"I should be glad if you would
inform your Prime Minister that I have for some time had in mind
the conferment of a suitable title of dignity upon
[ ]
On the occasion of my return with H.RH. the Duke of
Edinburgh from my tour of Commonwealth countries, I propose
to confer by Letters Patent issued under the Great Seal of
the Realm the title of [ ]
The Letters Patent to give effect to my wishes will
issue on the [ ]
I should wish it to be made clear to your Prime
Minister that the conferment of this title has no
constitutional implications."
The Foreign Secretary,
whom I informed
confidentially of our meeting on the duke of
Edinburgh’s title, does not like “Prince Consort”. He
suggests “Prince of the Realm”. What are your views?
Yours sincerely,
WC
Lord Chancellor
House of Lords, S.W. 1
The LC replied to the PM to the effect that he preferred "Realm" to
"Commonwealth", tho' that was not saying much. Realm has principally a
geographical significance, as "Peer of the Realm", "coin of the Realm",
and if the title is Prince of the Realm the next question is, what
Realm, and we are no further on than with Commonwealth. The PM's
original suggestion is best & has the merit of
familiarity.
A further argument against Commonwealth is that to Australians that
means first and last Australia.
CL 13/5
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street,
Whitehall
May 13, 1954.
My dear Ld Chancellor,
You are really a marvel at these things. I agree with every word
you say. So many thanks.
Yours sincerely
WC
The Right Hon. Lord Simonds
Prime
Minister’s personal minute serial no. M 115/54
Lord
President of the Council
Lord
Chancellor
Secretary
of State for the Home Department
Lord Privy Seal
Secretary
of State for Commonwealth Relations
Secretary
of State for the Colonies
Secretary
of State for Scotland
The Queen
informed me that She had made the suggestion to the Duke of Edinburgh
and that
His Royal Highness refused even to consider accepting any new title at
present. Her Makesty asked that the
matter should be allowed to rest indefinitely.
I will arrange for the documents to be preserved.
W.S.C.
23 June 1954
Home Office,
Whitehall, S.W.1.
4th February, 1955.
SECRET
Dear Lord Chancellor,
The Home Secretary has had to go to Wales to-day and will not he able
to attend the Cabinet this afternoon. You will no doubt remember that
when the matter which is to be discussed was last raised you were asked
to ascertain by informal enquiry from the College of Heralds whether
there was authority for the view that the title "Prince" had not
normally held in this country any territorial implication. I
attach a copy of a note on this point which was prepared for you by
Strutt.
The matter was not considered again by the Cabinet because of The
Queen's desire that it should not be proceeded with at that time, but
at your request Strutt had some informal discussion with Garter King of
Arms. He showed him a copy of the memorandum and subsequently received
a letter expressing Garter's agreement with the view that the title of
Prince in this country is normally a courtesy title indicating certain
degrees of relationship to the Sovereign and having no power to govern,
the only exception being the title "Prince of Wales", which, as
indicated in Strutt's note, did at one time imply some executive
responsibility but has long ceased to do so.
If this point is raised during the discussions in Cabinet this
afternoon, perhaps you would be prepared to deal with it in the absence
of the Home Secretary.
Yours sincerely,
Frank Newsam
The Rt. Hon. Viscount Kilmuir, G.C.V.O.
S. of S.
The Title of "Prince"
In Great Britain the use of the title of "Prince" by the children of
the Sovereign is comparatively modern. During the Middle Age a
the King himself was never referred to as "Majesty", but in a number of
other ways, e.g. "Our Sovereign Lord The King", "The King's Highness",
and "The King's Grace". "Majesty" as a description of the
Sovereign came into use in the l6th century when in an age of
nationalism and of grave danger, first from the Holy Roman Empire, then
France, and then Spain, this "Realm" of England was declared, in the
Act forbidding Appeals to Rome in 1533 an "Empire".
With the increased splendour of the dignity of the Sovereign came an
increase dignity for the sons of the Sovereign, and Henry VII's
reign was the first in which all the King's sons began to be styled
"Princes".The exception had been the
eldest son of the Sovereign who, since the reign of Edward III, had
always been Duke of Cornwall by birth and, with one exception (Henry
VI), Prince of Wales by creation.
Edward I had conferred the Principality on his eldest son, afterwards
Edward II, who was summoned to and sat in Parliament as Prince of
Wales, but Edward the Black Prince was the person to whom the
Principality as well as the Dukedom was
granted.The Patent for the creation of
Edward, the son of Henry VI, as Prince of Wales in 1453-4 contains the
words :-
"We have made and created and by these Presents make and create him the
said Edward, Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester, and to the same
Edward we give and grant and by this Charter have confirmed the name,
style, title, state, dignity, and the honour of the said Principality
that he may therein in governing rule and in ruling direct and defend
... invested him to have and to hold to him and to his heirs Kings of
England for ever."
The Dukedom of Cornwall - the first creation of a Duke in England -
annexed certain specified possessions to the Duke of Cornwall (the
Black Prince) "habendum 'eidem duci et ipsius et heredum suorum regum
Anglie filiis primogenitis et dicti loci ducibus in regno Anglie
hereditarie successuris'."
The Black Prince was created Prince of Wales in 1343 and presumably was
given executive functions in the Principality, if the terms in
which the infant son of Henry VI was created Prince of Wales followed
precedent, as no doubt they did.
[
The patent of Edward Prince of Wales of June 3, 1911,
contains the
words "that he may preside there and may direct
and defend these
parts" - an interesting example of the survival into the
20th century of words of several
centuries' antiquity wholly inappropriate in modern conditions.]
In the 16th century Wales was incorporated with England,
made subject to English law and was then governed through the
Council of Wales. For centuries the
prince of Wales has had no executive responsibilities in the
Principality and as such has had no
Sovreignty.The Principality of Wales was
not a Sovereign House as some of the Principalities on the Continent,
particularly in Germany, e.g. the Prince of Lichtenstein.
In Scotland the eldest son of the Kings of Scotland was created Duke of
Rothesay in 1398, and like the Duke of Cornwall certain lands
"dominium de Bute, cum castro de Rothesay [and various other lands]...
Princibus primogenitis Regum Scotie, successorum nostrorum,
perpetuis temporibus futuris uniantur, incorporentur et
annexentur". Apparently the title "Prince of
Scotland", the origins of which are by no means clear, was
an established title by about 1500.
The first Charter creating the Principality of Scotland was granted in
1404 by King Robert III and was made permanent by Act of Parliament
somewhere about
1470. Henry, the eldest son of James VI,
was Prince of Scotland in 1603 at the Union of the Crowns but was not
created Prince of Wales until 1613. At
his death, his younger brother Charles became Prince of
Scotland. The title was last used in 1649
when Charles II became King on his father's
execution: I ignore the use of the title by the Old
Pretender.
Although the title Prince of Scotland has not been used, it is
interesting to record that in the Patent creating King George V's
eldest son Prince of Wales be is described as "Prince of the United
Kingdom and of Great Britain and Ireland, Duke of Cornwall and
Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the
Isles, and Great Steward of Scotland ...".
No Prince of Wales has had Sovereign Powers in his Principality for
centuries and there has been no Prince of Scotland for three
centuries. In Great Britain the style of
"Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland" is merely a title, implies no notion of Sovereignty or
territorial supremacy and is restricted to Princes of the Royal Family.
It is purely a courtesy and the holders of that title remain commoners
until they are raised to the Peerage, the only exception being the
eldest son of the Sovereign who at birth or, as in the case of Prince
Charles, at his mother's accession to the Throne, immediately becomes
Duke of Cornwall.
17th June. 1954.
