to the newspaper attacks upon the Prince. He observed the article, to which your Majesty refers, in the Morning Chronicle of yesterday; and he believes he may certainly say that it was written by Mr Gladstone, although he would not wish it to be known. There was also a very sensible letter in the Standard of last night, signed D. C. L. This is the signature always assumed by Mr Alexander Hope,[1] in his contributions to the Press, and Lord Aberdeen does not doubt that it is written by him. It is only a wonder to find it in such a quarter; and it shows some disposition on the part of that scurrilous paper to alter its course. There is perhaps no great objection to the papers dealing with the subject as they think proper, before the meeting of Parliament, provided the Tames takes no part at present; for as this paper is supposed to be influenced by the Government, this belief would injure the effect of anything that might appear in its columns.[2] . . .
Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell.
WINDSOR CASTLE, 21st January 1854. The Queen has received Lord John Russell’s letter of the 19th, and the Bill as now agreed upon by the Cabinet, which she hopes may meet the wishes of the Country and pass into law.[3] From what she understands the chief argument used in opposition to the measure will be, that corruption and bribery is the evil which the Country really complains of, and not an unequal distribution of the representation, and that a new distribution or even extension of the franchise will not touch the evil, and may be said perhaps in some instances to tend towards increasing it. The success of the measure will therefore, she concludes, in some degree depend upon the Bribery Bills which will accompany it. How far are these advanced? and what expectation has Lord John Russell of succeeding in framing such a measure as would remove that ground of objection to the Reform Bill?
- ↑ Mr. A. J. Hope (afterwards Beresford-Hope), at this time out of Parliament, had written over the signature "D. C. L." a series of letters to the Press on the Papal claims.
- ↑ On the re-assembling of Parliament, the charges against the Prince were at once refuted by the Prime Minister and Lord John Russell; and his right to assist the Queen completely established by those Ministers, with the concurrence of Lord Derby and Mr Walpole, on behalf of the Opposition, and Lord Campbell, the Chief Justice of the Queen’s Bench.
- ↑ Notwithstanding the impending war, the Government considered itself bound in honour to bring in a Reform Bill. Lord Palmerston and his special supporters were opposed to the project, but the measure was brought forward on the 13th of February. After a chequered career it was withdrawn. The Bill for the prevention of corrupt practices at elections was introduced on the 10th of February, and after many vicissitudes and several Ministerial defeats in the Commons as well as in the Lords, it was, in a modified form, carried.
