H. REEVE.

The Journal here notes:--

_April 25th_--Lord Derby gave a great dinner at the F.O. I sat between Stirling-Maxwell and Pender.

_May 9th_--Lord Derby presided at the Literary Fund dinner. I proposed the health of the Chinese Amba.s.sador. I retired this year from the council of the Literary Fund.

_18th_--Went to Paris alone. 20th, long interview with the Duc Decazes.

Dined at the Emba.s.sy. Thiers in the evening.

_May 22nd_--Dinner at Laugel's. [Footnote: The Duc d'Aumale's secretary.]

Duc de Broglie, Duc Decazes, Chabaud-Latour and the Haussonvilles. The '_coup d'etat_ of the Marshal,' as it was called, when Macmahon turned out Jules Simon and the Radicals, took place on May 16th, just before I reached Paris. Hence the agitation was extreme; and at this dinner at Laugel's I had to encounter the dukes, who wanted to know why we disapproved their measure.

_23rd_.--Dined with Thiers, who was depressed. I had, however, several important conversations with him during this visit, of which I took a note.

He expected to become president again. If that had happened, much would have been altered, but he died on September 3rd.

_28th_.--Back to London. Related to Lord Derby what Thiers said.

_31st_.--Severe gale. To Foxholes for a day on June 2nd.

_June 12th_.--The Duc d'Aumale came over to dine with The Club.

_19th_.--Mrs. Oliphant's party to Maga at Runnymead [to celebrate her 25th year of alliance with 'Blackwood's Magazine.' A lovely day, and an amusing party of litterateurs, publishers, writers, &c.]

_July 19th_.--Came down to Foxholes.

_October 18th_.--London to Durham, with Hopie. Durham Cathedral. 19th, to Matfen (Sir E. Blackett's); 24th, to Yester (Lord Tweeddale's) by Edinburgh; 29th, to Ormiston; and 31st to Minto. Back to town on November 3rd. Some London dinners.

_To Mr. T. Longman_

_C. O., November 8th_.--There ought to be, in the January number, an article on the Organisation of the Liberal Party. I have asked several leading politicians of the party to undertake it, but in vain. The truth is, that it is a very thankless and hopeless subject; and the recent discussion of the county franchise by Lowe and Gladstone renders it still more difficult. I put my own opinions wholly out of the question, and should give _carte blanche_ to any competent and accredited writer to treat the subject. I think I shall ask Lord Hartington what he wishes to be done.

My own opinion is that this county franchise move is suicidal to the Liberal party, and I clearly perceive that the Tories are preparing--when somewhat hard pressed--to take up and carry some such measure, accompanied by a redistribution of seats that will swamp a great many Liberal boroughs.

They say, If the thing is to be done, we had better do it....

It is generally supposed that Gladstone published his article, which points to universal suffrage, in order to cut the ground from under Hartington's feet at the Scotch meetings. Hitherto Whig principles and the whole Whig party have been decidedly opposed to an unrestricted franchise.

_C.O., November 15th_--Lord Granville is so cautious and reserved a man that it is impossible to extract any definite opinion or advice from him.

I have tried repeatedly, and I never got so much as a hint from him worth anything How different from Lord Clarendon or Lord Aberdeen! The truth is that Granville is always waiting upon fortune; ready to take any course that may turn up, but utterly incapable of taking a strong resolution based on principle and conviction....

I dare say May's book will have success. It is very well written; but it is not what I expected. It is an historical survey of the political inst.i.tutions of all nations, 'from China to Peru,' executed with care and great reading; but there are no traces of original thought, and it leaves you exactly where you were before in relation to the democratic element in society. Bagehot's books have ten times as much _thought_ in them.

A most excellent book, which I am reading with great delight, is Mr.

Gardiner's 'Reign of Charles I. before the Rebellion.' It is, to me, as interesting as Macaulay, and singularly impartial.

And the Journal winds up the year with:--

_December 12th_--To Foxholes. Christmas at Farnborough. [Mrs. Reeve wrote on December 24th: We start this morning for Farnborough Hill. It is now eighteen years that we have spent Christmas with the Longmans.] Back to Foxholes.

1878.--We spent the first week of the New Year at Foxholes, the weather charming, and returned to London on January 11th.

_To Mr. T. Longman_

_Foxholes, January 7th._--I know the auth.o.r.ess of the Russian letters very well. She is one of the boldest and keenest Russian agents in Europe, who was sent here three or four years ago to endeavour to prepare English society for the coming war, and she has returned here every winter. She has made repeated attempts to capture me, though, as you may suppose, without success. But on politicians of a sentimental cast her influence has been considerable, especially on Gladstone, who is singularly amenable to female flattery, and a perfect child in the hands of a clever _intrigante_ of this kind.

But I am certainly sorry that Froude should have attached his name to her letters. To suppose that this great and dreadful war has been undertaken for the sole purpose of 'liberating' the Southern Slavs, and that the Russians hate the Turks because the Tartars conquered Russia some centuries back, are a.s.sumptions which can hardly impose on the most credulous of men.

This is a war of conquest, and the spirit of the Crusades has been evoked to stimulate an ignorant and enthusiastic people.

One of the points of the Russian party in England is to denounce and misrepresent the Crimean war. That war was carried on in defence of great principles of European law--not for the sake of the Turks--by the statesmen to whom we are particularly attached--Palmerston, Clarendon, Russell, Lewis, Panmure, &c. Mr. Carlyle, Froude, Freeman, Goldwin Smith, Bright, and at last Gladstone, were opposed to it. I adhere to the views of the statesmen, which the 'Review' defended in 1854 and 1855. I am, therefore, extremely glad, and think it highly proper and necessary that the Queen should defend the course taken by her ministers and by the nation at that time; and it would be the excess of inconsistency in the 'Review' not to maintain, as a matter of history, the same principles for which we have invariably contended.