SECRET
Prime Minister
1. You asked me to let you know my views on the proposal that Her
Majesty should confer on the Duke of Edinburgh the style and title of
"The Prince". It is hardly necessary to observe that over this
matter it is proving very much easier to offer destructive criticism
than to make constructive proposals, and I have borne this in
mind. I think that the title of "The
Prince" has certain advantages over anything which has hitherto been
proposed.
- It has not got the obvious disadvantage of titles with
territorial descriptions - e.g. Prince of England, Prince of London,
etc. – of provoking national or regional jealousies.
- It would, so far as I am aware, be unique as a formal style and
title in this country and therefore something personal to the Duke
alone.
- The title "Prince" carries no implication of sovereignty or
territorial supremacy.
2.
On the other hand this proposal too has its disadvantages.
- It might lead to confusion with other Princes and particularly
with the Prince of Wales if, In due course, that title is conferred on
the Duke of Cornwall: It would then be natural, and
in accordance with popular practice in the past, to refer to the
latter as "the Prince".
- The words "The Prince", In the same way as the words "The Queen",
are nowadays really a colloquialism, a shortened version, for every-day
use, of a longer and more formal title. It is a matter of the use
of language on which I should always hesitate to set my opinion against
yours, but I am doubtful whether "The Prince" has sufficient content
and significance.
- It might provoke discussion about the position of the Duke with
which I deal below (para. 4).
3.
I turn now to the question whether the Queen has power to do what is
proposed. I think She has. As the Fount of Honour She can confer
any style, title or dignity which She is pleased to, and "Prince" has
been described in Letters Patent as a "titular dignity". The use of the
title "Prince" by the children of the Sovereign is comparatively
modern: it did not become general until Henry VII's reign, although
since the reign of Edward I the eldest son of the Sovereign has always
been created Prince of Wales. Nowadays the use of the style
"Royal Highness" and the prefix "Prince" toy members of the Royal
Family is governed toy Letters Patent of George V dated 30th November,
1917; and there is a precedent for adding to the class of persons
entitled under those Letters Patent to the style and prefix. As
you will remember, by an omission, the children of Princess Elizabeth
and the Duke of Edinburgh born before Her accession to the Throne would
not have come within the terms of the Letters Patent of 1917. To
put this right Letters Patent were issued on the 22nd October, 1948,
conferring upon the children of the marriage the style and title of
H.R.H. and the titular dignity of Prince or Princess.
I can therefore see no objection to the Queen conferring this or any
other title She likes on the Duke, and no formal objection to Her
conferring the title "The Prince" quite shortly without a territorial
title or any qualifying words, although there are, I think, the
practical and aesthetic objections which I have already mentioned.
4.
A further question that must be considered is whether the Duke is now a
Prince or not., and this is a matter on which there is some
doubt. When George VI conferred the style and title of "Royal
Highness" on him in 1947, there was some correspondence in the
press about it, and while the authorities principally concerned were
agreed that the style of H.R.H. does not necessarily connote the rank
and dignity of Prince, there was a conflict of opinion on the question
whether or not it was correct to describe the Duke as a
Prince. Some said that he was not a Prince because when he became
naturalised he renounced his Greek and Danish Royal styles: others said
that in spite of naturalisation he remained a Prince. The
confusion was increased by the fact that in various formal documents he
has been differently described:
- In the Letters Patent of 1947 conferring the style of
H.R.H. upon him - "Sir Philip Mountbatten, Knight of Our Most
Noble Order of the Garter, Lieutenant in Our Navy".
- In the Letters Patent of the 22nd October, 1948, conferring style
and title on the children of the marriage of Princess Elizabeth and the
Duke - "His Royal Highness. Prince Philip”.
- In the Regency Act, 1953, and the Letters Patent of the
20th November, 1953, appointing Counsellors of State during the absence
of the Queen and the Duke on their Australian tour — "His Royal
Highness Philip, Duke of Edinburgh". This is the description that the
Duke himself used when registering the birth of Princess Anne.
These documents therefore are of no assistance in determining whether
the Duke is a Prince or not, but there remains the fact of his
membership of the Greek and Danish Royal Family. Any title
conferred by such, membership would be a dignity conferred by a foreign
Sovereign. Such dignities are not recognised by law in this
country, but the right to bear them may be granted by the
Sovereign. The Duke's "renunciation" of his Greek and Danish
titles must, I think, be regarded as an expression of his
intention not to seek the Sovereign's permission to use
then. If therefore the authorities are right that the style
of H.R.H. does not necessarily connote the rank and dignity of Prince
it would appear probable that it is not legally correct to describe the
Duke as a Prince in this country.
However that may be, the question is certainly arguable and the
controversy will be revived if the present proposal is proceeded
with. On the other hand, the conferment of a new title which
included the word "Prince" would solve the problem.
5.
To sum up. My opinion is that there are no constitutional or
legal obstacles to the proposal but that it has the disadvantages
which I have set out in paragraph 2 of this note. I
do not think that the style of the King's eldest brother at the French
Court -"Monsieur" - presents a good analogy. That style
arose by usage: the word was really a nickname which could not be
appropriately conferred by any formal process, just as, for
instance, it would be inappropriate to confirm by Letters Patent the
usage, which seems to have become fairly common with regard to the
Duke, of calling him "Prince Philip".
I am sorry to come to this conclusion, particularly as I have quite
failed to think of a style or dignity which is not open to some
objection. The best I can suggest is "The Prince of the United
Kingdom".
Kilmuir
26th February. 1955.
Home Office,
Whitehall. S.W.1.
28 February, 1955.
My dear George,
We were speaking the other day about the designation of the Duke of
Edinburgh.
In 1948 the General Register Office consulted us about the way in which
the birth of Prince Charles was to be registered. They sent over
a suggested entry, in column 4 of which (name and surname of
father) they had inserted:
"His Royal Highness Prince Philip".
I consulted Lascelles on this and he laid my letter before The King,
together with the draft entry, I have in my possession the entry,
as amended by The King in his own hand. The King amended column
4, name and surname of father, to read:
"His Royal Highness Philip, Duke of
Edinburgh".
Should you or the Lord Chancellor wish to see the actual document I
will, of course, send it over. But I keep it locked up in my safe
and am not going to have it registered until nearer the time of my
retirement as I think it is somewhat delicate to have lying about in a
file at the present time.
Your truly,
Austin Strutt
George Coldstream, Esq., C.B,
Thank you very much for troubling
to write to me about the designation of the Duke of
Edinburgh. I told the Lord Chancellor you had
said to me on the telephone about the circumstances attending the
registration of the birth of Prince Charles, but it is very helpful to
have this confirmation of your recollection.
I certainly do not think that it would be necessary for the Lord
chancellor to trouble you to send over the document, and I am not
surprised to hear that you are keeping it locked up in your safe.
GPC
RESTRICTED CIRCULATION
CABINET: 4TH FEBRUARY,
1955
(CC.(55) 9th Conclusions) Record of Confidential Discussion
DUKE OF EDINBURGH
THE PRIME MINISTER said that he had discussed with some of his Cabinet
colleagues, at informal meetings held on 11th May and 16th June, 1954,
a suggestion that His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh should
assume the title "Prince of the Commonwealth".
It had then been foreseen that this suggestion might give rise to some
difficulties, and it had not been pressed at that
time. The Queen had recently suggested however
that, while the Commonwealth Prime Ministers were in London, the
opportunity might be taken of ascertaining informally whether they
would all be prepared to support such a
proposal. He had therefore sounded some of
them. The Prime Ministers of Australia, New
Zealand and Pakistan had welcomed the suggestion; and the
Prime Minister of India had said that he himself would favour it,
though it might give rise to some criticism in his
country. The Deputy Prime Minister of South
Africa had said that he could offer no opinion without first consulting
his Government. The Prime Minister of Canada
had expressed misgivings: he thought that the assumption of
such a title might raise awkward constitutional questions.
