Palmerston: N is for Newfoundland

As we reach the final letter in our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N blog series, what better destination to choose than the beautiful island of Newfoundland?

Map of Newfoundland, Maps of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, Vol.1 (1844) [Rare books ff G1019]

Newfoundland is a large island positioned in the north-eastern region of North America and is separated from the continent of America by the straits of Belle Isle. According to the Cyclopaedia; or Universal Dictionary of Arts, Science and Literature Vol. XXIV by Abraham Rees, the island is rather more hilly than mountainous, and as a result of its many large and good harbours, the fishery on its banks is its chief source of wealth. The chief fisheries for green cod are near the coast of Newfoundland.

The primary sources contained within the Palmerston Papers that focus on Newfoundland consist of Foreign Office memoranda on the French claim to exclusive fishing rights from 1842 to 1843, which is what we will be discussing in this blog.

Primary sources on fishing rights in Newfoundland: the problem

Lord Palmerston’s Foreign Office memoranda on Newfoundland begins with a letter from Viscount Canning (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs), dated 16 December 1842. He transmits a despatch from the Governor of Newfoundland, regarding the claim of the French to an exclusive right to every description of Fishery throughout Newfoundland. He explains that the French are making a claim on which a concurrent right of fishing and curing cod has been conceded to French subject of treaty. He wishes Palmerston to lay the despatch before Lord Aberdeen (Foreign Secretary).  Sir John Harvey (Civil Governor of Newfoundland) reports that while the French version of the 1783 Declaration of the Treaty of Versailles states the word concurrence, the English version states the word competition. On 1 April 1843, Addington (Colonial Office), under the direction of Lord Stanley (Secretary of State for War and Colonies), writes that competition must involve interruption and that the party that possesses the right of fishing must possess that right to the exclusion of all other parties. He further writes that Sir John Harvey should be made acquainted with the opinion entertained by Lord Aberdeen as to the exclusive right of the French to fish for salmon and for “every description of fish” on the coasts of Newfoundland to which they have access by Treaty. Even the Queen’s advocate, Dodson, confirms that he cannot see any limitations in the Treaties or declaration that prevent France from having an exclusive right to take salmon and other fish besides cod fish on the coast in Newfoundland.

Primary sources on fishing rights in Newfoundland: proposed solutions

In a memorandum dated 5 September 1843 to the Earl of Aberdeen, Sir Anthony Perrier (British Consul of Brest, France) suggests the present Governor of Newfoundland cede to the French the right of fishing on the Island of Belle Isle, situated between the coast of Labrador and Newfoundland in exchange for this abandonment of all rights in the bay of St George. He further writes that his next step will be to confirm what grounds the French will be likely to treat for a better arrangement of the Fishery limits. He states that he will confer with Captain Fabre, Commander of the French Naval Station at Newfoundland.

Memorandum to the Earl of Aberdeen from Sir Anthony Perrier, 5 September 1843 [MS62/PP/MM/NE/1/38]

Primary sources on fishing rights in Newfoundland: Palmerston’s thoughts

In his notes, dating September 1843, Palmerston explains that Newfoundland and the adjacent islands (apart from St. Pierre and Miquelon) belong to Great Britain, and so consequently, every part thereof and the territorial seas adjacent there to are subject to the Sovereignty of the British Crown. The right of fishing on nearly one half of the Coast of the Island during the fishing season has been conceded to France, by treaties and declaration. The yellow line on the map below denotes that part of the Coast where the French have the right to fish.

The Treaty of 1713, article XIII therefore admitted French subjects to fish and to fly fish on that part of the Coast of Newfoundland which stretches from Cape Bonavista to the northern part of the said Island and from thence running down by the Western Side, reaching as far as Point Riche; but the French are not to fortify any place, nor to erect any Buildings besides stages made of boards and huts necessary and usual for fishing and drying of fish.

The Treaty of 1763 cedes the Islands of the Pierre and Miquelon to France, but no fortifications are to be erected on these Islands. The Treaty of 1783 alters the limits between which the French are allowed to fish, which limits are fixed by this Treaty to the Cape St John and Cape Raye. The declaration signed at Versailles on the 3^rd September 1783 states that His Britannic Majesty will take the most positive measures for preventing his Subjects from interrupting in any manner by their competition, the fishery of the French upon the Coasts of the Island of Newfoundland; and he will therefore cause the fixed settlements to be removed. His Britannic Majesty will give orders that the French fishermen be not incommoded in cutting the wood necessary for the repair of their Scaffolds, Huts and Fishing Vessels. The Treaty of 30^th May 1814 article XIII confirms the abovementioned stipulations by placing the French fishery at Newfoundland upon the same footing as it stood in 1792.

The Law Officers’ opinion in 1835 was that the subjects of France have the exclusive right of fishery on that part of the coast of Newfoundland specified in the 5^th article of the definitive Treaty of Versailles of 3^rd September 1783. The opinion was modified in 1837 to Great Britain having bound herself to permit the subjects of France to fish during the season in the allotted District free from an interruption on the part of British subjects. If there were really good room within the limits of the District in question, for the fishermen of both nations to fish without interfering with each other, then this country would not be bound to prevent the subject from fishing there. According to the report of Admiral Sir P. Halket, this was not practicable. British subjects were precluded from fishing if they cause interruption to the French fishing. There were no limitations according to the legislation the description of fish which the French are entitled to take on certain parts of the Coast of Newfoundland.

The present Governor of Newfoundland suggested as a measure to induce France to abandon the Bay of St George, to admit the French to a participation in the Fishery at Belle Isle, which is a barren rocky island seldom frequented by British fishermen according to Captain Wyvill of Her Majesty’s Navy. Palmerston wrote that the French abandoning the Bay of St George would only remove part of the existing difficulties.

Map of Newfoundland enclosed in letter from Sir Anthony Perrier of 9 September 1843 [MS62/PP/MM/NE/1/39]

Primary sources on fishing rights in Newfoundland: the final proposed solution

Sir Anthony Perrier spoke with Captain Fabre, who believed that a new arrangement needed to be made by means of mutual concessions. By this, he meant in the way of France no longer having rights along the shores from Cape St John Bay to Bonne Bay but in return, having the right to fish along a part of the coast of Labrador, and all that part of the coast of Newfoundland remaining under the stipulations of the Treaty of 1814. This would mean that the salmon fisheries, timber cutting and other branches of industry which have so long been matters of dispute, would become exclusively British.

We hope you have enjoyed our whistle-stop tour of the Palmerston Papers by exploring the papers held on places beginning with the letters contained in the name. Join us in a fortnight, where we will start our International Women’s Month themed blogs, beginning with Mrs Eliot Yorke!

Palmerston: T is for Tuscany

As we continue into the winter months, what better way to feel warm than to head to Tuscany for the letter T of Palmerston in this blog.

Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston, Illustrated Times, 11 Apr 1857 [MS62/MB6/P18]

We will begin by discussing the state of Tuscany in the 1830s and the early 1840s, and then take you through some of the main series of primary sources within the Palmerston Papers relating to Tuscany.

