Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T07:18:45.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I. British Secret Diplomacy from Canning to Grey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2011

Harold Temperley
Harold Temperley
Affiliation:
Master of Peterhouse, Professor of History in the University
Get access

Extract

Secret diplomacy is inevitable in wartime. I once heard Lord Grey denounce “secret treaties and bombing from the air”, as its two most evil effects. But between 1815 and 1914 England was only engaged in a major war for three years, and thus secret diplomacy had seldom the excuse pleaded by Grey. How far then is it inevitable in peace time? A careful examination of England's methods during this century, which ended in democracy, leads to some remarkable conclusions. Canning and Palmerston were less secretive than Gladstone, and Salisbury was infinitely less secretive than Lansdowne and Grey. Indeed it seems to be actually the case that our diplomacy became more secret as our constitution became more democratic. The purpose of this paper is to gather up the hints and traces of secret diplomacy, scattered through nearly a century of official papers. For, if these conclusions are to be established, it can only be by surveying long periods and estimating tendencies through several generations of diplomats.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Historical Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , 1938 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Webster, C. K. in Camb[ridge] Historical] Journ[al] (1924), 1, No. 2, p. 159Google Scholar.

2 Id. p. 162.

3 Quoted in Temperley and , Penson, Foundations [of British Policy] (1938), pp. 62–3Google Scholar.

4 Walpole, Spencer, History of England (1890), III, p. 27Google Scholar.

5 , Malmesbury, Diaries (1844), iv, p. 404Google Scholar. Malmesbury adds: “I am against this sort of new habit.”

6 F.O. Austria 7/66. Wellesley to Canning, 16 Oct. 1824; v. F.O. Austria 7/67 for Canning's reply of 5 Dec. No. 29, Confidential.

7 It is true that there was a good deal of delay in obtaining the correct text of the Treaty but it was known in 1834, and it was not till 8 March 1836, and then in Reply to an Address, that it was ordered to be printed.

8 Palmerston to Clanricarde of n Jan. 1841, partly printed by Major Hall and Professor Rodkey, and given in full in Temperley and , Penson, Foundations, pp. 135–8Google Scholar.

9 , Temperley, England and the Near East: The Crimea (1936), p. 257Google Scholar.

10 Temperley, V. and , Penson, [A Century of] Blue Books (1938), p. 145Google Scholar. The instructions of Lord John Russell for Vienna (22 Feb. 1855) were published on 24 July, and various transactions at the Conference itself were published on 12 July. But it does not seem to have been the intention of the Government to publish the first. Their hand was forced by Lord John's indiscreet utterances in the Commons.

11 , Temperley, Journal of Modem History, Sept. 1932, pp. 391–2Google Scholar.

12 Orlov to Nesselrode, 18 April 1856. Krasni Archiv (1936), II, xvn, p. 58Google Scholar.

13 Pte Clarendon MSS. Palmerston to Clarendon, 11 March 1856. He writes that, if the Russian fleet in the Black Sea did not cease to exist, “the country would be satisfied to continue the war”.

14 , Temperley, Journal of Modern History, Dec. 1932, p. 528Google Scholar.

15 , Temperley in Camb. Hist. Journ. II, No. 3, October 1928, p. 298Google Scholar.

16 W[iener] S[taats] A[rchiv], VIII, 67. From Apponyi, London, No. 86 B of 18 Nov. 1863, quoting Lord Russell. This is printed in Temperley and , Penson, Foundations, pp. 230–1Google Scholar.

17 V. the whole evidence on this very strange transaction in Festskrift til Koht, Oslo (1933). PP. 285–91Google Scholar.

18 This tendency is evident throughout Gladstone's Ministry. But it hardly applies to the most celebrated instance, that of Lord Clarendon's negotiation with Bismarck for reducing armaments. This was an almost purely private transaction. But it did not really sin against the old rule for, had the negotiation been successful, it would have become official and public.

19 , Temperley and , Penson, Blue Books, p. 253Google Scholar.

20 There are only two other instances between 1839 and 1878 in which this was done. Temperley, V. and , Penson, Blue Books, p. 257Google Scholar.

21 , Gooch and , Temperley [British Documents on Origins of the War], in, p. 409Google Scholar, note; X, pt. 2, p. xiii mentions other instances.

22 Gooch and Temperley, VIII, p. 4.

23 Hansard Debates, 3rd Series, CCCXXII, 1888, p. 153Google Scholar(10 Feb.), p. 377 (14 Feb.), p. 558 (16 Feb.), pp. 1182–7 (22 Feb.).

24 Id. p. 1189 (22 Feb.).

25 Gooch and Temperley, VIII. p. 13.

26 Gooch and Temperley, VIII, p. 4.

27 Gooch and Temperley, VIII, pp. 4–5.

28 Miss , Penson in Comb. Hist. Journ. (1936), v, No. 1, p. 106Google Scholar. I should like to acknowledge a deep debt to this colleague for advice in many parts of this paper.

29 E.g. Rosebery refused nearly all the correspondence over the Congo Treaty with King Leopold of 12 May 1894; Lansdowne was jejune over the Anglo-Japanese Alliance i n 1902 and secretive in regard to the Anglo-French Entente in 1904.

30 Gooch and Temperley, I, No. 69, pp. 51–2: it will be noted that Granville did not say specifically that he included the Portuguese colonies in the guarantee but the probability is that he meant to do so. V. id. Ed. Note, pp. 94–5.

31 Salisbury to Hatzfeldt of 14 June 1898, quoted below (p. 19 and n. 36), is even stronger than the assurance to Soveral on 22 June, quoted above.

32 Gooch and Temperley, I, No. 80, p. 60.

33 , Dugdale, Life [of Earl Balfour] (1936), I, pp. 270–1Google Scholar.