The Prime Minister said that The Queen would not
wish to proceed with this suggestion unless it
had the full support of all Commonwealth
Governments. He thought that, if Canadian
Ministers could be persuaded to support it, it might be possible to
secure the agreement of South Africa.
THE LORD PRESIDENT said that this was a matter which directly affected
the relations of Commonwealth Governments with the
Crown. It would be unwise to proceed with the
suggestion unless it commanded the unanimous support of all
Commonwealth Governments.
There was general agreement with this view. The Cabinet took note
that the Prime Minister would report to them the result of the further
conversations which he was proposing to have on this question with the
Prime Minister of Canada and the Deputy Prime Minister of South Africa.
Cabinet Office, S.W.1. 11th February, 1955.
RESTRICTED CIRCULATION
CABINET
9TH FEBRUARY, 1955 (C.C,(55) 10th Conclusions)
Record of Confidential Discussion
THE PRIME MINISTER said that he had now been informed that the South
African Government would not be prepared to support the suggestion that
His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh should assume the title
"Prince of the Commonwealth". The Canadian Prime Minister had also
indicated that his Government would not be able to support this
suggestion. As the suggestion did not command the
unanimous support of all Commonwealth Governments, it would not be
possible to proceed with it at the present time; and he had
informed The Queen accordingly. Her Majesty accepted this position, but
it was still her wish that some formal title should be conferred on the
Duke of Edinburgh. She did not herself favour the title "Prince
Consort" or "Prince Royal".
In a short discussion several alternatives were put
forward. It was, in particular, suggested that
the title "His Royal Highness the Prince" might be
considered.
The Prime Minister undertook to consider this particular suggestion
further and to take a suitable opportunity of mentioning it informally
to The queen.
Cabinet Office. S.W.1.
11th. February, 1955.
RESTRICTED CIRCULATION
CABINET:
2ND MARCH, 1955 (C.C.(55) 19th Conclusions)
Record of Confidential Discussion
THE PRIME MINISTER said that in informal conversation with The Queen he
had put forward the suggestion that the Duke of Edinburgh should assume
the title "His Royal Highness The Prince". Her
Majesty had been favourably disposed towards
this. The next step would be to submit the
suggestion to her more formally in writing.
In discussion the question was raised whether the assumption of this
title would give the Duke of Edinburgh precedence over the Prince of
Wales. It was the general view of the Cabinet
that this was a point which could be left to be settled by Her Majesty
at a later stage. There was general agreement
that "His Royal Highness The Prince" was the most suitable title which
could be devised for the Duke of Edinburgh.
THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARY said that, as the title now suggested had no
territorial significance, there would be no occasion to consult other
Commonwealth Governments. It would, however, be
desirable that they should be informed before any public announcement
was made; and the appropriate channel for this
communication would be from Her Majesty's Private Secretary to
Governors-General.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR said that he had considered whether this was a
matter on which the Sovereign should act on advice from
Ministers. Though the point was open to
argument, it was his view that this would be a personal decision of the
Sovereign. Nevertheless, it would be expedient
that Her Majesty should consult her Ministers before a final decision
was taken. The point would be covered if the Prime Minister, in a
formal letter to The Queen, commended the suggestion to Her Majesty.
In further discussion it was suggested that The Queen's Birthday would
be a suitable occasion on which to announce the new title.
The Prime Minister invited the Lord Chancellor to submit to him a draft
of a Letter to the Queen commending the suggestion that the title “His
Royal Highness The Prince” should beformally conferred on the Duke of
Edinburgh. He also asked the Commonwealth Secretary to send him a
note on the procedure to be followed in relation to other Commonwealth
Governments. The matter would be brought before the Cabinet again, for
final decision, when these documents were available.
Cabinet Office, S.W.1.
3d March 1955.
45
Secret
Serial no. 7/55
Prime Minister
I cannot do better than send you the draft which the late Lord
Chancellor and I agreed last June and which you approved at that
time. If it is decided to adopt the title
"The Prince", the action with the Commonwealth Governments, other than
India, would be as set out in paragraph 3. At
the same time I would communicate the decision to the Government of
India as proposed at the end of paragraph 5.
(SGD) Swinton
3rd March. 1955.
Secret
1. The Prime Minister has now had a further opportunity of
discussing with some of his colleagues the alternative Titles which
Your Majesty wished us to consider further.
2. The Title “Prince of the United Kingdom” appeared to Ministers to be
open to the following objections. It would particularise the
United Kingdom too closely as distinct from the other parts of the
Commonwealth. Moreover, the designation of the United Kingdom in
Your Majesty’s present Style and Title is “United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland” which Your Majesty will agree would not
be
a felicitous Title. The suggestion was, however, made that
“Prince Royal” would be a high and suitable Title. Though there
might be a possibility of confusion of the Title with that of the
Princess Royal, Ministers thought that this possibility was so slight
as to be negligible. They thought that the combination of “Her
Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness the Prince Royal” had a very
dignified sound and that the Title “Prince Royal” would be generally
accepted and indeed acclaimed.
3. If Your Majesty should be pleased to favour this Title, Ministers
considered that there would be no need to consult with any other
Commonwealth Government. it would be sufficient for Your
Majesty’s Private Secretary to inform Governors General, in advance of
the conferment of the Title by Letters Patent under the Great Seal,
that it was Your Majesty’s intention to confer this title on His Royal
Highness.
4. If, however, Your Majesty wishes the Title to be “Prince of the
Commonwealth”, Ministers are convinced that it would be very desirable
to consult the other Commonwealth Governments and not merely to inform
them. In that event, Ministers would recommend that Your
Majesty’s Private Secretary should write or telegraph to the Governors
General of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Pakistan and
Ceylon in the terms of the attached draft.
5. Ministers also considered what action it would be proper to take in
regard to India. They do not think it would be either necessary
or proper for Your Majesty to consult the Indian Government. Your
Majesty is not the Queen of India and the conferment of a Title on His
Royal Highness is a prerogative act of Your Majesty as Queen. On
the other hand, Your Majesty is “Head of the Commonwealth”, and
Ministers think that it would be both right and courteous that the
Government of India shoud be informed at the same time that the other
Commonwealth Governments are informed or consulted. The Queen’s
Private Secretary has no direct contact with the President of India in
the same way that he has with the Governors General of other
Commonwealth Countries. It would therefore be appropriate that
the intimation of Your Majesty’s intention should be made by the
Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.
L. Swinton agreed, subject to a small
drafting amendment to the letter to the Queen. 7/3
7th March, 1955.
TOP SECRET
PERSONAL
Dear Smedley.
The Lord Chancellor would like Lord Swinton to see the attached draft
of a minute from the Lord Chancellor to the Prime Minister enclosing a
draft letter, also attached, from the Prime Minister to the
Queen. He would he glad to know whether Lord Swinton agrees with
these drafts. The matter is somewhat pressing, since the Prime Minister
intends to mention the matter at his audience with the Queen tomorrow
evening and I have told Colville that we will do our best to get the
drafts over to No. 10 either this evening or first thing tomorrow
morning. Perhaps when Lord Swinton has had an opportunity of
looking at the papers you will he good enough to telephone me - if he
has any amendments of substance to make I shall be glad to have them by
hand as soon as you are able to send them.
Yours sincerely,
C.W. B. RANKIN
H. Smedley, Esq, M.B.E.
Prime Minister
1. At the meeting of the cabinet on the 2nd March I was invited to
submit to you a draft of a letter to the Queen commending the
suggestion that the title “His Royal Highness The Prince” should
formally be conferred on the Duke of Edinburgh. I accordingly
submit a draft. The Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations
has seen it and agrees with it.
