King Charles and Queen Camilla

[Sister Morphine]

I think during the news of engagement, the clarence house wanted to soften some attitude towards Charles and Camilla's marriage. Then they announced that Camilla will not be called Princess of Wales or Queen. However later the news turned out that Camilla is legally Princess of Wales or Queen in the future which sounds like hiding some facts or misleading some facts. Camilla will be Queen Consort when Charles becomes King Even Camilla really not wanting to be called Queen, she will learn to accept the fact that marrying a heir to the throne will become Queen. Basically Camilla will never do anything to block Charles's rights to inherit the throne and she will compromise finally because that is the way the tradition set.

Wait, did Camilla publicly object to being called Princess of Wales/Queen Consort? Because that's what it sounds like you just said.

 

[Skydragon]

It really doesn't matter what anyone on here says, when the time comes, the decision will be made by the government of the time and the British public.

Someone mentioned outrage? Dear, I hope not. If there is, surely it will be the traditionalist factions who are as intolerable to change as the IHA of Japan.

I object to being compared to the IHA, it will not just be the traditionalist factions, but people who accept that Charles has the same rights as anyone else to be married to the woman he loves and believe she has every right to be known and accepted as Queen Consort when he becomes King.

 

[Madame Royale]

I object to being compared to the IHA

Perhaps it was not 'the' best comparison.

It really doesn't matter what anyone on here says, when the time comes, the decision will be made by the government of the time and the British public.

Good thing I hold a British passport then

 

[Frothy]

Branch,

Legally, she cannot style herself HRH The Princess Consort because she is not a princess and The King has to make her one. How do you make a Queen Consort a princess?

You have yet to adduce any evidence for this statement. I say it is not so. Was legislation required to create Albert Prince Consort? Or to make Philip a Prince of the UK? The only previous consort to a Queen Regnant had been known as King Consort - both in England and in Scotland. All I see needed here is some letters patent conferring on Camilla the title of PC and saying she will use that instead of her legal status as queen (which would remain, but be irrelevant since she would be known as a princess all her life).

The rest of your post, with all due respect - I'm sure you were trying to be helpful - told me stuff I already know. I am well aware of the order of precedence in the UK and what is due to wives and divorced wives and the reason a royal duchess is a Princess etc.

None of it addressed my point re: Princess Alice. Alice was a princess but only through marriage. To give her the use of her first name gave her a style reserved for born princesses, as you know, and it implied, as you know, that she was an OWN right princess of the UK. There was no precedent for that. Now, not only was legislation not brought forward for this odd title, letters patent were not even issued. The will of the Queen was enough.

I say that the only legislation required here is to deny Camilla the legal status of queen not that she should use the style of HRH the Princess Consort.

Buckingham Palace has already said this will happen. I do not know why there is doubt about it on this forum when Buckingham Palace has confirmed it!

 

[Frothy]

Jo of Palatine, I fully agree. I want to see Camilla as Queen. I think there is a dangerous complacency on TRF assuming the palace didn't really mean it when they said she'll be known as Princess Consort. Unless something happens to change it, she will. Legally queen, known as PC.

I am mostly a fan of Charles and a tremendous fan of Camilla.

 

[branchg]

The Palace never said it would happen. They said it was "intended" that Camilla would be known as Princess Consort.

The Department of Constitutional Affairs confirmed shortly before the wedding that Camilla would be the legal wife of Prince Charles and share all of his titles and rank. When he becomes King, they confirmed legislation would be required for Camilla to be known as Princess Consort.

It is a political matter for a future Government and Parliament to consider when the time comes. If public opposition remains strong against Camilla being Queen (which I highly doubt will be the case), then legislation will be passed allowing The King to create her HRH The Princess Consort instead.

 

[branchg]

You have yet to adduce any evidence for this statement. I say it is not so. Was legislation required to create Albert Prince Consort? Or to make Philip a Prince of the UK? The only previous consort to a Queen Regnant had been known as King Consort - both in England and in Scotland. All I see needed here is some letters patent conferring on Camilla the title of PC and saying she will use that instead of her legal status as queen (which would remain, but be irrelevant since she would be known as a princess all her life).

