[ 'The Hudson Case'. ] Manuscripts of Elliot's defence of Russell and Sir Henry Elliot in controversy over Italian ambassador Sir James Hudson, including 'unpublished part', letters by Countess Russell and Sir Henry Elliot, annotated pamphlet.

A son of the Earl of Minto, Elliot (hereafter GSE) was Russell's brother-in-law and one of his two executors. The events described in the present collection occurred while GSE was living with Russell, who was then Home Secretary, as his private secretary; and the controversy is over the claim that the replacement of Sir James Hudson as Italian ambassador by GSE's brother, the future Sir Henry Elliot (1817-1907), was an 'act of nepotism' on the part of Russell. A favourite of the Whig leadership, Hudson had served successively as secretary to the legations at Washington, the Hague, and Rio de Janeiro (where he was active in the suppression of the Brazilian slave trade), before being appointed in 1852 minister of legation at Turin. Identifying strongly with the Italian liberal-nationalist movement, he became closely associated with the policies of Cavour. His retirement in 1863 was made, according to the Oxford DNB, 'amid press speculation that Lord John Russell had forced him from office to make way for Russell's brother-in-law Henry Elliot. The controversy was revived in 1868 and 1885.' On Hudson's death The Times, 24 September 1885, described the 'amazement, not unmixed with indignation' on the part of the public over the way in which Hudson had been treated, and the Daily News, 23 September 1885, stated that Hudson 'was, by an act of nepotism too familiarly associated with the names of the allied families, removed by Lord Russell from the Legation there to make way for Sir Henry Elliot'. The present collection consists of the manuscripts of GSE's pamphlet in defence of his brother and Russell, written between 1881 and 1886, with related material (including letters from Countess Russell and Sir Henry Elliot), and including the 'unpublished part' of the pamphlet, containing material which GSE claims is 'especially worthy of attention as exhibiting delusions on [Hudson's] part hardly compatible with soundness of mind'. The collection is in good condition, on lightly aged and worn paper. The following description is divided into twelve parts, and all manuscripts are by GSE unless otherwise stated. ONE: Printed pamphlet titled 'Sir James Hudson and Earl Russell. An Historical Rectification from Authentic Documents. By the Hon. George Elliot.' London: William Ridgway, 169, Piccadilly, W. 1886. [2] + 65pp., 8vo. In grey printed wraps. At the head of the front cover Elliot has written 'With Notes - see pp.18 28 35, 53'. On p.28 is an autograph note concerning the lease of Hudson's house in Turin, and on the other three pages (18, 35 and 53) Elliot has indicated in autograph where notes lettered A, B and C are to be placed. The three autograph 'Notes to Hudson Pamphlet' are in a bundle (10pp., 12mo) on three bifoliums attached with string, loosely inserted in the volume. That the notes were written after the publication of the pamphlet is indicated by a reference in Note C to Lord Clanricarde, 'in a letter to the St. James's Gazette (March 3d. 1886)', taking exception to a paragraph in the pamphlet. Note A (4pp.) contains a 'summary' of correspondence 'found among Hudson's papers after his death', together with an explanation of '[t]he way I obtained knowledge of the above correspondence'. TWO: Holograph manuscript of 'Hudson Case. | The unpublished part', signed at end 'Geo. S. Elliot'. 27pp., 8vo. With deletions and notes. In paper folder. On 20 leaves attached with pink ribbon to leaf bearing the following signed autograph note: 'This is the latter half of my Paper on the Hudson case as originally drawn up. - It contains several particulars which I thought it proper to omit in the published Pamphlet. - | The transaction relating to the the house in Turin which he had made over to Henry Elliot, is especially worthy of attention as exhibiting delusions on his part hardly compatible with soundness of mind. | G. S. E | Jany. 1889'. As Elliot explains in the note, the manuscript is an alternate version of the latter part (pp.54-65) of Item One ('Pamphlet p.54' is written at the head of the first page), giving greater detail and additional information. Paginated in pencil 38-64, it forms with Item Four below, which is paginated 1-36, the complete original draft. Seven pages concern Hudson's 'misrepresentations or delusions' on the 'subject of the house & furniture at Turin', including a four-page transcript of the first part of a letter from Hudson to Elliot, Desenzano, 24 September 1863, with nine long marginal notes by Elliot. (On p.54 of Item One above, Elliot explains the reason why this passage was omitted from the published version: 'As this was a private transaction between him and Henry Elliot, I refrain from giving this part of his letter, though it is not without reluctance I withhold it, as it would have served to show the extraordinary