2. I have made no mention in the draft of the doubts which exist about
whether the Duke can properly be described as a Prince in this
country. This is a delicate subject, and since I sent you my
minute of the 26th February I have received certain information which
makes it appear that His late Majesty King George VI, in conferring
upon the Duke in 1947 the style “His Royal Highness” did not intend at
the same time to confer upon him the rank of Prince.
3. You will note that the draft includes the suggestion that the title
should be conferred by Letters Patent. I have no doubt that this
would be the most suitable means: it follows the precedent of 1857 when
Queen Victoria conferred upon Prince Albert the title “Prince Consort”
by the same means.
I have considered whether it would be preferable to proceed by
legislation, for that would present an opportunity to correct a
somewhat irritating anomaly that exists in regard to the Duke’s
precedence in Parliament. The Queen has already conferred upon
him precedence next to Her Majesty everywhere save in Parliament, for
precedence in Parliament is still regulated by the old Act of Henry
VIII. In Parliament the Duke is placed below the Royal Dukes, the
Archbishops, the Great Officers of State and the non-royal Dukes, and
in my opinion he can only be placed higher by an Act of
Parliament. It would be pleasant to correct this anomaly, and if
the title “His Royal Highness The Prince” were to be conferred by
legislation it could be done at the same time. I do not advise
this course however.
Legislation here would raise doubts whether legislation in other
Commonwealth countries was required, and the Duke’s precedence in
Parliament is not of great moment, for the only occasions on which he
is likely to attend the House of Lords are when he accompanies the
Queen at the Opening of Parliament and takes his place to the left of
the Throne. Moreover, I think it is always advisable to keep
these matters concerning the Royal Family out of the Parliamentary
arena.
4. I have given further consideration to the question whether this is a
matter in which the Queen should receive formal advice, and although it
is such a private matter I have come to the conclusion that it is
desirable that She should. I find that Queen Victoria in 1856 not
only consulted Her Ministers but also, since Her original intention was
that the title “Prince Consort” should be conferred by Act of
Parliament, sent a memorandum to the leaders of the opposition
enclosing a draft of Bill prepared by the Chancellor (Letters of
Queen Victoria Vol. III pp. 244-247 and 249-251). The Queen is
the fountain of honour and conferment of Honours is a prerogative
act. In practice, however, it is only the Garter, the Thistle,
the Order of Merit and the Royal Victorian Order which She confers
without consulting her Ministers, if only for the reason that any
criticism that may arise should fall upon them and not upon her.
For the same reason it is expedient that in this matter also She should
have the advantage of receiving formal advice, although it is a matter
that touches Her so personally that no objection, in my opinion, could
be taken if She declined to act upon the advice.
K.
7th March 1955
Draft
The Prime Minister with his humble duty begs to inform Your Majesty
that he has discussed with his colleagues the suggestion which he made
informally to Your Majesty that Your Majesty might be pleased to confer
upon the Duke of Edinburgh the title “His Royal Highness The Prince."
2. Ministers desire to commend this title to Your Majesty, if Your
Majesty should be disposed to favourt it, and believe that its
conferment upon the Duke would be widely acclaimed and would give great
satisfaction to Your Majesty’s subjects. Ministers considered
that the title having no territorial description attached to it, would
not provoke any national or regional jealousies, and being unique as a
style and title in this country, would have the advantage that it was a
distinction personal to the Duke alone.
3. If Your Majesty should be pleased to confer the title upon the Duke,
Ministers considered that the most appropriate means would be by
Letters Patent under the Great Seal, and that the most suitable moment
for an announcement, if Your Majesty thought fit, would be on the
occasion of Your Majesty’s birthday.
4. Ministers further considered that there would be no need to
consult any other Commonwealth Government. It would be sufficient
for Your Majesty’s Private Secretary to inform Governors General, in
advance of the conferment of the title, that it was Your Majesty’s
intention to confer it.
5. Ministers also considered what action it would be proper to take in
regard to India (and to Pakistan if by the time of the announcement it
has become a Republic). They think that it would be right that
the Indian Government should be similarly informed at the same
time. The Queen’s Private Secretary has no direct contact with
the President of India in the same way that he has with the Governors
General of other Commonwealth countries. It would therefore be
appropriate that the intimation of Your Majesty’s intention should be
made by the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.
The above is humbly submitted by Your Majesty’s dutiful servant and
subject
Prime Minister’s Personal Minute
serial no. M 46/55
9/3
Lord Chancellor
Thank you for your excellent paper. I do not think it is
necessary to suggest a date to the Queen, and the event would have more
distinction if it were not mixed up with the ordinary Honours List,
including the Party Honours. As it is my submission, I have sent it
informally to the Queen as amended.
WSC
Secret
PRIME MINISTER
I have as you requested looked into the question of the form in
which The Queen might announce her wish that the Duke of Edinburgh
should be known as Prince Philip, and in the following paragraph I
suggest the form in which a note might be sent to Sir Michael Adeane.
"I have considered most carefully the
form in which effect might be given to The Queen's wishes regarding the
Duke of Edinburgh's title.
When Prince Albert was given the style and title of Prince Consort in
1857 they were granted by Letters Patent. I feel that the
constitutionalists would question any announcement of the Queen's
Pleasure if there were no formal document conferring on the Duke the
style and title of Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories. They would
contend that if Letters Patent were necessary in 1857 they are equally
necessary today.
Once the Letters Patent had been issued I think that an announcement
should be made in the London Gazette to the effect that Her Majesty has
been graciously pleased to declare Her will and pleasure that His Royal
Highness the Duke of Edinburgh shall henceforth be known as His Royal
Highness Prince Philip."
R. A. BUTLER
8th February, 1957.
Well, is it correct to say Prince Philip?
by P. Wykeham-Bourne
The Evening Standard, Feb. 8,
1957, p. 10.
ONCE again the argument has blown up whether the Duke of Edinburgh is
or is not a Prince. The official programme of his three-day visit to
the Gambia, in which he is referred to throughout as Prince Philip, has
upset some people.
For over nine years, since his marriage to the Queen, no one has really
known the answer to this question. No official pronouncement has ever
been made, and officials always hedge when asked for a ruling. This
leads one to conclude that no unanimity has yet been reached by them.
Debrett says he is a Prince: Burke that he is not. One London Gazette
announcement referred to the marriage solemnised between Princess
Elizabeth and " His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh."
Yet when Princess Anne was born, her birth certificate omitted the
style of Prince from her father's titles. It is undisputed that Philip
was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark, but he had to relinquish these
foreign titles on becoming a British subject. He then assumed the
surname of his mother's family and became Lieutenant Philip
Mountbatten, RN, a British commoner. When King George VI created him a
Knight of the Garter and a Royal Highness on the eve of his wedding,
his peerage titles were gazetted in a most extraordinary way, as His
Royal Highness Sir Philip Mountbatten.
Some officials may have advised King George that he could not create
his son-in-law a Prince on the argument that a British Prince normally
is so born and not created. Precedents are always followed on matters
of this sort What are the precedents in this case?
There has certainly never been in Britain a Royal Highness who was not
a Prince, nor a Prince who was not a Royal Highness or Highness. There
was no need
for Queen Victoria to create her husband a Prince, since Prince Albert
was never required to give up his title of birth.
There is a precedent for the creation of Princesses. Edward VII ordered
the College of Arms to set the machinery in action to create his two
granddaughters — children of his daughter the Princess Royal—
Highnesses and Princesses. The elder of these is Princess Arthur of
Connaught; the younger, the late Princess Maud, voluntarily
relinquished the style on marrying the Earl of Southesk. If it could be
done for them, why not for Philip?
Those who argue that Philip is a Prince, base their view on the
common-sense one that this title cannot be divorced from that of a
Royal Highness. They say that HRH is to a Prince what His Grace is to a
Duke, merely a descriptive style for a substantive title. If not, these
words are meaningless and ambiguous. If he is royal, but not a Prince,
what is he?
If the argument is upheld that a British Prince cannot be created and
Philip has only the empty adjectival style of HRH, then the Duke of
Windsor is in the same position, for the princely title with which he
was born passed from him on succession to the throne.
The London Gazette of May 28, 1937, which confirmed his style of HRH,
did not name him Prince, but who can doubt that this was his brother's
intention and that the two titles are
inseparable?
No one has dared to clarify the situation, but surely the Duke's, and
presumably the Queen's, view was made clear in 1954, when a Royal
Society of Arts medal, which he chose, was struck with the inscription
"Prince Philip, President."
Thus the Duke, who signs as Philip, the prerogative of a Prince, has
vindicated the name, by which the man in the street has always called
him.
The time is long overdue for an official pronouncement confirming that
the Queen's consorts is undoubtedly a Prince. If not, why not ?
Top Secret
Lord Chancellor:
Your people are not sure whether you saw the attached draft over the
weekend. The Home Secy. has only one minor drafting suggestion on
it, which I have marked on p. 3.
The Prime Minister may wish to have a word after Cabinet about this, if
you have any points on it.
J.B. 10/2
Draft letter from the Prime Minister to Sir Michael Adeane
TOP SECRET
I have thought over the question of finding a more generally acceptable
title for the Duke of Edinburgh which would appeal to the whole people
and recognise the unique position which he has earned for himself by
his immense contributions to the life of the Commonwealth. I have
also discussed this with two or three of my most senior
colleagues. It would have been very attractive if some such
title as "The Prince of the Commonwealth" had been a practical
proposition but I have read carefully through the minutes that were
prepared nearly two years ago and I am convinced that in the present
rather uncertain phase of Commonwealth development it would be an error
for such a proposal to be put to the Prime Ministers of all the
separate independent countries for their approval.
We have therefore been thinking of some way in which we could achieve
this purpose without the necessity for doing more than informing the
Prime Ministers, with reasonable certainty that they would raise no
objection.
There are two possible titles which might be
used. One would be "The Prince". We feel
that this falls between the two stools of being neither sufficiently
formal nor sufficiently popular. It sounds either rather
stiff, or to be a colloquialism or shortened version of a longer title.
It would seem to me however that it would be quite suitable if The
Queen were to confer upon the Duke in a formal way the Style and
Dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Her other Realms and Territories. That having
been done, presumably by Letters Patent, an announcement could be made
in the London Gazette that Her Majesty had been graciously pleased to
declare Her will and pleasure that His Royal Highness the Duke of
Edinburgh should henceforth be known as "His Royal Highness Prince
Philip”, or "His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh".
If Her Majesty thought this title appropriate I feel confident that the
public would feel that it [had just that combination of more honourable
position with the] [was both distinctive and had a] popular appeal
which I think The Queen would like.
10, Downing Street,
February 11, 1957.
Dear Adeane,
I have thought over the question of finding a more generally acceptable
title for the Duke of Edinburgh which would appeal to the whole people
and recognise the unique position which he has earned for himself by
his immense contributions to the life of the Commonwealth. I have
also discussed this with two or three of my most senior
colleagues.
It would have been very attractive if some such title as "The Prince of
the Commonwealth" had been a practical proposition, but I have read
carefully through the minutes that were prepared nearly two years ago
and I am convinced that in the present rather uncertain phase of
Commonwealth development it would be an error for such a proposal to be
put to the Prime Ministers of all the separate independent countries
for their approval.
We have therefore been thinking of some way in which we could achieve
this purpose without the necessity for doing more than informing the
Prime Ministers, with reasonable certainty that they would raise no
objection.
There are two possible titles which might be used. One would be
"The Prince". We feel that this falls between the two stools of
being neither sufficiently formal nor sufficiently popular. It
shoulds either rather stiff, or to be a colloquialism or shortened
version of a longer title.
It would seem to me however that it would be quite suitable if The
Queen were to confer upon the Duke in a formal way the Style and
Dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Her other Realms and Territories. That having been
done, presumably by Letters Patent, an announcement could be made in
the London Gazette that Her Majesty had been graciously pleased to
declare Her will and pleasure that His Royal Highness the Duke of
Edinburgh should henceforth be known as "His Royal Highness Prince
Philip", or "His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh", as
She may prefer.
I should be grateful if you would seek The Queen's views on this
suggestion, which, if Her Majesty wishes, I would discuss with Her
tomorrow evening.
Yours very sincerely,
HAROLD MACMILLAN.
Lieutenant-Colonel
the Rt. Hon. Sir Michael Adeane, K.C.B., K.C.V.O.
10, Downing Street, Whitehall.
February 13, 1957.
In confirmation of my telephone call this afternoon, I now send you a
copy of a letter which the Prime Minister sent to the Queen's Private
Secretary on February 11. As I explained we thought that the form of
words of the Style and Dignity proposed in the penultimate paragraph of
this letter made it unnecessary to do more than inform other
Commonwealth Prime Ministers. On reconsideration this seems, to
say the least, doubtful, and I would be grateful if you could give me
urgently, the views of your experts. It is not merely a question
of legal obligation, but rather of desirability. That is to say,
if The Queen were to confer upon the Duke of Edinburgh the Style and
Dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northhern Ireland
and Her
other Realms and Territories, would it be desirable that other
Commonwealth Prime Ministers should be consulted, and not merely
informed, in advance?
In view of at least one of the replies from other Commonwealth Prime
Ministers in connection with a similar proposal made by Mr. Menzies
last summer, it seems to me to be clear that we should not embark on
such a process of consultation.
Accordingly, if your advice is that this form of words makes
consultation desirable, I should advise the Prime Minister to propose
to the Queen that the form of words should be amended by omitting the
words underlined above. If that were done, I take it that quite
clearly it would be sufficient to inform, and not consult, other
Commonwealth Prime Ministers. I should be grateful if you would
let me have your views on this point also.
Finally, I must apologize for not having brought the Commonwealth
Relations Office into this matter at an earlier stage. I am
afraid that I assumed, in the way that this matter was considered, that
for technical reasons the longer form of words proposed made
consultation unnecessary.
I hope to be able to advise the Prime Minister so that he can make a
formal submission to The Queen as soon as possible tomorrow, in which
it may be necessary for him to explain that he would now propose a
different form of words from those suggested in his letter to Adeane.
I am sending copies of this letter to Coldstream and Strutt, and also
to Pittam, Rankin, and Hunt.
(Sgd.) F.A, BISHOP
D.I. Cole, Esq., M.C.
Commonwealth Relations Office
TOP SECRET
12th February 1957.
I am enclosing a first draft of a Warrant leading to the issue of
Letters Patent conferring the style and dignity of a Prince of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of The Queen's
other realms and territories on His Royal Highness The Duke of
Edinburgh.
The draft is, in the main, modelled on the letters Patent issued on the
2nd July, 1857, granting the title and dignity of Prince Oonsort to
H.R.H, Prince Albert. But, bearing in mind the terms of the Prime
Minister's minute to Adeane, I have included a recital recognising the
regard, etc. in which the Duke is generally held. It would be possible,
no doubt, to add a phrase recognising the "services" or "contribution"
which he has rendered or made to the life of the Commonwealth, but I am
not sure, as a matter of taste, that it is wholly appropriate and it
would find no analogue in the Prince Consort's Letters
Patent.
