New Year Blog, 2024

 

Bronchitis

 It is about a month since my last blog; most unusual. I have been otherwise engaged, chiefly in being very ill with acute bronchitis. As my self-image is of a reasonably healthy person, I am also rather offended at this sudden descent into illness. Hadn’t realised how very quickly the normal, quietly-expected reasonable health can disappear and with such rapid negative results. In fact, I have never felt so ill! The aftermath, as is usual post-M.E. long ago, is the present prolonged fatigue and weakness. I have no desire to walk outside, even on the terrace. Little desire to do anything except rest, sit, lie! And rage, though quietly, not to waste the energy!!

The Telegraph

My week in hospital was partly passed in a haze and partly in waiting to be released!! I said, rather too often, that I was most unwilling to be a ‘bed-blocker’ and was happy to leave at any time. No one took any notice. Hospital hours are astonishingly long and empty and boring but, since returning home about a week ago, has come the discovery that, though wonderful to be back, home without the attendant energy, also boasts incredibly long and inert lonely hours of ‘doing not much’. Writing emails is occasional and short-lived before I need a rest; occasional visits from family or friends, or, the very occasional Facetime session, are manna in the desert, but infrequently so, as people do have busy lives. My dear neighbour has bought me a newspaper over the last two or three days about which I became insanely excited! I specified The Guardian or The Times but once he bought me The Telegraph!! This was an undeserved blow which caused a dent in high spirits; had to read about the Queen at Balmoral. Words fail me!

Esther Rantzen, looking amazing at 83.

Esther Rantzen has been in the news talking of buzzing off to Dignitas in Switzerland as her Stage Four lung cancer progresses; she has single-handedly re-energised a public debate about ‘assisted dying’ a cause dear to the collective heart of many elderly people. A similar plea was made by Diana Rigg three years ago as she was dying of cancer. Certainly my having to part with my Belgian permission for euthanasia when I returned to live in England, was reluctant and regretful.

Some of the reprobates in pursuit of
health perhaps.
Or  en route to the pub?

SO useful to have in one’s back pocket, as it were!! If just being ill is so boring and difficult to bear, one can only imagine the tedium of having to hang around in order to stagger through the various stages of dying. Definitely to be avoided if possible. Now, with a public/Parliamentary discussion on the cards, there will be the usual public breast-beating about the dangers of allowing euthanasia; how the elderly or mentally fragile could be bumped off for the convenience or enrichment of their nearest and dearest. So predictable and typical; not sure quite why we are so nervous of this topic; the Belgians aren’t much different from the British and they seem to manage euthanasia without the entire nation having a breakdown!! They even have euthanasia for terminally ill children which is too distressing to even write about.

Back home, determined to finish this blog, after a superb Christmas at my son’s when, unusually, on the Day, I had the luxury of all my three children and all six grandchildren around, plus partners, wives etc!! I was struck by the easy cameraderie and various joint cooking endeavours accomplished apparently without rancour or dissent. I thought quietly how lucky I am to have the family I have. Meanwhile, I did nothing except sit and rest or lie and rest as my recovery continued! Although, being with the family did mean I dipped briefly into their lives which was both interesting and delightful! As I write I hear that about half of the family party has gone down with bad colds! Nothing comes free!

And now to 2024 which will begin a little later for me this year. I am hoping the fatigue fades during January leaving me free and energetic by early Feb at the latest. I shall march on as indefatigably as usual.

Bona Vacantia

The Duchy of Cornwall

 As an unintended sequel to my previous blog on The Crown, my discovery of Bona Vacantia in the Friday 24^th Guardian [I allow myself one newspaper per week as more would mean I did nothing else!!] is astonishing! Bona Vacantia means ‘vacant goods’ and is the name given to ownerless property normally left after a death without a will. In most of England and Wales, the assets of those who die without a will, and where no identifiable relatives can be found, are transferred to the Treasury to be spent on public services, which all seems impeccable. However, under a custom rooted in mediaeval times, two hereditary estates or duchies, which belong to the Crown, can collect bona vacantia; these estates can also collect assets owned by companies at the point of their dissolution. In effect, the Treasury Solicitor acts for the Crown to administer the estates of people who die intestate (without a Will) and without known kin (entitled blood relatives) and collect the assets of dissolved companies at the point of their dissolution, and other various ownerless goods in England and Wales.

Duchy of  Lancaster

When I first read of the above, I thought what a charming relic from mediaeval times when the King really was at the pinnacle of power. It was only when I discovered more that I began to slowly give way to astonishment. One of the two bona vacantia regions is the Duchy of Cornwall; the other is the Duchy of Lancaster. Both generate income for the Crown and are, in effect, real estate empires that manage swathes of farmland, castles, hotels, offices, warehouses, shops and urban properties, including, the article claims, some of London’s prime properties. Neither Duchy pays corporation tax nor capital gains tax which confers a considerable commercial advantage, and together, both Duchies have generated for the Royal family more than £1.2 billion in the last 60 years, Since inheriting the Duchy of Lancaster from his mother, this first annual income has generated £26 million for Charles.