State of Tuscany in the 1830s and 1840s

From 1831 to 1848 the peace enforced on Italy favoured economic development, which came in varying degrees everywhere except in the south. In Tuscany banking and commerce flourished, especially via the port of Livorno. Throughout the country the construction of a railroad network, beginning in the 1840s, heightened commerce and gave rise to additional industries.

Palmerston remained above all concerned to uphold the balance of authority among the great powers as established in the Treaty of Vienna. As reforming movements built strength in the dependent or neighbouring states of Austria and Russia, notably in Poland, Germany and Italy, Palmerston intensified his ‘moral’ challenge to the autocratic powers, as stated by David Brown in Palmerston: A Biography.

“Florence from the Cascina”, The Landscape Annual for 1832, ‘The Tourist in Italy’ by Thomas Roscoe, 1832 [D919], p.29.

Primary sources on Tuscany

The Palmerston Papers contain some interesting series of primary sources on Tuscany, including draft despatches and general correspondence with British Diplomats in Tuscany, and correspondence with the Honorary George Edgcumbe and Honorary Peter Campbell Scarlett, secretaries of the British Legation at Tuscany.

Label found in the drafts of despatches to British diplomats in Tuscany [MS62/PP/BD/TU/130A]

The draft despatches largely cover controversial appointments made by the Pope in Rome to a vacant canonry of the Cathedral church at Malta, and the request to remission of punishment for murder. They also explain the intentions of the Papal Government to cede to the Grand Duke of Tuscany a portion of the Papal states, providing His Royal Highness takes on the debts and financial engagements of the Roman Government. Palmerston writes in his response to Ralph Abercrombie, later second Baron Dunfermline, British minister resident in Tuscany, 1835-1838, that this will “contribute greatly to the welfare and happiness of the population which would be transferred to the Dominion of the Grand Duke”. [Despatch to Ralph Abercrombie, later second Baron Dunfermline, August 1837, MS62/PP/BD/TU/129]

Further correspondence between Abercrombie and Palmerston can be found in the General Correspondence series of the Palmerston Papers, which covers matters between Tuscany and Sardinia. While Abercrombie informs Palmerston of the King’s readiness to conclude the defensive alliance with Tuscany and Rome, he also reveals his hope that the change of government will produce much good:

“The late ministers had permitted all authority to escape from them, and the country was fast falling into confusion for the want of some firm and judicious minds to set things to rights… The King has decided to seek his ministers from those who have public confidence… and who, by their previous conduct, have a right to count upon the frank and cordial support of the liberal party in this country, in helping them to preserve order, and to repress the violence of the radicals, who desire only to create anarchy in the hope of making a nest for themselves”. [Letter from Ralph Abercrombie, later second Baron Dunfermline, to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, 8 March 1848, MS62/PP/GC/AB/117]

In his response Palmerston assures Abercrombie that he is quite right in pushing the Sardinian government to form a league with Tuscany and Rome, stating that “the more Italy can unite its separate parts into one common system, commercial and political, the better… Now that France has broke loose, the King of Sardinia must bless his stars that he gave way in time.”

Letter from Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston to Ralph Abercrombie, later second Baron Dunfermline, 21 March 1848 [MS62/PP/GC/AB/269]

The letters from Honorary George Edgcumbe, secretary of the British Legation at Tuscany, to Palmerston provide great amusement. Edgcumbe protests of the squabble taken place between Mr Abercrombie and his wife and himself and his wife, which all started when “Mr Abercrombie suddenly dropped my wife’s acquaintance, and even ceased bowing to her in the streets” [MS62/PP/GC/ED/2]. This led Edgcumbe to believe that his wife may have said something imprudent and injudicious about his associates. His wife had sent her apologies via a message through a third person, but Mr Abercrombie proceeded to no longer allow Mrs Edgcumbe to present the English ladies at Court.

In his response, Palmerston explains that the matter could have easily been dealt with by the good offices of friends and private communication on the spot and states:

“Pray remember that the credit and character of the mission and of the Government which it represents will be seriously affected by any recurrence of such bickerings.”

Letter from Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, to Hon George Edgcumbe, secretary of the British legation at Tuscany, 7 December 1836 [MS62/PP/GC/ED/6]

In contrast to Edgcumbe’s correspondence, Hon. Peter Campbell Scarlett reports of issues of a more serious nature, reporting that the Pope in Rome was very unpopular amongst the public as a result of not yet removing from power the legates in the Provinces known to be attached to the system, who were adopted by his predecessor. Campbell Scarlett further reports that robberies and murders are on the increase in Bologna, to the extent that inhabitants demand provision to form an armed patrol to defend property and life. There have also been rumours that there is some secret arrangement in existence for the protection of the Italian courts in case of a rising in these countries.

Hon. Peter Campbell Scarlett, secretary of the British legation at Tuscany, to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, 8 November 1846 [MS62/PP/GC/SC/8]

We hope you have enjoyed your whistle-stop tour of primary sources on Tuscany that can be found in the Palmerston Papers. Join us in a fortnight, where we will be exploring the Ottoman Empire using sources from the Palmerston Papers.

Palmerston: R is for Romsey

In this latest edition of our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N series we turn to the letter R and this time stay closer to home as we look at the nearby town of Romsey.

Statue of Lord Palmerston in Romsey, 19th century [MS62/BR136/37]

A statue of Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, is situated in the centre of the Market Place, Romsey. The Lords Palmerston took a keen interested in the town next to their estate of Broadlands and had direct involvement in the history and development of aspects of the market. So, it seems appropriate to take a look at what we hold relating to the market and the Market Place in the Broadlands Archive.

Romsey Market dates at least back to the time of Henry I in the early twelfth century, when rights to hold a weekly market was granted to the Abbess of Romsey Abbey. This market was held on a Sunday, but in the seventeenth century this was altered to Saturday.

By the early part of the nineteenth century the fortunes of the market took a dip.  It was decided that a change of day for the market might be the answer and Lord Palmerston was approached to make the case for this. The proposal was strongly opposed by Stockbridge, but the case was eventually found in Romsey’s favour. A patent was granted by George IV in May 1826 to Lord Palmerston changing the day of the Romsey Market from Saturday to Thursday. It was reported that the bells rang out in Romsey to celebrate the decision.

Detail of patent granted by George IV changing the day of the Romsey Market from Saturday to Thursday, 1826 [MS62/BR132]

A Market House had been built by the first Viscount Palmerston in 1744-5. Constructed by him for use as an audit house, it also was used for fortnightly magistracy meetings. Third Viscount Palmerston presented this building to the town and consented to its sale and subsequent demolition in August and September 1820 to make way for a new building. A new building took some time, and in the interim the Corporation made efforts to provide improved facilities for the traders at the Market.

Within the Archive, for instance, is a letter from Henry Holmes to Lord Palmerston of 27 May1825 setting out an explanation of the additional stands and other accommodation provided by the Corporation to traders in the Market Place now that the old Market Hall has gone. In a letter Holmes notes that “the butchers used to complain of the draft between the pillars and … the Market House was very cold and uncomfortable”. [MS62/BR131/6] 

By 1835, the market was again suffering a decline in fortunes. Another letter to Palmerston in 1835 sets out a scheme to revitalise the fortunes of Romsey Market, which it was stated were suffering from the success of markets in Stockbridge and Botley. It was noted that Palmerston subscribed £10 to the proposed scheme for a year as an experiment, but there is no indication of what return he had on this. [MS62/BR131/7]

The installation of a statue of Lord Palmerston in the Market Place in 1857 cemented the link between the town and the family. Although whether the statue contributed to the profitability of the market is another matter.

Installation of the statue of Lord Palmerston in Romsey, 1857 [MS62/BR136/30]

Amongst other material in the Broadlands Archive relating to the market are a series of returns of Market Place tithing for the period 1677-99, listing the names of those individuals making their tithe payment to the Romsey Abbey.

Return of Market Place tithing, 14 May 1685 [MS62/BR153/101]

There is also material within the papers of the first Viscount Palmerston relating to the construction of the Market House building in 1744-5. Amongst these are the building accounts in the first Viscount’s account book MS62/BR2/6. Amongst the costing are 43 yards ruff ceiling and partition at 6d per yard, 159 yards stucco walls at 12d per yard and 446 foot superficial rubbed and gaged arches at 1 shilling and 6d per foot.

For further information on the connection between Romsey and the inhabitants of Broadlands go to MS62.

And for our next Palmerston related blog we will be focusing on another Hampshire locality – S will be for Southampton.

Palmerston: M is for Mexico

As we reach the fourth in our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N series we turn to M for Mexico and a not particularly glorious chapter in European-Mexican relations.

Having declared independence in 1821, Mexico was firstly a short-lived monarchy before adopting a republican constitution in 1824.  In the late 1850s, the country was involved in an internal strife between the Liberal reformist forces of Benito Juárez against those of the Conservatives led by Félix Zuloaga.   Unable to face a growing national debt and with no other options, in 1861 Juárez suspended the payment of debts for two years.  In response France, Great Britain and Spain signed an agreement on 31 October by which they agreed to intervene in Mexico to recover unpaid debt repayments.  The navies of the three nations disembarked at Veracruz in December 1861.

Britain negotiated an agreement with Mexico to settle the debts and withdrew from the country once it became clear that France and Napoleon III’s aim was to seize control in Mexico. Spain followed likewise.  France’s military operations began in April 1862 but initially faced defeat before reinforcements under the command of Élie Forey arrived.  Mexico City was captured in June 1863 and the following month an Assembly set up by Foley met and invited Archduke Maximilian of Austria to be Emperor of Mexico. Maximilian formally accepted the crown believing that the Mexican people had voted him their king, rather than this being a scheme between the French Emperor and conservative Mexicans. He arrived in Mexico in May 1864 and was crowned the following month. The Second Mexican Empire and the monarchy of Maximilian displaced Juárez’s Republican government but collapsed within a few years. Aid from America after 1865 and the decision by Napoleon III in 1866 to withdraw military support for Maximilian’s regime, accelerated its collapse.

‘The city of Mexico’ from A compendium of authentic and entertaining voyages (second
edition, London 1766) vol. 2 [Rare Books G 160]

The French government’s presentation of its actions and motivations for its invasion of Mexico were set out in a speech made by Adolphe Augustin Marie Billault, the minister without portfolio in the government of Napoleon III, on 27 June 1862 at the Corps Leglatif in Paris.  A copy of a Reuter News Agency telegraph of the speech can be found in the papers of the third Viscount Palmerston.

Wrapper of the copy of the Reuter Telegraph of M. Billault’s speech [MS62/PP/MM/ME/2]

Billault began by describing what he called the anarchy which had prevailed in Mexico for the last 25 years.

“It was the robbery, pillage and assassination of strangers that determined the three powers to carry out the expedition. France and England were not hostile to the candidature of the Arch Duke Maximilian if the Mexicans chose him voluntarily…”

He went on to pay a high tribute to the character of Admiral Jurien de la Graviere who had repeatedly said that France wished for neither a monarchy nor a republic but simply a good government.

M. Ballault maintained that it was incorrect that France had sent Almonte to excite a civil war.  “He was only to arrive in the city of Mexico when the ballot had been opened to consult the national will.  He arrived in Mexico under the protection of our flag and committed no hostile act before the rupture of negotiations.”

Replying to an interruption from M. Jules Favre, M. Billaut said that when the French flag floats in Mexico the population will, as in Italy, be called upon to express their intentions.

“If”, said M. Billaut, “they reply that the Juarez government suits them we shout reply Amen!”

He energetically repelled the council of M. Favre to treat with the Juarez government and continued: “Our honour is engaged and we must avenge the insults offered to us.  On the departure of our allies the Emperor sent the following instructions to General Lorencez:

`It is contrary to my interest, origin and principles to impose any government whatever on Mexico.  Let the Mexican nation choose what form of government suits them.  We only ask of them sincerity in the elections.  We desire the happiness of that fine country under a stable and regular government.’”

[MS62/PP/MM/ME/2]

The Second Mexican Empire would prove to be short-lived but, as Billault stated in his speech, Britain and Spain were not hostile to the candidature of Maximilian. Indeed Great Britain was one of a number of European countries that would recognised Mexico under his rule as a political entity.

A speech made by Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons on 29 July 1864 set out the rationale under which Great Britain would recognise the government of Emperor Maximilian:

Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston from a leaflet, c. 1860s [MS62/MB6/P18]

…It has been our practice to acknowledge established Governments. Without going into minute questions as to the origin of the Government—whether it be a republic or a monarchy—when we find a Government established we enter into friendly relations with that Government. My Hon. Friend says that we have promised prematurely to acknowledge the Emperor of Mexico before that empire has practically and really been established. I do not think our engagements have gone to that extent. Before the Archduke left Europe we were asked to acknowledge him as the future Emperor of Mexico. We were not inclined to do that, and we said it would be entirely at variance with our practice and our principles; but that if on his arrival in Mexico he should be well received by the people and his Government regularly established, our wish was that Mexico should have a stable Government. The great cause of the dissatisfaction which we have had for a long time in respect to that country is that Mexico has been governed successively by a number of military chiefs, who one after another obtained power, and one after another availed themselves of that power to plunder and murder English subjects, for they treated them no better than the people of any other country, but rather worse. It was, therefore, a great object with us to see established in Mexico a Government with which friendly relations could be maintained; and from which we might expect justice for British subjects resident in or engaged in commerce with Mexico. My Hon. Friend says that as far as his information goes the portion of Mexico occupied by French troops is very limited. That may be so; but it does not follow that in other parts of the country not occupied by French troops the people may not be inclined to support the Government of the Emperor. And we have information —we may be misled, but our information is to the effect that the Indian population, who form a large portion of the total number of the people, are very well disposed to the establishment of an empire…. We are told that the French Government are employing transports to bring back a number of their soldiers, which fact implies that the disposition on the part of the people of Mexico to acquiesce in the rule of the Emperor is considerably greater than my Hon. Friend has been informed it is. All I can say is that our course will depend on what we hear as to the manner in which the authority of the Emperor is established. If we find there is a prospect of a permanent Government being established, we shall be very glad to acknowledge it, because we think that would be a very great good not only to the people of Mexico but also to all Europe. If, on the other hand, we find matters still uncertain, and a war still going on, which may result one way or the other, we shall say the Government is not of a kind that would justify us in acknowledging the Archduke as Emperor of Mexico—

Relations with Mexico, papers moved for [Hansard, 29 July 1864 2202-4]

In the end, what the Saturday Review in 1873 described as “perhaps the maddest scheme which in modern times ever tried to cloak itself under the guise of practical statesmanship” proved fatal to Maximilian, who was tried and executed for treason by firing squad in June 1867, and played a significant part in the downfall of Napoleon III’s regime. Lord Palmerston did not live to see the end of this maddest scheme. But a successor as leader of the Liberals and Prime Minister, William Gladstone, described it as “one of the greatest political blunders ever perpetrated”. [Richard Shannon Gladstone: Peel’s Inheritor (London, 1982) p. 496]

And so after our travels to Latin America where will the next Palmerston blog lead us? Do join us when we will be looking at the letter E.

