Family Is Key To Reproduction Of Nation

"Is The Royal Family a family? For they themselves refer to the collective of Royals as "the firm" and ever since the failure of three of the marriages of the Monarch's own offspring, there seems less and less of an effort to present this "model" of family life for the nation to emulate. It was not always thus."

"In the 1950s, under controlled media management, there was a concerted campaign to present The Royal Family as a model family. Post Office Savings Stamps were sold to children with pictures of a young Prince Charles and Princess Anne. The Queen and Prince Philip are typical of the post-war married couples who produced the baby boom generation: marriage was for life and the reproduction of the nation was best handled by the institution of the family."

"Public affection for King George VI and His Queen – who courageously lived in Buckingham Palace as bombs fell on London – was then transferred to the very young Queen Elizabeth II and Her dashing young naval officer Consort. After their marriage in 1947, the speedy birth of children, and the Accession to the Throne in 1952, their position as positive role models for the family seemed secure." Continue Denis MacShane's article for The Yorkshire Post via here.

Read More »»

Anger Over Queen Crowning Son

Republicans in The Principality of Wales have marked the 40th anniversary of the Investiture of The Prince of Wales with a "protest" at Caernarfon Castle. Organisers of the event told the media that dozens of people were going to turn out to show their anger. In the event "nine members of the public" turned up.

Speaking to the nine people present, Adam Phillips, organiser of this event demanded that the Royal title 'The Prince of Wales' be abolished and called for Prince Charles to be the last ever Prince of Wales. Mr Phillips, who is also a chairman of a Welsh language and culture promotion group, added: "The people of Wales need to wake up and discover who they are. Years ago we had a royal family which was systematically destroyed by our neighbours. If the people of Wales want a monarchy, we should create one of our own. We have to ask ourselves 'do we want to be a Principality, a toy or plaything of The Prince of Wales, or a country in our own right?'" No doubt to cheers and loud applause from the nine strong group, Mr Phillips then said: "Prince William should never be Invested. It's an outdated concept. Why should the people of Wales have a foreigner (who was born English as opposed to born Welsh) as their liege?"

Full details about this protest were actually withheld from the local media so protesters could "make the most impact" as July 1st 1969 was remembered. The Evening Leader newspaper also reports that this group of nine even carried placards, put up signs and banners - and then quietly "spoke to passers-by about their demands". For pictures of their quite hilarious placards and banners just click here. For more about the protests click here. Colour film footage of the Investiture in 1969 has recently been put online for the very first time. Watch these new clips of the 1969 Investiture in colour via the link here. Last Monday a BBC poll found that 71% of people in Wales believed that the Monarchy should continue. When asked 29% said they wanted to see the Monarchy abolished.

Read More »»

"Gentlemen: The Queen"

The 78th Heavy Anti Aircraft Regiment R.A., 1953.
Photographer: Ralph Crane. Hat tip, Dr. David Flint, ACM

Officers Dress Night at the mess of the 78th Heavy Anti Aircraft Regiment R.A. toasting the Queen. (Click photo to enlarge)

Read More »»

The Old Chieftain

SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD, FATHER OF CANADIAN CONFEDERATION

The old Tory and flamboyant Scotchman who's greatest achievement was to unite the colonies of British North America into a single polity and become the first Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada in 1867.

Memorable Quote: "A British subject I was born, a British subject I will die"

Read More »»

UT INCEPIT FIDELIS SIC PERMANET?

Well, maybe not....

The monarchy is a bust with today's Canadians. When asked if they felt a stronger connection to the Queen or the Queen's representative, Governor-General Michaëlle Jean, 20 per cent named the Queen, 10 per cent said the G-G – and a remarkable 70 per cent said “ neither .”

And when asked to look beyond the relatively popular Queen, 65 per cent of Canadians thought the ties to the Crown should be severed once she passes. Only 35 per cent care to think of Prince Charles, who will visit here this fall, as a future king of Canada.

How do you spot a Canadian Republican? It's difficult. They don't advertise themselves. There is no passionate debate in Canada about the monarchy. Only the Australian Republicans were foolish enough to launch a full frontal assault on the Crown. Canadian Republicanism proceeds by stealth. How? Quite simply. There is essentially no mention of the monarchy in the schools, except in passing in history and civics courses. After two generations one of the most fervently monarchist societies on earth is now utterly apathetic about its head of state, and her symbolic import.

Having produced the effect, the Canadian Establishment now claims we must accept the inevitable. The ostensible reason for the fading to black of the monarchy is the Quebec Question, as a different generation would have put it. The French, or French-Canadians as that different generation would have called them, don't like the monarchy. The Exhibit A is the outbreak of a riot when the Queen visited Quebec City in 1964. For the sake of national unity it was best to keep the monarchy in mothballs. This was a cynical position. Those who opposed being subjects of the crown were not going to be reconciled to a Canadian Republic. The problem wasn't who the head of state was, but the state itself. Quebec nationalists have little interest in preserving a united Canada, whatever its constitutional trappings. What the slow undermining of the monarchy has done is remove a vital symbolic unifier, while signaling to Quebec nationalists our lack of will. If the ROC was wiling to all but junk a deeply held symbol, how hard will they fight for the country itself?