Queen Elizabeth and three heirs to the throne.
Charles; son Will; grandson George

Both Duchies claim that, after costs are deducted, the profit goes to charities. The Duchy of Lancaster’s website names three charities which benefit from its bona vacantia excess finance. However, its accounts suggest that only 15% of the £61million it has collected during the last decade has indeed been donated to charities. A large proportion of the profits appear to go to the renovation of commercial properties in its portfolio. This practice has accelerated since May 2020 when Policy S9 was introduced which omits mention of ‘bona vacantia’, instead, referring to special costs which can be used for the public good. Under this worthy umbrella lie the Duchy properties, the fabric of which can be restored, repaired, and protected from funds generated by bona vacantia. Under a broad definition, [broader than that for listed properties] Duchy-owned properties qualify for funds if they fit within a further seven categories including buildings in a conservation area; a site of special scientific interest; AONB [Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty]; are of local historical importance.

Lancaster House, Lancaster Gate, London.
H.Q. of the Duchy of Lancaster. The Duchy flag is shown.

Charles re-affirmed his mother’s decision to spend the assets left without wills, with the primary intention of supporting local communities; protecting the sustainability and biodiversity of the land; and care for properties in the two Duchies; this income must not benefit the Privy Purse. The primary aim is to restore and protect buildings and land on Duchy estates for future generations. Before the income from bona vacantia is available for donation to charities, money is allocated to a fund in case relatives make future claims plus any costs associated with the upkeep of public buildings and those of architectural importance, are deducted.

In the same edition of The Guardian, Maeve McClenaghan, Henry Dyer and Rob Evans had done some most effective detective work in identifying people who had indeed died intestate, with no apparent relatives and whose assets had gone to one of the Duchies. They identified one man who had died intestate leaving £230,000 and mention examples of higher sums but most inheritances are relatively small and average £12,000 according to Duchy accounts. The British Royal Family is wealthy and it appears that one small but steady income stream has gone to the Duchies via bona vacantia. The history of the Duchies is so interesting and identifies how the Royal Prerogative has benefitted the Duchies from their beginnings, as intended . In 1265 Henry 111 quashed a revolt by

King Henry 111 with Westminster Abbey in the background

feuding lords, seizing the lands of the leading rebel and donating them to his son, Edmund. These lands, mainly in the North, became known as the Duchy of Lancaster and in charters in 1399 and 1485, the then monarch stipulated that the Duchy’s profit should go to the person on the throne as should that of the Duchy of Cornwall. This power of the monarch to claim all the assets of those who died without an heir continued until 1830 when it was stopped, but with the caveat that the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall would retain their ancient privileges. Unbelievably, this Victorian legislation was re-affirmed in 1925 in an act of apparent rubber-stamping. Interestingly, there appears to have been no Parliamentary discussion on the subject nor is there any record of the decision in the National Archives.

Although it is true that King Charles does not personally gain from bona vacantia, his ‘business’ benefits hugely and furthermore, in a system where no appropriate tax is paid by the monarchy. It seems ridiculous that a custom dating from the 14th/15th centuries, an era of absolute monarchical power, should now legally continue to benefit the current regal incumbent! Another nail in the Royal coffin I would say.

Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester.
After the overthrow of the King, de Montfort convened
the first authentic Parliament with 2 knights from each
county; clergymen; 2 representatives from each major
town and the Cinque Ports.  There was an expenses' system
to help those attending!
On January 20th. 1265 in the Palace of Westminster.

Historical background to the existence of the two Duchies.

A major rebellion against the monarch began in 1258 when  a group of barons seized the reins of government from the King and governed by a council in his name. This became known as the First Barons' War and ended with the signing of Magna Carta in 1215 by a reluctant King John. Henry III (1216–1272) came to the throne and over the next few years the country was plunged into further civil war [the Second Barons' War as Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, sought to establish control of the country. His rule was ended in 1265 in the bloody mess that was the battle of Evesham where

Here were buried the remains of Simon De Montfort, Earl of Leicester. Pioneer of representative government who was killed in the Battle of Evesham on August 4th 1265.

This stone brought from his birthplace The Castle of Montfort-Lamaury in France was erected to commemorate the seven hundredth anniversary of his death.

Oliver Cromwell who seized the two Duchies
from the Crown during his Commonwealth.

 This Montfortian revolution was the greatest assault on royal power in England before the 17th century when the English civil wars between Royalists and Parliamentarians led to the overthrow of the monarchy and the execution of Charles 1 in 1649. The Duchies and Crown lands were seized by Oliver Cromwell, and a fire sale of their assets commenced to raise money for the new Commonwealth. It was a brief interregnum when royal wealth was transferred to the nation. Parliament passed an act prohibiting the king’s heirs from holding crown property, overturning the status of Duchies as private inheritance. But the Duchies were back in royal hands 11 years later, after the restoration of the monarchy with Charles II.