Palmerston: L is for London

About 5 o’clock a rush was made down Grosvenor Place + to Belgravia + Eaton Place + a good many windows broken before the Police could turn out in sufficient numbers to catch them.

Letter from Sir G. Grey to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, regarding disturbances in London, [8 July 1855] MS62/PP/GC/GR/2510

This week’s blog, the third in our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N series will focus on London. And, specifically disturbances there in 1855, a response to the Sunday Trading (Metropolis) Bill, introduced by Lord Robert Grosvenor. The action all takes places on four consecutive Sundays in late June and early July.

We’re spotlighting three letters Sir George Grey, Secretary of State for Home Affairs, sent on 8 July to the Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston prior to, during and following the disorder.

Broadsheet about the New Sunday trading bill, 1855
[National Library of Scotland Crawford.EB.3237]

The riots were provoked by two key things. Firstly, in 1854, the Wilson-Patten Act closed English drinking places on Sundays between 2.30pm and 6pm and after 10pm. The “second ingredient of discontent in 1855”, states Brian Harrison, was “Lord Robert Grosvenor’s Sunday Trading Bill”. The Bill forbade all Sunday trading in London with a penalty of 5s for each individual sale, but exempted meat and fish sold before 9am and newspapers and cooked food sold before 10am.

Lord Robert Grosvenor was a prominent Evangelical and Member of Parliament for Middlesex. A meeting was arranged in Hyde Park on Sunday 24 June to protest against his Bill. Karl Marx reported that 200,000 people attended. The police tried to prevent the public meeting and there was general disorder for several hours. After the weekend Palmerston hinted that Lord Robert should withdraw the Bill but he declined. There were further disturbances the following weekend (1 July) and Grosvenor withdrew the Bill the next day.

Lord Palmerston as an elder statesman, West Front, Broadlands: an albumen print probably from the 1850s [MS62/BR/22(i)/17]

The violence did not cease even though the original grievance had been removed. On the subsequent Sunday morning (8 July) Sir George Grey wrote to Palmerston stating that he was aware of the rumours that a large number of people were coming to London from Manchester and Birmingham and that someone had been sent to ascertain if they were true. The troops, including the Household Cavalry has been ordered to muster at Knightsbridge Barracks and that there would be police at Marble Arch and the top of Constitution Hill. [MS62/PP/GC/GR/2438]

While many people did stay away, alarming events occurred – this time outside the Park – and the crowd broke 749 window panes in Belgravia.

Sir Grey comments to Palmerston:

I am told the mischief was all done by a set of boys who ran away as soon as they had done it, but some thousands of people followed, taking no part and scarcely any of them using any means to lay hold of or stop the delinquents.

Letter from Grey to Palmerston, regarding disturbances in London, [8 July 1855 ] MS62/PP/GC/GR/2510

Brian Harrison comments “apprentices and teenagers” were common in disturbances of this period. Although he suggests in this instance they may have been encouraged by adults from the rear. Young craftsmen who came to London to complete their training were of the “lodger class”: articulate and politically influential working men who relied on drinking places for meals and recreation; they were usually unwelcome at their lodgings except to sleep.

Letter from Sir G. Grey to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, regarding disturbances in London, [8 July 1855] [MS62/PP/GC/GR/2510]

Grey sends his final of three letters of the day after events have started to die down.

I am afraid none of the Belgravia Window Breakers have been caught, except one who was captured by Mr Whitbread, +another knocked down + taken to the hospital. But since then they have been breaking Robert Grosvenor’s windows since, + as the police were ready for them there I hope they will have made some prisoners.

I have given directions for every vigilance being used this evening.

Letter from Sir George Grey to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston   
[MS62/PP/i/GC/GR/2439]

Join us in two weeks for our next blog as we continue our series; where will Lord Palmerston take us for “M”..?

Palmerston: A is for Austria

This week’s blog, the second in our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N series, will be on Austria. We will be focussing on the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire.

Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston

In discussing the revolutions, we will be highlighting the memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs, the drafts of despatches to British diplomats, and correspondence between Lord Palmerston and Lord Ponsonby (British ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at Vienna at the time) and Lord Abercromby (British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia).

The 1848 revolutions in the Austrian Empire

The foundations of the causes of the revolution can be identified by the opposition to the regime of Prince Clemens von Metternich, who was Austria’s Foreign minister from 1809 and Chancellor from 1821. His secretive and arbitrate system of government supported by the most repressive and inquisitorial police methods in Europe could not last forever.

Vienna’s revolution began in March, with liberal lawyer Baron Alexander von Back petitioning the Lower Austria Diet, which requested public accountability for state finances and support for the establishment of an imperial parliament. Students petitioned for complete press freedom, freedom of expression, the establishment of militia and other basic rights. Writers and academics joined some 400 students on a march to the seat of the Diet in order to emphasise the seriousness of their demands. They then moved to the Hofburg, seat of the Imperial Court. Outside the city walls, workers attacked tax offices, police stations, factories and new machinery. Hearing news of the march to the Hofburg, they moved towards the inner city, demolishing gas lamps and igniting the escaping gas to create a ring of fire around the city. Numerous speeches by leading demonstrators were taken up by the protesting crowds; all demanding Metternich’s resignation, the expulsion of Jesuits, the formation of an armed Civil Guard and the establishment of a constitution.

Archduke Albrecht, who still supported Metternich, employed troops to clear the streets, supported by a contingent of the newly formed National and Civil Guards. In the ensuing violence, 48 demonstrators were killed, a majority of them workers. This led to further uproar and a solidarity between students, craftsmen and the industrial proletariat to present a united front against Metternich. Under pressure from the city authorities, the army withdrew and a University-based Academic Legion was formed, which together with the Civil Guard took control of the city. With even his closest allies turning against him, Metternich resigned his position on 13 March 1848, only minutes before the ultimatum issued by the Civil Guard expired. He left the city secretly the next day and went into exile in London.

“News arrived of Metternich, resignation on the 14^th” Palmerston’s political diary entry MS62/PP/D/10, 18 March 1848

Metternich’s departure was greeted with jubilation but led to widespread looting and rioting in the city outskirts, where the Civil Guard and the Academic Legion were employed to restore order. On 14 March a constitution was promised and a new government was established serval days later led by Prime Minister Karl Ludwig Ficquelmont with Branon Franxz Xaver Pillersdorf as Minister of the Interior, both liberal opponents of Metternich. The new government was met with a great deal of opposition; by 4 May Ficquelmont was forced to resign, making way for the more accommodating Pillersdorf.

