Prince Charles to alter the Letters Patent - Sussex Children won't become Prince/Princess

[Comeinoutoftherain]

Apologies for the Daily Mail reference, but it's all I have so far.

Apparently PC told H&M shortly before the Oprah interview that his intention was to amend the Letters Patent so that only the children in direct line to the throne (aka William's children) would receive the Prince/Princess title.

So neither Archie nor Lilibet were going to be "upgraded" to Prince/Princess on the Queen's death.

That explains that slightly vague comments made in the OW interview about Archie not being made a Prince; and why relations between PC and H&M were clearly very fraught.

If this is true (and I accept it's hard to see the wood for the trees with the constant press briefings from both sides) I can see it from both points of view.

Harry is in Prince Andrew's position (as a royal, not as a person) which makes Archie and Lilibet on a par with Beatrice and Eugenie. As they get older, and William's children start their own families, the Sussex children drop down the pecking order pretty quickly.

I think Charles has it right that the British Public don't want to keep paying for an extended royal family, you can see that playing out in Europe at the moment. So even if H&M were working royals, their children likely won't be; and I can understand why he wants to present a limited number of royals to the public.

From Harry's perspective, it must feel like a downgrade. It must be difficult being the second (and only other) child in a hierarchical monarchy; being aware from the beginning of all that William is to inherit. Having his children lose something that is currently their birthright must sting a bit.

This should probably have been considered before William and Harry had kids. I doubt it would have been as big a deal when you are not considering actual children, just abstract ones. Or at the very least, it should have been done when the Letters Patent were altered for George, Charlotte and Louis.

It's clearly added to an already tense atmosphere and won't help family relations get back on track.

Anyway. Harry, Archie and Lilibet will always remain in the line of succession, it will just be less of an issue as time goes on.
I would like to see Princess Lilibet, President of the USA, though!

@PicsInRed

All this twisting and turning to figure out a way to get rid of a mixed race family who complained of racism. So much twisting that we're considering paving the way to a man implicated in child trafficking and rape, and then multiple family members (Peter, Wessexes) who have used royal status for commercial gain, and even Queen Bea, who's renowned for being work shy, the beginning of whose relationship with now husband Ed was far to close for comfort with that of the abandoned mother of his child. . Bleeding Christ.

No-the question is why are they so determined to cling on to a racist family?

@caringcarer

I thought Prince Charles told Harry if he was leaving to be a private citizen he was going to change LP so H&M kids would not be HRH Prince and Princess but if stayed as a working royal they would be. It seems fair enough to me. Those kids don't need titles in US and H&M already turned down the Earl of Dunbarton title.

I’m reading it that Charles told them earlier, probably during M’s first pregnancy in England that that was the plan, (hence her comments to Oprah) & has more recently firmed that intention up a bit more or elaborated as a kind of “I’m going to change the LPs. That will work.” Now it’s been leaked to Lacey.

@myrtleWilson

Building on the hypotheticals... presumably an adult cannot abdicate their existing children from the line of succession. So how old do you have to be to exercise this option. Is it 26,18? Or is their a royal version of Gillick competence?

An adult can’t abdicate their child from the line of succession, but Catholics are still banned from taking the throne so if you really wanted your kid out of it then having them christened Catholic and bringing them up as such knocks them out.

It would be interesting to see if there would be any legal challenge to a senior royal trying to do that. The most senior person not in the line because of that is Lord Downpatrick, grandson of the Duke of Kent, and his parents didn’t make the decision for him - he chose to follow his mother and grandmother into the Catholic faith at 15.

His cousins, children of Lord Nicholas Windsor, are not in the line of succession due to being baptised Catholic as babies (lord and lady Windsor married in the Vatican City) but they are so far down the line it wouldn’t have been remotely an issue.

In theory though that’s how you’d be able to knock your kids out of the line. Marrying a Catholic no longer knocks you out, but being one does.

No-the question is why are they so determined to cling on to a racist family?

I think quite a few Brits, and growing, want them gone now. It’s getting interesting that we might be getting closer to that. All the time the poll numbers fall it’s looking dicier for the monarchy. I wonder if there’s a recent poll.

@RickiTarr

I think you make a good point about the evolving optics.

Whilst removing H (and his children) from the line of succession now, would I feel be a bad move for the RF, in 10/15 years the situation could be very different.

I think it probably is fair to say that assuming relations remain strained and the Sussex children grow up as "fully fledged" Americans due to very limited trips back to the U.K. and limited relationships with the family here, the argument for removing them from the succession strengths.

I'd still probably on balance put money on that not happening. A debate on the succession in parliament (or rescinding titles) is not where the RF will want to go at any point in time unless they are really pushed and I would bet that H&M don't want this outcome either.

What I query is if H&M fully understand where the "tipping point" is for the RF.

They keep acting as if they hold all the cards and in some regards they have a good hand because the cards the RF would have to play aren't ones without considerable risk - but ultimately if pushed the RF are not without nuclear options and depending on what lines H&M choose to cross there could well be increasing public sympathy for them to press the big red button.

