Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Prince Charles  (Read 15317 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
diamond

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 170

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 979





Ignore
« on: June 10, 2014, 09:00:07 AM »

After seeing photos of Prince Charles not looking happy lately (and I take the point he
was at a serious and sombre occasion) but does any one think Catherine's general
behaviour and the fact that neither William nor Catherine are liked that much in the
U.K. is a factor?

The marriage certainly does not look happy, has it hit home what a mistake this was?



Sorry if this I rambling, I am not that eloquent. Roll Eyes


Logged
luvcharles

Warned
Big Member
*******

Reputation: 531

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 1713





Ignore
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2014, 10:32:00 AM »

I think Charles has been looking fine lately. He knows that at serious events he should look serious and so did so at the events last week, but at the Garden Party he looked like he was enjoying himself fine.

He looks happy most of the time to me.

Logged
Lady G

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 426

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1077





Ignore
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2014, 11:33:45 AM »

Charles has been in fabulous form these last couple of years - happiest I've ever seen him I would say. I'm sure he has his moments (don't we all?) but I see a man now at ease with himself and generally content with his life (give or take the odd "politically controversial" moment  Wink).
Logged

"Cowards falter, but danger is often overcome by those who nobly dare."
generosityliving

Baby Member
*

Reputation: 18

Offline Offline

Posts: 60





Ignore
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2014, 03:09:37 PM »

Charles looks fine to me, his facial expression has always been like that...even when he was young.

I doubt the marriage is a mistake to him, he and Camilla looks very happy to me. he seems content with her.

nothing to worry about here...people see what they want to see.

Logged
Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 247

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2014, 10:40:47 AM »

Most people mellow with age and become happier with the simple things and Charles is no exception.
Logged
cordtx

Warned
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 895

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 6566





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2014, 11:10:48 PM »

http://www.telegraph.co.u...ng-for-commemoration.html

Was this addressed earlier? Sorry if it was, I didn't find it
Logged

There's a feeling I get when I look to the West....and my Spirit is crying for leaving
Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 247

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2014, 08:50:37 AM »

http://www.mirror.co.uk/n...9255#.U6ZzboJD2VQ.twitter

Prince Charles has been accused of a “medieval land grab” after claiming the right to mine under homes in a coastal town.

Hundreds of residents have been sent letters saying the heir to the throne can dig for minerals beneath them in his Duchy of Cornwall.

And they fear they will not be able to stop Charles – an environmental campaigner – from mining under their properties in an area famous for tin.

Land registry documents sent to dozens of homes in St Austell, Cornwall say: “We have received an application for ­registration of mines and minerals including powers of working and getting any such minerals. The mines and minerals lie under your registered title.”

The letter lists the applicant as “ His Royal Highness Charles Philip Arthur George Duke of Cornwall ”. The duchy – founded in 1337 and traditionally held by the heir to the throne – includes the right to income from thousands of acres.

Paul and Joan Marrett, 67, were among residents sent the letter.

http://i4.mirror.co.uk/in...hy-of-Cornwall-letter.jpg

 Nono
Logged
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2014, 09:03:32 AM »

Thanks, Crawler.  Star

 
I'm glad that the The Duke of Cornwall is reminding people of the Duchy's right to mine under their homes and claiming it.  Surely that stops any other tin miner from staking a claim.
Better an homegrown 'environmental campaigner' have the license than a developer or foreign investor who might be out to make a quick dollar and destroy the countryside.

I predict that if any mining is conducted by the Duchy of Cornwall it will be done in a manner sympathetic to the residents and the environment.  I actually will be very surprised if mining takes place at all.  
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 2873

Offline Offline

Posts: 11513


BooHoo Sugars




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2014, 09:40:11 AM »

Yes, nothing says benevolent ruler like 'know your place peasants and, in case you forget, I will remind you every so often of my divine rights'.

 Laughing
Logged


Ain't nobody got time for Mary's sh*t.
luvcharles

Warned
Big Member
*******

Reputation: 531

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 1713





Ignore
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2014, 10:30:30 AM »

The Duke of Lancaster has sent similar letters to residents on Duchy land - and yes it isn't all about 'we will do the mining' but 'we wish to remind you who owns the land and therefore the mineral rights'.

There is nothing in the letters that indicate that either the Duke of Cornwall or the Duke of Lancaster intend on mining but more simply reminding the residents who owns the rights - as a protection as much as anything else.

Some people will always see the negative (and there may be in this case of course) but there is also a positive - to stop others coming in and claiming the rights from the current occupiers of the land who may not realise that they only own the land under their homes to a certain depth rather than to the earth's core and that someone else owns the land below that certain depth e.g. I own my house down to xxx metres and the state government owns the land below that so they could come in and start mining or anything else below that and I would have no say in that fact at all.
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 2873

Offline Offline

Posts: 11513


BooHoo Sugars




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2014, 10:34:59 AM »

Know your place, peasants.  In case you forget, here's a letter to remind you to know your place.  I will be benevolent and let you lead your pitiful lives in your cute little houses, but - please - know your place. 
Logged


Ain't nobody got time for Mary's sh*t.
Lady Willoughby

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 486

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1631


Circa Regna Tonat




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2014, 11:30:41 AM »

Know your place, peasants.  In case you forget, here's a letter to remind you to know your place.  I will be benevolent and let you lead your pitiful lives in your cute little houses, but - please - know your place. 

 Crazy   Maybe those letters mean something else in the UK, but trust and believe environmental protection is not the intention of letters of that nature where I come from & no landowners waste the paper to send them if they only have plans to mine in 50 years.  Star FTS
Logged

luvcharles

Warned
Big Member
*******

Reputation: 531

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 1713





Ignore
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2014, 12:22:51 PM »

Just to clarify - these letters had to be sent as the Land Registry required mining rights to be registered by October 2013 - which is why this story originally surfaced last year with the same letters being sent by The Duke of Lancaster (AKA HM The Queen).

The Duchies do own the mining rights and have done so for centuries - they haven't necessarily exercised those rights and there is no reason to assume that they will be doing so now.

This is more a tidying up to clarify who actually has the rights to mine in the different areas of the country rather than anything else.

The Telegraph report on this says very clearly that  "This does not mean that the Duchy has any intention at this time to work the minerals. The Duchy has owned these mineral rights for many centuries - it is simply a case of the Duchy registering its existing rights.’

When you read the actual letter that was sent it is saying exactly that:

due to a law change the Duchy - like others across the country - are registering their mining rights:


Logged
Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 247

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2014, 03:06:35 PM »

The Duchy of Cornwall and all monies made should be given back to the people IMO. The Monarch could have the Duchy of Lancaster and pay all working royals with that money.

Charles is a very greedy man IMO and has more money than is needed already. The NHS, education etc. you know the needs of the people could put the money to better use than Charles ever has IMO.
Logged
esther angeline

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1018

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 4251





Ignore
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2014, 11:25:55 PM »

As an American, I don't get the Duchy owning mineral rights under land owned by someone else.  In the three states I have lived in, two of which being Commonwealth ones, if you own the land, you own the land and whatever is on it or in it.

 The only caveat to that is the public right of way to the sea shore where grand private estates are seaside and claim the beaches.  Even that has oft ended up in court.  Historical associations do have say in how a house may look in a particular historic neighborhood.  

I guess all of this is the result of a greater than a thousand year old country vs a very young in comparison US.  

To my Aussie legal eagles: how is the law in Australia pertaining to land rights?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: