Notes and Queries, Vol. V, Number 131, May 1, 1852: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc. — John Shaqi
Notes and Queries, Vol. V, Number 131, May 1, 1852: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.Various
History
Notes and Queries, Vol. V, Number 131, May 1, 1852: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
Your correspondent may be referred to _Blackstone_ (Introd. §4.), where
is a very interesting account of the Palatinate and Duchy of Lancaster.
We are there told that on his succession to the crown, Henry IV. was too
prudent to suffer his Duchy of Lancaster to be united to the crown, and
therefore he procured an act of parliament ordaining that this duchy and
his other hereditary estates--
"Should remain to him and his heirs for ever, and should remain,
descend, be administered, and governed in like manner as if he had
never attained the regal dignity."
In the first of Edward IV., Henry VI. was attainted, and the Duchy of
Lancaster declared forfeited to the crown. At the same time an act was
passed to continue the county palatine, and to make the same part of the
duchy; and to vest the whole in King Edward IV. and his heirs, _kings of
England_, for ever. Blackstone then mentions that in the first Henry
VII. an act was passed vesting the Duchy of Lancaster in that king and
his heirs; and in a note examines the question whether the duchy vested
in the natural or political person of the king. He then says:
"It seems to have been understood very early after the statute of
Henry VII., that the Duchy of Lancaster was by no means thereby
made a separate inheritance from the royal patrimony, since it
descended, with the crown, to the half-blood in the instances of
Queens Mary and Elizabeth; which it could not have done as the
estate of a mere Duke of Lancaster in the common course of legal
descent."
If, in saying that William III. never created himself Duke of Lancaster,
your correspondent means that he caused no patent to issue granting
himself that dignity, he is, I doubt not, correct. But if, after the
above quotations, any doubt could remain on the subject, possibly the
following extract from the act 1 Will. & Mar. sess. 2. cap. 2. ("An Act
declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and settling the
Succession of the Crown") will sufficiently dispel it:--
"And the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons seriously
considering, &c., do hereby recognise, acknowledge, and declare,
that King James II. having abdicated the Government, and their
Majesties having accepted the Crown and Royal dignity as
aforesaid, their said Majesties did become, were, and are, and of
right ought to be, by the laws of this realm, our sovereign liege
lord and lady the King and Queen of England, France, and Ireland,
and the dominions thereunto belonging, in and to whose princely
persons the Royal state, crown, and dignity of the said realms,
with all _honours_, _styles_, _titles_, regalities, prerogatives,
powers, jurisdictions, and authorities to the same belonging and
appertaining, are most rightfully and entirely invested and
incorporated, united and annexed."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account