Pillersdorf began work on the promised constitution, which involved people being represented by an Imperial Diet and a second chamber, the Senate, consisting of members of the imperial family, imperial nominees and the landed gentry with the aim of upholding their historical privileges in Austria and Bohemia but not in Hungary and Italy. This constitution included an ‘agreement’ clause, which granted special privileges on the emperor, including his inviolability, sole executive power and supreme command over the armed forces and remained unclear on a number of other constitutional details, such as the relationship between the central government and the provinces. While the nobility and the more prosperous bourgeoisie approved of it; the Academic Legion, the Democratic Club and other radical associations rejected it, leading to the May revolution.

On 15 May violent disturbances ensued, which led to the second chamber being abolished and the court fleeing for Innsbruck on 17 May. While petitions created by citizens’ groups, such as the National Guard were dispatched to Innsbruck, begging the emperor to return, a virtual collapse of the banking system ensued, as customers withdrew their savings, threatening financial insolvency.

When matters reached a climax on 26 May, 160 barricades were constructed in the inner city and regular troops found themselves in armed conflict with students, workers, and the National Guard. Fewer than 12,000 troops in the Vienna garrison faced nearly 40,000 student legionaries and national guardsmen, as well as thousands of workers streaming into the city to support them.

The democratic victory led to the formation of a Security Committee, consisting of members from a Citizens’ Committee, the National Guard and the Academic Legion. One of the new Committee’s first demands was the removal of all ‘unnecessary military forces’ from Vienna and the surrender of Count Hayos, former Commander in Chief of the Vienna National Guard, as a hostage to the students. It also urgently attempted to persuade the emperor to return to Vienna.

With eruptions further ensuing in August and September 1848, October saw the final act. As political pressure increased, poor leadership and increasing divisions led to defeat. The ‘October’ revolution began when Count Theodor Baillet Latour, Minister of War, ordered troops to be transferred from Vienna to Hungary to assist Jellaĉić’s army in its campaign against the rebellious Magyars. This led to the Academic Legion, supported by crowds of angry Viennese workers and the more radical elements of the National Guard preventing regular troops from leaving Vienna. During an exchange of fire several people were killed, including the general in charge of the operation. Inspired by their success, the revolutionaries marched on the Ministry of War, intent on overthrowing the government. Prime Minister Wessenberg and his Minister of the Interior, Bach, managed to escape, but the despised Minister of War, Latour, was seized by the crowd and brutally murdered. The crowd then stormed the armoury in an attempt to secure the city against military attack and declared a provisional government. The court fled once more and Vienna was besieged by the armies of Windischgrätz and Jellaĉić.

Memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs

Palmerston’s years as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs from 1846 to 1851 involved dealing with brutal political disruption all over Europe. The memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs for Austria contains insightful information on the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire, including “answers to Lord Palmerston’s queries respecting special missions to announce accessions of Emperors of Austria & Russia”, as well as an explanation by Palmerston on Count Ladislas Teleke’s memorial on the system of Austrian government and the feelings of Hungarians:

“The maintenance of the Austrian empire is an object of first-rate importance to Europe at large, as this statement points out internal dangers which threaten the unity of that Empire, & which not withstanding Count Teleky’s opinion to the contrary might surely be diminished if not averted entirely by an improved system of administrative government”

Note written by Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston on Count Ladislas Teleke’s memorial  submitted to the French Government [MS62/PP/MM/AU/5/enc1]

MS62/PP/BD/AU Drafts of despatches to British diplomats abroad

The drafts of despatches to British diplomats abroad include despatches to Lord Ponsonby from Lord Palmerston which contain valuable information on the context of the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire. Revelations include questions sent to Count Dietrichstein from Prince Metternich on whether His Majesty’s Government admit the principle that the state of possession established in Italy by the Treaty of Vienna ought to be maintained, and the wish of the Emperor of Austria to defend his station territories against any attack. Lord Palmerston also reveals his own thoughts on such revelations, stating:

 “the stipulations and engagements of the Treaty of Vienna ought to be adhered to in Italy as well as in all other parts of Europe to which they apply, and that no change can be properly be made in the territorial arrangements which were established by that Treaty without the consent and concurrence of all the Powers that were partied to it.”

Memorandum from Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston to Lord Ponsonby, 12 Aug 1847 [MS62/PP/BD/AU/55/1]

MS62/PP/GC/PO Letters from Lord Ponsonby

As British ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at Vienna from 10 August 1846 to 31 May 1850, Lord Ponsonby’s general correspondence to Lord Palmerson provide a vital insight into the state of play in Austria during the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire, revealing that “chief movers of the revolution are on the brink of ruin” and that “people hope for moral support from England” [MS62/PP/GC/PO/568].

Lord Ponsonby ensures that Palmerston is kept up to date on all affairs in Vienna, reporting when the Emperor has left, and when Pillersdorf gave up the idea of a second chamber following the demands of the students [MS62/PP/GC/PO/571]. He also provides his opinions on Palmerston’s plans, warning him that “if you do not take care you will produce a war” and that “it not possible to bully Austria into concessions.”

Letter from Lord Ponsonby to Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston, 15 Sep 1848 [MS62/PP/GC/PO/579/1]

MS62/PP/GC/AB Letters from Lord Abercrombie

The last section of material we will discuss in the Palmerston Papers in connection to the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire is correspondence from Ralph Abercrombie, British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia, Turin. The letters predominantly discuss the need for care to be taken with future actions to avoid a general war in Europe, and the state of affairs between Italy and Austria.

In the following letter, Lord Abercrombie explains that the Marquis Ricci from Paris has taken steps “to apply to the French government for their guarantee of the King’s Dominions, should the Sardinians be forced to advance into the Duchies for the protection of their inhabitants against the vexations and oppressions of the Austrians, who according to the armistice of the 9th August have no right to occupy the Territories.”

Letter from Ralph Abercrombie, British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia, Turin, to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, 11 Dec 1848 [MS62/PP/GC/AB/177]

Do look out for our next blog post, where we will be continuing our journey through places beginning with the letters of Palmerston’s name, which will focus on L for London!

Palmerston: P is for Paris

This is the first post in a new series from Special Collections on Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston: P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N.

This week it’s P for Paris, a city whose fortunes were at the centre of early nineteenth-century European politics and, therefore, Palmerston’s political career. Developments in Paris often feature in the Palmerston Papers, held at the University of Southampton’s Special Collections. The city acts as a useful lens, focusing attention on his career at distinct points in time.

The Right Honorable Henry John Temple, Lord Viscount Palmerston, G.B.C. Painted by J.Lucas; engraved by H.Cook. [Cope Collection cq 95 PAL pr 102]

Palmerston was Secretary at War from November 1809 until May 1828; Foreign Secretary on three occasions between 1830 and 1846; Home Secretary from 1852-5; and finally Prime Minister for two non-consecutive terms from 1855-8 and again from 1859 until his death on 18^th October 1865.

