liked the Prince (whereas she has not even seen him since she was a child), would be one which would cause nothing but trouble and annoyances and unhappiness, and which never would consent to. Nothing is more unpopular here or more uncomfortable for me and everyone than the long -residence of our married daughters from abroad in my house, with the quantities of foreigners they bring with them, the foreign view that they entertain , on all subjects ; and in beloved , Papa's lifetime this was totally. different, and besides Prussia had not swallowed every- thing up. You may not be aware, as I am, with what dislike the marriages of Princesses of the Royal family with small German Princes (German beggars as they most insultingly were called) were looked (on), and bow in former. days many of our Statesmen like. Mr. Fox, Lord Melbourne and Lord Holland abused those marriages, and said how wrong it was that alliances with noblemen of high rank and fortune, which' had always existed formerly and which are perfectly legal, were no longer allowed by the Sovereign. Now that the Royal family is so large (you have already five, and what will these be when your brothers marry ?) in these days, when you ask Parliament to give money to all the Princesses to be spent abroad, when they could perfectly marry here and the- children succeed just as much as if they were the children of a Prince or Princess, we could not maintain this exclusive principle. As to position I see no difficulty whatever ; Louise remains what she is, and her husband keeps his rank (like the Mensdorffs and Victor), only being treated in the family as a relation when we are together."

There is an amazingly insular tone about the whole letter- It shows bow exceedingly English in mind and outlook the. Queen had become in the latter part of her reign. Hers was a mind naturally English. It might be the widow of some old squire writing about " the quantities of foreigners " and " the foreign view they entertain on all subjects," and what a misery it was to all concerned when they descended on the Park ! One can picture how the various officials high and low and the domestic servants at Windsor and Balmoral had conveyed to Her Majesty all sorts of stories as to swaggering and moustached members of German suites and German Princes and Princesses making themselves disagreeable to people not accustomed to be treated as if they were dogs or worse. Altogether, the letter is very human and very vivid, and Mr. Buckle is to be congratulated on his wisdom in putting it in.

J. ST. LOE STRACHEY.