Read More »»

The Maple Leaf Forever

Read More »»

Proclamation

CANADA.

By His Excellency the Right Honorable Charles Stanley Viscount Monck, Baron Monck of Ballytrammon, in the County of Wexford, in the Peerage of Ireland, and Baron Monck of Ballytrammon, in the County of Wexford, in the Peerage of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Governor General of Canada, &c., &c., &c.

To all to whom these presents shall come, and whom they may in anywise concern—Greeting :

J. A. Macdonald,
Minister of Justice.WHEREAS by Royal Proclamation dated at Windsor Castle on the 22nd day of May, in the year of Our Lord 1867, Her Most Gracious Majesty did ordain, declare, and command, that on and after the 1st day of July, 1867, the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick should form and be one Dominion under the name of Canada ;

And Whereas the Anniversary of the formation of the Dominion of Canada falls upon Wednesday, the 1st day of July next ensuing ;

And Whereas it is meet and proper that the said Anniversary should be observed and kept ;

Now Know Ye, that I, Charles Stanley Viscount Monck, Governor General of Canada, do hereby proclaim and appoint WEDNESDAY, the FIRST day of JULY next, as the day on which the Anniversary of the formation of the Dominion a Canada be duly celebrated. And I do hereby enjoin and call upon all Her Majesty's loving subjects throughout Canada to join in the due and proper celebration of the said Anniversary on the said FIRST day of JULY next.

Given under my Hand and Seal at Arms, at the Government House, in the CITY of OTTAWA, in the said Dominion, this TWENTIETH day of JUNE, in the year of Our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, and in the thirty-first year of her Majesty's Reign.

MONCK.

By Command,

HECTOR. L. L ANGEVIN,

Secretary of State.

Read More »»

Subjects Need "A Little Majesty"

Jonathan Prynn of The London Evening Standard writes: "Regina v Darling, or more likely v Osborne, will be one of the more fascinating departmental spending struggles of the coming years. Next summer The Queen's senior courtiers lock horns (or perhaps tiaras) with Treasury mandarins over the future funding of our Head of State. It could be a defining moment for how Britain wants to run its Monarchy. The annual Civil List, the public income used to pay for The Queen's daily costs, mostly staff salaries, has been set at £7.9 million for the past 20 years. It only covers about half of Her spending, the short-fall made up from reserves. The reserves are almost depleted and will be down to a few million by the time The Queen's next 10 year financing cycle starts in Spring 2011."

"Just to keep The Queen's way of life at current levels would mean increasing The Civil List by at least £7 million and more realistically probably £10 million a year. The claim will come against one of the bleakest public spending backdrops in British history. It also comes in a new era when hostility to the taxpayer funding the lifestyles of public servants is more intense than ever. The Queen cannot be compared to those "flipping" MPs of course. The public expects a little Majesty from their Monarch, but prefers humility from their political representatives. Nonetheless the case for the extra money is going to be an unbelievably hard one to make. If anything the public mood could harden over the next two years as the grim reality of deep public spending cuts takes hold. It was anger over alleged "Royal profligacy" that forced The Queen to start paying tax on Her income during Her 'annus horribilis' during the last recession in 1992."

Jonathan Prynn concludes his article by adding this: "We could be approaching the moment when The Monarchy takes another lurch towards a pared down Scandinavian model. Less Majesty it may be but The Queen has finely tuned political attenae. If the alternative means stoking up Republicanism she will happily accept more tupperware and less flummery at The Palace."

Read More »»

Royal Tour Of Canada 1860

"The Heir to the Throne of the British Empire visiting the Provinces of that Empire in America is a new fact in the history of both. Never was a visit more graciously made, or more cordially received. The personification of free monarchical government and the spirit of British North American liberty meet for the first time, and never was meeting more affectionate, or congratulations and prayers more hearty. The representative person of majesty, and the representative thousands of freedom, embrace each other with an ardour and earnestness that bespeak the strongest convictions and the deepest feelings."

"Why is this? No favours are sought or expected on either side. The visit is not diplomatic, nor are the greetings those of cliques. The visit is the expression of a Queen-mother's affection to her son, and a Queen-sovereign's love to her free people; and the reception is the spontaneous ovation of all ranks, classes, parties, and ages; the unanimous, concentrated heart of our whole country, offering its warmest tribute of love and loyalty to the filial representative of the most beloved of sovereigns, the truest guardian of civil and religious liberty."

