The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2221  
Old 08-04-2020, 07:34 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 14,035
The government were thankful for Wallis as they didn't have to reveal how incompetent Edward was.

My grandmother's uncle was in the cabinet in 1936 and he told her that the government were talking, as early as April, about how to remove him ... Wallis gave them that excuse but he was going to be removed by some means. How hadn't been discussed as far as I am aware as they knew that Wallis was going to land in their laps before the end of the year.

Don't forget that by April the government had stopped sending him the most sensitive documents simply because they couldn't trust him not to let that information reach countries Britain would prefer didn't have that information.
Reply With Quote
  #2222  
Old 08-04-2020, 07:49 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 3,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
My grandmother's uncle was in the cabinet in 1936 and he told her that the government were talking, as early as April, about how to remove him ... Wallis gave them that excuse but he was going to be removed by some means. How hadn't been discussed as far as I am aware as they knew that Wallis was going to land in their laps before the end of the year.
And nobody thought to inform the Duke of York?

I always have trouble believing that people were actively pushing for Edward VIII to go, simply because nobody seems to have said "well thank God he's gone" when he did go.
Reply With Quote
  #2223  
Old 08-04-2020, 08:17 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 14,035
Until I moved house about a decade ago I had my great-uncle's communication with my grandmother in which he was telling her the government's views on the King.

They didn't tell the Duke of York as they weren't sure they were going to continue with a monarchy. They were actively asking whether a monarchy was even the way to go.

A lot of the government said exactly that - they were happy to see him go. It meant they actually had a King that they could trust. Just because it wasn't reported in the media doesn't mean it wasn't said.

Sorry you don't believe me ... I am not a liar. For generations my grandmother's family were part of the government, and moved in royal circles (they still do). My grandmother's father was born on the 'wrong side of the blanket' but I am still in contact with that branch of the family as he was acknowledged as the son of his father, even if not given his name or raised by his father.
Reply With Quote
  #2224  
Old 08-04-2020, 09:40 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,339
Even when he was Prince of Wales, there were concerns about Edward VIII / Duke of Windsor. In the late 1920s, years before he ascended, Stanley Baldwin and Tommy Lascelles had a discussion where Lascelles said that it may be best if the then Prince of Wales broke his neck in a riding accident, and Baldwin's response was that he had similar thoughts. His father, George V said he would ruin himself. For all those concerns, it does not seem like there was enough resolve to actually do anything other than workarounds like not sending him sensitive papers. What galvanized those who felt Edward VIII was unfit was when Wallis Simpson filed for divorce. It was the prospect of Wallis being freed up to marry The King that caused those who had concerns about him to take real action. JMO.
Reply With Quote
  #2225  
Old 08-04-2020, 10:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 14,035
The government were talking about ways to remove him and then along came Wallis.

Would they have gone so far as assassination ... I am not sure but I wouldn't say no to that idea.

Forcing him to abdicate was the best option and they were looking at that ... and then along came Wallis and her second divorce. They would have found a way.
Reply With Quote
  #2226  
Old 08-04-2020, 11:19 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Coastal California, United States
Posts: 1,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Until I moved house about a decade ago I had my great-uncle's communication with my grandmother in which he was telling her the government's views on the King.

They didn't tell the Duke of York as they weren't sure they were going to continue with a monarchy. They were actively asking whether a monarchy was even the way to go.

A lot of the government said exactly that - they were happy to see him go. It meant they actually had a King that they could trust. Just because it wasn't reported in the media doesn't mean it wasn't said.

Sorry you don't believe me ... I am not a liar. For generations my grandmother's family were part of the government, and moved in royal circles (they still do). My grandmother's father was born on the 'wrong side of the blanket' but I am still in contact with that branch of the family as he was acknowledged as the son of his father, even if not given his name or raised by his father.
I donít think itís a case of believing or not believing you, I thought forum guidelines are to not make claims that you have personal/inside knowledge and I think thatís because thereís no way to verify whether your unnamed great Uncle was in a position to really be privy to events, and even if he was, thereís no way to know whether his private letters reporting events were accurate or colored by a personal bias or if he was just passing on gossip and conjecture. Youíre a long time poster and I understand that you believe the version of events you posted. However, thereís no need to take it personally when others chose to discount that version because thereís no verifiable source for it. Too bad you donít still have the letters - I have to believe one of Edward VIIIís biographers would have loved to see them!
Based on several biographies Iíve read, I agree there were serious concerns about Edward VIII having nothing to do with Wallis. Iíve even read that they considered going with a brother other than the Duke of York. I havenít read that they considered abolishing the monarchy - but I certainly havenít read every biography out there.
Reply With Quote
  #2227  
Old 08-04-2020, 11:46 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,137
I've read articles in newspapers several years ago which stated that TPTB were considering George Duke of Kent, the youngest Royal son of all, as King should the negotiations with Edward VIII end with abdication.

