take part in the final settlement of the Eastern
Question, which she desires no better than to accept, and then to
disarm; indeed, she has already begun to do so. The delay is
occasioned by some difficulty as to the forms to be adopted. The
French want some phrases, which don't seem unreasonable in
themselves, but about which the Russian makes a difficulty. There
is to be a Note, and in this Note Bourqueney wishes it to be
expressly stated that the integrity of the Ottoman Empire is now
secured, but Brunnow makes this strange objection, that they
should thereby be admitting the _de jure_ occupation of Algiers
by the French. This seems such a frivolous objection that it is
difficult to conceive it can be the real one. The wonder is that
Palmerston, who carries everything with so high a hand, does not
overrule it _auctoritate sua_. He has been showing off his
flippancy lately not only to France, but to Austria, writing
despatches to Lord Granville, which are in such a tone that he
complains bitterly of being instructed to read them to Guizot;
and, with regard to Austria, this occurred: Metternich wrote some
letter complaining of delay in settling the question of Mehemet
Ali's hereditary possession of Egypt, which, it seems, nettled
Palmerston, and he wrote a remarkably clever but very insolent
answer, in which he reviewed the vacillations and inconsistencies
of the Austrian Cabinet in a very offensive style. This despatch
was read by the Cabinet; and I fancy generally disapproved, very
much so by Melbourne, who however did not interfere, and let it
go. But Frederick Lamb, who has all the confidence and courage
which Melbourne wants, very quietly put it in his drawer, and
wrote word to Palmerston that circumstances were changed and he
should not give it to Metternich. Melbourne was very much pleased
at this, and said it was very judicious; but he forgot that it
was his business to stop it in the first instance, and that,
thinking it imprudent, as Prime Minister he ought to have put his
veto on it. But he is only Prime Minister in name, and has no
authority. He is all in all at Buckingham Palace, but very little
in Downing Street.

March 2nd, 1841, Tuesday {p.378}

[Page Head: THE PROTOCOL DELAYED.]

On Sunday I met Bourqueney at dinner. He was very gloomy, talked
of the debate in the Chamber and the declarations in favour of
keeping up the _isolement_ as '_tres-grave_,' and then complained
bitterly, but obscurely,