"The universal and cordial welcome to The Prince of Wales, were no prostrations of superstitious ignorance and galvanized serfdom before an Eastern potentate or an European despot; they were the cordial homage of a virtuous people to parental, royal, and personal virtue - the intelligent appreciation by a free people of a principle of government and law, which is above party; which, like the sun in the firmament, is no less impartial than universal in its benefits. It is in this that a free monarchy is distinguished from a free republic on the one side, and an arbitrary despotism on the other - as the personifica of impartial authority and supreme law, and not the head of a party - as the impartial guardian of public rights and freedom, and not the absolute disposer of a people's religion, liberties, properties, and lives. The visit of The Prince of Wales to these Provinces must have been one of great pleasure, profit, and pride to His Royal Highness, as it has been one of great interest and satisfaction to all classes of their inhabitants." Continue reading this historical document and detailed record of 'The Visit Of The Prince Of Wales To British North America In 1860' which has recently been scanned and published online for the very first time.

Read More »»

How long can this go on?

Whilst most people in Australia have put the republic debate behind them, there is an ongoing unhealthy state of affairs with many of our politicians and the Crown.

Even though many Labour voters support the Crown the Labour Party has taken on an ideology that states Australia must be a republic. Once the party takes on something as an ideology it is next to impossible to have them overturn it. Since The Labour party governs nearly all of Australia we have a state of affairs where the elected government is totally against the Crown. My question is – how long can this go on?

Is Australia going to continue as a nation where the government of the day is against the Crown and actively undermines it? One only has to look to New South Wales where the State Labour government threw the Governor out of Government House and has totally downplayed the role of the Crown in that state.

I call upon readers to offer ideas on to how to combat this....

Read More »»

Royal Tour Of Canada 2009

Her Excellency The Right Honourable Michaelle Jean, Governor General of Canada, is pleased to announce an upcoming Royal Visit to Canada that will take place later this year. Their Royal Highnesses The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall have accepted the invitation of The Government of Canada to undertake a visit in November 2009. They will visit Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia and The National Capital Region. The visit will be coordinated by The Canadian Secretary to The Queen, Mr. Kevin MacLeod, CVO, CD. A detailed itinerary will be published at a later date by The Department Of Canadian Heritage. Learn more here. Live online debate in Canada about November's Royal Visit is now available via here and here.

Read More »»

"the nearest-run thing you ever saw in your life"

Waterloo Day 2009.  Victor Hugo's The The Eighteenth of June, 1815 from Les Miserables:

If it had not rained in the night between the 17th and the 18th of June, 1815, the fate of Europe would have been different. A few drops of water, more or less, decided the downfall of Napoleon. All that Providence required in order to make Waterloo the end of Austerlitz was a little more rain, and a cloud traversing the sky out of season sufficed to make a world crumble.

The battle of Waterloo could not be begun until half-past eleven o'clock, and that gave Blucher time to come up. Why? Because the ground was wet. The artillery had to wait until it became a little firmer before they could manoeuvre.

Napoleon was an artillery officer, and felt the effects of this. The foundation of this wonderful captain was the man who, in the report to the Directory on Aboukir, said: Such a one of our balls killed six men. All his plans of battle were arranged for projectiles. The key to his victory was to make the artillery converge on one point. He treated the strategy of the hostile general like a citadel, and made a breach in it. He overwhelmed the weak point with grape-shot; he joined and dissolved battles with cannon. There was something of the sharpshooter in his genius. To beat in squares, to pulverize regiments, to break lines, to crush and disperse masses,--for him everything lay in this, to strike, strike, strike incessantly,-- and he intrusted this task to the cannon-ball. A redoubtable method, and one which, united with genius, rendered this gloomy athlete of the pugilism of war invincible for the space of fifteen years.

On the 18th of June, 1815, he relied all the more on his artillery, because he had numbers on his side. Wellington had only one hundred and fifty-nine mouths of fire; Napoleon had two hundred and forty.

Suppose the soil dry, and the artillery capable of moving, the action would have begun at six o'clock in the morning. The battle would have been won and ended at two o'clock, three hours before the change of fortune in favor of the Prussians. What amount of blame attaches to Napoleon for the loss of this battle? Is the shipwreck due to the pilot?

Read More »»

Royal Ascot 2009

It's tails and toppers at Royal Ascot again. The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh at Royal Ascot, 16 June 2009. Her Majesty is Patron of Ascot racecourse, following in the footsteps of eleven previous monarchs since Queen Anne founded the racecourse in 1711.