The subject matter of these Letters Patent is a personal honour, not
descendible like a hereditary peerage. So far as I am aware, it will be
the first time that anyone has been created a Prince of the United
Kingdom and Northern Ireland and of The Queen's other realms and
territories. I have tried to avoid giving the impression that a new
Commonwealth style and dignity is being granted in contrast to a style
and dignity in the realms and territories of which Her Majesty is
Queen. I should be grateful if you would give special attention to this
point when you are considering the draft, bearing in mind again the
terms of the Brims Minister's minute to Adeane.
The draft says nothing about the title by which The Queen wishes the
Duke to be known in future. On reflection I still think that this is
the right course and that The Queen's Pleasure should be made known
in a Gazette notice, whilst the Letters Patent should he confined
to the grant of the actual style and dignity to be conferred.
GEORGE COLDSTREAM.
F. A. Bishop, Esq.
top SECRET
12th February 1957.
Bishop rang me up this afternoon to confirm a note which you sent me. I
have prepared a first draft of the Warrant and you will forgive me, I
know, if I ask you to look at the attached copy of the letter I have
sent to Bishop drawing attention to the special matters on which I
should be grateful for your help. But of course I want your comments on
the document as a whole. Will you let me know as soon as you are
ready when I should be glad to discuss the draft with you?
GEORGE COLDSTREAM.
Sir Austin Strutt, K.C.V.O., C.B.
February 13, 1957
Prime Minister
10, Downing Street
Whitehall
SECRET
My dear Coldstream,
The Prime Minister yesterday evening discussed with The Queen
the proposal for a new Style and I Dignity for the Duke of Edinburgh.
The Queen welcomed his proposals, and the Prime Minister will therefore
make a formal submission today. I enclose a copy of the draft formal
submission, on which I should welcome your comments in case the wording
is open to any technical objection. I have also sent a copy to Pittam
in the Home Office.
The draft Warrant which you sent me with your letter of yesterday seems
entirely suitable from the Prime Minister's point of view.
Yours sincerely,
Bishop
Sir George Coldstream, K.C.B.
DRAFT LETTER FROM THE PRIME MINISTER TO THE QUEEN
Mr..Macmillan with his humble duty to The Queen,
My senior colleagues and I feel that the great services which the Duke
of Edinburgh has gendered to this country over many years, and his
unique contribution to the life of the Commonwealth, culminating in the
tour which is now reaching its conclusion, should receive some
significant mark of public recognition,
I therefore humbly propose that Your Majesty should be pleased to
confer upon the Duke the Style and Dignity of a Prince of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Your other Realms and
Territories. This would be done, if Your Majesty
pleases, by Royal arrant leading to the issue of Letters Patent.
I further suggest, if such a proposal is approved, that an announcement
should be made in the London Gazette that Your Majesty had been
graciously pleased to declare Your Will and Pleasure that the Duke
should henceforth be known as "His Royal Highness Prince Philip,
Duke of Edinburgh". It would be fitting that this announcement should
be Bade soon after the return of Your Majesty and the Duke from
Portugal.
I feel sure that such a distinction would be a proper public
recognition of the position which the Duke of Edinburgh undoubtedly
holds in the life of the nation, and that it would be widely welcomed.
Mr. Macmillan with his humble duty remains Your Majesty's most faithful
and devoted servant.
14th February 1957
I believe that Bishop may have told you that he has brought me into
consultation over the form of the formal Submission which the Prime
Minister is making to The Queen in connection with The Duke of
Edinburgh's new title. I had a discussion with Bishop after lunch
today and in the course of it he suggested that I should send you a
draft of the Warrant which I have prepared for the conferment of the
new title.
I am enclosing a copy of the draft Warrant on which 1 should be very
grateful for your opinion, and on which I should like to make a few
observations.
In preparing the draft, I have followed, to some extent, the terms of
the Letters Patent which were issued on the 2nd July, 1857, when Queen
Victoria granted the title and dignity of Prince Consort to Prince
Albert. As in that case, the present draft is intended to
lead to the grant of a personal titular dignity, which may be
contrasted with the grant of an inheritable dignity like a peerage
which descends to the successors (if any) of the grantee.
There is no doubt that The Queen, as the Fount of Honour, may confer on
any of her subjects any style or titular dignity She
pleases. Thus the title need have no territorial or other
qualification, although in this case it is proposed to couple the
titular dignity of "Prince" with a territorial definition and one which
has already been recognised in letters Patent. For instance, in
the Patent creating King George V's eldest son Prince of Wales, he was
described as "Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland" as well as Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay, etc, etc.
The grant of the the titular dignity will not affect The Duke's
precedence which is already governed by the Royal Sign Manual Warrant
of the 5th January, 1953, in all places except in Parliament,
where his precedence as a Duke is governed by the House of Lords
Precedence Act, 1539 (31 Hen. 8. c.10).
I must draw your attention to the fact that the draft warrant
does not describe His Royal Highness as "Prince Philip" although the
Letters Patent of 22nd October, 1948, conferring the style and title of
Prince and Princess on the children of the marriage of The Queen and
The Duke, so described him, and there is doubt, at any rate in
the public mind, whether he is correctly described as a Prince in
this country. You may know that the Lord Chancellor
considered this point at the invitation of the Prime Minister on the
last occasion when the question of a new title for The Duke came
up. Lord Kilmuir then thought that "it would appear
probable that it is not legally correct to describe The Duke as a
Prince in this country". I have adopted this view in
the draft
not merely as a matter of law, but because it seemed to me
inappropriate to do so in a document the object of which is to confer
the titular dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, and which will set the doubt at rest.
I should be very grateful for your opinion on the wording which I
have suggested for this important document, particularly on the wording
of the recital.
I understand that, if the Queen approves the Submission which the Prime
Minister is to make to Her, it would be desired to have the Warrant
ready for Her Majesty's signature on Her return from Portugal.
If, therefore, the draft could be approved before the Queen left this
country, or if it could be settled by (say) Tuesday of next week, the
Letters Patent could be prepared and would be ready for sealing on
Friday, 22nd February, on which day the proposed announcement about the
name by which She wishes The Duke to be known in future could be issued
too.
GEORGE COLDSTREAM.
Prime Minister
10, Downing Street
Whitehall
SECRET
February 14, 1957
My Dear Coldstream,
You will have seen a copy of my letter of yesterday to Cole about the
difficulties arising from the wording of the Style and Dignity which
the Prime Minister proposed to recommend to The Queen to confer on the
Duke of Edinburgh.
I have now discussed this question with the Commonwealth Secretary. In
Lord Home's view, the inclusion of the words "and Her other Realms and
Territories" would have made it essential for other Commonwealth Prime
Ministers to be consulted, and not merely informed, in advance. He
appreciated that in the light of the replies which were received from
Commonwealth Prime Ministers to Mr. Menzies' proposal last summer, it
might not be a straightforward matter to secure the concurrence of all
other Commonwealth Prime Ministers concerned in a Style and Dignity
which included those words. It was, of course, on these grounds that
the Prime Minister, and the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor, had
reached the view that it was desirable to find some wording which would
not make it necessary to do more than inform the other Commonwealth
Prime Ministers.
Lord Home took the view that if these words were left out, and if the
Style and Dignity were simply "A Prince of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland" it would not be necessary for other
Commonwealth Prime Ministers to be consulted. (He pointed out
that it would be desirable to explain the proposal particularly fully
to Mr. Menzies, in view or his earlier proposal.) You told me this
morning that this was also your view, and I assume that it is shared by
Strutt.
I therefore now propose to put before the Prime Minister a
formal submission for him to send to The Queen, in the terms of the
enclosed draft, and would be grateful for any comments you have on it
as soon as possible.
You will also wish to reconsider the wording of the draft Warrant which
you sent me with your letter of February 12. I think that it
would be convenient if, as soon as we have had The Queen's reply to the
formal submission, the Warrant were shown to the Palace for informal
approval. It would be desirable for this to be done sometime on
Friday.