34 , Brandenburg, [From Bismarck to the World War, Eng. trans.] (1927), p. 156Google Scholar.

35 , Dugdale, Life, I, p. 272. Date of Salisbury's letter not given but early in Sept. 1898Google Scholar.

36 , GrossePolitik, xiv, pt. 1, p. 261Google Scholar.

37 Gooch and Temperley, I, p. 99.

38 Gooch and Temperley, VIII, p. 49, Ed. Note; and minutes, p. 54; cp. also x, pt. a, minutes, p. 484. There was, in fact, a published Treaty of Windsor. It was one of Arbitration, signed at Windsor 16 Nov. 1904 between England and Portugal, when King Carlos was in England. By a curious misunderstanding Sir Edward Grey and Sir F. H. Villiers mixed up this Treaty of Windsor of 1904 with the secret Anglo-Portuguese Declaration of 1899. V. Gooch and Temperley, Vin, p. 58, Ed. Note, and note 3 to Sir E. Grey's dispatch of 29 May 1907. Villiers assumed that Sir Eric Drummond had drafted Grey's dispatch and was responsible for the blunder.

39 Gooch and Temperley, x, pt. 2, No. 373, p. 568: Grey to Goschen, 7 April 1914.

40 Gooch and Temperley, II, p. 196.

41 MSS. Interview with H. Temperley, 11 July 1926, now for the first time published.

42 MSS. Interview with H. Temperley, of II July 1926; Sanderson's view as to “the steadying effect” on Japan is given in a private letter to Satow of 9 May 1902. V. Gooch and Temperley, n, No. 148, p. 137. Satow entirely disapproved this view and said the agreement would induce Japan to fight as soon as she was ready, which she did.

43 Langer, W. L., Diplomacy of Imperialism (1935), II, p. 780Google Scholar.

44 Gooch and Temperley, n, No. 398, p. 353. Lansdowne to Cambon, 11 March 1904; Documents Diplomatiques français, and Ser. Tome IV, No. 342, p. 451. Cambon t o Delcassé, 11 March 1904.

45 Documents Diplomatiques français, 2nd Ser. Tome iv, No. 343, p. 452. Delcassé to Cambon, 12 March; and id. to id. 20 March, No. 354, p. 471.

46 V. Parl. Deb. 4th Ser. cxxxVIII, p. 1063 of as July 1904, and p. 1224 of 26 July.

47 Parl. Deb. 5th Sen, House of Commons, XXXII, p. 58, 27 Nov. 1911.

48 Parl. Deb. 5th Ser., House of Commons, XXXII, p. 1400, 6 Dec. 1911. Cf. Mr Asquith's earlier statement of 27 Nov., Part. Deb. 5th Ser., House of Commons, XXXII, pp. 106–7; Gooch and Temperley, VII, No. 720, p. 725.

49 Gooch and Temperley, III, No. 221a, p. 185; V. also Ed. Note, p. 169.

50 MSS. Interview of H. Temperley with Lord Lansdowne, II July 1926. Even , Huguet, L'intervention [militaire britannique[ en 1914, Paris (1928)Google ScholarPubMed, makes no assertion that his conversation in the autumn of 1905 with General Grierson was authorized (P. 15).

51 Gooch and Temperley, in, No. 210, p. 171: Grey to Bertie of 10 Jan. 1906.

52 Id. III, p. 174.

53 Id. Ill, p. 203. Ed. Note. From Grey's private papers. It should be read in connex-ion with III, p. 186, Ed. Note. , Trevelyan'sLife of Grey (1937)Google Scholar discusses the whole question at length. V. esp. pp. 133–40.

54 Gooch and Temperley, III, p. 185. Haldane's above-quoted statements are in Ed. Note, p. 179.

55 MSS. Interview with Dr Gooch, 14 Feb. 1929. Dr Gooch has permitted reproduction of this interview for the first time.

56 Grey said the same on 3 Aug. 1914. , Trevelyan, Life of Grey, p. 136Google Scholar and n., says, I thin k rightly, that this is a mistake. Asquith perhaps learned of these talks in 1908, on becoming Prime Minister, though Grey's letter of 16 Ap. 1911, in Twenty-Five Years (1926), 1, p. 94Google Scholar suggests that he only did so in that year.

57 Grey, V., Twenty-Five Years (1926), 1, p. 340Google Scholar; and cp. Steed, Wickham, Through Thirty Years (1924), 11, p. 14Google Scholar.

58 V. Gooch and Temperley, vn, No. 639, pp. 626–9 and Ed. Note, p. 629, for relevant references.

59 A good example of such misunderstandings is supplied by the reported words of General Chamoin to Colonel Lowther—on which the French Government commented with severity. Gooch and Temperley, VIII, No. 312, p. 380, note 3.

60 Gooch and Temperley, vn, p. 629, note 6.

61 MSS. Interview with H. Temperley, 22 March 1929.

62 Gooch and Temperley, x, pt. 2, No. 416, pp. 614–5; Documents Diplomatiques français, 3rd Ser. Tome iv, pp. 535–7, No. 534 and Annexe 1.

63 Gooch and Temperley, XI, No. 369, Enclo, pp. 228–9.

64 , Asquith, Memories and Reflections (1928), 11, p. 9Google Scholar; Grey's decision to resign and the reasons are in Twenty-Five Years, I, pp. 312–13.

65 Renouvin, M., in Studies in Anglo-French History, ed. Temperley, and Coville, (1935). PP. 171–2Google Scholar.

66 Salisbury to the Queen, 29 Aug. 1886. Letters of Queen Victoria, 3rd Ser. (1930), I, p. 195Google Scholar.