Important? Nah . . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by honeychile
I daresay that Parliment is changing the order of succession, or at least, there are those who are trying to change it. If changed, the eldest child would precede any younger child, male or female.
|
There have been measures to that effect introduced in Parliament, as I understand it, but so far they have gotten nowhere. I think Blair's government actually blocked any such measure, not because he/they disagreed in principle, but because they thought changing the rule at this point would be a constitutional quagmire, especially since the monarch is monarch not only of the UK, but also of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji . . . .
Quote:
|
And Queen Victoria is a prime example of not being the child of a sovereign, is she not?
|
Yes, but if I'm not mistaken she was not heir apparent; she was an heir presumptive. I guess there was at least the theoretical possibility that William IV could have fathered a legitimate child before he died.
Threaded Mode