I am sending copies of this letter and the enclosure to Strutt and
Pittam, and to Rankin, Cole and Hunt.
Yours sincerely,
Bishop
Sir George Coldstream, K.C.B.
DRAFT LETTER FROM THE PRIME
MINISTER TO THE QUEEN
Mr. Macmillan with his humble duty to The Queen.
My senior colleagues and I feel that the great services which the Duke
of Edinburgh has rendered to this country over many years, and his
unique contribution to the life of the Commonwealth, culminating in the
tour which is now reaching its conclusion, should receive some
significant mark of public recognition.
I therefore humbly propose that Your Majesty should be pleased to
confer upon the Duke the Style and Dignity of a Prince of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
I have considered whether the territorial description of the Style and
Dignity should extend to Your Majesty's other Realms and Territories.
On reflection I think it would be best if it were not
to do so, as such a form would be an innovation. As such, it would be
necessary to consult other Commonwealth Governments about it. The
present proposal is made by Your Majesty's Ministers in the United
Kingdom, and it is right that the Style and Dignity should be consonant
with the territories for which they are responsible.
The Style and Dignity I propose, if Your Majesty Pleases, could be
conferred by Royal Warrant leading to the issue of Letters Patent.
I further suggest, if such a proposal is approved, that an announcement
should be made in the London Gazette that Your Majesty had been
graciously pleased to declare Your Will and Pleasure that the Duke
should henceforth be known as "His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke
of Edinburgh". It would be fitting that this announcement should be
made soon after the return of Your Majesty and the Duke from Portugal.
I feel sure that such a distinction would be a proper public
recognition of the position which the Duke of Edinburgh undoubtedly
holds in the life of the nation, and that it would be widely welcomed.
Mr. Macmillan with his humble duty remains Your Majesty's most faithful
and devoted servant,
14th February 1957.
I am enclosing -
(1) a copy of the grant to the Prince Consort of the 2nd July,
1857.
(2) a redraft of the current Warrant which I have amended to take
account of the altered form of Style and Dignity.
Apart from cutting out the references to "Our other Realms and
territories", I have deleted references to all Our loving subjects, and
to making known "Our purposes" "to Our peoples everywhere".
F.A. Bishop, Esq.
TOP SECRET
14th February 1957.
You will have heard from Bishop that it has been decided to drop "of
Our other Realms and Territories" in the new title. I amended the draft
which you were good enough to consider yesterday to give effect to the
revised instructions in that respect and I have also made some
corrections, and I hope improvements, in the wording,
I had a short talk with Bishop after lunch today and he suggested that
it would be a good thing if I sent Adeane a copy of the draft and drew
attention to any special points which I thought he ought to have in
mind.
Here is a copy of the latest draft Warrant and of my letter to Adeane.
Would you kindly let me have your comments?
Mr Strutt telephoned today to say
that he had no comments either on the letter or on the draft warrant.
GPC 15.ii.57
Sir Austin Strutt, KC.V.O., C.B.
Draft
II 14 February 1957
as setteld with Bishop and No. 10. GPC
ELIZABETH THE SECOND By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and
Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the Faith To all
to whom these Presents shall cone Greeting WHEREAS is
testimony of the great love which We bear towards Our dearly beloved
Husband and Counsellor His Royal Highness Philip Duke of Edinburgh
Knight of Our Most Noble Order of the Garter Knight of Our Most Ancient
and Most Noble Order of the Thistle Grand Master and First or Principal
Knight Grand Gross of Our Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
Admiral of Our Fleet and being sensible of the high regard and
affection in which he is held by Our loving subjects We are desirous of
conferring upon him a style and dignity appropriate to his rank and
station NOW KNOW YE that We of Our especial grace certain
knowledge and mere motion do by these Presents give
and grant unto His Royal Highness Philip Duke of Edinburgh the Style
and Titular Dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland to have and at all times to hold and enjoy the
said Style and Titular Dignity in addition to any other titles of
honour which to him belong or at any time hereafter may belong Our Will
and Pleasure further is that Our Earl Marsha! of England or his Deputy
for the time being do cause these Our letters or the enrolment thereof
to be recorded in Our College of Arms to the end that Our
Officers of Arms and all others may take due notice thereof IN WITNESS
WHEREOF We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent Witness
Ourselves at Westminster
the
day of February in the sixth year of Our Reign.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE
15th February, 1957.
TOP SECRET
My dear Coldstream,
Thank you for your letter of 14th February and for the enclosed draft
Warrant which deals with The Duke of Edinburgh's new title.
I am most grateful to you for sending this before The Queen's departure
for Portugal and I have, this morning, laid it before Her Majesty who
has given it her approval.
That is to say, she has no comments to make on the drafting or form of
words,which she thinks excellent. I should, however, point out
that she has not yet signed the Prime Minister's formal submission; Her
Majesty hopes to do this tomorrow, Saturday evening after which I shall
telegraph to Bishop.
Yours sincerely,
M Adeane
Sir George Coldstream, K.C.B.
Prime Minister
10, Downing Street
Whitehall
February 15, 1957
TOP SECRET AND PERSONAL
my dear Coldstream,
For your personal information, I should let you and the others
primarily concerned know the position about the submission for a new
Style and Dignity for the Duke of Edinburgh.
The Prime Minister made a formal submission in the terms of the draft
enclosed with my letter of February 14, amended as you proposed. The
Queen has seen this, and, subject to one point, is content with it.
That point is that the form by which The Queen would wish the Duke of
Edinburgh henceforth to be known should be "His
Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh".
However, before signifying Her formal approval, and proceeding with the
matter, The Queen naturally wishes to speak to the Duke of
Edinburgh, and this She will probably do soon after Her arrival
tomorrow in Portugal.
Until I hear from Adeane, the Prime Minister will not, of course, send
any message on this matter to the other Commonwealth Prime
Ministers.
I
I am sending copies of this letter to Strutt, Pittam, Rankin, Cole and
Hunt.
Sir George Coldstream, K.C.B.
Draft Warrant
This draft warrant has been read and
approved by the Queen. GPC 15 ii 57
ELIZABETH THE SECOND By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and
Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the Faith To all
to whom these Presents shall come Greeting WHEREAS in
testimony of the great love which We bear towards Our most dearly
beloved Husband and most faithful Counsellor His Royal Highness Philip
Duke of Edinburgh Knight of Our Most Noble Order of the Garter Knight
of Our Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle Grand Master
and First or Principal Knight Grand Gross of Our Most Excellent Order
of the British Empire Admiral of Our Fleet And being sensible of the
high regard and affection in which he is held by Our loving subjects We
are desirous of conferring upon him a style and dignity appropriate to
his rank and station NOW KNOW YE that We of Our especial
grace certain knowledge and acre notion do by these Presents give and
grant unto His Hoyal Highness Philip Duke of Edinburgh the Style and
Titular Dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland to have and at all times to hold and enjoy the said
Style and Titular Dignity in addition to any other titles of honour
which to him belong or at any tins hereafter may belong Our Will and
Pleasure further is that Our Earl Marshal of England or his Deputy for
the time being do cause these Our Letters or the enrolment thereof to
be recorded in Our College of Arms to the end that Our Officers of Arms
and all others may take due notice thereof IN WITNESS whereof We have
caused these Our Letters to be made Patent Witness Ourself at
Westminster the twenty-second day of February in the sixth year
of Our Reign.
TOP SECRET
18th February 1957.
Many thanks for sending me a copy of your proposed Gazette notice about
the new title. I have no comment to offer, save that I am not sure
whether the word "the" should be as you propose; or thus "The". Would
you let me know, in due time, which it is going to be (although it does
not affect any of the documents with which I am concerned).