Read More »»

Trooping the Colour 2009

The Duke of Edinburgh salutes as he and The Queen make their way to Horse Guards Parade for the Trooping the Colour ceremony to mark Her Majesty's official birthday, 13 June 2009. The military ceremony dates back to the early 18th century, or even earlier, when the colours (flags) of the battalion were carried (or 'trooped') down the ranks so that they could be seen and recognised by the soldiers. Since 1748 the parade has also marked the Sovereign's official birthday. (Also see Trooping the Colour 2008)

Read More »»

Keep our Westminster Democracy

Be very afraid that Gordon Brown, who is desperate and whose Labour party is frantically trying to avoid obliteration at the next general election, is now flailing about with electoral reform plans, including apparently, PR, on the false pretence of democratic principle. Egad is all I can say about that. The Tories need to immediately stick a dagger through the heart of the Labour corpse before it does any more real lasting damage to that country's future. PR would be the end of the British nation as we know it.

If it is not already apparent to our beloved readers, The Monarchist is a supporter of our First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system and an avowed enemy of Proportional Representation (PR). We should be wary of any leader who has lost sight of the reasons why we have a democracy, which is not to give voice to every Tom, Dick and Harry - for that path leads to tyranny of the masses over the rights of the individual - but to provide a means to preserve our ancient liberties.

If I was to look for a country who is furthest from losing sight of this crucial objective, I would look no further than Poland. Serious thinkers there have good reason not to believe in power to the people nonsense, for they have suffered too much for too long not to get it finally right. Go over to AndrewCusack.com to read this excellent essay, for here is what Professor Jerzy Przystawa of the University of Wrocław has to say about PR:

PR creates “party states” and makes the political life of a country into a field of eternal and continuous battle among the political parties. It gives enormous privileges to parties and their leaders at the expense of citizen’s rights, it deprives the voters of any control over elected deputies, it eliminates then accountability of the MPs, and the political parties cease to be responsible for their actions. Such a system does not inspire confidence among voters, is conducive to large abstention from voting, and it does not allow any political party to win the parliamentary majority. In this way, the system enforces coalition governments, thus governments are weak, torn by continuous party battles among the members of the coalition. It exerts pressure on the state budget which weak governments cannot resist. This, in turn, deepens the budget deficit. As it has been proven on numerous examples of many countries, the system generates political corruption. The list could be continued.

So why pray, did the victorious Allies foist this failed, totally alien system onto the losing powers of the Second World War? Answer: Because we wanted to keep them politically and terminally weak:

It is worth reflecting on how the best democracies in the world, the United States, Great Britain or Canada and Australia built democracies in the countries under their domination and responsibility. What electoral systems were “suggested” to Japan, Germany, Italy or Austria? Or even France, their less than terribly responsible ally? Should one not be tempted to expect that all those established democracies would propose their own electoral systems as a model of democracy? Would it have been unreasonable to suppose that they should strongly advocate their electoral systems, of which they benefited so much?

As we know well, nothing of the sort happened. On the contrary: America and England, with the help of their Soviet ally, imposed on Japan, Germany and Italy electoral systems totally alien to their own, totally different from their ways of electing national parliamentary representation. Instead of the so well-functioning First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) majoritarian rule, they imposed on their defeated enemies the so-called Proportional Representation! We know that they did so against the will of some important politicians of those countries. For example, one of the major proponents of the European Community, Konrad Adenauer and his Christian Democrats, the CDU, intended to introduce the Westminster FPTP system in Germany, but the occupying powers had not agreed to that! There is little doubt that similar “good advice” was given to Japan and Italy. And, of course, it must not have been very difficult to persuade them: their trustful Soviet ally was certainly in favour of such a solution; the communist parties they created, especially in France and Italy, strongly supported the idea, and all the socialist illusions, prevailing all over Western Europe at that time, made the task so much simpler and easier. We are now entitled to analyse why electoral systems were so important to them.

I think there might be little doubt that the real reason for this was a sensible intention to make certain that the Japanese, German and Italian states, that were about to be rebuilt and reorganised, should be politically weak, unable to ever become a threat to the world again. And one efficient, civilised and “democratic” measure to achieve that was the so called Proportional Representation. The Soviets achieved similar effect by direct fraud, without going through any subtleties. The Western democracies embarked on a more sophisticated approach. Of the many “qualities” of PR, the most important of all was that PR weakens the state and thus prevents it from being a real competitor on the political arena.

In other words, why would we want such a system, do we now wish to be weak, poor and unfree? If our very best thought this back in 1945, if the world's strongest democracies have since maintained a fairly consistent track record of producing stable, reasonably free governments, if we have avoided the need for mainstream winners to form political coalitions with minor, fringe and lunatic parties that mass democracy, PR-style elections inevitably produce, why would we risk touching it with a ten foot pole today? Good question.

Read More »»

The Gentlemen at Arms

The ancient Corps celebrated their 500th anniversary on June 4th

Her Majesty's Body Guard of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen at Arms was instituted 500 years ago by King Henry VIII in 1509. Although the Yeomen of the Guard, which was founded in 1485 is older, the Gentlemen at Arms are more senior, due to their being classed as 'gentlemen' rather than 'yeomen', and because they are classed as the 'nearest guard', i.e. the personal guard to the Sovereign.


