Talk:Duchy of Cornwall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

		This article falls within the scope of the the Cornwall Wikiproject, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. Contributions and new members welcome, you can edit the attached page, do a task from our to-do list, or visit the project page, and contribute to discussion.
		See drop down box for suggested article edit guidelines: Suggested article edit guidelines: Articles are written using a standard set of headings (see suggestions for article structure here. This is to maintain consistency between Cornwall articles and improve the quality of entries through a constant style of writing. These headings are, however, plastic and in state of flux and although we welcome suggestions or improvements, we would appreciate discussionbefore any major changes to the layout yourself. Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid is your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty! At the the Cornwall Wikiproject we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. These pages, and are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish self-government movement) and should not flow over into other articles. Most of all have fun editing - thats the reason we all do this right?!

Contents 1 The Duchy 2 Celtic Frontier or County Boundary? 3 More info 4 Two pages for the duchy 5 De facto status 6 Duchy of Cornwall dispute

[edit] The Duchy

I really don't want to get embroiled in an edit war, but I confess I was rather miffed to see Astrotrain delete the entire paragraph I had written explaining the meanings that "the Duchy" holds for Cornish regionalists and others. Surely this is at least worth a mention — how many times have we not heard somebody casually making the point that "Cornwall is a duchy, not a county"? How many websites could I not cite from people and organizations claiming that the Duchy is, in fact, the foundation-stone of Cornwall's actual sovereignty within the UK? Mind you, I'm not going to argue whether such a position is right or not — and if I was, I certainly wouldn't do it on wikipedia. But surely it's not POV to mention that these points of view exist and to explain them a little. QuartierLatin1968 02:35, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I totally agree and it is just you QuartierLatin1968 it seems to be politically biased vandalism. Please Astrotrain provide your reasons or leave it alone! Bretagne 44 11/4/05

If Prince Charles fell under a bus tomorrow, then the monarch's eldest surviving son would be Prince Andrew, but surely the title of Duke of Cornwall (and the accompanying Duchy) would go to Prince William, who would also be Heir Apparent. PatGallacher 16:22, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

The title would become dormant, and the income from the Duchy would go to The Queen. When Frederick, Prince of Wales died during the lifetime of his father, King George II, his eldest son, the future King George III, inherited his Dukedom of Edinburgh (and was soon created Prince of Wales), but did not become Duke of Cornwall. To hold the Dukedom of Cornwall (and thus get the income from the Duchy of Cornwall), one must be both the monarch's eldest surviving son and the Heir Apparent. If no one is both, then no one is Duke of Cornwall. Proteus (Talk) 17:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

In that case, the article is badly worded, since it implies that in the scenario outlined Prince Andrew would become Duke of Cornwall. PatGallacher 17:13, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

Found the origional text of the charters[1]. They are accessed via the sidebar (->Forshore case->the Duchy). Throughout, they continue to refer to the "county of cornwall". The following text is the complete sentence that is currently only partially quoted in this article.

Moreover, we have granted to the same Duke for us and our heirs that he receive and have the scutage and profit of scutage, as well of the fees aforesaid as of all other fees appertaining to the aforesaid castles, manors, honors, lands, and tenements, which we have lately given and granted to the said Duke, as well out of the said county of Cornwall as within the same county, as annexed and united to his Duchy aforesaid;

This clearly differenciates between the county and the duchy. Overwise why would lands within Cornwall have to be annexed if the whole county is already considered part of the duchy. josh (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

You are selectively quoting from the TGG site and out of context:

Firstly - as to why the need to annex? - Historically the Earldom of Cornwall was a complete and well understood entity which included both territory & administration, stannaries, property, all revenues and royal prerogatives, which because of inconsistency of past grants (to king's favourites) became fragmented. The first Duchy Charter of 17th March 1337 was an enumeration of what this Earldom, and which was now a Duchy, properly comprised - intended to clarify past severences and restore them to the Honor "lest hereafter in any wise it should be turned into doubt, what or how much the same Duke, or other the Dukes, of the said place, for the time being, ought to have in name of the Duchy aforesaid, we have caused all things in kind, which we will to pertain to the same Duchy, to be inserted in this our charter".

Secondly: - There is a clear distinction between the Honor (e.g. Kingdom/king, Dukedom/duke etc.) and its administrative structure(s) relating to property and taxation within it (e.g. shire/county/hundred). Historically 'county' derives from Earldom whereas a tax district derives from a shire - rendered in latin as Comitatus (Earldom/County) and Vicecomitatus (a tax district). Therefore, the tax district of Cornwall is annexed and united to the Honor of Cornwall "forever". Since Cornwall, territorially, is both 'Honor' and tax district it seems more equitable to refer to it as the Honor (the Duchy) rather than its subsidiary (a county) - as recommended by the Royal Commission on the Constitution [Kilbrandon 1973]. Please see [2] (->Foreshore case->the Duchy - TGG Comment) regarding official use of 'the county' etc.. -- TGG 12:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Celtic Frontier or County Boundary?