While I am writing, would you mind letting me know whether I am to get
my formal instructions to prepare the Warrant from the HomeSecretary or
from the Prime Minister? I shall tend over the Warrant either to you or
to No.10 on Thursday, so that it will be ready for signature on Friday
morning.
Sir Austin Strutt, K.C.V.O., C.B.
PRIME MINISTER
10 Downing Street, Whitehall.
February 18, 1957.
TOP SECRET
Dear Strutt,
Adeane sent me a telegram from Portugal on February 17
saying that The Queen had approved the submission, and I accordingly
enclose a formal "giving effect" letter.
I presume that informal approval of the revised draft Warrant, which
Coldstream sent with his letter of February l4, was obtained, and that
it will now be possible to go ahead with the preparation of the
Warrant. I understand that The Queen would propose to sign this
immediately on her return to this country on February 21, so that the
Letters Patent and the announcement in the London Gazette can be made
on February 22.
Yours sincerely,
(Sgd.) FREDDY BISHOP
Sir Austin Strutt, K.C.V.O., C.B.,
Home Office.
Secretary of State
Home Department
WHITEHALL.
18th February, 1957.
Sir,
I am to signify to you The Queen's Commands that you prepare a Warrant
for Her Majesty's Signature, addressed to the Lord High Chancellor, to
cause Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the Realm
granting the Style and Titular Dignity of a Prince of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland unto His Royal Highness
Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, K.G., K.T., G.B.E, by the name
style and title of His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of
Edinburgh, K.G., K.T., G.B.E., and that such Warrant shall set forth
the tenor and effect of such Letters Patent, and shall contain all such
clauses as are usual and requisite.
I am, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
For the Secretary of State.
F. A. Newsam
The Clerk of the Crown in Chancery,
&c., &c., &c.
To all to whom these Presents shall come Greeting WHEREAS
in testimony of the great love which We bear towards Our most dearly
beloved Husband and most faithful Counsellor His Royal Highness Philip
Duke of Edinburgh Knight of our Most Noble Order of the Garter Knight
of Our Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle Grand Master
and First or Principal Knight Grand Cross of Our Host Excellent Order
of the British Empire Admiral of Our Fleet And being sensible of the
high regard and affection in which he is held by Our loving subjects We
are desirous of conferring upon him a style and dignity appropriate to
his rank and station NOW KNOW YE that we
of Our especial grace certain knowledge and mere notion do by these
Presents give and grant unto His Royal Highness Philip Duke of
Edinburgh the Style and Titular Dignity of a Prince of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and northern Ireland to have and at all times
to hold and enjoy the said style and titular Dignity in addition to any
other titles of honour salon to him belong or at any time hereafter may
belong Our Will and Pleasure further is that Our Earl Marshal of
England or his Deputy for the time being do cause these Our Letters or
the enrolment thereof to be recorded in Our College of Arms to the
end that Our Officers of Arms and all all others may take due notice
thereof In Witness whereof We have caused these Our Letters
to be made Patent Witness Ourself at Westminster the twenty-second day
of February in the sixth year of Our Reign.
BY WARRANT UNDER THE QUEEN'S SIGN MANUAL
COLDSTREAM
I, Sir George Phillipe Coldstream, K.C.B., Clerk of the Crown in
Chancery, do hereby certify that the above is a true copy of Her
Majesty's Letters Patent under the Great Baal bearing data the
twenty-second day of February, 1957.
Clerk of the Crown in Chancery.
10, Downing street
Whitehall
February 21, 1957
Top Secret
Thank you for sending on to me Michael's letter of February 17
with which he returned the Prime Minister submission of February 14,
which has had The Queen's approval.
As I said on the telephone yesterday, the Prime Minister agrees that,
when the announcements of the new Style and Dignity of the Duke of
Edinburgh are published in the Gazette on Friday, some
guidance should be issued at the same time to make it clear that this
is the result of a proposal made by the Prime
Minister. The Prime Minister's feeling
was that this guidance would best emanate from No.10, since it
would describe the attitude and view of the
Government. Your preliminary feeling was
that, from your point of view, it would be helpful if it were to
come from No.10, rather than from the Palace.
As I promised, I have tried my hand at a form of words for this
guidance, and I enclose a copy of my draft. I think
that it would be preferable for the guidance, in whatever form of words
we finally agree, not to be given to the Press as an official
communique. This is to say, it would not appear as the following "A
statement was issued from No. l0 ..."; but if we give the Press a
precise form of words, I understand that all the reputable papers will
in fact quote that form of words.
The next question to decide is when the guidance should be issued to
the Press. I understand that the Gazette is available
to the Press at about 5.45 p.m. on Friday. There would, of
course, be advantage in giving the guidance to the Lobby Correspondents
(on the assumption that the action is to be taken here) somewhat
earlier than that. It occurs to me that Richard
Colville may have it in mind to give the Gazette announcements to the
Court correspondents some time before the appearance of the Gazette,
with an embargo on it until the Gazette is available. If this is
so. the best course would be for the Public Relations Adviser at No. 10
to see the lobby Correspondents, to give them the guidance, at about
the same time as the announcements are disclosed to the Court
correspondents. I myself see no harm in releasing the guidance to
the Lobby early in the afternoon, of course on the understanding that
no use is made of it until the Gazette has appeared.
To sum up, there are three Questions. first, the wording of the
guidance. Second, whether it should be issued from No. 10,
And third, at what time should it be released. I should be
grateful if you or Michael would let me have your views about these
points. I am sending copies of this letter to Coldstream and
Strutt since we must be sure that the form of the guidance is
technically inoffensive.
(signed) F.A. Bishop.
Major Edward Ford, C.B., M.V.O.
Draft Guidance to Press
The Prime Minister and his senior colleagues felt that the great
services which the Duke of Edinburgh has rendered to the country and
his unique contribution to the life of the Commonwealth, culminating in
the tour which he has just concluded, ought to receive some significant
mark of recognition.
They therefore proposed to The Queen that the Duke of Edinburgh should
formally be given the title and dignity of a Prince, and The Queen was
graciously pleased to approve this proposal. In giving effect to
it The Queen has let it be known that she would like the Duke of
Edinburgh henceforth to be known as His Royal Highness The Prince
Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, thus confirming a title which common usage
and general affection have already largely accorded to him.
The effect of the announcement is really to give His Royal Highness the
same position and title that he would have if he had been born a member
of the Royal Family. It does not, of course, affect the
succession. But it does signify appreciation of the unselfish devotion
of His Royal Highness to the public interest.
His Royal Highness The Prince
Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
Draft Note on Letters Patent
The Letters Patent were passed under the Great Seal pursuant to a
Warrant approved by Her Majesty The Queen under the Royal
Sign Manual commanding the Lord Chancellor "that under theGreat Seal
of Our Realm remaining in your custody you cause these Our letters to
be made forth Patent."
The Queen's command for the preparation of the warrant was given
by the Home Secretary to the Clerk of the Crown in
Chancery. By Act of Parliament the clerk of the Crown is
responsible for preparing all warrants for the purpose of passing
instruments under the Great Seal, and according to tradition hie
surname appears at the foot of the document. After The
Queen had approved the Warrant one of the three lady artists who do
illuminated lettering for the Crown Office was directed to prepare the
Letters Patent, the wording to follow exactly the wording of the
Warrant. Miss Hutton, who prepared this document, is a
member of the Society of Scribes and Illuminators. The Letters
Patent are on vellum and the great Seal is attached by a
plaited gold cord.
The Seal is a cellulose acetate preparation. It is
the custom to make the Seal in green for documents conferring high
dignities and honours: other Seals are in red. The sealing
operation takes two hours. The two silver matrices of the Great Seal
are heated in a special oven and a suitable quantity of the sealing
preparation is then compressed between them.