This was because he was youngish, personable (the scandals about his private life when single had been squashed) had an elegant wife, young son etc etc, while the Duke of York had a speech impediment, frail physical health and was said to have bad nerves.

However, it doesn't seem to have been anything other than a brief consideration. The line of succession had to be kept, the Abdication was a serious enough jar to the life of the nation and Empire without British people everywhere wondering what was wrong with the Duke of York that he should be passed over. Continuity was everything at that moment of national crisis.
Reply With Quote
  #2228  
Old 08-05-2020, 04:56 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
And nobody thought to inform the Duke of York?

I always have trouble believing that people were actively pushing for Edward VIII to go, simply because nobody seems to have said "well thank God he's gone" when he did go.
Nobody could have iwshed for such a trauma... Its not a small thing to get rid of a King or a monarchy....But I think there were certainly concerns about his behavour

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
I've read articles in newspapers several years ago which stated that TPTB were considering George Duke of Kent, the youngest Royal son of all, as King should the negotiations with Edward VIII end with abdication.

This was because he was youngish, personable (the scandals about his private life when single had been squashed) had an elegant wife, young son etc etc, while the Duke of York had a speech impediment, frail physical health and was said to have bad nerves.

However, it doesn't seem to have been anything other than a brief consideration. The line of succession had to be kept, the Abdication was a serious enough jar to the life of the nation and Empire without British people everywhere wondering what was wrong with the Duke of York that he should be passed over. Continuity was everything at that moment of national crisis.
Also, George had a male heir -And while not hte first consideration it was a plus point. I think that they examined all options when they had to consider finding a replacement for David. Maybe not including Pss Mary but they considered all the other sons and decided in the end to go with the Yorks. They were a happily married couple, they had 2 pretty little daughters, they were the next in line and it seemed best to go with continuity and the tried and tested, even if Bertie had the stammer and was a rather shy nervy person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher View Post
That would be the best case scenario.
What would be best case bout it? It was a title concocted for a very difficult and traumatic situation. The RF still remembers teh Abdication as an appalling problem... and are not likely to use that title again

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
Even when he was Prince of Wales, there were concerns about Edward VIII / Duke of Windsor. In the late 1920s, years before he ascended, Stanley Baldwin and Tommy Lascelles had a discussion where Lascelles said that it may be best if the then Prince of Wales broke his neck in a riding accident, and Baldwin's response was that he had similar thoughts. His father, George V said he would ruin himself. For all those concerns, it does not seem like there was enough resolve to actually do anything other than workarounds like not sending him sensitive papers. What galvanized those who felt Edward VIII was unfit was when Wallis Simpson filed for divorce. It was the prospect of Wallis being freed up to marry The King that caused those who had concerns about him to take real action. JMO.
I dont suppose they really wanted Edward to fall off his horse but even to say something like that does indicate that they were concerned that he was increasingly a loose cannon..
I think that George V probably half meant what he said, and maybe envisaged that Edward WOULD get fed up with being royal and might abdicate of his own accord.. or that he would be a lazy King and let the burden fall on the Yorks.

But at the time, in the 1930s, Marrying a twice divorced woman WAS a problem for a royal who was Governor of the Church.. and in itself was a reason for considering pressings or frocing him to abdicate..
Reply With Quote
  #2229  
Old 08-05-2020, 06:08 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,137
George V reportedly said to the PM Stanley Baldwin in 1934 'After I am dead the boy' (Edward Prince of Wales) 'will ruin himself within twelve months'. He much preferred that his steady second son and his wife should reign next and after that his beloved granddaughter Lilibet.
It didn't take twelve months for Edward to abdicate and King George probably just envisioned some scandal or other for the bachelor King with a married woman in the next reign, but he certainly had forebodings about his son's demeanour and attitude to his duties as well as his unmarried status.
Reply With Quote
  #2230  
Old 08-05-2020, 06:20 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
George V reportedly said to the PM Stanley Baldwin in 1934 'After I am dead the boy' (Edward Prince of Wales) 'will ruin himself within twelve months'. He much preferred that his steady second son and his wife should reign next and after that his beloved granddaughter Lilibet.
It didn't take twelve months for Edward to abdicate and King George probably just envisioned some scandal or other for the bachelor King with a married woman in the next reign, but he certainly had forebodings about his son's demeanour and attitude to his duties as well as his unmarried status.
Yes but still, I'm sure George did not want the whole trauma of an abdication. And it hadn't happened in the UK before.. Look what strain it put on Bertie and the queen mother when it DID happen.
George said (I think) something like he hoped his son wouldn't' marry and have children so that the throne would eventually go to Bertie and then Elizabeth. He did say something like "the boy will ruin himself in 12 months" but then again, fathers are often grumpy about their sons and feel they're not going to measure up. I think that when it happened.. the RF couldn't quite believe it, because it had never happened in the UK that a monarch had voluntarily abdicated..
Edward COUDL have probably worked something out, if he had been a bit more willing to talk and compromise.. Maybe a morganatic marriage could have been agreed or even secret private marriage.. I am sure that the royal circle mostly felt that this was so weird they could hardly believe it. Kings had had long term mistresses before, why couldn't' Edward settle for that? He was liked and popular, he was only asked to do ceremonial duties, why couldn't he find some way of sticking it out?
Reply With Quote
  #2231  
Old 08-05-2020, 05:35 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 3,695
It's probably all rooted in David never having wanted to be king, at all, ever, and not being able to reconcile himself to the hated "duty". He found a way out by tying himself to Wallis.

By doing the selfish thing he spared the rest of us, but even after getting what he wanted, it didn't seem to bring him as much happiness as he'd thought.
Reply With Quote
  #2232  
Old 08-06-2020, 06:37 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
It's probably all rooted in David never having wanted to be king, at all, ever, and not being able to reconcile himself to the hated "duty". He found a way out by tying himself to Wallis.

By doing the selfish thing he spared the rest of us, but even after getting what he wanted, it didn't seem to bring him as much happiness as he'd thought.
Never does...
I think he did what was right for him in that he was a loose cannon and probably would not have made a good wartime King.. to put it mildly. but it did impose a trauma on the rest of the family, and esp on his brother...
Having said that I dont think the PTB really wanted the whole drama of his leaving, but really there was no choice. He didn't want to do the duty part of being king.. He wanted to marry a woman who had had 2 divorces which was a problem at the time.. and who also had no idea of what royal life was like and might not have adjusted to being either queen or morganatic wife.
Reply With Quote
  #2233  
Old 08-06-2020, 10:48 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Never does...
I think he did what was right for him in that he was a loose cannon and probably would not have made a good wartime King.. to put it mildly. but it did impose a trauma on the rest of the family, and esp on his brother...
Having said that I dont think the PTB really wanted the whole drama of his leaving, but really there was no choice. He didn't want to do the duty part of being king.. He wanted to marry a woman who had had 2 divorces which was a problem at the time.. and who also had no idea of what royal life was like and might not have adjusted to being either queen or morganatic wife.
I recently read an article about Alan Lascelles, Private Secretary to Edward VIII for a long time as POW. He highlighted the unsuitability of Prince Edward over many years prior to his accession - his womanising, disregard for his father the King, lack of duty etc. Edward's abdication was undoubtedly pengineered by the British Establishment. He was a loose cannon demonstrating signs of meddling in politics, indiscreet, and latterly with a lover that was close to Nazi diplomats in the late 1930's. There are many interesting parallels with his second cousin Carol in Romania and all the talk around forming a King's Party in the run up to the abdication would have been disastrous with possible links to Mosleys BUF. Undoubtedly the abdication outcome was best for the country. Sad for Edward, a vain, selfish, spoilt prince that never really grew up or found a satisfying role in life.
Reply With Quote
  #2234  
Old 08-06-2020, 11:18 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius1 View Post
. There are many interesting parallels with his second cousin Carol in Romania.
That's an interesting point. Edward/David was dead set on marrying Wallis. What if he'd been happy for her to hang around as his mistress, like Madame Lupescu did for so many years? The Establishment couldn't have done much about it, but it would have been rather embarrassing.

The British monarch didn't have anything like as much power as the Romanian monarch did, and there's no way Edward could have declared personal rule - Charles I was the last one to try that here! - but, if the king were known to sympathise with certain political factions, it could have got very awkward.
Reply With Quote
  #2235  
Old 08-06-2020, 11:28 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,137
Below is the disillusioned Tommy Lascelles' view of King Edward VIII, the man he had served as Prince of Wales and later King. I posted the original article here about two years ago but can't find it.

https://newscolony.com/longstanding-...g-edward-viii/
Reply With Quote
  #2236  
Old 08-06-2020, 06:08 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
That's an interesting point. Edward/David was dead set on marrying Wallis. What if he'd been happy for her to hang around as his mistress, like Madame Lupescu did for so many years? The Establishment couldn't have done much about it, but it would have been rather embarrassing.

