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.

Oooh, careful now, the Richard III society will be along shortly with that invocation. And you think us supporters of H&M are resolute? Crosses self 😉

TEAM MARGARET BEAUFORT IS ALREADY HERE

@ohforarainyday

Oooh, careful now, the Richard III society will be along shortly with that invocation. And you think us supporters of H&M are resolute? Crosses self 😉

TEAM MARGARET BEAUFORT IS ALREADY HERE

Those saying this story is coming from the royal family are wrong - this is from the Sussexes. One of their friends I think. So who knows if it will even happen.

I kind of feel like William and Harry should be treated equally and both be entitled to call their children prince and princess. Especially as there's only the two of them. But then I think why shouldn't my daughter be a princess too...fact is that the concept of monarchy isn't fair and the line between who is in and who is out has to be drawn somewhere.

If Archie doesn’t become Prince then not will Louis’s children be Prince and princesses. And honestly why should they be? He won’t be a working royal, I’m sure of it. Unless you’re the monarch’s sibling or child then you don’t need a massive title! And H&M didn’t even want the bog standard ones for Archie anyway. He will be Duke of Sussex if he wants it when Harry dies.

The RF Needs to be shrunk right down.

Lucky W&H didn’t have a sister. Any of her children wouldn’t even have had the chance to be Earl of Dumbarton!

"I kind of feel like William and Harry should be treated equally and both be entitled to call their children prince and princess."

But it's still like this in families with an estate & titles.

The eldest son gets the lot, other sons & daughters have to shift for themselves!

@diddl

"I kind of feel like William and Harry should be treated equally and both be entitled to call their children prince and princess."

But it's still like this in families with an estate & titles.

The eldest son gets the lot, other sons & daughters have to shift for themselves!

Yes, I went to university with a guy who inherited a Barony. His younger siblings didn't get a look in.

Totally feudal.

He's in the House of Lords still.

we’re sat here paying for a racist and we don’t know which one it is

Boris johnson

Who’s the one that referred to his colleague as a paki?

Or said of his Zimbabwean girlfriend Chelsy “Don’t worry, she’s not black or anything”

@FillerAngel

Who’s the one that referred to his colleague as a paki?

And has done 2 (I think) diversiry courses?

And has done 2 (I think) diversiry courses? Well the first one, at least didn’t help.

Out of interest, if Harry is so easily forgiven for his multitude of racist comments why shouldn’t the rest of the royal family be?

Well, yes, he learned racism from his "very much not a racist family"... then he went and unlearned it, which is surely a step in the right direction - it's what we want from children raised in racism, to reflect, educate themselves and learn how to stop being racist.

I'm still waiting on the edge of my seat to find out who said what about Archie. That won't be forgotten, we can wait patiently. ☕

But shouldn’t he have learned the first time? Why did he do it again? Does that not suggest that he is only paying lip service to having educated himself?

@smilesy

But shouldn’t he have learned the first time? Why did he do it again? Does that not suggest that he is only paying lip service to having educated himself?

Yeah, you're right. Harry's the REAL racist here. wink

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/18/prince-andrew-used-n-word-former-no-10-aide-claims

abc7chicago.com/queen-elizabeth-buckingham-palace-racism-ethnic-minorities-office-jobs-meghan-markle/10738232/

www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2017/8/13/the-priceless-racism-of-the-duke-of-edinburgh

www.independent.co.uk/news/people/uncle-who-encouraged-young-queen-s-nazi-salute-plotted-adolf-hitler-regain-throne-10398750.html

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

That wasn’t my point. It was that he has not really learned. I didn’t say he was the “real racist”.

Nice whataboutery and attempt at deflection there!

The fact remains, H called his colleague a paki and said what Serenster said. He did it. His family are a separate entity.

I am always amused by people bringing up of the footage of the young Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret and their mother doing a “Heil Hitler” in 1933 and thinking it can tell us something about the political proclivities of a young child more than a decade or more before the truth of the Hitler’s regime was realised. Isn’t it lucky that had you been around in those times you’d have known the future….

The same point is true of the Buckingham Palace HR policies in 1965. I really don’t think that “large organisations had discriminatory hiring practices in the 1960s” is the tell you think it is.

@Serenster absolutely correct. I decided to do a quick google and found this interpretation of the Hitler salute story. It shows that something that is not acceptable with hindsight was widely accepted at the time as no one was eager to get dragged into another war.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/20/queens-nazi-salute-a-sign-of-ignorance-shared-by-many-in-scary-times

The footage of Princess Elizabeth and that salute dates from 1933 when she would have been 6 or 7.

I don't think it's a good comparison for the recent actions of adults

Personally I think the hrh & Prince/princess should be removed from all non working grandchildren of a monarch so Beatrice & Eugenie become Lady B & Lady E. The Wessex children also shouldn’t be able to use the royal titles either.

It maybe prove difficult for the Queen’s cousins but if they still count as working royals then they keep the titles.

Didn’t one of the Scandinavian monarchs do similar?

Didn’t one of the Scandinavian monarchs do similar?

If you mean the recent changes in Sweden then no, it was quite different.

