Hark what discord follows when you meddle with the monarchy
Has the Government really thought through its plans to change the laws of succession?
8:17PM GMT 16 Dec 2011
There is a widespread delusion, I find, that the succession to the throne has been changed. If William and Kate have a first-born daughter, people think, that girl will be Queen. And if, in due time, she marries a Roman Catholic, that too will be permitted. It’s all been sorted out, apparently. There will be what is called – without any apparent sense of absurdity – a Royal Equality Act, and then Bob’s your uncle (though your poor uncle Bob, if currently in line to the throne, will now have to give place to your first-born aunt).
With monarchy, you should agree the rules and stick to them. Not for nothing is the original act of 1701 called the Act of Settlement. It doesn’t much matter what the rules are – elective, first-born, male line only, religious choice, lottery – but they must be settled. When they are not, the personal principle which is the focus of unity becomes the point of dispute. Some people think that A should be King (or Queen) and others think it should be B. This is why it was so mischievous – in the furore after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales – to quarrel about whether Charles or William should succeed to the throne. If you cast doubt on the succession, you cast doubt on the whole thing.
Read thze full story here: The Telegraph
- What is the difference between constitutional monarchy and monarchy (wiki.answers.com)
- Campaign group plan protest at Queen’s Jubilee (liberalconspiracy.org)
- First Come, First Crowned: The British Monarchy Gets Modern (time.com)
- Britain Changes Its Archaic Royal Succession Rules (time.com)
- Changes in the monarchy (geneveith.com)
- Rule of Male Succession to British Monarchy Is Abolished – New York Times (news.google.com)
- The 75th Anniversary of King Edward VIII’s Abdication: The Crisis That Rocked British Monarchy [PHOTOS] (ibtimes.com)