In conclusion, it is submitted that the facts and authorities before referred to are sufficient to establish,-
1st. That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects, as distinct from England.
2nd. That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.
3rd. That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a greater extent than bad been enjoyed by the Earls.
4th. That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending its creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm the natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls had enjoyed, but also afford evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges.
And lastly. That the Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall.
Response from the Duchy, thanks to the individual involved.
I wont provide a full copy but just the main points.
1) Cornwall is a county of England.
2) The Duchy and the County are not one and the same. many Duchy lands are outside Cornwall.
3) The Duchy does have a more general relationship to the county ie it appoints the Sherif of Cornwall and has the right of advowson (presentation of incumbents).
4) The Duchy was probably founded for military reasons. At a time of increasing hostility with the French relm, Edward III created the Duchy inorder to protect a remote part of the English relm. Foundation charter "lands subjet to our dominion may be more securely and fitly defended against the attacks of our enemies and adversaries".
5) Edward III also created the Duchy in recognition of the fact that Cornwall was one of the "remarkable places of our Kingdom".
Thats a recap of the Duchy response, a response that does not address one single example that i put in my first letter such as the Cornish foreshore case, the Kilbrandon Report or other Duchy statements about its own nature.
Congratulations on getting ‘something’ out of the Duchy – even if it only restates the official propaganda. The interesting aspect of this reply from 'them' is that it treads new ground by offering some opinion over the 'creation'. But beware the insidious English half-truth which superficially seems credible but used, invariably, to hide a deeper truth. The following are some of the thoughts that just popped into the head:
As a dominion territory of the English Crown, in 1337, the ambiguity between of England (the Realm) and of England (the Country) is a half-truth which demands definition whenever the term ‘England’ is used. A similar situation exists today between the misuse, and contrived synonymity, of England and Britain. Likewise, references to the Tamar Border as a county boundary with Devonshire rather than a national border with England!
Whilst a dominion territory of England (Realm), Cornwall is not, and never has been, of England (Country). Therefore, if the Duchy comment is meant to be of England (Realm), then surely this would have been superceded, by the progression to the current Realm of the United Kingdom, to be a county of Britain (or United Kingdom)?
150 years ago, the Duchy proved that it was the County (Earldom/Comitatus) of Cornwall that had been erected into a Duchy and showed that it was distinct from the Crown and England. Within this creation we find that the civil government of Cornwall (vicecomitatus) was annexed forever to the Duchy. Surely, therefore, this civil government is clearly defined de jure as being in, and of, the Duchy of Cornwall – not England!
We are faced once again with another insidious English half-truth. What, in fact, is meant here by “the County�? If we think in terms of territory, then the comment above is completely and mischievously incorrect. It was the Earldom (County) of Corwall which was to become the Dukedom. If, on the other hand, we construe it to be (as, I am sure, intended?) the civil administration, then we see from my above comment that this – like the estates – forms only a part of the whole and the mischievous reference to “Duchy lands� is a red-herring to direct you away from the truth.
This wilfully, even criminally, understates the truth and implies that the Duchy is some distant entity – on Mars, perhaps? - whereas in truth the Duchy is specifically Cornwall as mentioned above. For example, all revenue from Cornwall, when an Earl or Duke was in existence, ceased to be answered to the Crown. The form of political chicanery that has changed that status has yet to be exposed!
The whole concept of Royal Patronage in the 14th century was geared towards rewarding loyalty and ensuring ongoing support in that bloody period of the English Empire. It was, therefore, not “probably� but a given. The quote offered to support this supposition has an even greater significance, however, in that it reflects the perceived perception of Cornwall at that time. This contrived mystery of ‘why Cornwall’ was created a Dukedom becomes clear by intelligent reading of the associated documents of creation and investiture. With, of course, less of a closed mind on the facts of Cornish history.