The uniform is that of a Heavy Dragoon Guards officer of the 1840s. It has a skirted red coat with Garter blue velvet cuffs and facings embroidered with the Tudor royal badge of the Portcullis. Helmets with white swan feather plumes are worn when on duty, even in church. Officers wear gold aiguillettes and carry sticks of office which they receive from the Sovereign on appointment. Cavalry swords are worn, and long ceremonial battle-axes, over 300 years old, are carried by all the Gentlemen.


The Queen sits for an official photograph with Her Majesty's Body Guard of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen at Arms, 4 June 2009. The Queen's ‘Nearest Guard’ commemorated the 500th anniversary of their founding with a parade and luncheon at St James's Palace. © Press Association


The Queen inspects Her Majesty's Body Guard of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen at Arms at St James's Palace during a parade to celebrate their 500th anniversary, 4 June 2009. In a speech to mark the occasion, Her Majesty remarked that, 'As individuals, you have all given long and distinguished military service to the nation. As members of the ‘Nearest Guard’, your service to the Crown continues in a distinctive way'.

Read More »»

"Obama Beach"

You can almost forgive Gordon Brown for his Freudian slip on Omaha Beach, for subconsciously admitting that the 65th anniversary of D-day has been more about the presence of one man than the sacrifice of thousands of English-speaking veterans. No disrespect to the President, but the Queen should have been the lightning rod for this event, the only head of state to have served during the Second World War, who was a dear friend of Ike, and who therefore would have been a more generational and affectionate representative for D-day veterans.

I think I have watched Saving Private Ryan about a dozen times, love the film, but one gets the impression that too many Americans believe Operation Overlord was a mostly American show. It was not an overwhelmingly American operation, most of the troops who landed on the Normandy Beaches were from other countries.

No it was not a Franco-American initiative, nor was it an Anglo-American one, unless you believe the 15,000 Canadians who landed on Juno Beach that fateful day was a minor event. Remember that "Anglo-American" is a British invention, most Americans would probably rather not share the glory, but neither would most Britons want to share it beyond those two.

Properly told, D-day was a triumph of the English-speaking peoples. Yes, a battalion of Free French came ashore that day, as did some Polish and Norwegian units, but it was predominantly the work of three nations, many of whom died fighting for King and Country. What a travesty the Queen couldn't be there.

Read More »»

Norfolk House

Between the Glorious First of June and the 6th of June Normandy Landings, now is as good a time as any to showcase the Naval and Military Club (see post below) located at 4 St. James's Square. The Club where I now stay while in London is located right beside Norfolk House where General Dwight D. Eisenhower planned Operation's Torch and Overlord and directed the largest amphibious assault in military history.

Norfolk House, the former Headquarters of General Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander during the Second World War

Read More »»

The Naval and Military Club

St. James's Square in London is Clubland for the Gentleman. The Carleton Club, Reform Club, Travellers Club and Naval and Military Club are all within a five minute walk of each other. With so many spacious private clubs around, it is a wonder how so many Members of Parliament would rather rip off the taxpayer with expensive London mortgages rather than live in temporary affordable comfort at a traditional gentlemen's club.

Gordon Brown may mock the Tories for moat cleaning and life at the Gentlemen's Club, but the Naval and Military Club where I stayed for four days cost me a very reasonable £65 per day, so assuming Parliament sat for 100 days each year, the taxpayer would only have to reimburse each MP £6,500 for their trouble. If a handsome Georgian mansion within spitting distance of Westminster was good enough for Lady Astor, the first woman to sit in Parliament, who lived here from 1912 until 1942, why should a backbencher feel any less privileged in such surroundings.


The Naval and Military Club was established in 1862. It was founded in 1862 because the three then existing military clubs in London - the United Service, the Junior United Service and the Army & Navy - were all full. The membership was long restricted to military officers. This is no longer the case, but it still has a predominantly military and ex-military membership. The old "In and Out" (Cambridge House at 94 Piccadilly) where Lord Palmerston lived until his death in 1865. Shortly after Palmerston's death Cambridge House was purchased by the Naval & Military Club, which had outgrown its previous premises.
The new "In and Out". The Club moved to its current location at 4 St. James's Square in 1999. The nickname "In and Out" heralds from the famous lettering found on the gate posts (seen above), which existed to guide London cabbies in and out of the Club.

A Bust of King Edward greets Members and Visitors to the Club

Her Majesty the Queen graces the first room

The Duke of Edinburgh is President of the Club and has been known to pop in from time to time. He donated this portrait to the Club in 1999.

H.M.S. Victory

The Mandatory Portrait of Lord Nelson, Hero of the Nile

A Naval Club without a portrait of the Immortal Nelson wouldn't be right.

Neither would a Military Club without a portrait of Wellington.