The British monarch didn't have anything like as much power as the Romanian monarch did, and there's no way Edward could have declared personal rule - Charles I was the last one to try that here! - but, if the king were known to sympathise with certain political factions, it could have got very awkward.
I don't really take Edwards political views too seriously or Wallis's.. And I'm sure that the Govt would not mind if he had Wal as a logn term mistress. The papers would keep stchum about it, the trouble was that he wanted to marry her...
Reply With Quote
  #2237  
Old 08-06-2020, 07:52 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 3,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Below is the disillusioned Tommy Lascelles' view of King Edward VIII, the man he had served as Prince of Wales and later King. I posted the original article here about two years ago but can't find it.

https://newscolony.com/longstanding-...g-edward-viii/
Not sure if it's in here, but David was at least briefly self-aware enough to apologize to Lascelles, once. "I suppose the fact of the matter is that I'm quite the wrong sort of person to be Prince of Wales."

Lascelles: "Which was so pathetically true that it almost melted me."

It can't have been easy being either of them.
Reply With Quote
  #2238  
Old 08-06-2020, 08:54 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,137
Another extract...

Legh [later, equerry to King George VI] warning me that plans were already afoot to liquidate [Wallisís second husband Ernest] Simpson (matrimonially speaking), and to set the Crown upon the leopardessís head.

Simpson, who was nothing worse than a nincompoop, I believe, was aware of this plot, and for some reason best known to himself had thought fit to communicate the details of it privily to [a fellow Freemason] the Lord Mayor of London, of all people ó an uneasy secret which the good man was naturally unable to keep to himself.

My impression is that the Prince of Wales was caught napping by his fatherís death; he expected the old man to last several years more, and he had, in all probability, already made up his mind to renounce his claim to the throne, and to marry Mrs S.

The comparatively sudden death of George V upset any such plans. But I believe that even then, he would have clung to them (he always hated changing any scheme he had evolved himself) but for the provisions of his fatherís will.

The will was read, to the assembled family, in the hall at Sandringham. I, of course, was not present; but, coming out of my office, I ran into him striding down the passage with a face blacker than any thunderstorm. He went straight to his room, and for a long time was glued to the telephone.
Reply With Quote
  #2239  
Old 08-07-2020, 12:19 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bordertown, Australia
Posts: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
That's an interesting point. Edward/David was dead set on marrying Wallis. What if he'd been happy for her to hang around as his mistress, like Madame Lupescu did for so many years? The Establishment couldn't have done much about it, but it would have been rather embarrassing.

The British monarch didn't have anything like as much power as the Romanian monarch did, and there's no way Edward could have declared personal rule - Charles I was the last one to try that here! - but, if the king were known to sympathise with certain political factions, it could have got very awkward.
He had no interest in duty or being King though...no respect for the position at all. I think he would have abdicated WITHOUT Wallis being on the scene...he would have just limped on a few months longer probably, returning a few more official papers with coffee rings on them and getting another cruise or two in while he could.
Reply With Quote
  #2240  
Old 08-07-2020, 12:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,265
I do wonder what Wallis would have made of what Lascelles & co were saying. I don't for one second imagine that she thought David/Edward would renounce the throne, either as Prince of Wales or as King, for her. I think she was genuinely fond of him, but presumably she expected that, like Freda Dudley Ward and Thelma Furness, she'd have her time as his mistress, with all the kudos that that entailed, and that hopefully she could remain part of his inner circle once he either found someone else or was pressurised into making a suitable marriage.


The Abdication was best for the country, but I wonder if Wallis felt that it was best for her.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, britain, duchess of windsor, duke of windsor, edward viii, king edward viii, wallis simpson


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Duchess of Windsor Jewellery micas Royal Jewels 221 08-17-2022 09:44 AM
The Duke of Windsor and Wallis Simpson - 3 June 1937 aussiechick12 Historical Royal Weddings 36 01-11-2022 05:29 PM
Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester and Miss Birgitte van Deurs: 8 July 1972 Scott Royal Weddings 17 08-15-2018 01:49 AM
Books on The Duke and Duchess of Windsor Duchess Royal Library 106 07-15-2013 12:49 PM
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester Current Events 1: October 2003-January 2006 A.C.C. Current Events Archive 132 01-13-2006 10:37 PM




Popular Tags
abdullah ii america arcadie arcadie claret austria british british royal family caribbean caroline charles iii claret congo current events danish royal family death duarte pio duchess of kent edward vii elizabeth ii emperor naruhito espana genealogy general news grace kelly grimaldi hamdan bin ahmed harry history identifying india introduction jewels jordan royal family king king charles king philippe king willem-alexander louis mountbatten matrilineal monaco monarchy mountbatten need help official visit order of precedence portugal prince christian princess of orange queen queen alexandra queen camilla queen elizabeth queen ena of spain queen margrethe ii queen mathilde queen maxima queen victoria republics restoration royal initials silk spain spanish history spanish royal family state visit switzerland tiaras visit william wine glass


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:42 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2023
Jelsoft Enterprises