Prince Harry and Archie: Expert discusses line of succession
When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters.Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer.Our Privacy Notice explains more about how we use your data, and your rights.You can unsubscribe at any time.
Constitutional expert Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky said the Queen should think about making Archie a prince – as well as allowing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex some royal roles. His comments come after Meghan suggested in the bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview that her son was not given the title because of his race.
However, Archie was not entitled to be a prince because of rules set down by King George V more than 100 years ago.
Express.co.uk readers reacted strongly to the suggestion that Archie should be handed the title to heal the rift with Meghan and Harry.
Commenting on this website, one fumed: “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets, sorry your Majesty, if you give in to this, the Monarchy will be finished in the UK.”
Another blasted: “What complete rubbish if anything the pair of them should be stripped of any title.”
A third demanded: “No prince, just cut them off entirely.”
Another insisted: “Harry and Meghan have made there bed and should be known as Mr & Mrs and pay there own way.”
A fifth commented: “Absolutely NOT. Remove their titles!”
One more said: “You do not reward bad behaviour!”
Dr Pinto-Duschinsky set out a number of suggestions to mend the rift between the Sussexes and the royals.
Writing in The Article, he said: “The Queen should consider giving Archie and, after her hopefully safe birth, his sister the same princely titles as those bestowed as a matter of discretion on Prince William’s younger children.”
Dr Pinto-Duschinsky also said: “It is not too late to give both Meghan and Harry some royal roles and patronages, albeit part-time and without financial benefit.
“Clearly they both have exceptional abilities and motives to give public service.
Prince George has royal title but not Archie – Expert explains why [ANALYSIS]
Strain is clearly taking toll on Kate and William – VIRGINIA BLACKBURN [COMMENT]
Queen ‘subtle and tactful’ in response to Meghan claims [INSIGHT]
“Such concrete measures are urgently needed.
“The greatest beneficiaries will be the Prince of Wales, as he prepares to assume the throne, the British and Commonwealth publics, and the cause of family reconciliation, finally laying to rest the legacy of Princess Diana’s tragic death.”
During the Sussexes’ interview with Winfrey, Meghan suggested she wanted Archie to be a prince so he would have police protection.
But being a prince or princess does not automatically mean royals have security.
In a Letters Patent issued in 1917, George V declared that the great-grandchildren of the monarch would no longer be princes or princesses, except for the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.
It read: “…the grandchildren of the sons of any such Sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms.”
Only the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s son Prince George was originally entitled to be a prince.
He is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.
Her Majesty stepped in ahead of George’s birth to issue a Letters Patent to ensure all the Cambridges’ children would have titles.
Princess Charlotte would have been a Lady and Prince Louis a Lord had the Queen not intervened, and they would have not been HRHs.
Archie will be entitled to be an HRH or a prince when Prince Charles accedes to the throne.
Source: Read Full Article