Frothy,

The husband of a reigning Queen does not share her rank and can be granted any title or rank the Sovereign decides, short of being King.

In the case of Philip, he was created a Royal Highness by George VI and granted the titles of Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich the night before his wedding to Princess Elizabeth. He relinquished his title as a Prince of Greece & Denmark when he was naturalized to British citizenship as Lt. Philip Mountbatten, RN.

In 1957, The Queen created Philip a Prince of the UK with precedence ahead of all princes of the blood royal, including Prince Charles. At that point, he became HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

Unlike a male consort, the wife of the King shares his rank and is Queen. To hold a lesser rank requires an Act of Parliament because there has never been a morganatic marriage for the King. The precedents must be established and defined constitutionally because the Crown may not act independently of Parliament on matters of law.

The King cannot issue letters patent creating his wife a princess of the UK without parliamentary consent, as was made clear by the Department of Constitutional Affairs before the wedding.

 

[Madame Royale]

I thought this would be an interesting source to add to the discussion if I may

Taken from TimesOnline and dated: March 21, 2005

Camilla Parker Bowles will automatically become Queen when the Prince of Wales succeeds to the throne unless there is a change in the law, the Government confirmed tonight.

The Department for Constitutional Affairs admitted legislation would be needed no matter what Camilla wished to call herself when Charles becomes King, to prevent this happening.

It is believed to be the first time that the Government has acknowledged this stance on the record.

Clarence House has previously insisted that the Government agreed with its view, taken from legal advice, that it was only a convention for the wife of the King to be known as Queen.

The Prince's aides did admit, when the royal engagement was announced, that legislation might be needed to tidy the issue up later on.

Mrs Parker Bowles will be known as the Duchess of Cornwall after her marriage at Windsor on April 8 and intends to take the title Princess Consort when the Prince accedes the throne.

A Department for Constitutional Affairs spokeswoman confirmed that legislation would be needed for Camilla not to become Queen automatically on Charles's succession.

"I think traditionally that's probably the case because in all similar circumstances in the past in past royal marriages that is what has happened," said the spokeswoman.

"But I think she is not going to be referred to as Queen, she will be referred to as the Princess Consort." Asked about the position of other countries where the Prince of Wales would become head of state on his succession, the spokeswoman replied: "I think you are right in thinking it would require legislation for her not to be Queen."

Tony Blair's official spokesman said: "The position at the moment is limited to what the title would be on her marriage. In terms of any future events, let's wait until future events arise."

On the question of whether Mrs Parker Bowles would automatically become Queen in the absence of legislation, the spokesman added: "I'm not disputing what you have said."

A Clarence House spokesman said tonight: "With any legal situation there are always different views.

"If the Government said legislation would be needed it wouldn't be a problem. It can easily be done in the Civil List Act. "This is something which is a long way in the future, we hope."

Earlier the Government confirmed that the marriage will not be "morganatic", which means that the couple's decision not to call her Queen Camilla will have no legal standing.

Hmm I wonder what 'their' concept of 'easily' is. Perhaps, 'you deal with it and let us know the outcome.'

It is my understanding that the civil list is revised at every accession is it not? So, this does provide the opportunity to elucidate the legal pose and push forward with such legislation. Whether or not it happens of course, is another matter.

I just generally find it, a most interesting circumstance.

 

[Skydragon]

Perhaps it was not 'the' best comparison. Good thing I hold a British passport then

No it was not. Traditionalists would find it hard to cope with such concepts as divorce and remarriage, I like many others think it is wonderful that people can realize their mistake and move on.
It will not be the traditionalist factions who are intolerable to change who would be outraged at any attempt to demote Camilla to PC, but ordinary people who have realised what an absolute treasure, Charles and the UK has in Camilla.

Many traditions should be upheld, but there are also many which should be disgarded (such as a male child taking precedence over his older sister/s).

There are many British passport holders, I'm afraid that doesn't make you a member of the British public and quite possibly by the time it is up for debate, Australia will no longer even be part of the commonwealth.

 

[Madame Royale]

I like many others think it is wonderful that people can realize their mistake and move on.

but there are also many which should be disgarded (such as a male child taking precedence over his older sister/s).

I agree.

