Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
|

cornubian
|
How to make a country disappearHow to make a country disappear: http://duchyofcornwall.eu/
Well I don’t have the exact formula but if you study this website from the Duchy of Cornwall Human Rights Association you’ll be able to see exactly the constitutional loops the establishment and Duchy authority have jumped through to turn Cornwall, an extraterritorial crown possession legally separate from England, into a supposed English county.
This site explains how a British territorial possession became someone’s private estate.
It makes great and fairly easy reading and should be studied by all those interested in the UK constitution.
|
Blackleaf
|
Even the EU considers Cornwall as an English county.
Here are 13 reasons why Cornwall is an English county:
Cornwall was absorbed into England rather than conquered.
Several English charters dating from before 1066 show the king of England exercising effective power in Cornwall as in any other part of England. For example, in 960 King Eadgar gave land in "Tiwaernhel" to one of his thanes
From the mid-ninth century the Cornish Church acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and in the 10th century the English king Athelstan created a diocese of Cornwall centred on St Germans. In 1050, King Eadward subsumed the diocese of Cornwall under that of Exeter
In 1051, Cornwall appears among the territories granted as an earldom to Earl Odda after the forfeiture of the earldoms of Godwin, Earl of Wessex and his sons, suggesting that Cornwall had by then been integrated into the normal English system of local government as part of the earldom of Wessex.
In the Domesday survey of manors in 1086, Cornwall is dealt as a comitatus, a Medieval Latin term, which is generally equated with the English word "county", or the Anglo-Saxon scir (shire). Notably the Domesday Survey included parts of modern day Wales, but excluded some areas of northern England such as much of Westmorland, Cumberland, Northumberland and County Durham, and even some parts of Lancashire, for they were under Scottish rule at that time. The Domesday Book also excludes London and Winchester, whether these particular omissions are deliberate or reflect a loss of records is unknown.
The records of the medieval eyres, the court sessions of the king’s itinerant judges. Maitland FW (1888) Select pleas of the crown prints examples from Cornwall. The eyre records show Cornwall and England with common judicial arrangements from the police duties of tithings at the lowest level of administration to the highest itinerant courts.
The Patent Rolls which inter alia record the King and his council governing Cornwall after the creation of the Dukedom in 1337. Examples are the King granting licences to trade to people in Cornwall in 1364, the Duke of Cornwall complaining in 1371 to the King's Council about offences by some local men in Cornwall, and in 1380 the King's Council ordering the Sheriff of Cornwall to arrest and imprison an offender.
The 1337 charters describe Cornwall as a county, using the same word (comitatus) as that used to describe other counties such as Devon and Surrey.
Cornwall sent members to the Parliament of England from the late thirteenth century when that parliament originated.
Medieval taxes such as the Papal 1291 taxation and the 1377 poll tax.
The subsidies/taxes and musters of the Tudor period.
The grants of fairs and markets in Cornwall by the king; for example, Penzance in 1406.
Cornwall is currently in the South West England European Parliament constituency.
|
Holebender
|
By that logic, Jersey, etc. must also be English counties.
|
cornubian
|
Yes Blackleaf you could have also copied the following from wikipedia.....
That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England.
That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.
That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a great extent by Earls.
That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending to its creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls enjoyed, but also afforded evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges.
The Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall.
....which are the actual legal arguments used by the Duchy in a legal dispute with the crown. The Duchy won!
|
cornubian
|
Yet again I must point out that your anglo-supremacist fantasies to not equate to the truth.
|
Moonshine
|
Cornwall is indeed administered AS an English county. However, the Duchy itself has already proved that the county of Cornwall "sits firmly" within the Duchy of Cornwall and that the Duchy of Cornwall is in fact the whole of Cornwall.
As the Duchy of Cornwall has also been proved to be the government of Cornwall, with Charles Windsor as head of state, then the county argument has no really bearing on the constitutional relationship between England and Cornwall.
You can not have two Sovereigns in one country.
|
Aventinian
|
| Moonshine wrote: | | You can not have two Sovereigns in one country. |
The Andorrans would beg to differ.
|
Moonshine
|
| Quote: | | The Andorrans would beg to differ. |
I don't give two hoots about Andorra.
You cannot have two sovereigns in England, so Cornwall, having its own sovereign, as proved by the Duchy of Cornwall itself, must be extra territorial to England.
|
Aventinian
|
| Moonshine wrote: | | Quote: | | The Andorrans would beg to differ. |
I don't give two hoots about Andorra.
You cannot have two sovereigns in England, so Cornwall, having its own sovereign, as proved by the Duchy of Cornwall itself, must be extra territorial to England. |
Except that the law is clear that it is not.
I think you've rather wrapped yourself up in a flight of fancy here.
|
Moonshine
|
| Quote: | | I think you've rather wrapped yourself up in a flight of fancy here. |
I think you know little about Cornwall.
|
Aventinian
|
| Moonshine wrote: | | Quote: | | I think you've rather wrapped yourself up in a flight of fancy here. |
I think you know little about Cornwall. |
I think you know considerably less about the law.
|
cornubian
|
You can listen to the person behind the Duchy of Cornwall Human Rights Association, John Angarrack, in interview on BBC radio Cornwall talking about his new book here: http://www.myspace.com/thecornwellian
|
cornubian
|
If you want to find out more then try the books on the Cornish question by John Angarrack : http://johnangarrack.co.uk/
|
cornubian
|
In the 19th century a dispute blew up between the Crown (UK government) and the Duchy of Cornwall (Cornish government) over the foreshore of Cornwall. At this time Cornwall was producing tin and a lot of the foreshore had mine shafts under it so you can imagine that a fair bit of money was at stake.
The dispute went to arbitration as there was no court in the land deemed high enough.
The Duchy won and did so by effectively proving that all of Cornwall was the Duchy and that this was exterior to the crown i.e. Cornwall was outside England legally.
The Duchy provided reams of documents to support its case and even made mention of the territorial waters of Cornwall as a threat in case the Crown did not capitulate.
One key passage from the Duchies case is as follows:
| Quote: | That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England.
That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.
That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a great extent by Earls.
That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending to it's creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls enjoyed, but also afforded evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges.
The Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall. |
All of the above is explored in much greater detail on John Angarracks website as well as:
The Cornish Stannary Parliament: http://www.cornishstannaryparliament.co.uk/
Tyr Gwyr Gweryn: http://www.kernowtgg.co.uk/
|
cornubian
|
Here is a book review of John Angarracks Scat t'larrups Resist and Survive: http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/news...cacheBust=2zEIQkOY5XA3#addcomment
|
|
|
|