ueen is very sorry to learn from Lord Derby's letter, received
last evening, that her communication to him on the Indian Army
question had caused him deep pain. She had long hesitated whether
she should write it, from a fear that its purport and motive might
possibly be misunderstood; but feeling that there ought to exist
nothing but the most unreserved and entire confidence between herself
and her Prime Minister, she thought it incumbent upon her to let Lord
Derby see exactly what was passing in her mind.

If, notwithstanding the Queen's expressed hope that Lord Derby might
not consider the communication as intended unduly to influence his
free consideration of the important subject, he should feel that
its possession, without being at liberty to communicate it to his
colleagues, does so in effect, she would ask him to return it to her,
and to consider it as not having been written. If he should think,
however, that a communication of the Queen's views to the Cabinet is
due to them, she is quite prepared to make one. In that case it would
naturally have to be differently worded, would omit every reference to
Lord Stanley, and might go more into detail.

The Queen cannot close this letter without correcting some
misapprehensions into which Lord Derby seems to have fallen. It was
not the Queen's intention to impute any motives of systematic action
to Lord Stanley; she referred simply to facts and steps, known as well
to Lord Derby as to herself, which "uniformly tended" to place her in
a powerless position with regard to the Army question.

The Queen protested against "the _creation_ of a British Army distinct
(in its existence and constitutional position) from that of the
Crown," and not against the "_continuance_ of an European Army, under
terms of service different from the Line, paid out of Indian Revenues,
and officered by men educated for that special service, and looking to
India for their whole career." In fact, she does not understand what
meaning Lord Derby attaches to the words "terms of service." Every
force kept in India, however constituted, would be paid out of Indian
Revenues. _This_ would therefore not form the distinction, and Lord
Derby cannot intend to convey that on these revenues one set of
Englishmen can have a greater claim than another; nor does she see
why English officers, commanding English soldiers and charged with
the maintenance of _their_ discipline and efficiency, should for
that objec