The King removed the HRH and position in the royal house from his grandchildren from his two younger children. Swedes in the royal house are expected to be working royals and receive an appenage to fund them. They’re also obligated to be educated through the Swedish education system. As Princess Madeleine and her family don’t live in Sweden it was raising questions about the children’s future rules.
They’re now just Prince/Princess and and RF members, but not royal house so not going to be working royals or receive any state funding. The same was done for her brothers children at the same time.

There's a lot of speculation and inaccurate posts on this thread I believe.

Here is my understanding of the facts:

1. Archie and Lili already have titles. Earl and Lady respectively as a result of their father being a Duke. Their parents have chosen, to date, not to style them as such but are within their rights (for now, see next point) to do so.

1. The RF have the power to remove the title of HRH and Duke of Sussex (and the lower titles that come from the dukedom) from H. If they did so, they would also be de facto stripping the titles above from Archie/Lili irrespective of whether they use them or not.

1. The RF cannot strip Harry of the title Prince. That is his by birthright. So if they did remove the Sussex title, H would still technically be Prince Henry and could make clear he wanted to be known as such even without the HRH. As such his wife would be able, should she choose, to style herself Princess Henry.

1. Archie and Lili will be entitled to be styled as Prince/Princess when Charles becomes King as currently stands. The only way to stop this is if HMQ makes a change to the Letters Patent prior to her death so that the children never gain the titles by birthright.

1. As per point 2, if Archie and Lili become Prince/Princess by birthright then that is not something Charles could strip away from them even when he became King, the same way HMQ cannot prevent H styling himself as Prince if he chooses.

1. H is still in the line of succession. To remove him (and thus his children) would need an act of Parliament.

1. Regarding the Cambridge children. Two changes to the Letter Patent were made. One (as a nod to progress) was to ensure any female child would not be bumped down the chain of succession by younger male siblings. The other was to "accelerate" the provision of the titles Princess/Prince to Charlotte and Louis so they were on par with George (who in the direct line of succession was automatically a Prince). This was needed, in effect because of HMQ's longevity. Typically there has historically been little need to address the issue of great-grandchildren because being blunt the monarch didn't live long enough to have any. Having George a Prince but his siblings not would have been an anomaly within the same family "unit".

So that said my opinion.

Yes it's well known Charles wanted to slim down the monarchy but I see no evidence (especially given the high profile Commonwealth roles) that he did saw H&M being outside the "top team".

It may be that true that that he had a discussion with H&M about Prince/Princess titles for A/L and hoped that this was something they would volunteer to "rescind" on their children's behalf - very much in the the style of the Wessex family (though to be clear, Sophie has gone on record to say that will be for their children to decide in adulthood).

However as above he can't stop this process. Only HMQ can, before they inherit and I very much doubt she would choose to do so.

By stripping H&M's Duke/Duchess titles she gives them leave to style themselves as Prince/Princess - arguably a "worse" PR outcome than currently stands for both those clamouring for them to be stripped of titles and also it looks very petty and opens accusations of racism to pro H&M supporters. So lose/lose.

Ditto with changing the Letters Patent for Archie and Lili - it's not a good look.

As such I think it could well be that discussions have been had about how H&M children will be styled in the future and that it's fair to say that didn't go down well with the Sussex's.

However, I actually think it's sensible that they are not Prince/Princess. They will (at their parents choice) not grow up in the country by virtue of which those titles are bestowed and their parents are no longer active members of the royal family.

Frankly, the grandchildren of HMQ who have forgone (whatever the reason) the "big" titles (or had none at all) appear to have far more grounded lives, greater privacy and freedoms.

What of course Charles can do when he becomes King is to change the Letters Patent to stop the children of Charlotte and Louis becoming Prince/Princess and for the reasons above I think this would be a good thing and to do it as soon as possible, so they grow up with that expectation.

Happy to be corrected if I am wrong re: the above.

@diddl

"I kind of feel like William and Harry should be treated equally and both be entitled to call their children prince and princess."

But it's still like this in families with an estate & titles.

The eldest son gets the lot, other sons & daughters have to shift for themselves!

Yes, this is the point I was trying to make. The system isn't fair. I don't understand why Harry thinks it should be fair for him when it isn't for others.

Like Meghan said of Archie and his not being a prince that it should be "if you can see it you can be it". But that's not true for anyone elses children so why should it be true for theirs?

Sorry if the post below was a bit long, in summary:

• only the monarch can change the letters patent.

• a Prince/Princess by birthright cannot be stripped of that title (HRH and Dukedoms yes, but Prince/Princess no once you inherit it by birthright).

• Charles thus cannot change the Letters Patent to stop Archie and Lili becoming Prince/Princess until he is King - but as soon as he becomes King they become Prince/Princess by birthright and no changes at that point to the Letters can remove those titles.

• As such the only people who have the power to stop Archie/Lili becoming Prince/Princess is HMQ or H&M/ Archie and Lili, the former via Letters Patent and the latter by voluntarily reminding the titles.

For accuracy what M said in the OW interview:

"They were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or Princess, which would be different from protocol, and that he wasn't going to receive security."

To be clear the words were "didn't want" not going to strip him of a title or prevent him gaining one.

Equally the protocol being referred to is unclear because as stands protocol is being followed, unless she was referring to the change in protocol made for the two younger Cambridge children which is arguably a different scenario wrt treating all the children in that family unit on the same footing (whereas Archie and Lili are already on the same footing).