By 1858, the 1337/1338 Letters Patent, three duchy charters, the 1422, 1465 and 1539 Acts of Parliament, the judicial ruling in the Prince’s Case of 1606; the Rowe v Brenton trial at Bar(12); the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act 1858 and other statutes, royal prerogatives, customs and practices formed part of the constitutional legal arrangements for overseeing the administrative relationship between the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the Duchy of Cornwall – which by now had assumed a ‘behind the scenes’ role in the governance of Cornwall.

An administrative coup d’etat.

The foreshore dispute had reminded the UK government of unfinished business and sometime after 1858 a covert coup d’etat attempted to gerrymander the malignant constitutional discrepancy, wrest Cornwall from the de jure jurisdiction of the Duchy of Cornwall and place it firmly within England. Several Acts of Parliament were made to disappear. The pre-1st charter Letters Patent and the last two duchy charters were shredded. The English translation of the remaining 1st duchy charter was altered from the original translation that previously read:

To have and to hold to the said duke, and to the first begotten sons of him and his heirs, kings of England, being dukes of the said place and heirs apparent to the said kingdom of England, together with knights fees…….etc.(13)

This translation speaks of the king’s son being heir to the kingdom of England, and dukes of the said place, thus differentiating between Cornwall and England. This reflected the then understanding of the relationship between Cornwall and England as revealed by the contemporaneous [c.1290] Hereford Mappamundi showing Britain as a composite of Wales, Scotland, England and Cornwall. The differentiation is also mirrored in the language used in other documents of the period:

The King to the Archbishops, etc greeting. Whereas, our very dear brother Richard, the illustrious King of the Romans, ever august, for the common advantage of the whole land of Cornwall, did grant for himself and his heirs, that all and every inhabitant of the same land may take in all the lands of him, the said King, and also throughout all Cornwall, sea sand without payment etc……
Charter to the Community of Cornwall, 18th June 1261(14)

Similarly, Edward &c, to our dear servant, John Dabernoun, our Steward and Sheriff of Cornwall, greeting. We command you that you enquire by all means in your power how much land and rents, goods and chattels, whom and in whom, and of what value they are which those persons in Cornwall and England have.
Acts of the Council of the Black Prince, 16th July, 1351.

Finally, We have inspected a certain Charter which Henry our great grandfather, formerly King of England, made to the Burgesses of Truro in these words: Henry King of England, Duke of Normandy etc….. to the Abbots, Barons …..and all French and English in England and Cornwall, greetings. Know ye that I have granted, and by the present Charter confirmed, to the Burgesses of Richard de Lucy, of Truro, all liberties……
1488 Inspeximus Charter of Henry VII (15)

However, like Doddridge’s earlier re-ordering of the constitution, the recently revised translation of the 1st duchy charter now resting in the Public Record Office [and on the Halsbury’s laws statute book] gives the impression that the charter spoke of Cornwall being in England:

To have and to hold to the said duke, and to the first begotten sons of him and his heirs, kings of England, and dukes of the region in the kingdom of England, together with knights fees……etc.

These actions possibly took place after 1858 and prior to the UK Parliament passing the Local Government Act 1888 which created county councils. These actions were kept secret and the people of Cornwall were never consulted. The 1st duchy charter [Constitutional Law 10] is still on the statute books but is marked by government as being ‘revised’ again in 1978.

The co-conspirators in the coup d’etat were and are the Government of the Duchy of Cornwall and the Government of the United Kingdom. The arrangement was as follows: the duke would forgo his charter rights, but the UK Parliament would ensure that these same rights were re-granted by dozens of unprecedented and entirely unique Acts of Parliament that acknowledged and secured the dukes status as a Head of State [complete with royal prerogatives and immunity from prosecution etc] alongside that of the Head of State of the UK.

<<<   Next Page