Admiral Beatty Graces the Entrance to the Library

The Library

The Canning Room

The Canning Bar

The Long Bar and what I would call the Field Marshal Room, owing to the number of portraits of British field marshals.

Field Marshal Roberts and Haig on the back wall

Field Marshal Haig

The staircase with columns resplendent

The grand staircase

Up we go.

Down we look.

Under over: Another portrait of Field Marshal the Lord Roberts

At the top.

They serve more than coffee in this upstairs room, yet this is what they call it: The Coffee Room. Here you can wine and dine and pretend you are someone who you are not.

Queen Victoria and Prince Albert

The Astor Room, this was Lady Astor's bedroom. Likely misattributed quote to Lady Astor: "Mr. Churchill, you're drunk!" Winston Churchill: "Yes, and you, Madam, are ugly. But tomorrow, I shall be sober." ...Other undefinitive anecdotal dialogue between Churchill and Lady Astor: "Winston, if I were your wife, I'd poison your tea." Churchill: "Nancy, if I were your husband, I'd drink it."

There is a long forgotten special link between Lady Astor and Canada. It was Lady Astor who volunteered to have her English country house converted into a hospital for wounded Canadian soldiers during the Great War and personally tended to their needs.

The view from Lady Astor's Room. All Gentlemen Clubs need a courtyard these days - "Gentlemen, you may smoke".

King Harald V Room (Reign: 1991 to Present). As it turns out, The Norway Club is closely affiliated with the Naval and Military Club and shares the same grand London home.

A Portrait of King Haakon VII of Norway (Reign: 1905-1957)

A Portrait of King Olav V of Norway (I believe) who reigned from 1957-1991

The British/Canadian name for this military dress is "Number 4s". I have to say the Norway version beats ours. Love the uniform.

A portrait of George V in the Palmerston Room

Read More »»

The Glorious First of June

When the haze lifted on 1 June 1794, Admiral Howe's fleet engaged the navy of Revolutionary France for the first time in what became the largest sea battle in the French Revolutionary Wars. Although it was henceforth decreed by the Royal Navy that the First of June would forever be 'Glorious', it was not a decisive victory since the French loss of seven ships was mitigated by the fact that their grain convoys from America to France made their destination, thus preventing an outbreak of famine in the Revolutionary Republic.

It is interesting to note that the Naval General Service Medal was a campaign medal approved in 1847, for issue to officers and men of the Royal Navy and was retrospectively awarded for various naval actions during the period 1793 to 1840, provided the applicant for the medal was a surviving claimant. One surprising claimant was 54-year-old Daniel Tremendous McKenzie, who had been born during the battle of the Glorious 1st of June on board HMS Tremendous, and was duly awarded the medal 54 years later for a battle fought on the day he was born!

Which brings me to the expression "son of a gun". This came about during the Age of Sail when ladies such as Mrs McKenzie were in transit on His Majesty's ships and needed to give birth, the only place available was to have a part of the gun deck between two cannons, screened off, for the birth to take place, hence the expression:- "son of a gun". Now you know.

Read More »»

Zadok the Priest

Read More »»

Royal Oak Day

In the past few weeks parliament has faced a level of upheaval not seen for more than 300 years. Outrage at MPs expense claims should remind us that politicians exist to serve the people – not the other way around. But those calling for the ‘Spirit of Cromwell’ would do well to remember Friday, May 29th - named Royal Oak Day almost 350 years ago by Act of Parliament:

Parliament had ordered the 29th of May, the King’s birthday, to be forever kept as a day of thanksgiving for our redemption from tyranny and the King’s return to his Government, he returning to London that day.

— Samuel Pepys’s Diary 1st June 1660

English Oak is the national tree of our people. It represents strength and endurance. Oak is traditionally seen as the protector of our way of life. Royal Oak Day (also known as Oak Apple Day or Restoration Day) marks the restoration of England’s Monarchy. It recalls how Charles II hid in an oak tree to escape following his defeat in the battle of Worcester.

Many who fought the king and his troops under the military command of Cromwell were fuelled with outrage at high taxes and the unaccountable lavish lifestyle of their Monarchy. They were united in a desire for freedom and political liberties.

As a political leader, Cromwell placed the interests of his elite minority above the civil liberties of our nation. There were many problems, arguments and new laws based on his strict puritanism. Cromwell considered many things English people enjoyed as sins to be outlawed - eating plum pudding, theatres, singing and dancing were made against the law. Cromwell ruled by force – not by the will of the people.

Cromwell’s dictatorship and tyranny was not acceptable to those who opposed Charles II. Not long after Cromwell’s death, many of those who had previously fought the king under Cromwell united with English royalists to secure the king’s peaceful return. Charles II arrived in London on his 30th Birthday - 29th May 1660.

Charles II’s arrival marked the beginning of Restoration - the return of Monarchy for England. And this time not only Royalists welcomed him. His arrival meant everyone could enjoy singing, dancing, and plum pudding once more. On the day of his arrival there were fireworks, bonfires, dancing in the streets; church bells rang and cannons roared!