Fascinating, though isn’t it @DeRigueurMortis

Even the fact that they’re all involved in a dispute we might want to place bets on.

@PicsInRed @diddl The polls are changing. This one must have been in the news but I missed it.

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/21/young-britons-are-turning-their-backs-monarchy

I’m reading it that Charles told them earlier, probably during M’s first pregnancy in England that that was the plan, (hence her comments to Oprah) & has more recently firmed that intention up a bit more or elaborated as a kind of “I’m going to change the LPs. That will work.” Now it’s been leaked to Lacey.

I just don't see how this can work - unless I'm missing something.

Only HMQ can use the LP's wrt Archie/Lili. Charles can't do that as King as the children are then de facto Prince/Princess.

At which point he'd have to strip the titles (via Parliament) as opposed to prevent them getting them.

So either Charles is confident he can get HMQ to do this, thinks he can put pressure on the Sussex's to renounce the titles on behalf of the children (not sure they can do this) or thinks there is another route to achieve this.

@RickiTarr

Fascinating, though isn’t it *@DeRigueurMortis*

Even the fact that they’re all involved in a dispute we might want to place bets on.

Indeed!

Ahh I've seen Lyra has answered the question about the Sussex's rescinding the succession on behalf of their children - thank you.

Im assuming that would apply to titles also?

As such I'm still at a loss on how Charles (and Lacey) think this could be accomplished (short of an act of Parliament - which atm just feels like a bad move - but as Rikki pointed out the optics may well change).

Only HMQ can use the LP's wrt Archie/Lili. Charles can't do that as King as the children are then de facto Prince/Princess.

At which point he'd have to strip the titles (via Parliament) as opposed to prevent them getting them.

Yes ISWYM. Unless they’re brainstorming it as we speak? Or working on some secret other option? Like a residency qualification?

I don’t think Lacey cares if Charles’ plan is achievable as long as his story about Charles’ attempt to do it stands up.

@DeRigueurMortis

Ahh I've seen Lyra has answered the question about the Sussex's rescinding the succession on behalf of their children - thank you.

Im assuming that would apply to titles also?

As such I'm still at a loss on how Charles (and Lacey) think this could be accomplished (short of an act of Parliament - which atm just feels like a bad move - but as Rikki pointed out the optics may well change).

Tbh the assumption I’d make is that is highly likely HMQ would currently be prepared to issue LP’s that Charles and William felt important to the future of the monarchy.

However, I’ve seen nothing anywhere in anything the RF gave done in the last years that suggest Harry’s children were going to be part of the slimming.

The opportunity to square it all away nicely if the 1917 LP’s are going to be scrapped was when the changes to male-preference primogeniture were made abd the one off LP’s for the Cambridge children were announced.

The whole thing could have been sorted then. The fact it wasn’t suggests - to me - that Charles sees nothing wrong with them and had no plans to have any grandchildren by Harry go untitled.

It should be remembered that not only has he been brought up in the RF but he spend a lot of time with the Queen Mother. So many of his views were part formed by someone even older than his parents.

I don’t think for a second that the slimming ever involved his sons or his grandchildren.

The comment from Meghan in the OW interview about thinking the grandchildren would all be treated the same reeks to me as a mahoosive misunderstanding with Harry expecting LP’s to be issued and Meghan not knowing that they’d need to be if he was to be titled at that point. Everything she said about not knowing they curtsied in private and the likes suggests she was very ill prepared and Harry is to blame for that.

I thought Charles had previously made it clear that the slimmed down monarchy was him and Camilla, William and family, and Harry and family.

"I don’t think for a second that the slimming ever involved his sons or his grandchildren."

I wouldn't have thought so either.

Although it would always have been wise I think for them to have careers in place & not rely on doing Royal Duties.

Perhaps for Charlotte & Louis also!

I doubt the RF would bother tbh. H&M's children are so far removed from the succession now, and are the last generation from H to be 'royal'. They are just irrelevant and not worth the upheaval (let's face it, change is slow with the RF).

I suspect they will grey rock, and realise that getting into a tit for tat just causes more headlines.

Thanks @JustLyra

I agree with your assessments that a) there's no evidence that Charles wanted to dis-inherit his Sussex grandchild and that b) the issue the Sussex's have is that HMQ didn't issue LP's to make Archie a Prince at birth.

I also think your correct that HMQ will absolutely be conferring with C/W on any actions wrt the future strategy of the monarchy but I still can't see her wanting to disinherit the Sussex children.

The whole Lacey revelations just don't make any sense to me at all because as you say, the perfect timing to scrap the 1917 conventions was when the changes were made for the Cambridge children.

I've re-read exactly what M said in the interview and it absolutely only makes sense if she's referring to LP's not being issued to make Archie a Prince from birth but that's not a change in protocol as she stated.

Rather it reflects her lack of understanding of protocol and again I agree that H is to blame for that (though I suppose he too may have been very peeved that his children were treated differently to his brothers and expected otherwise - but frankly that's the way the cookie crumbles for the heir vs the spare).

Maireas

I thought Charles had previously made it clear that the slimmed down monarchy was him and Camilla, William and family, and Harry and family.

