THE KING’S PUCE

Evening Star, Issue 22596, 13 March 1937, Page 30

THE KING’S PUCE

TITLES AND REVENUES MmTmrrwM explained INHERITED RIGHTS On the death of a King the new Sovereign is proclaimed. “ The High and Mighty Prince is now, by the death of our late Sovereign of happy'mempry, become our only lawful and rightful’liege lord George the Fifth, 1)3 - the Grace of God, of Great (Britain, Ireland, and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, King, Defender of the Faith, Emperor of India ” (writes Sir John Marriott, in the ‘ Daily Mail ’)• Three points here demand attention and they are. all of recent origin. ■ The first addition to the Royal titles was made in 1876 when, under an Act of Parliament, initiated by Disraeli. Queen • Victoria assumed ■ the title of Empress of India. The Act was bitterly denounced at .the time as “ a characteristic bit of melodrama performed by a political charlatan.” - I have still in my possession a pamphlet of the day. f A Blot, on the Queen’s Head,’ but Disraeli had more imagination, and .much, more foresight than his critics. British India had passed from John Company to the Crown in 1858. The Royal Titles Act was the fitting and appropriate sequel to that transference of authority. BEYOND THE SEAS. The King, then, is Emperor of India. He is also King of the British Dominions Beyond the Seas. This title is assumed under the general power conferred by the Royal Titles Act of 1901, which authorised the Crown to make *ucb additions to the existing style as seemed fit. Of all the developments in the later years of Queen Victoria’s reign the most significant was the movement towards the closer union of the over-

seas parts of the Empire. Consequently King Edward VII. signalised his accession by an appropriate addition. The form ultimately adopted was “ and of the British Dominions Beyond the Seas.” But an alternative suggestion is, curiously enough, recalled by the inscription on our coinage. Britt: Omn ; Rex stands for “ King of all the (Britains ” rejected in 1901 in favour of the simpler addition One other change in the title was made as recently as 1927, under the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act of that year. The old style “ King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,” was held to be no longer appropriate. It was, indeed, most unhappily, a misnomer ‘ Since 1922 there had no longer been a United Kingdom: the Union was dissolved. The present style was accordsubstituted. POSITION SUMMARISED. The Act of 1927 was the first (since the Kings of this realm abrogated the title of King of France) which apparcircumscribed the immediate j jurisdiction of the Crown. The Act ol 3870 “entitled” Her Majesty's “to I make an addition to a Ro.val St3 - le and i Titles.” The Act of 1901 likewise authorised an addition “in recognition of His Majesty’s Dominions Beyond the Seas.” So matters remain. The King bears another title: but it is not “ ro.val.” He is Duke ot Lancaster —a title which carries with it a large revenue. His eldest son is born Duke of Cornwall, and as Duke enjoys a princely income. But apart from private resources (which may or may not exist) the King’s revenue depends on an Act of Parliament which it is customary to pass at tlie beginning of each new reign, and which must be passed within six months of the death of the previous Sovereign. The history of the Royal revenue can be briefly summarised. In early days no distinction was drawn between the King and the State —betw-een “royal” revenue and “national ” revenue. Down to the seventeenth century the. King bore the whole charge of government and administration. A MODERN ATMOSPHERE. With the accession of the Tudors we j get into a modern atmosphere. Henry Vlf. was a first-rate man of business, and accumulated a huge fortune, which was quickly’ dissipated by his gay and extravagant successor. Parliamentary grants and “ benevolences ” were needed to sustain the monarch and cany out his policy. Queen Elizabeth was more careful, not to say (as her enemies said) parsimonious in the extreme. But the critical