Royal Oak Day is a celebration of our freedom, liberty and nationhood - all of which are depicted in the strength and stability of the Oak. Royal Oak Day traditions such as enjoying plum pudding and ale are specific reminders of our redemption from tyranny.

This day was celebrated nationally throughout England for over 200 years. It has been customary to wear a sprig of oak on this day for centuries. There have been numerous naval ships, a train and a London underground station named ‘The Royal Oak’ and it remains a popular name for our pubs and hotels. The image of the Royal Oak continues to be found on our stamps and coins. Yet apart from within a few English village communities, this important day and its traditions have now almost been forgotten. As we approach the 350th Anniversary of this celebration in 2010, let us consider its significance and forever keep the 29th May as a day of thanksgiving for our redemption from tyranny – this Royal Oak Day you are free to wear a sprig of oak and enjoy traditional English plum pudding!

Read More »»

Bleeding Hearts

The Queen's Governor General in Canada is being accused of being a blood lusting Neanderthal after swallowing a dripping chunk of raw seal heart as hundreds of Inuit looked on at an Arctic community feast in Rankin Inlet, Nunavut.

Her Excellency Michaelle Jean, on a week-long trip to the Arctic, knelt above a pair of seal carcasses and carved out the meat using a traditional ulu blade. After slashing through the flesh, the Governor General turned to the woman beside her and asked: "Could I try the heart?"

Shortly thereafter, Jean was given a bloody piece of seal heart and ate it whole. She then grabbed a tissue to wipe her blood-soaked fingers. "It's like sushi," she said. "And it's very rich in protein." The Queen's Representative said it was "absolutely delicious."

With an approval rating hovering around 83%, her action has won plaudits from Inuit organizations and Ottawa, where Peter MacKay, the Defence Minister, raved:

I think that was wonderful. I think she’s Canada’s new Braveheart for eating the seal heart. We’re going up there again in the summer, the chief of defence staff and I as we did last year [for a military operation], and I expect there’ll be an opportunity to try some delicious seal. I would encourage all Canadians to try seal. It’s a wonderful product.

International Reaction and Condemnation

Her behaviour on Monday is being interpreted as a protest after the EU imposed a ban on seal products on the grounds that hunting the mammals is cruel. An EU spokeswoman yesterday said Jean's gesture was "too bizarre to acknowledge."

Barbara Slee of the International Fund for Animal Welfare in Brussels said she was disgusted by Jean's actions. Animal rights groups say Canada's annual seal hunt is cruel, poorly monitored and provides little economic benefit. Sealers and Canadian authorities say it is humane and provides income for isolated communities.

Dickie Arbiter, the Queen’s former press secretary, was less than impressed telling the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.,

I find what she’s done extraordinary to comprehend. Her role is largely ceremonial and what she does in the political arena is really on the advice of the prime minister and the ministers. And to start cutting up a seal and eating it is sort of making a political statement and not what one expects a Governor General to do.

Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported the event under the sensationalist headline, "‘Blood Lust’: Canada’s G-G eats seal heart."

The New York Gawker called Her Excellency the "Sarah Palin of Canada":

Now, the question on everyone's mind has to be, "How will Sarah Palin top this one?" Maybe she can take down a polar bear to eat its heart AND its liver? She's got to do something, because as it stands now, it appears as though Canada is easily winning the "Who has the kookiest female Governor" sweepstakes, and couple that with the fact that they have health care for all their citizens, and it becomes increasingly clear that America is nothing more than Canada's bitch.

Canada's Vice Regal agrees to join seal hunt; all Europe collapses in dead faint.

Canadian Press reports that Governor General Michaelle Jean, far from being cowed by the international uproar created by her participation in a seal-eating ceremony, has upped the ante:

In fact, the Governor General’s response could hardly be more defiant: Jean was invited by a group of Inuit to join them on a seal hunt Wednesday evening.

And she accepted.

As Don Martin pointed out in the National Post: "Far from being heartless to animal suffering, her Arctic snack has sealed Ms. Jean's status as a worthy torchbearer for a Queen who, and this is just a hunch, would probably demand her seal organs seasoned, sauteed and served on silver."

Read More »»

So I'm in Dublin, staying at the Shelbourne, having a drink with Bono...

That would be Bono, honourary Knight Commander of the British Empire, lesser dubbed the lead singer of U2. The Shelbourne is Dublin's pre-eminent five star hotel just across from St. Stephen's Green, which I understand is named after the Earl of Shelburne, who once lived there, before he became known to history as the Marquess of Lansdowne.