We are left agog at what this quote refers to and from whence it came!:!: Is it, perhaps, an attempt to euphemise a following comment in the charter preamble, referred to above, which states: “desiring that places of note of the same kingdom should be adorned with their pristine honors�. Consider this statement, also, within the context of the the Duchy as being, allegedly, only the private estates (sic)
I can only say: find the truth at www.kernowtgg.co.uk
The Department of Constitutional Affairs
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Selborne House
54 Victoria Street
London SW1 6QW general.queries@dca.gsi.gov.uk
have responded and said that this question as to the constitutional nature of Cornwall "falls outside their remit"?
This department in its letter head has the words Justice, rights and democracy!?
I will be contacting them shortly to as why they cannot answer, why it fall outside there remit.
They kindly forwarded my question to the:
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Customer Liaison Unit
Zone 3/B4 Eland House
Bressenden Place
Victoria
SW1E 5DU
I will send my question again to the ODPM
Eh? Do we count as "Customers" of the Government now? That's worse than my PhD supervisor calling university students "customers".
The government should be careful of calling us customers, customers have statutory rights, and if we aren't getting satisfactory service for our money we can ask for a refund...maybe 10p/l on unleaded and any above-inflation council tax rises?
Well i think that's the point, if you are Cornish and want to know about the constitutional status of Cornwall you are not seen as a customer you're more seen as an undesirable homeless person who has wandered into the shop and who is most definitely not welcome.
Of course if a rich tax exile walks into the shop from Guernsey and wants to buy half a pound of constitutional particularism..............
Dept Const Affairs
Ministerial correspondence Unit
7th floor
Selborne house
54 Victoria Street
London SW1E 6QW general.queries@dca.gsi.gov.uk
Dear Mr Breton
Thank you for your letter blah blah.........
I can confirm that, in as far as constitutional issues are concerned, Cornwall is covered in the same way as every other county within England, by the DCA.
However your initial question was "What is Cornwall". This is not something that falls within the remit of the DCA to answer.
Your letter has been forwarded to the Government Office of the South West.
So from this response i understand that the DCA treats Cornwall as an English county however they cannot tell me if Cornwall is part of the country of England or if it is even a county.
They assume it is an English county and cannot or will not address the evidence that contradicts this assumption, such as the foreshore case.
I think you'll find, Fulub, that the usual govt response to questions of the constitutional position of Kernow is to metaphorically close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALALA I can't hear you LALALALA" until the questioner gets bored and goes away.
They are frightened that if the truth about Cornwall's legal level of independence from the English State were known, there would be hell up that Cornwall's legal rights weren't being up held by the Westminster parliament, and rightly so.
They file it on a list of "important things to do". Granting Cornwall independance comes in at number 327625, just after number 327624; "revive trade links with Burkini Faso."
They find it easier to avoid answering certain questions so that's what they do.
You would think i could address some part of the government of the UK and get a straight answer concerning the constitutional status of Cornwall that takes into account all the evidence provided.
Surely my government should be able to provide an answer that is credible as opposed to avoiding direct answers and passing the buck continuously. Is that the kind of government you want stroppy?
If the UK government wants to convince me that Cornwall is a county of England then they are going to have to address the foreshore case where Cornwall was described as a Duchy and apart from the country of England.
This was case law and should have set the precedent for the treatment of Cornish constitutional affairs but it did not, why?
Coastguard in Bank Holiday strike
Coastguards will stage another walkout over the Bank Holiday weekend in a long-running row over pay.
Teen apology after 'Beirut' party
Shocked parents make their daughter apologise after party gatecrashers "terrify" neighbours.
Patients 'too fat to fit' scanner
Scans are cancelled at a Cornish hospital because of fears overweight patients may get stuck in the machine.
Lifeguard's treacherous rock swim
A beach lifeguard swims through a notorious stretch of water to save two boys trapped by the tide.
Festival refunds are 'uncertain'
Organisers who cancelled a music festival say it is "too soon" to say if refunds will be available.
Estate tea brews up foreign sales
A tea plantation in Cornwall says exports of its tea to China, India and Japan may overtake its UK sales.
Police are to fly gay flag at festival
Members of Cornwall police force's Gay Police Association are to officially support a gay pride event.
Knife-bearers face Taser arrest
Anyone carrying a knife on the street in risks being shot with a Taser electric stun gun, police warn.
