Proposal for Equal Primogeniture Succession

[sliver_bic]

Originally Posted by Molly2101

From what I have read, this change of law does not affect the current line up does it? It WOULD have been nice to see Anne come before her younger brothers, as anything to get Beatrice and Eugenie further from the Crown is always a bonus.

Seems a bit harsh. Yes, Andrew is more than a bit of a child and Sarah's a colossal mess but we've yet to see what those girls have to offer. Remember that the Wales boys had media protection and that their mother is considered all but a saint. William has a permanent pass unless he does something severely stupid. Beatrice and Eugenie aren't nearly so lucky.

[DukeOfAster]

I am just curious to find out sill the daughter be the Duchess of Cornwall and then Princess of Wales like the men have. I take it to be so just have not heard this in this terms.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by DukeOfAster

I am just curious to find out sill the daughter be the Duchess of Cornwall and then Princess of Wales like the men have. I take it to be so just have not heard this in this terms.

Actually I think all it would pertain too is that should William and Kate have a daughter first, she would be heir apparent to the throne. Will be interesting to see what happens with the Duchy of Cornwall. As I understand it, there are only two royal duchies in the UK, Lancaster and Cornwall. The duchy of Lancaster pertains to the monarch while the Duchy of Cornwall is inherited by the eldest son of the monarch.

This could be problematic should they retain the standards set now for Cornwall. Should William and Kate's 2nd child be male and he inherits the Duchy when William becomes king, with an older sister as monarch eventually, wouldn't that be a sticky situation if the monarch herself then would have a male child?

With this reasoning, I'd think they'd almost HAVE to change the ruling to be the eldest child of the monarch as far as the Duchy of Cornwall. It wouldn't necessarily have to affect the peerages as it would only pertain to ROYAL duchies and with the monarch holding Lancaster, that's a no-brainer to figure out.

Ahhh.. too much thinking this early in the morning..

[Jacknch]

OK, I've got afew questions!
I'm way behind on the rules and regulations governing inheritance, but with regard to the peerage, is it LAW or CUSTOM to pass your title down to the next oldest male in the family?
What is the likelihood of female eldest children of dukes and earls throughout the country now suing for the right to take the title over their younger brothers?
The Queen is currently the Duke of Lancaster (and still referred to as the Duke of Normandy in the Channel Islands), so is it too far fetched to imagine a female heir apparent being the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cornwall?
What happened to the Duchy of Cornwall when the Queen was Princess Elizabeth? Who looked after the estate in those days and gained the income from it?

[Jacknch]

Originally Posted by wbenson

No, it won't. This only affects succession to the throne. Succession to peerages is a different issue.



That was done as a special remainder to his two daughters. No other women are able to succeed to that earldom. (It will descend to the heirs male of the current Countess, then if they are exhausted to her sister Pamela and her heirs male.)

Do we know how Lord Mountbatten enabled his eldest daughter to inherit his title? Was it simply in his will? EDIT: Ok, I've researched this now and found that it was arranged by Letters Patent when he was given the title.

[Baroness of Books]

Under that scenario, then, would it be allowable for peers to have letters patent issued to permit their first-born daughters to inherit the title? If a title had to pass out of the family because there is no son, if such is the case currently, can a daughter now inherit it?

Too early in the morning to contemplate these intricacies; I need my coffee.

[NGalitzine]

Succession is based entirely on the original Letters Patent. New Letters Patent would mean a new creation of the title, and new hereditary titles have not been created (aside from the Royal Family) since Mrs Thatchers time so I doubt if this would be a feasable way of dealing with female succession.
Since hereditary peers no longer sit in the House of Lords there really is no motivation for a government to act on changing peerage succession laws and some may even feel it desirable to let hereditary peerages become extinct in cases where there is no male heir.

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Baroness of Books

If a title had to pass out of the family because there is no son, if such is the case currently, can a daughter now inherit it?

Currently if there is no male heir the title cannot be inherited by a daughter unless the original Letters Patent provide for succession by heirs general as opposed to heirs male. If there is no such provision the title eithers passes to another male heir or becomes extinct or at least dormant.