I'm afraid that doesn't make you a member of the British public and quite possibly by the time it is up for debate, Australia will no longer even be part of the commonwealth.

With all due respect, you are not aware of where I have resided, how long for, or how frequently I may visit Britain.

There are many British passport holders, I'm afraid that doesn't make you a member of the British public and quite possibly by the time it is up for debate, Australia will no longer even be part of the commonwealth.

And as a member of the British public, I object to your comment for I have as much of a legal say as you.

As for Australia...

When Australia becomes a republic the governing body will be that of a federal republic and shall retain its position within the Commonwealth of Nations as a sovereign governing independency, so to say Australia shall no longer be part of the Commonwealth is entirely inaccurate.

Furthermore, an Australian republic has no concequence on my British citizenship and there is very little likeliness that by the time Charles is King, that Australia would have become a republic.

 

[Frothy]

Branchq, the husband of a queen regnant can be and has been King in this country. King Philip II of Spain was King Consort of England. Lord Darnley married Mary, Queen of Scots and became King Consort of Scotland. It is up to the Soverign. (Practically of course Prl't can object as they did with Albert and the monarch will have to take account of their views).

It is simply not necessary to create new legislation for this matter. The Dept of Constitutional Affairs did not say - at least as I recall - that legislation would be required to make Camilla Princess Consort. It said, and this is different, that legislation would be required to deny her the rank of Queen.

It is only your assertion that she could not be legally queen and yet, with letters patent, be made Princess Consort as well and be known by the lesser title, without legislation.

It has happened time and time again.

The helpful post by Mme Royale gives the position:

A Department for Constitutional Affairs spokeswoman confirmed that legislation would be needed for Camilla not to become Queen automatically on Charles's succession.

"I think traditionally that's probably the case because in all similar circumstances in the past in past royal marriages that is what has happened," said the spokeswoman.

"But I think she is not going to be referred to as Queen, she will be referred to as the Princess Consort." Asked about the position of other countries where the Prince of Wales would become head of state on his succession, the spokeswoman replied: "I think you are right in thinking it would require legislation for her not to be Queen."

Exactly what I've been saying over and over. Legislation: needed to take away the rank of queen. Not needed for her to use a lesser title granted her by letters patent.

 

[Skydragon]

With all due respect, you are not aware of where I have resided, how long for, or how frequently I may visit Britain.

It is not a case of how often you visit, but whether you are resident in this country and of course for how long.

 

[branchg]

King Philip of Spain and King William of Orange were already King and Sovereign of their native lands. When they married a reigning Queen of England, they retained their rank with the consent of Parliament.

The quote from the Department of Constitutional Affairs is confirmation that Camilla cannot be anything but Queen without legislation being passed. If she is legally Queen Consort, she cannot be styled as a Princess without Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations passing an Act clarifying her rank as the wife of the King.

 

[Elspeth]

Well, I suppose they can call her whatever they want. I mean, without legislation to prevent it she'll be HM The Queen Consort, just like Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was before George VI died. But she can call herself whatever she likes - Princess Consort, Bozo the Clown, whatever. However, without this legislation, she'd have to be referred to in official or legal documents as HM Queen Camilla because that's the only title she'd legally hold.

 

[branchg]

It's a game the Government played until Members of Parliament demanded legal clarification of the marriage and her rank and titles. Constitutionally, there is no precedent for the wife of the King being styled a Princess of the UK despite being Queen Consort.

The King would have to issue letters patent creating this title and defining her precedence in the kingdom. Since there is no legal foundation for the letters patent, the Government would have to seek consent from Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations before the Crown could act.

What do you think the chances are of getting approval from Parliament and the Commonwealth for the wife of the King being a princess instead of Queen? Next to zero.

 

[Madame Royale]

It is not a case of how often you visit, but whether you are resident in this country and of course for how long.

Again, as I have already stated, I have as much of a legal right as you (a reflection of my living circumstances) so please dont insinuate otherwise

 

[Madame Royale]

But she can call herself whatever she likes - Princess Consort, Bozo the Clown, whatever.