Added the following link

• Celtic Frontier or County Boundary? Competing discourses of a late nineteenth century British border

Bretagne 44 14:44, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More info

In 1780 Edmund Burke sought to curtail further the power of the Crown by removing the various principalities which existed.

… the five several distinct principalities besides the supreme …. If you travel beyond Mount Edgcumbe, you find him [the king] in his incognito, and he is duke of Cornwall …. Thus every one of these principalities has the apparatus of a kingdom …. Cornwall is the best of them….

Bretagne 44 17:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two pages for the duchy

Is there a reason why we have two pages that talk about the duchy of Cornwall here and here? Although the name suggests that they cover different faces of the Duchy of Cornwall (as a property holding of Prince Charles, and as a once semi autonomous block of the UK) in reality they cover mostly the same information - wouldn't it be better for readers unfamiliar with this information to merge the two articles? At the moment it just looks like a potential POV fork waiting to happen Mammal4 15:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree that there should be a merge/redirect of Cornwall (territorial duchy) into Duchy of Cornwall. MLA 06:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cornwall_%28territorial_duchy%29 Gulval 17:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] De facto status

Would someone please explain why the phrase de facto is being removed from the first para? To simply delete with nothing more than a fascile comment that there is nothing de facto about it beggars belief! -- TGG 10:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There is no part of the duchy that is not enshrined in law. Obviously the duchy itself was defined by the charters of 1337 and the definition of England was given by the [1978 Interpretation Act]. josh (talk) 11:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you suggesting, in that case, that 'de facto' automatically implies unlawful? Thanks for the link but failed miserably in accessing it. Perhaps you may care to quote the relevant part for us to see? Since I disagree with you on the 'de facto' issue, who would arbitrate? -- TGG 12:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Schedule 1 states

"England" means, subject to any alteration of boundaries under Part IV of the Local Government Act 1972, the area consisting of the counties established by section 1 of that Act, Greater London and the Isles of Scilly. [1st April 1974].

De facto means adopted by custom rather than a specific law. This is clearly not the case with the English duchies. josh (talk)

The point of dispute is over the origins of the Duchy rather than the Imperial States modifying meanings to suit its own modern agenda. There is nothing to suggest that de facto is not also a legal state of affairs - particularly if its origins are wilfully misrepresented - it exists because it is accepted as such (de facto). However, I have modified the para to make it incontovertibly correct.

If the current status of the Duchy of Cornwall, as simply an Estate, is by legitimate means, you will perhaps be able to point to the various Acts by which this was done? Of particular interest, to me, is when, and how, did the revenue collecting powers of the Sheriff (the officer of the Dukes) become transferred to the Crown. The creation of the Duchy vested all public revenues to the Dukes! In fact, the vicecomitatus and the right to appoint the sheriff (as hitherto accustomed to be done) was the principal item enumerated in the Great Charter!

I would also appreciate your opinion on the fact that the Duchy, at the time of creation, was not considered to be in England (the country) by the first Duke of Cornwall. Similarly, there are many references, subsequent to the creation, that show Cornwall to be distinct from England. Historically, this has been the understanding of the Cornish people up until the present day! -- TGG 21:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad I understand your objections better. My main problem with inserting de facto in the first sentence was that it implied that it was some wishy washy insitution that wasn't fully qualified in law. The fact that some of the rights that the duchy has are now being ignored/denied/unclaimed doesn't distract from the important fact that it is a duchy in England. I am happy to put in a sentance in the opening para about the controversal nature of the modern interpretation.

As regards to whether the duchy was in England when it was created, it is irrelevent. The opening sentence states that the Duchy of Cornwall is a duchy in England. The definition of England in the Interpetation Act makes certain of that fact. Part II of Schedule 2 also makes it clear that this act applies to all previous Acts of Parliament (as the charters were defined as in 1605?).

The current wording is a bit arkward. I would propose something along the lines of

"The Duchy of Cornwall is one of the two Royal duchies in the England (with the Duchy of Lancaster). The true nature of the duchy, and whether it should be considered to be in England, is a matter of dispute within Cornwall."

josh (talk) 22:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for that! That seems to be a very concise way of putting it and I fully accept that form of representation. I have inserted it (after removing a superfluous 'the') into the article. -- TGG 12:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duchy of Cornwall dispute

Restored deleted section to main article. Please do not delete this section from the article under the pretence of 'opinion' -- TGG 17:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)