Sunday Images/ Gentlemen of the World, Unite! -
4 years ago
Harry and Meghan's statement on their website in full
AS AGREED AND SET OUT IN JANUARY 2020:
It is agreed that the commencement of the revised role of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will take effect Spring 2020 and undergo a 12 month review.
The Royal Family respect and understand the wish of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to live a more independent life as a family, by removing the supposed ‘public interest’ justification for media intrusion into their lives. They remain a valued part of Her Majesty’s family.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will become privately funded members of The Royal Family with permission to earn their own income and the ability to pursue their own private charitable interests.
The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant.
While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.
Per the agreement The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.
As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their “HRH” prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020.
As the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of The Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex remains sixth in line to the throne of The British Monarchy and the Order of Precedence is unchanged.
It was agreed that The Duke and Duchess will no longer be able to formally carry out ‘official duties’ for The Queen or represent The Commonwealth, but they will, however, be allowed to maintain their patronages (including those that are classified as ‘royal’ patronages).
It is agreed that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son. This is based on The Duke’s public profile by virtue of being born into The Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess’ own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years. No further details can be shared as this is classified information for safety reasons.
In relation to the military, The Duke of Sussex will retain the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader. During this 12-month period of review, The Duke’s official military appointments will not be used as they are in the gift of the Sovereign. No new appointments will be made to fill these roles before the 12-month review of the new arrangements is completed.
While per the agreement, The Duke will not perform any official duties associated with these roles, given his dedication to the military community and ten years of service he will of course continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity. As founder of the Invictus Games, The Duke will proudly continue supporting the military community around the world through the Invictus Games Foundation and The Endeavour Fund.
Based on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s desire to have a reduced role as members of The Royal Family, it was decided in January that their Institutional Office would have to be closed, given the primary funding mechanism for this official office at Buckingham Palace is from HRH The Prince of Wales. The Duke and Duchess shared this news with their team personally in January once they knew of the decision, and have worked closely with their staff to ensure a smooth transition for each of them.
Over the last month and a half, The Duke and Duchess have remained actively involved in this process, which has understandably been saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.
As The Duke and Duchess will no longer be considered full-time working Members of The Royal Family, it was agreed that use of the word ‘Royal’ would need to be reviewed as it pertains to organisations associated with them in this new regard. More details on this below.
As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a ‘foundation’, but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally.
The creation of this non-profit entity will be in addition to their cause driven work that they remain deeply committed to. While The Duke and Duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘Royal’, it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name ‘Sussex Royal’ or any other iteration of ‘Royal.’
For the above reason, the trademark applications that had been filed as protective measures and that reflected the same standard trademarking requests as done for The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have been removed.
While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.
As The Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to develop their non-profit organisation and plan for their future, we hope that you use this site as the source for factual information. In Spring 2020, their digital channels will be refreshed as they introduce the next exciting phase to you.
The statement Harry and Meghan sent to the press
'As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a "foundation", but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally.
'The creation of this non-profit entity will be in addition to their cause driven work that they remain deeply committed to.
'While The Duke and Duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word 'Royal', it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name "Sussex Royal" or any other iteration of "Royal".
'For the above reason, the trademark applications that had been filed as protective measures and that reflected the same standard trademarking requests as done for The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have been removed.
'While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use "Sussex Royal" or any iteration of the word "Royal" in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs spring 2020.
'As The Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to develop their non-profit organisation and plan for their future, we hope that you use this site as the source for factual information.
'In Spring 2020, their digital channels will be refreshed as they introduce the next exciting phase to you.
'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex eagerly await the opportunity to share more with you and greatly appreciate your support!'
Harry and Meghan show anger at palace over loss of royal branding
Sussexes say monarchy has no jurisdiction over use of word ‘royal’ overseas
Sun 23 Feb 2020 09.52 GMTLast modified on Sun 23 Feb 2020 09.56 GMT
The freeze in relations between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Buckingham Palace has become apparent after the couple were forced to drop plans to use the brand “SussexRoyal”.
Posts on the couple’s official website suggest they are angry at the way the decision was reached and how they have been treated compared with other royals. A statement on Friday night suggested that a blanket ban on the use of the word “royal” was unenforceable abroad. “There is not,” it noted, “any jurisdiction by the monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘royal’ overseas.”
The couple’s Instagram account uses the name SussexRoyal, as does a website they set up following their shock decision to stop carrying out official royal duties in favour of financial freedom. Both will have to be rebranded.
A spokeswoman for the Sussexes said: “While the duke and duchess are focused on plans to establish a new non-profit organisation, given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘royal’ it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation, when it is announced this spring, will not be named Sussex Royal Foundation.
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘SussexRoyal’ in any territory post-spring 2020.”
The spokeswoman explained that trademark applications, which were filed as protective measures “acting on advice from and following the same model for the Royal Foundation”, had been removed.
