HO144/1476/333045
BUCKINGHAM PALACE
21st. March 1917.
Dear Harris,
We have been trying, but without success, to ascertain whether or not
Princess Mary of Cambridge (afterwards the Duchess of Teck) was born a
Royal Highness. Neither in the Record Office, the College of
Arms, or the Lord Chamberlain's Office is there any record, except that
Her Royal Highness was born in Hanover on 27th. November 1833. Possibly
the Home Office may be able so supply the information.
Yours very truly,
S.W. Harris Esq: C.B.
Home Office.
MEMORANDUM.
The use of the style "Royal Highness" is now governed by the
Letters Patent of 1864, which give it to (1) all
children of a sovereign, and (2) all children of the sons of a
sovereign.
It is perfectly clear that under this rule the Duchess of Teck
(Princess Mary of Cambridge) as the daughter of a son of George 3, was
"Royal Highness" from 1864 onward; the question is as to her
position before 1864.
In O.S. 8933/1 is a memorandum by Garter
as to the use of
the style "Royal Highness" with an examination of the
precedents for the method of addressing members of the
Royal family since the accession of James I.
It is clear from these that the style "Royal Highness" was never given
to the grand children of a sovereign, and not always to the
children of a sovereign, before 1750; that between 1750 and 1864
the practice of calling the children of the sons of a sovereign "Royal
Highness" gradually became common; but that - as the
preamble to the Letters Patent of 1864 shows - there was no
authoritative ruling on the subject until those letters were issued.
I find that both the Duchess of Teck and her elder sister
Princess Augusta were called "Royal Highness" in the
Acts of Parliament granting them
annuities. This would not of itself
confer the style; but Garter points out in his memorandum --I think
rightly - that as such Bills originate in a Royal Message the
style given in the Message must be regarded as emanating from the
Sovereign.
The Act relating to the Duchess of Teck was passed in
1850; the Message to the Lords (Hansard CXIII p.77) simply calls her
Princess Mary of Cambridge, but that to the Commons (Hansard
CXII p.1455) expressly styles her "Royal Highness. I think the use of
the style in a formal Message of
this kind must be treated as a conferment of it by the Sovereign.
The result then will be that the Princess Mary of Cambridge was
not born a Royal Highness, as in view of the language of the Letters
Patent if 1864 it is impossible to maintain that she had a right
to the style in virtue of her birth but that it was conferred on her by
Queen Victoria in 1850 when her Majesty used it in her Message to the
House of Commons.
AJE [Arthur John Eagleston]
28.3.17