[Baroness of Books]

Yes, that's what I meant, that if LPs were now created for daughters to inherit, it would be possible to keep the title in the family and not become extinct. I was wondering how Lord Mountbatten's daughter had been able to inherit her father's title. Thanks for the explanation!

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Baroness of Books

Yes, that's what I meant, that if LPs were now created for daughters to inherit, it would be possible to keep the title in the family and not become extinct. I was wondering how Lord Mountbatten's daughter had been able to inherit her father's title. Thanks for the explanation!

In Mountbattens case a special remainder was included in his Letters Patent allowing for his daughters, and the heirs male of his daughters, to succeed to the peerage. If the males line descendents of Patricia and Pamela were to die out then the Mountbatten peerage would become extinct.

[Baroness of Books]

It was forward-thinking of Lord Mountbatten to do that, but unfortunate that this provision dies out eventually with male heirs. I wonder why the title couldn't be kept in perpetuity for his descendants regardless of gender?

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Baroness of Books

It was forward-thinking of Lord Mountbatten to do that, but unfortunate that this provision dies out eventually with male heirs. I wonder why the title couldn't be kept in perpetuity for his descendants regardless of gender?

As I understand it a special remainder was not unusual for war heroes without sons and in Louis Mountbattens case it was pretty certain that he would have no sons, but they kept to the general peerage rules for male succession. Womens rights were not exactly an issue in the 1940's, and the extinction of a peerage doesn't exactly impact on the life of the nation.

[Baroness of Books]

^^^^Thank you again; you've been very informative!

[Warren]

Sydney Morning Herald - 2 November 2011

Dr von der Osten: the German who would be queen of England

A homoeopathic doctor from Germany has been identified as the person who would be on the British throne if new rules on the royal succession had been adopted in the time of Queen Victoria. Friederike Thyra Marion Wilhelmine Dorothea von der Osten, 52, from Halle, a city in Germany, is descended from the long-serving monarch's eldest daughter Princess Victoria.

Speaking about succession, she said she had always known that if the rules were different she could have been queen - but that she could not see British people now accepting ''a German-educated person'' in the role.

Her heir apparent would be Felicitas Catharine Malina Johanna von Reiche, a 25-year-old marketing manager who lives in Berlin, who said she was ''easy-going'' about her family history, but probably knew more than most people about English royalty. Mother and daughter can trace their links to the British royal family back through Wilhelm II, the last German emperor and King of Prussia, who took his country into the First World War.

Dr von der Osten, who was born in Bonn in what was then West Germany, moved east after the fall of the Berlin Wall and has a medical practice in Halle. She said: ''I have always been aware of my place as descendant of Queen Victoria and that, if different succession rules had been observed, I could have had a right to the British throne. As a young girl, my mother met the Queen Mother but, as far as I know, she had no further contact. I have never met any members of the British royal family.

[Baroness of Books]

Thanks for that link, Warren; it's fascinating to know the "what could have beens" with another scenario if equal primogeniture existed back then. So very intriguing to ponder the possibilities.

[Thena]

It's an interesting possibility for what might have been. However, don't forget that Friederike's grandfather renounced his rights of succession for himself and his descendants when Kaiser Wilhelm II did not approve of his marriage.

[Iluvbertie]

Of course Vicky would never have been allowed to marry the Crown Prince of Prussia if she had been heiress apparent to the British throne.

[Sherlock221B]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

Of course Vicky would never have been allowed to marry the Crown Prince of Prussia if she had been heiress apparent to the British throne.

Fascinating...an heir apparent, and I mean this in theory only, would be able to wed who ever he chooses, but a heiress apparent would be restricted to only "certain" individuals. Theoretically of course...

[fearghas]

Originally Posted by Sherlock221B

Fascinating...an heir apparent, and I mean this in theory only, would be able to wed who ever he chooses, but a heiress apparent would be restricted to only "certain" individuals. Theoretically of course...

Well I doubt that the then Prince of Wales, future Edward VII would have been allowed to have married the heir to the throne of the Netherlands so that would abolish your theory

[Daphoenyx]

Originally Posted by fearghas

Well I doubt that the then Prince of Wales, future Edward VII would have been allowed to have married the heir to the throne of the Netherlands so that would abolish your theory

Exactly, it just goes both ways!