Duke and Duchess of Windsor (1894-1972) and (1895-1986)

[Osipi]

I agree that David should have done the right thing and with abdication, handed over the private residences that pass from monarch to monarch in the family to Bertie. It was David's choice not to remain as the monarch but yet he sure felt that the private residences passed to him as he became monarch were his eh?

I'm just happy that Bertie had the monies and the smarts to buy these residences back to remain within the royal family. Should David had held onto them, who knows who would own them and be living in them now. Any guesses? I don't remember reading anything about who David and Wallis' heirs were.

[Pranter]

I don't think they had any heirs except their families since neither had children. Although I'd guess that they had private bequests for some things.


LaRae

[Skippyboo]

The Pasteur Institute was the main beneficiary of the Duchess's estate

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/05/02/wo...ype=collection


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[CyrilVladisla]

Did the Duchess have any Warfield relatives residing in the United States of America?

[Curryong]

I remember reading, I can't remember where, perhaps Madame Suzanne Blum's memoirs of the Windsors, that in the Duchess's widowhood and old age Earl Mountbatten would apparently visit her quite a lot. (This was of course before she got dementia.)

At first she welcomed chatting about life in the old days but it seems that gradually talk would turn to what would happen to the Duke's of Windsor's possessions of historical interest which he had taken from Windsor etc (such as robes, personal awards and Orders etc) and the Duchess agreed that they should be returned.

Later conversations turned to her will, and to money bequests, and to her jewellery, much of it given to her by Edward at the time when he was Prince of Wales and King in the 1930's. (Perhaps some pieces had been made from older jewellery in the Royal vaults? Also I believe Queen Mary left her son some jewellery from her own collection.)

It seemed Mountbatten talked with a great deal of pleasure about his great-nephew. Perhaps the inference was that the next King would love items of such provenance.

Mountbatten must have pressed too hard however, as eventually Wallis wrote to him stating that the conversations they'd been having about her demise and who she was going to leave things to depressed her and she would rather not speak of it with him any more. So that was the end of Mountbatten's attempt to get those jewels back in Royal hands, though I believe some were returned anyway.

[Mermaid1962]

Some of the jewels were supposed to have gone to Princess Michael of Kent.

[Curryong]

Yes, I believe Marina of Kent and later Alexandra and Prince Michael of Kent did keep regular contact with the Duke and Duchess, and during the 1960's they visited them. When Prince Michael married Marie-Christine he took her to see Wallis while they were on their honeymoon. The Duchess was charmed by her and gave wedding gifts including an absolutely fabulous ruby brooch and cabochon diamond earrings from her collection. I believe these items were known 1930s pieces and Marie-Christine had to be a bit careful about wearing them at family get-togethers in the presence of the Queen Mother. She also left pieces of jewellery to other members of the Kent family including Alexandra as a Thankyou for their kindness to her.

Madame Blum, it was alleged, isolated the Duchess from many old friends, including her previously ever-present pugs. Much later on, items from the mansion and jewellery collection were sold, it was said without permission.

An independent assessment had valued Sandringham and Balmoral at £25,000. The new King couldn't pay outright and negotiations stretched until 1939 and the outbreak of war. The rather convoluted yearlyl 'party-plan' to pay for Balmoral and Sandringham (which had begun in wartime with tax free War Bonds plus a top up by King George) was continued by the present Queen on a reduced scale, via a yearly allowance to the elderly widowed Duchess, until in 1980 the Queen assumed responsibility for all the by then senile and bed-ridden Duchess's household and medical expenses. These were considerable by that time as she required 24/7 nursing.

[Queen Claude]

I firmly believe that the right thing happened when Edward abdicated but I don't think that the Yorks were as hapless as some may think. Edward not inviting the Archbishop of Canterbury to Balmoral was a slight against the Archbishop, but the Yorks then inviting him to Birkhall could be seen as a slight against the King.


IMO Edward was shady for pleading poverty and not disclosing that he had accumulated wealth as the Duke of Cornwall, but I don't think that he was unreasonable to want to be compensated for turning over Balmoral and Sandringham to his brother. Also even though Edward inherited Balmoral and Sandringham, George V did not bequeath any of his personal fortune to Edward but he did leave money/assets to Bertie/George VI and presumably his other children.

[Ish]

Leaving money/assets to the younger children but not the heir is actually fairly common within the BRF.

The heir automatically gets a lot - in fact the vast majority of everything goes to the heir. Sandringham and Balmoral, the palaces and castles, the royal collection, the income from the Duchy of Lancaster, even possibly still the income from the Duchy of Cornwall (which Edward would have kept as King, having no son).

[Queen Claude]

Upon Edward's abdication George VI in effect became the eldest son, and, except Balmoral and Sandringham, all the titles, assets and income streams noted transferred to George VI upon him becoming King-Emperor, and on top of that he had still had his "younger child" inheritance from his father.

[Ish]

But lacking a crystal ball, there is no way George V could have anticipated that Edward VIII would give up his inheritance like that.

[Pranter]

I think his father was aware something would happen, little he could do about it ahead of time. He famously said Edward would ruin himself within a year of his (George's) death. And he did.


LaRae

[CyrilVladisla]

Did Queen Alexandra leave any finances to Edward VIII?

[Curryong]

I don't think Alexandra left money to her children and grandchildren. Those were days long before trust funds etc. She herself had a generous yearly allowance as the widow of a King Emperor, but I certainly don't think she had millions to leave. As a Princess of Denmark before her marriage, Alexandra had little money of her own.

She did however have objects de art like the fabulous Faberge eggs her sister and brother in law had gifted her over many years, and wonderful jewellery. I know she left some jewels including an emerald necklace to Edward (David) for the use of his wife, whom she naturally assumed would one day be Queen. I don't know whether some of the pieces she left were converted to Wallis's use or not.

[CyrilVladisla]

Prince Edward, Prince of Wales met United States Army Major Generals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEoKNk-lRBE

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by eya

Duke of Windsor had a love child with a Parisian seamstress – and paid to keep her silence, new book claims

This sounds credible to me. The pictures alone are suggestive.

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

Don't forget the money and paying the school fees at a private boarding school and continuing to pay the child for over 50 years.

Without ever using the term 'father' the acknowledgement was understood locally that the child was Edward's and that he was ensuring she was supported without being allowed to call him 'Dad'.

If Edward hadn't slept with the mother why would he pay for the next 50+ years?

Fascinating story. I believe it.

[Duc_et_Pair]

This was an era long before the Welfare State. Royals and aristocrats often promised to pay for the education of children of their faithful servants, or give a pension or a grace and favour house to retired staff and the like. Or simply give support to widowers of tennants living on their estate whose husbands have been killed on the battlefields in France, in 1914-1918.

The fact that a royal person has supported someone for a longer time is immediately sensationalized by the Daily Mail and that sort of media. The fact that the person has always been undercover and that nothing from the millions of the late Duke of Windsor was claimed by his alleged offspring says enough.

The title (The Man Who Should Be King) already reveals the nonsense. An extramarital royal child (in old times we called this a bastard child) never is in line of succession and never can become a royal successor.

[Blog Real]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVZ6W5S-EMo

[Duc_et_Pair]

I liked the interaction of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor with the royal family. In Technicolor:

https://youtu.be/roZyok-oTBU

[Nico]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

I liked the interaction of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor with the royal family. In Technicolor:

https://youtu.be/roZyok-oTBU

And not even a curtsey for "Cookie" ...