In any event, there is a famous bar inside called the Horseshoe Bar, and there he was - Bono - with a party of five drinking Guinness and champagne and enjoying some private laughter. Bono, being Bono, was of course half shaved, wearing those tinted shades of his, same black leather vest and jeans - permanent dude, you know - and there I was dressed in my suit popping a few gin and tonics preparing to head down to the Hibernian Club for dinner with my well-to-do friend. I'm not going to tell you everything he said, except to say that the Big Labowski is one of his favourite films. Dude, mine too.

For a brief moment we contemplated selling tickets at the door, but thought better of it. We did politely ask the one-time most powerful man in the world if he would be so kind as to remove his bag so that we could sit at the adjoining table, whilst pretending not to recognize him. We may content ourselves that we don't genuflect in front of celebrities, but remember this is the people's Bono we are talking about, recall how he had the G7 eating out of the palm of his hand a couple of years back - every world leader wanted to be on every side of every issue that he was on, until they belatedly realized that they ultimately answer to taxpayers and not to Bono's charitable wishes. Not a bad gigg for a solitary figure, and so for the next two hours we drank beside the man who for a time seemed to have the international media and the whole wide world in his hands.

Dublin Castle, formerly the fortified seat of British rule in Ireland until 1922. Most of the complex dates from the 18th century, though a castle has stood on the site since the days of King John, the first Lord of Ireland.

Above is another view of The Record Tower, the sole surviving tower of the mediæval castle dating from c.1228. To its left is the Chapel Royal. Below is Dublin Castle on the Upper Yard. On the left is the entrance to the State Apartments. The Irish Crown Jewels were stolen from the Bedford Tower to the right.
The Lord Edward

Excuse me, Sir, can you please tell me where I can find some good Irish pubs?

Trinity College, Dublin, corporately designated as the "Provost, Fellows and Scholars of the College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Queen Elizabeth", was founded in 1592 by Queen Elizabeth I as the "mother of a university", and is the only constituent college of the University of Dublin. Trinity and the University of Dublin form Ireland's oldest and most prestigious university.

A Statue of Edmund Burke in front of Trinity College, Dublin, where the great man attended. At the main entrance of Trinity there are statues of Edmund Burke and Oliver Goldsmith, both graduates.

Inside the Trinity College courtyard

The famous Book of Kells and the most splendid vaulted library I ever did see can be found at Trinity.
The thousand year old Christ Church Cathedral. For Catholics visiting Dublin, be prepared to be Anglicized - apart from St. Patricks Cathedral, I came across no Catholic churches in Dublin. The ones I saw were all Church of Ireland Anglican, which surprised me. Ireland may be predominantly Catholic, but in central Dublin itself this is far from evident.

Which brings me back to Bono. I overheard him say that he was brought up a Catholic while his brother was brought up an Anglican. His mother apparently wanted one of each, which again suggests that Ireland is historically more ambivalent on the issue than what might be commonly believed by outsiders.

Read More »»

Buckingham Palace and The Mall

The last time I took a stroll down the Mall to the Palace was during the Royal Wedding of 1986. I had the same fantastic view of that event as television anchor Tom Brokaw of NBC News, because I stood within earshot of him and his crew as they broadcasted live to millions back in America. I also remember chatting with Valerie Pringle of CBC News during one of the long waits for the royal couple to appear on the balcony or for the carriage to arrive from Westminster Abbey, I can't remember which. It goes without saying that the place was jam packed with a million people, and was on the whole a rather exhausting experience waiting, waiting and more waiting. So I was pleased to be back 23 years later in a more tranquil setting.

I snapped the photo above from St. James's Park. I forgot just how massive the Palace really is. Below is St. James's Palace commissioned by Henry VIII in 1532. St. James's Palace is still a working palace, and the Royal Court is still formally based here – foreign ambassadors are still accredited to the Court of St. James's, even though they are received by the monarch at Buckingham Palace. It is also the current London residence of the Princess Royal.

Heading down the Mall from St. James's Palace

Clarence House, formerly the Royal Residence of The Queen Mother. Now the Royal Household of Prince Charles, the Duchess of Cornwall, Prince Willam and Prince Harry.

There are only three entrances to access the round turn at Buckingham Palace: The gates are called South Africa, Australia and Canada.

The Canada Gate

The Palace Gates

Her Majesty was not in Residence

Wellington Barracks situated beside Buckingham Palace just past the Australia Gate. The Queen's guard and horse guard regiments are conveniently housed here, since they have to form up everyday to carry out the Changing of the Guard ceremony.

The Parade Commander screams "Buckingham detachment, attention". I was so cast in this tradition at military college, I felt like marching on to join their ranks. The major difference now is that the rifles they use today are too short to order arms. The arms are now carried at the shoulder at all times.

One of the bands march off to change the Queen's guard.

At the other end of the Mall is the Horse Guards Parade where the annual Trooping of the Colour takes place. Tournaments were once held here in the time of Henry VIII, which will soon enough be converted into the beach volleyball venue for the London 2012 Olympics.

Read More »»