Thats quite funny, Elspeth

without this legislation, she'd have to be referred to in official or legal documents as HM Queen Camilla because that's the only title she'd legally hold

I thought so. You answered a question which I had not as of yet asked.lol. Thanks

 

[ysbel]

Well, I suppose they can call her whatever they want. I mean, without legislation to prevent it she'll be HM The Queen Consort, just like Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was before George VI died. But she can call herself whatever she likes - Princess Consort, Bozo the Clown, whatever. However, without this legislation, she'd have to be referred to in official or legal documents as HM Queen Camilla because that's the only title she'd legally hold.

That's so true, Elspeth.

Somehow I don't see Camilla calling herself Bozo though!

Seriously though, I don't think Charles and Camilla will try to pull the 'Queen but known as Princess Consort' routine. They were able to divert public opinion by referring to her as Duchess of Cornwall but now that everyone knows she's actually Princess of Wales, I'm a bit sceptical of the public accepting Camilla as Princess Consort when they know she's actually Queen and as you say, she'd have to be referred to as the Queen on public documents.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

What do you think the chances are of getting approval from Parliament and the Commonwealth for the wife of the King being a princess instead of Queen? Next to zero.

As I stated before this step would be so bad, so very bad for the public image of king Charles that I don't believe it either.

 

[Frothy]

Branch,

This is what I mean when I say people are deluding themselves on TRF.

The chances are not "less than zero". Most unfortunately, they are over 90%.

It has already been announced from Buckingham Palace that the queen will be known as HRH the Princess Consort.

Elspeth,

Surely it's simply a matter of issuing some letters patent, gazetting the queen with the title HRH the Princess Consort, and then having her known by the lesser title for the whole of her life. In which case, almost everybody in the world will think of her as a Princess and her queenly status will be a mere legal footnote.

Edited to add: in terms of "no precedent", it does not matter.

There is no precedent for the Princess of Wales to be known by a lesser title
There is no precedent for a Princess of the UK to be known as a mere daughter of an Earl
There is no precdent for the wife of a royal duke to be styled as if a Princess of the blood
There was no precedent for the husband of a queen regnant to be known as Prince Consort until Parl't insisted the earlier sole precedent of King Consort (in England) would be overturned

Precedent quite frankly is out the window in this wretched mess of a situation. Buckingham Palace has declared what the position will be and I remain confdent that they are the authority on the matter. Without intervention Camilla will be HRH the Princess Consort, a dreadful and most unwelcome first.

 

[Frothy]

Branch Q said

King Philip of Spain and King William of Orange were already King and Sovereign of their native lands. When they married a reigning Queen of England, they retained their rank with the consent of Parliament.

Please can we not introduce red herrings. William III was not a King Consort but took the throne in his own right and can be left out of the discussion.

Philip of Spain was most emphatically NOT King of Spain when he married Mary I in 1554. Nor was Darnley any kind of a King when upon marriage to Mary I of Scotland he was named "King of Scots" as King Consort. Philip was made King Consort of England by Mary, and as a gift and only upon his marriage, his father gave him some courtesy kingly titles like "King of Jerusalem' and other non-real places, rather like Napoleon's infant son being called 'The King of Rome'.

If she is legally Queen Consort, she cannot be styled as a Princess without Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations passing an Act clarifying her rank as the wife of the King.

This is absolutely false. The only act needed would be to deny her her rank as queen. If she is gazetted with a secondary title and chooses to use it no other legislation is required whatsoever.

 

[Frothy]

Another thread in this section had an interesting article on Camillas from yesterday's times

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2346450,00.html

“It appears that shortly after King George IV had acceded in 1820, the Cabinet, whilst refusing his request that they introduce special legislation enabling him to divorce Queen Caroline, did suggest that she might agree to use some title other than Queen (Duchess of Cornwall was apparently suggested) and to forgo the legal rights and privileges of a Queen,” Dr Cretney said.

It is not so outrageous that the wife of a King be known by a lesser title nor would Parl't or the public think it so.

 

[Avalon]

It has already been announced from Buckingham Palace that the queen will be known as HRH the Princess Consort.