The couple’s lives as working royals will end on 31 March when they stop representing the Queen and become financially independent.
On Friday night their website was updated to provide further details of the new agreement. “While there is not any jurisdiction by the monarchy or cabinet office over the use of the word ‘royal’ overseas, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs spring 2020,” said a statement.
Their failure to agree a hybrid role within the royal family – performing some royal duties while also working on outside projects – is also a source of regret.
They wrote: “While there is precedent for other titled members of the royal family to seek employment outside of the institution, for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a 12-month review period has been put in place.”
FIVE TIMES Evelyn Waugh
Was Evelyn Waugh a "snobbish misanthrope" ?
FIVE VIDEOS below
In the course of his lifetime, Waugh made enemies and offended many people; writer James Lees-Milne said that Waugh "was the nastiest-tempered man in England". Waugh's son, Auberon, said that the force of his father's personality was such that, despite his lack of height, "generals and chancellors of the exchequer, six-foot-six and exuding self-importance from every pore, quail in front of him".
In the biographic Mad World (2009), Paula Byrne said that the common view of Evelyn Waugh as a "snobbish misanthrope" is a caricature; he asks: "Why would a man, who was so unpleasant, be so beloved by such a wide circle of friends?" His generosity to individual persons and causes, especially Catholic causes, extended to small gestures; after his libel-court victory over Nancy Spain, he sent her a bottle of champagne. Hastings said that Waugh's outward personal belligerence to strangers was not entirely serious but an attempt at "finding a sparring partner worthy of his own wit and ingenuity". Besides mocking others, Waugh mocked himself—the elderly buffer, "crusty colonel" image, which he presented in later life, was a comic impersonation, and not his true self.
As an instinctive conservative, Waugh believed that class divisions, with inequalities of wealth and position, were natural and that "no form of government [was] ordained by God as being better than any other". In the post-war "Age of the Common Man", he attacked socialism (the "Cripps–Attlee terror") and complained, after Churchill's election in 1951, that "the Conservative Party have never put the clock back a single second". Waugh never voted in elections; in 1959, he expressed a hope that the Conservatives would win the election, which they did, but would not vote for them, saying "I should feel I was morally inculpated in their follies" and added: "I do not aspire to advise my sovereign in her choice of servants".
Waugh's Catholicism was fundamental: "The Church ... is the normal state of man from which men have disastrously exiled themselves." He believed that the Catholic Church was the last, great defence against the encroachment of the Dark Age being ushered in by the welfare state and the spreading of working class culture. Strictly observant, Waugh admitted to Diana Cooper that his most difficult task was how to square the obligations of his faith with his indifference to his fellow men. When Nancy Mitford asked him how he reconciled his often objectionable conduct with being a Christian, Waugh replied that "were he not a Christian he would be even more horrible".
Waugh's conservatism was aesthetic as well as political and religious. Although he praised younger writers, such as Angus Wilson, Muriel Spark and V.S. Naipaul, he was scornful of the 1950s writers' group known as "The Movement". He said that the literary world was "sinking into black disaster" and that literature might die within thirty years. As a schoolboy, Waugh had praised the art of Cubism but soon abandoned his interest in artistic Modernism. In 1945, Waugh said that Pablo Picasso's artistic standing was the result of a "mesmeric trick" and that his paintings "could not be intelligently discussed in the terms used of the civilised masters". In 1953, in a radio interview, he named Augustus Egg (1816–1863) as a painter for whom he had particular esteem.[n 7] Despite their political differences, Waugh came to admire George Orwell, because of their shared patriotism and sense of morality.
Throughout his literary works, Evelyn Waugh freely expressed racial and anti-semitic prejudices, especially in the books he wrote before the Second World War. The writer V.S. Pritchett said that Waugh's anti-semitism, "like Mount Everest, is there, nonviolent, but undeniable". Wykes said that anti-semitism is Waugh's "most persistent nastiness", adding that Waugh's racism was "an illogical extension of his views on the naturalness and rightness of hierarchy as the [main] principle of social organisation". As an admirer of Waugh's writing, Orwell said that Evelyn Waugh was "almost as good a novelist as it is possible to be ... while holding untenable opinions".
by Charles J. Rolo
Chillingham Castle is a medieval castle in the village of Chillingham in the northern part of Northumberland, England. It was the seat of the Grey and Bennett families from the 15th century until the 1980s, when it became the home of Sir Edward Humphry Tyrrell Wakefield, 2nd Baronet, who is married to a member of the original Grey family.
Love in a Cold Climate is a 1980 British television series produced by Thames Television. It is an adaptation of the Nancy Mitford novels The Pursuit of Love and Love in a Cold Climate, set between 1924 and 1940, with a screenplay adaptation by Simon Raven. It was originally broadcast on the ITV network in eight episodes. The series starred Lucy Gutteridge, Rosalyn Landor, Michael Aldridge, Judi Dench, Vivian Pickles, and Jean-Pierre Cassel.