Page 1 of 2

Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:03 pm
by Palores
Given that the Duke of Cornwall and not the monarch is Cornwall's head of state,
who was Cornwall's head of state during the years when there was no Duke of Cornwall?

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:47 pm
by Marhak
At those times, the Duchy is held in trust by the Monarchy until such time that another Duke is born. I resume the monarch takes on the role of duke, not as king or queen.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 7:40 pm
by Anselm
That's quite right. The Duchy is described as being 'in manu regis'.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:33 pm
by Cormorant
So, whilst "'in manu regis'." (In the King's Hand).

Does Cornwall belong to the King, (or Queen), of England? :lol:

i bet that's a pisser for all those little "Kernowists"? :lol:

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:00 am
by Anselm
Palores - yth yw an studh nebes hevelyp orth studh treste usi ow mires pyth ha da a-barth ken huni.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:07 am
by Marhak
Shaggy - you haven't a clue. Stay out of it, or research.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 7:59 am
by Anselm
Herwydh an keth gis yth o an keth huni, Charl V Emprour Almayn, kefrys Charl I Spayn.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:36 am
by factotum
There are two legal personalities, each a corporation sole, which may happen to be vested in the same human being from time to time. This does not merge the two offices, even after a long period. I seem to recall that the English monarchs were also the rulers of Hanover for several generations, but the two roles separated when Victoria came to the English throne, since the Hanoverian side couldn't pass to a female heir.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:01 pm
by Anselm
Just think of the fun if Queen Victoria had been Queen Victor! I wonder how Bismarck would have handled that one?

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:09 pm
by Ellery
You do all realise that there is no Kingdom of England right?

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:53 pm
by Cormorant
It would be called "flogging a dead horse"

If the "horse" have even existed to begin with.

So, the wannabee Irish/Welsh/Scottish still hope against hope. :lol:

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:38 pm
by Marhak
As do the English.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:32 pm
by Anselm
I don't think that need concern us. Since 1688, we haven't even thought of imposing regime change on our neighbours.

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:07 pm
by saltashliberal
a question that someone can no doubt answer: what is the Cornish position on the various historical
disputes as to how the monarchy of the UK, and therefore effectively the incumbent of the Duchy, was chosen? I obviously
refer to the Glorious Revolution but also to the various other disputes - Matilda/Stephen, John/Arthur, War of the Roses etc. Is the position that this is a matter for the UK Parliament to consider, or is it otherwise? Straightforwardish answers appreciated!

Re: Cornwall's head of state

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:19 pm
by saltashliberal
interestingly I just found that (according to Wiki...) James Stuart, although his father James II had been kicked off the throne in 1689, was not attainted as Duke of Cornwall until 1702. Obviously it was Parliament who attainted him, because he had then claimed the throne (his father having died) but up until that point he had retained the title even though Parliament did not recognise him as heir