Posted on 11/25/2009 4:12:41 AM PST by tlb
Secret correspondence between the exiled Duke and Duchess of Windsor and their confidant Kenneth de Courcy has revealed a dastardly scheme to change the course of British history by denying Queen Elizabeth II the crown, says royal biographer Christopher Wilson.
The Sunday Telegraph can reveal that amid the deteriorating health of the Duke’s brother King George VI, furtive discussions began among rattled courtiers and senior politicians to the possibility of a “caretaker” monarch.
The natural successor, and heir apparent, was the then Princess Elizabeth. But in the spring of 1949, when the plot was at its height, she was just 23 – four years younger than Prince William is today – and at the time there was a heavy bias against her taking the throne so young because she was perceived to be vulnerable to “the Mountbatten influence”
With the need to keep Princess Elizabeth out – for the time being, at least – and with no other candidate in sight, if the Duke made his move at the right moment, the traditionalists within the Royal court might very well endorse his candidature for the job of Regent.
It was the one great opportunity for the Duke to re-assert his place in history – and he flunked it. He dithered, and he lost; for within weeks his younger brother, the King, was on the road to a temporary recovery.
King George VI lived on, “walking with death” as Winston Churchill described it, until the early morning of February 6, 1952.
By the time his brother died, the Duke of Windsor had already embarked on the fruitless journey which was to occupy the rest of his life, wafting from Paris to New York to Palm Beach in the company of rich, bored, vacuous people.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Although it seems few realise it, Britain and the Commonwealth has an elected monarch. Ever since the Glorious Revolution and Hannoverian Succession the will of Parliament (in Westminster and later throughout the Commonwealth) approve the Ascent by law. The Acts of Parliament passed confirm the position and title of the monarch.
In addition, the current Oath of Allegience is worded in a way that could maintain legal stability and constitutional continuity if Rebublicanism was chosen by Parliaments. The Oath refers to the Soveriegn- their heirs and successors. A republican state president could be such a successor.
Interesting.
FTA: ...in the company of rich, bored, vacuous people.
Sounds a lot like “The View”.
Intresting read. She was also not crowned over the Stone of Destiny or Stone of Scone as it is called the first British crown to have not done so.
I love to watch those period movies that deal with palace intrigues. “The Other Boleyn Girl” was recently on cable.
I wonder if that might explain why Britain has gone down the tubes over the course of Liz’s reign?
Steady on....she’s been on the throne for almost 57 years. A lot has happened.
WWI and obviously WWII devastated Britain both at home (the Blitz) and abroad. She presided over a postwar rebuilding and reinvention of Britain as an industrial and financial power which is quite remarkable considering it had lost its empire and naval dominance.
She has handled liberals and conservatives alike with aplomb - often better than they handled themselves. Thatcherism saved Britain even if UK lefties don’t want to admit it. Unfortunately the modern British political system puts power almost exclusively in the hands of Parliament and the PM which is why the queen is mostly powerless to counter the creep of socialism.
No, he was travelling with relatives.
From what I’ve read, the Duke of Windsor couldn’t have pulled off a mosquito without guidance, never mind a plot. He was bored, rich and vacuous personified.
The succession to the throne is controlled by the Act of Settlement. The Act was amended in 1936 to allow Edward VIII to renounce his rights to the throne and abdicate. Obviously Parliament could can amend the Act in any way it wants, but the idea that Parliament would modify the Duke of Windsor's abdication... well maybe the Duke and Duchess of Windsor might have believed that, but that just proves that they had fairies living in their trees.
This story is designed to sell newspapers and has no real substance.
I would hate to see the UK become a republic.
Queen Elizabeth II WAS crowned over the stone of Scone.
Only subject to the Statute of Westminster.
And whereas it is meet and proper to set out by way of preamble to this Act that, inasmuch as the Crown is the symbol of the free association of the members of the British Commonwealth of Nations, and as they are united by a common allegiance to the Crown, it would be in accord with the established constitutional position of all the members of the Commonwealth in relation to one another that any alteration in the law touching the Succession to the Throne or the Royal Style and Titles shall hereafter require the assent as well of the Parliaments of all the Dominions as of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
Technically this expressed a convention rather than law (it is contained within the Preamble) but it would make any alteration of succession by the Parliament at Westminister legally problematic to say the least unless consented to by the Parliaments at Ottawa, Canberra, and Wellington as well - and possibly those of all the Commonwealth realms as well. The only situation in which that is likely is if both the Monarch and his or her Heirs according to law had expressed a desire for change. Removing the disqualification of Catholics or ending primogeniture might achieve that type of consent - little else would.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.