r I change came with the accession of the - j Stuarts. > i It is curious to reflect that but for : i tlie discovery of America, and the con- : i sequent increase in the production of i the precious metals, we might never i have heard of the “ Puritan ” Revolu- : tion. But so it was. The value of money rapidly fell; the expenses of ' the Crown and the Government rapidly increased ; The Stuart kings necessarily went i to Parliament for supplies; Parliament : would only’ make them on' conditions; i the conditions were distasteful to the Crown, and revolution ensued. The silver mines had produced it. After the Restoration, the House of Commons successfully maintained its exclusive right to determine “as to the method, measure, and time of every’ tax,” hut it was only after the Revolution of 1688 that a clear distinction began to be drawn between the expenses of the Crown and the ex- , ponditure ot the State. . Under successive Sovereigns the dis- ! tinction became more and more pre- . cise. . . , Tim Civil List, as it came to he , called, w:(s gradually relieved of nil [ charges which were properly national ‘ or parliamentary, but was, at the i same time, greatly diminished m amount. CIVIL LIST CHANGES. Queen Victoria on her accession com- , p'eted tlie process and' received a Civil List of £385,000 a year. _ This was raised on the accession of Edward VII. ' to £470.000, but the increment w;as more than compensated by tlie increased revenue from Crown lands. ■ When Queen Victoria surrendered the latter revenue it amounted to omy £245,000 a year. The nation now receives from that same source a net revenue of more than £1,300.000 a year. We have, therefore, made an exceedingly good bargain with tlie Crown. It costs the nation nothing. ; The Civil List, fixed l on the accession of the present King at only £433,100, represents barely a third of tlie present value of the “ lands ” surrendered by his recent predecessors on the Throne. But that is not all. The King docs not draw all the revenue appropriated to the Crown under the Civil List Act of this vear. j His income as Duke of Lancaster is, of course, unaffected by Act of Parliament and amounts (net) to seme £90.000 a year. Moreover, so long as King Edward VIII. remains unmarried lie ivae not to receive £40,000 a year which under the Civil List would come to him_ on marriage. Ho also with characteristic generosity agreed to pay an additional £25.000 a year to the Heir Presumptive out of tlie revenues of the Duchy

of 'Cornwall so long as they continued to suffice, and to relieve the istate of a portion of payments to the Privy Purse out of the same source. . • On abdication, if. a King has private property and a private income, he, 01 course, like any other citizen retails them. But what happens to the Duchy of Cornwall and to the Duchy of Lancaster 'i . . ■ The Duchy of Lancaster has been, since the fourteenth century, an appanage of the Crown, and the estates and “ jurisdiction attaching thereto descend with the Crown. Abdication involves their surrender. J REVENUES A BIRTHRIGHT. Cornwall was created a Duchy by Edward 111. for the benefit of his eldest son. To. the eldest son of the Sovereign its revenues belong as ; a birthright. Lacking a son, they lire vested in the Sovereign ; but plainly: a Sovereign from whom they could not be divorced. It is the duty of Parliament to make suitable provision for him. But it is under no legal obligation to do so; it would be an act of grace. ■. So much for the King’s revenues. It may be well here to restate the precise title of the Sovereigns of the House of Windsor. This rests on statute. By the Act of Settlement (1700-1701) the Crown, failing heirs to William 111. and the Princess Anne, was settled on the heirs of the body .of Sophia, daughter of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia (who was a daughter ■of .lames L), and widow of the Elector of Hanover. There were no heirs to William HI. or Queen Anne, and the. Crown, therefore, passed on the death of the latter to George L, the son of the Electress Sophia From him the House of Windsor descends, and on the Act of Settlement the title of the King rests. One thing only could have debarred his succession, or could, after his accession, vacate the Throne and absolve the people from their allegiance: that is profession of the Roman Faith. Should he abjure it in favour .of Roman Catholicism the Crown would automatically pass to the next heir—being a Protestant—precisely as if a demise of the Crown had occurred. A formal abdication operates in exactly the same way as decease, though it may be desirable to pass a statute, declaratory or otherwise, to regulate the sueressio n. I hat statute, of course, requires the assent of the new King. Were an abdication conditional a statute would be not merely desirable, but imperative. Especially would (h:« be necessary if abdication involved any financial proi vision for Ibc departing Kimr.