Political developments at Paris were intertwined with Palmerston’s career from the earliest days of his public service, but even in his childhood, as evidenced by the diaries of his parents – the second Viscount Palmerston and Mary Mee. Their diaries tell the story of an anxious carriage ride (which included a young Harry, future third Viscount) through the unhappy crowds and revolutionary streets of Paris in 1792.

As Secretary at War from 1809 Palmerston was in correspondence with Arthur Wellesley, first Duke of Wellington, on the progress of the campaigns of the Napoleonic War and the management of the army, as seen in this letter on the formation of a garrison company for hospital purposes, dated 26 May 1815.

In August 1815, a few months after the decisive battle at Waterloo, Palmerston left England to visit a recently defeated France. At this time Palmerston’s politics were closer to the Tory ministry of William Pitt the Younger and he was caught up in the patriotic fervour that overtook Britain, after years of war against the French. Palmerston kept a journal of his visit to France in 1815 and in it he describes the countryside and towns on the journey from Le Havre to Paris, passing through Rouen, Vernon and Nantes.

View of the Pont au Change and the Palais de la Cité, Paris from Prince Louis of Battenberg’s postcard album of the French Revolution [MS62/MB2/A19/93]

As Palmerston entered Paris he was overwhelmed by the imperial grandeur of the public architecture, as revealed by his diaries:

“Everything is upon a great scale and is evidently the result of a well directed but over whelming authority […] the public enjoy everything, individuals nothing: the strong arm of power has made the will of the few bend to the convenience of the many.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, pp.30-1, 2 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Whilst in France Palmerston watched the reviews of the allied armies of occupation, in the company of the Emperor of Russia, the King of Prussia, and the first Duke of Wellington. Palmerston’s interactions with a defeated French people generally reinforced his sense of English cultural superiority. He even preferred the style of marching used by the British soldiers, compared with the Prussians and Russians. When describing the look of the British soldiers encamped outside Paris, Palmerston cannot help but impute a politically meaningful attribute of rugged individualism to the British infantry, whose untidy shabbiness Palmerston contrasted positively with the machine-like comportment of the foreign troops:

“Our men certainly do not look so smart and uniform in a body as the Russians and Prussians but still they have a more soldier-like air, they look more like business and fighting: the foreign troops look like figures cut out of card, ours like a collection of living men […] their men seem to depend entirely on each other, ours look as if they moved independently and yet with equal uniformity as a mass: there is a character of individual energy about our people which one does not see in theirs.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.44, 5 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

On 4th September 1815 Palmerston attended a mock battle staged by the Prussians on the Plain of Grenelle near Paris. Here they recreated their recent march on Paris and the Duke of Wellington was apparently well pleased with the Prussian manner of deploying from column.

“I was observing to him [the Duke of Wellington] the different practice of our army and those of other nations in their manner of advancing to an attack. They always advancing in column, we in line. He said he was satisfied that this was one reason why we had always beat the French, that if troops are steady and the line is well formed the line will always have an advantage over the column from presenting so much larger a front of fire, and that by attacking the column rapidly they are prevented from deploying, which is an operation that cannot be performed under a close fire.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.35, 4 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Palmerston also discusses the repatriation of artwork from the Louvre, amidst the French defeat and much Napoleonic pilfering:

“The Louvre has not as yet been deprived of any pictures of importance but Ld Clancarty [Richard Le Poer Trench, second Earl of Clancarty, British plenipotentiary to the Congress of Vienna] has marched above a hundred which are claimed as the property of the King of the Netherlands and Cannova is arrived from Rome to claim both the pictures and statues that belong to the Pope; the Venus di Medici is also preparing to return to Italy.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.42, 4 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

That evening Palmerston also made a visit to the Théâtre Feydeau and took in a performance. Henry the Fourth was the subject of their representation and, as only royalists went to the theatre, the audience received with unbounded applause every thing that could be applied to the restoration of the Bourbons.

Palmerston also frequented the houses of the well-to-do and even went to a dance. This is how he describes the French interiors he encountered:

“The French theatres are small and dirty beyond description, whether from economy or from an idea of producing greater effect they keep the body of the house very dark and the gloom adds to the dirty appearance of the house; the heat of the houses in this weather is most oppressive and the atmosphere of the audience more pungently offensive than the exhalations of a British mob in Palace Yard.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.45, 5 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Unfortunately for poor Palmerston, he would have to endure another month of such terrible conditions before he returned to England via Calais in early October 1815.

After almost twenty years as Secretary at War, Palmerston left the post in the spring of 1828 when he resigned from Wellington’s Tory government along with his ally William Huskisson. At this point, the more liberal wing of the Tory party, which included George Canning, William Huskisson and Palmerston, found themselves closer to the Whigs and Palmerston joined the opposition. 

In January 1829 Palmerston travelled to France and his diaries reveal the behind-the-scenes machinations of French government circles, with conflicts between the liberal and conservative factions around King Charles X. Palmerston predicted that when the legislature met there would be considerable change in the liberal direction:

“[…] and thus matters will remain until the chambers meet – when it is far from improbable that a considerable change will take place, and if there is change it must be towards the Liberal side, the King is quite satisfied with the present state of things; but would wish any change to be towards Toryism. He was uneasy last summer about his disputes with the Bishops on the subject of the schools. But was satisfied by the report made by Chateaubriand of his conversation with the Pope; who said “What a troublesome lot of Bishops you have in France, they are the most so of any in Christendom […]”

Palmerston’s Political journal, 1828-9, pp.95-6 [MS62/PP/D/2]

Palmerston continues by stating that “constitutional principles have made great advances in France and public opinion is acquiring considerable force”. He would return to France later the same year when he visited the court of the Bourbon King Charles X, made his way to a lecture by François Guizot (a historian in favour of constitutional monarchy and later a government minister under the Duke of Orléans), dined with Jules de Polignac (prime minister under Charles X, just before the July Revolution in 1830 that overthrew the senior line of the House of Bourbon) and attended many soirées.

Portrait of Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, Prime Minister of France in 1815 and Ambassador to the United Kingdom, 1830-34, from Prince Louis of Battenberg’s postcard album of the French Revolution [MS62/MB2/A19/88]

Palmerston disliked the French ultra-conservatives of Charles X’s regime and predicted, correctly, that the regime was unpopular and would not last long. In July 1830 the French rose up against the increasingly reactionary King Charles X, the French Bourbon monarch, whilst his cousin Louis Philippe, Duke of Orléans, was established as a new constitutional monarch; the principle of hereditary right was replaced by that of popular sovereignty. Charles X had become increasingly unpopular for many reasons but two of the main grievances were the imposition of the death penalty for anyone profaning the Eucharist and the payment of indemnities to anyone who had previously been declared “enemies of the Revolution” under Napoleon.

Developments in France must have reinforced Palmerston’s increasingly liberal, or Whiggish, views: by 1829 he was in favour of parliamentary reform and supported the 1832 Reform Act (although he was opposed to any subsequent extension of the franchise); he recognised the importance of constitutional limits on the power of the monarchy; and although in favour of maintaining the established position of the Church of England he became a consistent advocate of toleration, especially for Roman Catholics.