mistakes into which he was capable of falling, and the delusions under which he was labouring as to what he himself had written and what had been written him in reply.') In the next part of this manuscript, also unpublished, Elliot produces evidence to support his claim that Hudson 'was at all times very inaccurate in his figures'. This part includes an extract from a letter written by one of Hudson's relations, of which Elliot comments: 'Such was the language used by those who, as Hudson's relations, were believed to know the truth & to have got their facts from him.' This item is accompanied by a 12mo leaf carrying the following signed autograph note: 'Mem. | The latter part of this Paper on the Hudson case - p.38 to the end - has been taken out to send to Walpole - | G. S. E. | Januy. 1889'. 'Walpole' is the civil servant and historian Sir Spencer Walpole (1839-1907), who published a life of Lord John Russell in 1889. THREE: Autograph manuscript: fair copy of Item Two. 20pp., 8vo. Incomplete: paginated 36-44, 49-59. Almost all of p.49, including a pencil marginal note, deleted in pencil. FOUR: Autograph manuscript: 'Memorandum | The Hudson Case.' 36pp., 8vo, on 19 loose leaves. Paginated in pencil 1-36, and making up, with Item Two, the original draft of Item One. With deletions, and long marginal note added in pencil. FIVE: Autograph manuscript: final version of Item One. 78pp., 8vo., on 78 loose leaves, in paper folder titled 'Hudson Case | Pamphlet with MS. Notes | & other papers relating to it | Other papers are in the two "GE" despatch boxes'. With emendations and deletions. At head of first page is 'No 419', suggesting that the pamphlet began as an official despatch. The settled text is that of Item One, and the manuscript carries instructions to the printer on the third page ('Set this letter in pica'). Paginated in pencil, with an earlier pagination of pp.12-28 as 2-18, and pp.46-56 as 19-29, indicating the patchwork nature of composition. SIX: Autograph manuscript of transcripts of correspondence between Hudson, Russell (with a letter from Russell to Henry Elliott), 1860 to 1863, much of it reproduced in Item One. 46pp., 4to. On eleven bifoliums and one loose leaf, attached with ribbon. Accompanied by another leaf, carrying a transcript of a letter (2pp., 8vo), 'Hudson to H. Elliott Sept. 7. 1863'. SEVEN: Seven autograph manuscript drafts of sections of Item One. Totalling 22pp., 8vo. Paginated in pencil: 1, 5-8, 15-18, 21-28, 32-33, 57. Pp.1 and 57 appear to be from one draft, and the others from another. With deletions and emendations. EIGHT: ALS ('Henry Elliot') to GSE from his brother the British Ambassador to Austria Sir Henry Elliot. 18 December 1884; on letterhead of the British Embassy, Vienna. 7pp., 12mo. After dealing with the weather and personal affairs he discusses the great Ringtheater fire which had taken place ten days before, in which 449 people were killed, before turning to 'the passage of arms that I spoke to you about between Sir H. Seymour & Hudson', regarding which he is sending a 'copy of the Desp. of the former which is amusing . . It is a very fair example of Hudson's habitual inaccuracy, and want of care in commenting upon matters on which he had taken impressions for which no <?> is to be found in the documents on which he relied.' He discusses the circumstances, relating to Count Buol and the Sardinian Chargé d'Affaires, before concluding: 'It is fortunate that the snubbing was administered by Ld. Clarendon and not by Ld. John, or it would have been another proof of the malignity with which he was inspired'. Accompanying the letter is Sir Henry Elliot's transcript (2pp., 4to) of Seymour's despatch to Clarendon, Vienna, 14 October 1856, and of Clarendon's reprimand of Hudson for a despatch which 'was neither accurate nor courteous'. [The discussion of the Ringtheater fire, although not relevant to the Hudson case, is of great interest, coming as it does from the British Ambassador: 'Nothing is yet thought or spoken of here but the great theatre fire; and it is not surprising, for a more horrible thing of its kind could hardly be imagined. The number of the bodies found and of the persons known to be missing is just 800, [sic] but there is no one among them belonging to the society or that we knew about with the exception of one lad, the eldest son of one of our hunting ladies . . If the fire had broken out a quarter of an hour later there would certainly have been many of our acquaintances but, but as it was, only the galleries were full, the persons going to the boxes & stalls not having arrived. Our Consul got to the door of the theatre just as it began to blaze . . A more disgraceful exhibition of incompetence & want of presence of mind on the part of the police and firemen could not have been made, and the feeling of irritation and anger of the public against all in authority is very great, but whether the real culprits will ever be called to account remains to be seen . .'] NINE: ALS, signed 'F', dated 'July 19 [1881], no place, written