QUEEN VICTORIA

Otago Witness, Issue 3854, 24 January 1928, Page 27

QUEEN VICTORIA

SECOND SERIES OF LETTERS.

COINCIDE WITH CALAMITIES. LONDON, January 19. The second series of Queen Victoria’s letters (1862-85) coincide with a series of calamaties which shook British prestige throughout the world, including the death of the Prince Imperial, the massacre of the British Mission at Kabul, the British disasters at Isandwana and Majuba Hill, General Gordon’s death, the Phoenix Park murders, and dynamiters’ crimes. All these tortured the distressed Queen. The tragedies are largely eflected in her letters. She wrote indignantly regarding the Prince Imperial. She said: “ Such an amiable, good man would have made such a good Emperor of France some day. It is incredible that none repiained to try to save this precious life.” When General Gordon was sent to Khartoum Queen Victoria was intensely apprehensive. She said: “If anything befalls him the result will be awful.” Queen Victoria repeatedly but vainly stirred up the Cabinet, which showed neither energy nor decision. It even tried to prevent her congratulating and encouraging Gordon. She accordingly wrote to Lord Hartington on the subject, saying: “ Lord Hartington’s letter is very officious and impertinent. The Queen will not stand dictation. The Liberals always wish to make her feel that she is a machine. She will not accept it.”

When she heard that Khartoum had fallen she sent the famous telegram to the Ministers, stating; “To think that all this might have been prevented and precious lives saved by earlier action is too frightful.” She wrote: “Mr Gladstone and the Government have General Gordon’s innocent, noble, heroic‘blood on their consciences. It is awful.' May they feel it and be made to feel it!” Queen Victoria so distrusted the Government that she wrote to Lady Wolse-ley,-intending that the remarks should be passed on to her husband, who w-as commanding in Egypt: “In strict confidence I must tell you that the Government is more incorrigible than ever. Your husband should use strong language to them, and even threaten to resign, if he does not receive support and liberty of action. Lord Wolseley must not let out. a hint, but I really think that the Government must be frightened.” Queen Victoria repeatedly bitterly criticised Mr Gladstone, notably when Lord Beaconsfield’s Government was defeated in 1880. She declared: “Mr Gladstone’s conduct for four years has been violent, passionate, invective abuse against Lord Beaconsfield, causing the Turco-Russian War. I could not have a particle of confidence in Mr Gladstone after his violent, mischievous, dangerous conduct and offensive language against myself.” The Queen regarded Mr Chamberlain and Mr Bright as dangerous members of the 1880 Ministry. She declared in a letter to the Irish Secretary that she had Liberal views regarding the improvement of the Empire, but would not be Queen of a democratic monarchy. Radical agitators must seek another monarch. She doubted whether they would find one. She blamed the release of Mr Parnell and other leaders for the Phoenix Park murders, after which she sent a letter to the late King Edward ordering him to remonstrate with Lord Hartington, jminding him of the assurance that the Cabinet would not include dangerous Radicals, adding: “ All the worst men not respecting kings, princes, and the Constitution are put into the Government despite me. Mr Gladstone’s mischief is incalculable.”

Many passages show sympathy with the public, as, for instance, when she expresses regret that the museums were not opened on Sundays, which was the best antidote to the public-houses. She also opposed heavy taxation on beer, which was the poor people’s only beverage. ~ GLADSTONE’S SUPPORTERS INDIGNANT. OUTSPOKEN PRESS CRITICISMS. LONDON, January 20. “ I have a great deal to say. Only one side has Deen given. As regards the other side, the time has not arrived for me to speak about my father.” This is Viscount Gladstone’s reply to an invitation to comment on the references to Mr Gladstone contained in the letters of Queen Victoria. Sir Almeric Fitzroy, who has been in the closest touch with the Ministries since 1885, says that he is surpriesd at the publication. He was not prepared for such a candid revelation of .Queen Victoria’s private views. The Queen’s dislike for Mr Gladstone was never concealed. She showed him no consideration, and hardly any courtesy. She never became reconciled to him. Mr Gladstone’s Eastern policy first aroused Queen Victoria’s resentment. It must be said to Mr Gladstone’s credit that he never commented on the Queen’s attitude, and always showed the greatest respect and courtesy for the monarchy. , The Evening Standard, in an editorial, says: “ We knew before that Queen Victoria was hot-tempered and stubborn, but we did not know how hot-tempered and stubborn she was, nor the full extent oi her fears and dislikes. It was entirely natural that a woman of Queen Victoria’s character and upbringing should regard the advance of democracy with fear ana resentment, and should oppose it with all

the strength at her command. The most surprising thing of all is that, notwithstanding- her determination and prestige, she rarely got her own way. The more one considers this aspect of her reign the more natural it is for one to admire the statesmen who so stoutly resisted her powerful influence. One is impelled to ask whether we have any’ such remaining with us ‘I ”

Th© Star says: “ The present monarch is constitutional in fact as well as in theory. We are not satisfied that it is a good thing to bring the letters into the limelight. They might arouse some future monarch to impossible ideas.”