Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Edward told to stay away from coronation

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 05 August 2007
THE Duke of Windsor was "advised" not to attend the Queen's coronation ceremony in 1953 by the then prime minister Sir Winston Churchill, it has emerged.
Newly-released official documents reveal he told Cabinet colleagues about his correspondence with Edward, who had abdicated as king in 1936, choosing his love for American divorcee Wallis Simpson over royal duty.

The Duke, then living in France,
was told to tell the press a former monarch could not attend the coronation of a new sovereign. Details of the discussions from minutes taken at Cabinet meetings, from 1951-54, have been made available at the National Archives at Kew, London.

Cabinet Secretary Sir Norman Brook noted that in 1952 Churchill had: "Advised [the Duke] not to come to coronation. He will say to press that it would not be consistent with usage for coronation to be attended by any former ruler."

It is not clear if the prime minister was asking the Duke to follow royal protocol or if Churchill was speaking from personal opinion. But the Duke did not attend.

The archives also reveal that the date of the coronation prompted fears about a clash with the Derby horse racing meet in Epsom, Surrey - a favourite of the Queen's - or falling on an unlucky day.

Churchill told his colleagues that May 29, 1953, was a Friday but he believed it was "thought unlucky", while June 3 was Derby Day. "Why not June 1," he concluded.

But the Cabinet thought staging the coronation on a Monday would see the unpopular move of having to hold preparations on Sunday. Churchill ended the debate with "argument points to June 2".



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 04 August 2007 11:08 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: The Monarchy
 
1

Tam O' Shanter,

05/08/2007 05:39:46

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

2

Guga II,

Rockall 05/08/2007 07:40:30

Yawn.

3

Boy Wonder,

05/08/2007 07:58:12

bored now. can I go out and play?

4

TimW1234,

Ontario, Canada 05/08/2007 15:02:43

Now that we know that posters 1 to 3 are bored to tears, can anyone add an intelligent comment rather than have to suffer through this pointless drivel?

Queen Mary attended the oronation of Elizabeth The Queen Mother and George VI and she was Queen Consort to George V does this mean she was a "former monarch" and Queen Mary was a former "ruler" with her husband.

I suppose it will take constitutional experts and cocktail party bores to determine if Queen Mary was a "former ruler".

This tedious argument is making me consumed by ennui. I must be have a very boring morning - or something.

Maybe it was the wines last night that were many and various.

5

Michaela,

Canada 05/08/2007 17:24:43

It's sad how Edward was rejected by his family because he didn't toe the Royal line. Shame too that he wasn't at the Queen's Coronation as she was very fond of her uncle Edward. It's good that he came home, albeit after death, and is buried at Windsor with his wife buried beside him.

6

Boy Wonder,

05/08/2007 22:25:54

#4. Timothy Charles Wingate .... is that you? That kind of post usually has your fingerprints all over it!!!

Where you been, man? Welcome back .... I've been missing my target practice! :)

7

The Daleks,

06/08/2007 09:27:16

When old what's his name abdicated, the rest of his parasitic family should have been sent packing too.

Dole scroungers have nothing on the Windsors.

8

TimW1234,

Ontario, Canada 06/08/2007 10:49:43

#6 Boy Wonder

None of your efffing business. And PLEASE do not use my full baptismal name, PLEASE SIR!, because my foolish use of it in these postings has caused some frightening intrusions into my personal life and financial affairs.

Thank you for you consideration in this matter.

9

The Daleks,

07/08/2007 06:06:20

#8 TimW1234,

Care to further enlighten us about these intrusions?


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.