I agree however I don’t think he would have ever envisaged one of his sons stepping back from royal duties and decamping to USA.

That's very true.

Rather it reflects her lack of understanding of protocol and again I agree that H is to blame for that (though I suppose he too may have been very peeved that his children were treated differently to his brothers and expected otherwise - but frankly that's the way the cookie crumbles for the heir vs the spare).

I think had Meghan posted on here she’d have been told to LTB several times. One could be very suspicious about the fact that his two long term girlfriends who knew (or learned) about the protocol decided not to marry him and he quickly (in royal terms) married one who seemed clueless to lots of big things...

I think with Archie one of two things happened. Either Harry assumed that the same would be done as was done for the Cambridge children (perhaps he misunderstood why it was done - many people did) on the basis that there has been a thing made over the years about William and Harry being treated the same.

Or Harry simply didn’t understand how the protocol worked. Given that Meghan definitely didn’t understand - she very clearly believed that all of Charles’ grandchildren being treated the same was standard protocol- it I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry didn’t.

Which makes you wonder what conversations were bad when Harry and Meghan got married. The plans for the titles and styles of their future children were announced on the day the Wessexes got married. I find it hard to believe that HMQ didn’t have a conversation with Harry - either that was delegated to Charles and it was cocked up or Harry’s knowledge and understanding was massively over estimated.

Which makes you wonder what conversations were bad when Harry and Meghan got married. The plans for the titles and styles of their future children were announced on the day the Wessexes got married. I find it hard to believe that HMQ didn’t have a conversation with Harry - either that was delegated to Charles and it was cocked up or Harry’s knowledge and understanding was massively over estimated.

Absolutely.

Only I'd probably add to your last sentence "or his sense of entitlement under-estimated".

The comment from Meghan in the OW interview about thinking the grandchildren would all be treated the same reeks to me as a mahoosive misunderstanding with Harry expecting LP’s to be issued and Meghan not knowing that they’d need to be if he was to be titled at that point.
Everything she said about not knowing they curtsied in private and the likes suggests she was very ill prepared and Harry is to blame for that.

I can see why the Sussexes were/are a bit disgruntled about Archie not being made a Prince straight away as I too assumed that HMQ would issue LPs to ensure that the Sussex children would be treated the same as the Cambridge children.
But on the other hand I think all the great grandchildren should just be Lord/Lady until Charles becomes King then get their upgrade.
I also think that it's a darn pity that equality in titles didn't start years ago & should also apply to aristocracy so that the firstborn can inherit the title regardless of biological sex.
However the RF have in the past created things as they went along.
Queen Victoria issued LPs that elevated her grandson-in-law Alexander, 1st Earl of Fife and 6th Earl Fife, (who married Princess Louise, the third child and eldest daughter of the then-Prince of Wales who would become the future King Edward VII) to the Duke of Fife with the standard remainder of the title being passed on to the male heirs of his body.
As the Duke of Fife had no sons, QV in 1900 amended the LP so his eldest daughter could inherit the dukedom & pass it on to the make heirs of that daughter.
Also in 1905 Edward VII had the children of Alexander, Duke of Fife upgraded from Lady Alexandra & Lady Maud to Princess Alexandra & Princess Maud.
Princess Alexandra became the Duchess of Fife when her father died. As Alexandra's only child (boy) died the title was inherited by the eldest son of her sister Princess Maud.

Queen Victoria was quite fond of 'upgrading' & giving out titles during her life.
She wanted Prince Albert to be created King Consort but the government of the day wouldn't have it.

As JustLyra & DeRigueurMortis posted before I completed my post, all H&M's upset was most likely down to Harry either not understanding the 'rules' or assuming the 'rules' didn't apply to him or the 'rules' weren't explained properly.

@DeRigueurMortis

Which makes you wonder what conversations were bad when Harry and Meghan got married. The plans for the titles and styles of their future children were announced on the day the Wessexes got married. I find it hard to believe that HMQ didn’t have a conversation with Harry - either that was delegated to Charles and it was cocked up or Harry’s knowledge and understanding was massively over estimated.

Absolutely.

Only I'd probably add to your last sentence "or his sense of entitlement under-estimated".

I genuinely don’t think, going by meghan’s level of misunderstanding, that it was about entitlement.

I think he genuinely thought that’s what would happen.

The only question, for me, is - did he think that because no-one educated him otherwise or did he think that because he’d always been told that was the plan and the plan was changed?

I have to be honest though - even if the RF were/are rampant racists I cannot see them being so badly advised and unaware of the publicity that they would have said, or thought, “sorry Harry, your kids would have been titled from birth had you married a white woman”. They knew the scrutiny of so much was on them, and in a time where people were questioning the idea of a monarchy.

The Queen is good at reading the public, and when she gets it wrong (such as the death of Diana and the Windsor fire) she is very good at winning the public back. There’s no way she’s had a hand in this whole saga and not fixed it in a way that makes the RF look shiny.

I think it’s as simple as a massive misunderstanding which lead to Harry chucking his toys out of the pram, and Meghan supporting that because she thought it was what should happen and it wasn’t just for her baby.