Not exactly, Frothy. It has been announced that when Charles becomes King, it is intended that Camilla will prefer to be known as Princess Consort.
That word tells it all. Imho this announcement was made just in case the Duchess of Cornwall will not be accepted by public and to calm the Diana-supporters.
However, we can see that Camilla was very much accepted. In just 1+ year she has become a rightful member (in the eyes of public) and a true asset to the BRF. This is based not only on my opinion (though I do think so) but on numerous surveys, which show that Camilla has really been accepted and enjoys love and support among the British public.

Quote from the official website of the Prince of Wales

It is intended that Mrs Parker Bowles should use the title HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne.

Now compare this with the following quote from the same article

Mrs Parker Bowles will use the title HRH The Duchess of Cornwall after marriage.

http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/news/2005/02.feb/marriage.php

While The Duchess is also Princess of Wales, they announced that she will use the title of the Duchess of Cornwall, which she did.
In case of the Queen/Princess Consort thing, it has been announced that it was intended to be used by the then Queen.

 

[Skydragon]

Not exactly.......
...... In case of the Queen/Princess Consort thing, it has been announced that it was intended to be used by the then Queen.

As you say Avalon, it is all in the wording.

 

[Frothy]

Avalon,

Yes, of course there is wiggle room. There is even wiggle room to toss out the current breach with precedent and style her normally instead of this nonsense with using a lower title.

But the fact is that she will be known as the Princess Consort unless Charles steps up and says otherwise.

What posters here don't seem to understand is the controversy has all passed for politicians at this point. It's been announced, the breach with precedent is operating with Louise and Camilla, and the sky has not fallen in. Right now the position is: legally queen, known as Princess Consort with an HRH, and the only thing needed for the latter are some letters patent - not a law.

To give her the style and title of Queen may be what seems normal to us royal watchers on this site, but it would be hugely controversial with the British public who are all expecting her to be known and titled differently from her husband as is presently the case.

To change this awful status quo Charles has to step up. Otherwise she's Princess Consort and her queenship is a legal anomaly, little more than a Trivial Pursuit answer. Does anybody outside of TRF think of Louise as a Princess? They do not.

 

[Frothy]

I think the public would appreciate Charles bravery if he simply changed the position and said he loves her and that's it.

People respect guts.

 

[love_cc]

Who knows the future? Look back and how we can expect Prince Charles married Camilla finally. IMO, Camilla will be accept as Queen Camilla finally. She is devoted to Charles and makes him relaxed and happy and she has tries her best to adapt to the royal life. Now Queen Camilla may sound controversial,but after ten or more years, do you still insisit? Charles is born to be King and his wife is destined to be the Queen. Peopel should learn to appreciate Camilla's strengths which helps to have a better King.
I am not sure about your feeling, but for me HRH Princess Consort will become a laughing stock for British Royal family when Charles succeeds his mother. He is a man and he loves his wife but he cannot protect her to get what she deserves. Kingship should have his diginity and protect his wife to share equal right, I assume, is part of the diginity.

 

[Laviollette]

She will be accepted as Queen but she will not be beloved I don't think. In any case she will be Queen if Charles becomes King and there's no way around it except the extraordinary act of Parliament to strip her of her rank. And she is HRH The Princess of Wales right now because she is married to HRH The Prince of Wales.

 

[Skydragon]

But the fact is that she will be known as the Princess Consort unless Charles steps up and says otherwise.

What posters here don't seem to understand is the controversy has all passed for politicians at this point. It's been announced,

No it has never been announced, it has been suggested that Camilla will use a lesser title - it will never happen, IMO.

To give her the style and title of Queen may be what seems normal to us royal watchers on this site, but it would be hugely controversial with the British public who are all expecting her to be known and titled differently from her husband as is presently the case..

It would be more controversial to the British public if she were denied her rightful title, IMO.

 

[Skydragon]

She will be accepted as Queen but she will not be beloved I don't think. In any case she will be Queen if Charles becomes King and there's no way around it except the extraordinary act of Parliament to strip her of her rank. And she is HRH The Princess of Wales right now because she is married to HRH The Prince of Wales.

I think you are wrong, as time passes she will become more and more popular and not just because she is the wife of the Prince of Wales. She has many more supporters now because of her quite strength and dignity. Her 100% support for her husband and their children, for her silence. I don't wish to start WW3 but his former wife was not beloved by the entire population of the UK, a fact that sometimes gets missed.