to GSE by his sister and Lord John Russell's widow Frances, Countess Russell (1815-1898). The context is explained in the conclusion of Item One, which states (p.65) that 'The first time Hudson came to England, which was not till some time after he had ceased to be Minister, Lord Russell expressed his willingness to see him. When they met, Hudson's first words were, "Do you forgive me? Can you forgive me?"' The present item reads: 'I'm very glad you are busy about the Hudson case - I'm pretty sure the words were "Do you forgive me?" & Wm. Says he remembers my tellg him so - Can you give me a notion of the date of that meetg? Had it not been outrageously hot I shd. have looked among the journals & letters - but my with[drawin]groom is uninhabitable as are all our upstairs rooms durg the day - In the meantime I send you what I fear can't be of any value to you - the P.S. of a letter to Isabel written when no suspicion of Sir J. had crossed our minds & we were pityg him for the pain the Times paragraphs wd. give him - & wch. I afterwards asked her to send back to me - Rollo says the Pantechnicon boxes contain all the Ravenscroft books - he is not sure what besides - Alas! For Dean Stanley [who had died the previous day] - | Ever yrs F'. TEN: Three sets of autograph transcriptions. Totalling 7pp. One set (4pp., 12mo) headed 'Hudson'. Together with a page of rough pencil notes on the back of an envelope, and two envelopes addressed to Elliot. ELEVEN: Manuscript note to Eliot from bookseller and binder S. Hogg, 32 Charing Cross Road, London, S.W., 22 March 1883: 'Sir. | Supplying 20 Copies of pamphlet as specimen would cost you about 6/6/0. | 50 Copies abt 6/10/0 | 100 Copies [abt] 7/0/0. | Yours obedly | S Hogg per E.M'. The note is loosely inserted in the 'specimen' pamphlet: 'Middle Class Education. Endowment or Free Trade, by the Right Hon. Robert Lowe, M.P.' London: Robert John Bush, 32, Charing Cross Road, S.W. 1868. In manuscript on cover, with author's name scored through: 'Qy cost of printing & supplying 20 Copies of a pamphlet similar to this same no of pages but a little better paper & type more spaced out. | twenty copies wanted only for Hon G. Eliot.' Unbound and with one vertical fold. Also loosely inserted in the 'specimen' are three scraps of paper with pencil calculations by Eliot of the length of the article, one set of calculations in relation to representative articles in the Edinburgh Review and Macmillan's magazine. (In the event, Item One was printed by G. Norman and Son, Hart Street, Covent Garden.) TWELVE: Three newspaper cuttings. The first from The Times, 28 October 1863, and titled 'The Retirement of Sir James Hudson', laid down on 4to bifolium docketed by Elliot 'Hudson Case | Despatches publd. In "Times" of Oct. 28. 1863.' The second from The Times, 24 September 1885, an untitled long obituary containing the following: 'All through the long struggle [for Italian independence] he was at Cavour's right hand, and to his trained ability, to his knowledge of European and English feeling, and to his quick insight into events as they arose, the great Italian was unceasingly indebted. It was, then, with amazement, not unmixed with indignation, that it was learned that the post of Minister to the new Italian Court was to be given not to the man whose services to Italy and whose knowledge of the whole facts of the situation gave him an overpowering claim, but to a relative of Lord John Russell. The Foreign Minister yielded for a moment to the protests of the country and bided his time. Three years later he carried his point, and Sir James Hudson, ill consoled by the Grand Cross of the Bath, withdrew from diplomacy.' The third, from the Daily News, 23 September 1885, a short obituary, containing the following: 'Sir James Hudson was regarded, while he was in the diplomatic service, as probably the ablest member of it. But before he had obtained its highest distinction he was, by an act of nepotism too familiarly associated with the names of the allied families, removed by Lord Russell from the Legation there to make way for Sir Henry Elliot. Sir James Hudson had rendered services not second to those of gave him an overpowering claim, but to a relative of Lord John Russell. The Foreign Minister yielded for a moment to the protests of the country and bided his time. Three years later he carried his point, and Sir James Hudson, ill consoled by the Grand Cross of the Bath, withdrew from diplomacy.' The third, from the Daily News, 23 September 1885, a short obituary, containing the following: 'Sir James Hudson was regarded, while he was in the diplomatic service, as probably the ablest member of it. But before he had obtained its highest distinction he was, by an act of nepotism too familiarly associated with the names of the allied families, removed by Lord Russell from the Legation there to make way for Sir Henry Elliot. Sir James Hudson had rendered services not second to those of any Englishman, including Lord Russell himself, to the promotion of Italian unity.'