It was through his criticism of the Tory government in the Commons from a Whiggish perspective in 1830 and his celebration of the July Revolution in France that year that he found himself nominated as Foreign Secretary when Wellington’s resistance to all parliamentary reform led to the creation of a Whig-Canningite coalition under Earl Grey.

Events at Paris were instrumental in shaping the political discourse and the worldviews of many contemporaries, not just Palmerston. If the horrors of the French Revolution, the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent defeat of France in 1815 had prompted a conservative and patriotic reaction amongst many Britons, then the political instability caused by the reactionary politics of Charles X had inspired a Whiggish turn towards constitutional monarchy, religious toleration and reform of the franchise. Palmerston’s travels to Paris demonstrate his transition from a Tory-sympathetic Pittite to a Whiggish liberal, for the sake of British political stability and possibly his own future political fortunes.

Our next post in the P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N places series will focus on ‘A’ for Austria…

Winter wonders: Food & feasting

This third blog post in our Winter Wonders series will take a look at some seasonal foods traditional in Britain during these winter months and, in particular, at foods associated with Christmastide.

While some of our food traditions (such as the Yule log) can be traced backed to pagan times, it was during the Victorian era that many of our current practises were established. Charles Dickens, for example, spread the idea of a Christmas dinner, with a roast bird, all the trimmings and a pudding on the table.

The Bernacle and Canada goose from Reec’s Cyclopedia

We suspect most meat-eating British families these days offer turkey as the centre point for their main meal. Traditionally, however, goose would have been served. Geese only laid eggs seasonally, so they were fattened up and eaten for Christmas. As families got bigger there wasn’t enough goose to go round and turkey became more popular.

The smell of those warming winter spices, nutmeg, ginger and cloves, cinnamon is pretty much synonymous with Christmas. But why is this? Cinnamon is known to inhibited the growth of bacteria on meat, and was used for its preservative qualities which might account for its original use during the winter period. These spices were also expensive a therefore saved for special celebrations; another possible reason why they became associated with the festive season.

“Returns respecting the importation of cinnamon, cassia, tea, raw silk, naukeen cloth, and other articles, from 1830 to 1842”. Ordered to be printed by the House of Commons, 16 May 1843 [MS61/WP2/102/14]

Whatever the reason fresh nutmeg was clearly an essential item for the eighteenth-century upper classes as Lady Palmerston write twice to her husband requesting a nutmeg grater!

Mary Mee, Lady Palmerston writes to her husband: “We have no nice nutmeg grater which is sometimes wanted by company after supper”, 19 December 1790 [MS62/BR/11/15/4]

In the second letter dated 23 December 1797 [MS62/BR11/24/6] she tells him “a nice plated nutmeg grater […] would be a great treasure”.

Mince pies – very common fayre at the modern day Christmas table – have been around for many years. The association was long established by the beginning of the nineteenth century when Lady Olivia Sparrow writes to Sir Arthur (later the Duke of Wellington) and his wife: “I must in this season of mince pyes, add the good wishes that belong to it, which Kitty and you will trace to a better source than old custom…”

Letter from Lady O. Sparrow to Major General Sir Arthur Wellesley, 26 December 1807 [MS61/WP1/179/124]

Mince pies used to be larger and contain actual mincemeat. To learn more about their history please check out our previous post, Some festive fayre for Christmas. We unsure of the ingredients in these ones found at Broadlands but a young Henry Temple was very keen to let his mother know he was ready to “goble up mince pyes” on “Christmass day”!

Letter from Henry Temple (later third Viscount Palmerston) to his mother Mary Mee, second Viscountess Palmerston, c. 1790 [MS62/BR/21/1/5]

A few years later, on Boxing Day in 1800, Frances Temple writes to her brother Henry asking about his Christmas and giving an account of her own. Is anyone else feeling tempted to claim that “it belonged to their religion to eat mince pyes”?!

“Did you eat any Christmas pies or plumb pudding? As for us we have been interdicted the latter for a long time & the former being as bad we were not suffered to have any neither which occasioned a warm debate between my Aunt Culverden & Mamma, the former said that many people thought it belonged to their religion to eat mince pyes, but Mamma said she had often heard that Religion proscribed fasting.” [MS62/BR6/7/36]

Frances’s reference to “plumb pudding” may have been an in-joke. A few years earlier, Mrs Bromley, wife of the House Master at Harrow was required to write to Henry’s mother reporting “Mr. Temple had a very sick stomach from being overloaded with plumb cake”. Perhaps this was the cause of their mother Mary’s aversion to these foods?

Of course, Christmas is not the only festival in the winter months. If you’d like to learn more about the traditional foods association with Chanukah (which often occurs in November or December) then take a look at our blog post Celebrating Chanukah: sources from the Special Collections. And join us in January when we’ll be continuing our Winter Wonders theme by looking at artic clothing.

Q is for Queen

And for this week’s blog our Special Collections series has reached the letter Q and we have Q for Queen. We hold a range of material on various monarchs within the Archives and Printed Special Collections, but will focus on just three individuals – Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Victoria and Queen Mary.

The University of Southampton claims a particular special link to the late Queen Elizabeth II in that it was the first higher education institution to be granted university status in her reign, receiving its royal charter in 1952. 

Queen Elizabeth arriving at the University and being met by the Chancellor, Lord Murray of Newhaven, 1966 [MS1/Phot/39/ph3372]

It was not until 1966, however, that the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh made a formal visit to the University, part of a visit to the City of Southampton on 15 July of that year.  The royal couple were met by the Chancellor (Lord Murray of Newhaven) and the Vice Chancellor (Dr K. Mather) and Mrs Mather. They then visited the exhibition room to view an exhibition of kinetic art, followed by a brief tour of the Nuffield Theatre. 

The Queen viewing an exhibition of kinetic art, 1966 [MS1/Phot/39/ph3371] 

At the senior common room there was an opportunity to view some of the new university buildings on campus as well as to meet members of staff and to see an exhibition of the work of the Departments of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, Oceanography and Civil Engineering and Electronics.

Invitation sent to Dr and Mrs Mather for a lunch in honour of the royal visit to Southampton, 1966 [MS101/18]

Within its Broadlands Archives the Special Collections holds a sizeable series (around 1,200 letters) of correspondence for the UK’s second longest serving monarch, Queen Victoria. This correspondence from the monarch to Henry Temple, second Viscount Palmerston, relates to state affairs and foreign policy. Lord Palmerston had a quite difficult relationship with the Crown and amongst the correspondence are demands from Queen Victoria for information.  In 1848, for instance, when there was revolution across Europe, she wrote to her Foreign Secretary demanding information:

“The Queen not having heard anything from Lord Palmerston respecting foreign affairs for so long a time and as he must be in constant communication with the foreign ministers in these most eventful and anxious times, wishes to urge Lord Palmerston to keep her informed of what he hears…”

[Letter from Queen Victoria, Osborne, to Lord Palmerston, 17 April 1848 MS62/PP/RC/F/350]

In contrast to these official letters of state, are the copies of personal letters to Queen Victoria from her granddaughter Princess Victoria of Hesse, later Princess Louis of Battenberg and Marchioness of Milford Haven.  These items, the earliest of which are bound into volumes, start in 1867 when the Princess was around 4 years and continue up until 1900.