_C. O., January 12th_.--One of the first persons I met on coming to London yesterday was Lord Granville, and I had a long talk with him. He was less reserved than usual. I don't know that there is any difference in our view of the foreign question, except that he thinks the Government should have said and done even less than they have done. But the disposition of many of the moderate Whigs, such as Lord Morley, Duke of Bedford, Duke of Cleveland, &c., is to support the foreign policy of the Government. The Duke of Sutherland is to dine at Disraeli's dinner, out of hatred of Gladstone. I believe Dizzy is to have the Garter!

Lord Granville said, 'I saw that the last article in the last number of the "E. Review" was _not_ Reeve. It might have been written by a contributor to the "Daily Telegraph."' To this I replied: 'It was written, in fact, by a very intimate friend of your own, who was, I think, staying at Walmer last summer; a man of great experience in political writing, not for the "D. T."

but for the "Times;" and, although I don't think it a good article, and differ from many things in it, I thought myself pretty safe in the hands of Sir George Dasent.' It was amusing to see G.'s look of astonishment.

Politically, the topic of 1878 was the settlement of the Russo-Turkish war.

The fall of Plevna in the previous December, and the subsequent collapse of Turkey, led to the advance of the Russians to San Stefano and the treaty of March 3rd, which seemed a direct step towards the seizure of Constantinople, and the swallowing up of the Turkish Empire. In England public feeling ran very high, but, unfortunately, in opposing currents.

The Government was resolved, at all risks, to prevent the extreme result foreshadowed by the Treaty of San Stefano, and to do so by acting on the _si vis pacem, para bellum_ principle. In the East, the Mediterranean fleet was ordered to pa.s.s the Dardanelles and to anchor in the Sea of Marmora; whilst at home, a vote of credit to the amount of 6,000,000. was rapidly pa.s.sed through Parliament, the navy was strengthened, the army reserves were called out, and the initial preparations were made for the despatch of an expeditionary force. And at this time what threatened to be a serious blow to the Ministry, in reality strengthened it. Lord Derby, the foreign secretary, resigned, possibly influenced, it was said, by personal intimacy with Count Schouvaloff, and in any case disapproving of the measures of the Government. He was succeeded by the Marquis of Salisbury, who, in June, accompanied Lord Beaconsfield to Berlin to attend the Congress, from which they returned on July 16th, bringing back, in Beaconsfield's now cla.s.sical words, 'Peace with honour.'

_From Mr. Richard Doyle_

7 Finborough Road, January 15th.

My Dear Reeve,--When at Foxholes, in August last, I began a sketch of the view from your house. It was my intention to ask you to accept the drawing when complete. In the presence, however, of the very attractive original, I, on leaving, was so little satisfied with my copy that I had not the heart to say anything about it. But, after an interval, and a little more work upon it, I begin to think that, after all, when in town, it perhaps may remind you imperfectly of the fresh skies and blue waters left out of town. So I return to my original intention, and herewith send you the little drawing for your acceptance. With best remembrance to Mrs. and Miss Reeve, yours very sincerely,

Richard Doyle.

_From Mr. Theodore Martin_

31 Onslow Square, January 16th.

Dear Mr. Reeve,--I have been much gratified by reading the review of my third volume in the 'Edinburgh Review,' which my publishers have just sent me. It brings out with admirable effect the pa.s.sages which bear on the present crisis--pa.s.sages which I inserted in the volume from a strong feeling that there would be occasion to strengthen the sound view of the Eastern Question by the emphatic language of the Prince Consort. G.o.d grant they may not have come too late!

With reference, especially, to what you say at the top of page 151, I must disabuse you of what seems to be the prevailing impression that things in this book have been written by the direct inspiration of the Queen. Not one word of it, from beginning to end, was prompted by Her Majesty, who has left me, from the first, unfettered, to draw my own conclusions, to select the doc.u.ments to be made public, and to state my own convictions in my own way.

What I have selected and what I have written has, when printed, been submitted, of course, for Her Majesty's approval, which, I am happy to say, I have always had. In regard to the third volume, it was written almost entirely last summer and autumn, at my country house, where I had no opportunity of even consulting Her Majesty. Your conjecture, therefore, as to the note you cite on page 151 is a mistaken one. That note only expresses a conviction which I have strongly felt for many years. You will, on reflection, I think, see that I could not with propriety refer to the circ.u.mstances alluded to in the note on the same page of the 'Review.' It is one of hundreds of cases where reticence seemed to myself, as, in some sense, representing Her Majesty, to be prescribed to me. When my book is complete, an abridged 'Life' will be published. I am sure this article must do good by being in the hands of the public before the meeting of Parliament.

Believe me, very truly yours,

THEODORE MARTIN.

_January 19th_.--I have no doubt the Queen will be much pleased with the 'E. R.' article. Believe me, Her Majesty's mind is far too candid and sincere to take any umbrage at what you say about the Prince's _Germanism_.

She may not think it went so far as you do; but she has always frankly acknowledged its existence, seeing, with her usual good sense, both the good and bad effects of any extreme views. If there be any one person more than another to whom the artificial language commonly addressed to royal personages is distasteful, it is the Queen herself. Such at least is my experience. I am delighted to see that the opinions of the Queen and Prince brought forward in this volume are causing some stir in the Parisian journals. They are being used to stimulate an active interest in the Eastern Question; and this, I venture to think, may produce results not unimportant at the present crisis.

The Journal here notes:--

_January 25th_.--Huxley lectured on Harvey.