Thank you letter from Queen Mary to Glady, Dowager Lady Swaythling for a picture, 31 March 1931 [MS383/A4000/4/1/11]

Within the collections of two prominent Anglo-Jewish women is to be found series of correspondence with Queen Mary, the consort of George V. MS371/A3042/2/5, the papers of Nellie Samuel, Mrs Basil Ionides (1883-1962), contain correspondence to her from various members of the royal family, although most significantly Queen Mary. These letters are often sending thanks for gifts but they also include photographs, such as those relating to a visit by Queen Mary to Buxted Church in 1914.  Gladys, Lady Swaythling, enjoyed a more extensive correspondence with Queen Mary and her archive includes files of correspondence from Queen Mary to her between 1905 and 1963 [MS383/A4000/4/1/11-12] together with a file of correspondence from ladies in waiting and equerries to Queen Mary, 1908-51. Amongst the correspondence files are a number of photographs, such as this a signed photograph of Queen Mary with her dispatch riders cutting wood for fuel at Badminton in 1942.  The Queen noted on the back that this was not bad for someone of 75 years of age.

Photograph of Queen Mary cutting wood for fuel at Badminton, 1942 [MS383/A4000/4/1/11]

After this brief delve into material relating to royalty, the Special Collections blog will move to the letter R next week when it will be R for Reinhart. Do join us.

Letters from “your most affectionate father”: celebrating Father’s Day through the Broadlands Archives

Father’s Day, celebrated in the United Kingdom on the third Sunday of June, is a day of honoring fatherhood and paternal bonds, as well as the influence of fathers in society. Unlike Mothering Sunday, which most historians believe evolved from a medieval practice of visiting one’s mother church during Lent, Father’s Day does not have a long tradition.

This year, to celebrate Father’s Day, we delve into the extensive resource that is the Broadlands Archives; this collection contains dozens of letters between Henry Temple, the second Viscount Palmerston, and his four children. Henry’s first child (also called Henry) was born in 1784. As Father’s Day is a twentieth century phenomenon, the Temple family would not have celebrated it. Despite the letters being over 200 years old, many themes are remarkably similar to modern day life and provide a wonderful vignette of Georgian family life.

Broadlands near Romsey, the country residence of the Temple family, Viscounts Palmerston. [London, Ackermann, 18- ] Aquatint 11.4 x 18.1 cm. Plate 14, vol. 6 of Repository of Arts, 1809-1818. [Cope Collection cq72 BRO; print number pr 41]

Henry Temple, second Viscount Palmerston was born in 1739. He married Mary Mee in 1783 and they had 4 (surviving) children: Henry, Frances, William and Elizabeth. In a letter to her husband, sent from Broadlands on 26 December 1788, Mary says:

Harry sends his love, and will kiss the letter, which he thinks the only way of sending a kiss, and Fanny ditto

MS62/BR/11/13/15

The future third Viscount Palmerston would have been about 4 at the time and his younger sister, Frances, just 2. If you note the date, it seems that Father’s Day was not the only celebration that had less significant status in the late eighteenth century!

The Temples spent a fair amount of time apart: probably not uncommon for a noble family in this period. Many of their frequent letters have been preserved, leaving a wonderfully rich resource for historians. Lady Palmerston went to Bath in January 1795 to stay with her ill mother. Lord Palmerston had all the children to live with him at their London residence in Hanover Square and sent regular domestic news to his wife:

Lilly’s cough has been nothing and only seemed to come at times and then was gone and then it came again but Mr Walker thought her bowels wanted clearing which might have something to do with her coughing. She has taken twice calomel which has had a very happy effect and she seems very well…

I will do something about a dentist. I have been talking with two or three people and for the present am inclined to apply to Spence as I understand that he is much used to childrens teeth about the time of changing them and that as some drawing may be requisite he is superior to any body in the respect.

MS62/BR/20/11/2

His remarks are strangely reminiscent of twenty-first century family life, if the medical treatments have advanced somewhat in two centuries! A subsequent letter sends good news respecting the dreaded dental appointment:

I am very happy to tell you that poor Fanny muster’d up a great deal of courage today and has had one tooth out which is what Spence thought most immediately necessary and she says it did not give her near so much pain as she expected and that she shall not much mind having the others out when it is necessary.

MS62/BR/20/11/1

Sketch of Henry John Temple, future third Viscount Palmerston as a young man

Later that same year in May, Lord Palmerston updates his wife that: “the boys are well but I never – but for a moment – see them as their hours are so different that I have no means of doing so, not dining at home, without deranging their studies or their amusements either of which I shd be sorry to do.” [BR20/12/40] Their eldest son would have been about eleven years old at this point and just about to start at boarding school, as we learn in the next letter.

I drove down to Harrow yesterday and had some conversation with Mr and Mrs Bromley. She seems very intelligent and notable and I dare say will take very good care of Harry… They do not wish for more clothes than are likely to be useful… I forgot to ask them about night shirts but I am persuaded they are quite out of the question and wd only make him the joke of the other boys.

Letter from Henry Temple, second Viscount Palmerston, London, to Mary Mee, Clifton, Bristol MS62/BR20/12/41

Harry was later persuaded that a night shirt might be a good idea. We are sure many parents of teenage children have had a similar battle respecting winter coats! The following year, December 1796, Lord Palmerston writes from their London home in Hanover Square to his daughter Lilly:

My dear Lilly

I am much obliged to you for your nice and well written Italian letter. I am very glad to hear that you and your brother and sister are well, and that you have nursed your mama so well…Miss Carter…is much delighted with your theatre, and says you are an excellent little actress… I hope you will not get cold this very severe weather. It freezes here uncommonly hard for the time of year… All the London ice houses are filling up and the ice is two or three inches thick…

Give my best love to all your party and believe me ever

My dear little Lilly

Your affectionate Father

Palmerston

MS62/BR6/3/9

Lord and Lady Palmerston decided to place their eldest son, now fifteen years old, in an intermediary situation between school and an English university. When Lord Palmerston writes to the proposed new tutor Dugald Stewart he acknowledged that his “father’s account” of his son’s character may not be impartial:

My son who was fifteen years of age last October has risen nearly to the top of Harrow School and has given me uniform satisfaction with regard to his disposition his capacity and his acquirements. He is now coming to that critical and important period when a young man’s mind is most open to receive such impressions as may operate powerfully on his character and his happiness during the remainder of his life … I would be cautious of saying thus much in his commendation if it was likely you would have much opportunity on enquiring what he is from others; but as that may probably not be the case, you must, in default of more impartial judges, accept a father’s account with such allowance as you may think proper to make.

[Jun 1800 MS62/BR12/1/4/1]

The tender care and fatherly pride is plainly evident through all of Lord Palmerston’s correspondence with his children. He died two years later aged only 63 leaving his son Henry to inherit his title and become the third Viscount Palmerston.

Many of you will be well aware that commemorative days are not always easy, particularly for children who have lost their father; fathers who have lost children and those who would have loved to have been a father, but never had the opportunity. We would like to take this opportunity to wish all the fathers, and others who take a paternal role in the lives of others, a very happy Fathers Day.