Regarding the Royal Collection. I think it is relevant to make a couple of points. I personally have no idea of precisely what is considered part of the Royal Collection, except for some major category of items - even so, not all such items will form part of the Royal Collection. I think there is a great deal of public confusion about what is in the Royal Collection. I believe that the Royal Collection has mounted exhibitions and published books on items which are not strictly part of that collection. For example, Roberts' book was published by the Royal Collection Publications. I believe that most of the jewels mentioned in the book are private property. 1. The Royal Collection site makes it clear that The Queen, as sovereign, holds items in the Royal Collection in trust for her successors and for the nation. HM The Queen does not own these items as a private individual. http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/about/frequently-asked-questions 2. As I understand matters, the paintings, furniture, silver, gold plate and other items in the Royal Collection have always been considered as something owned and passed from one monarch to the next. For example, when Edward VIII abdicated, he did not attempt to assert ownership of furniture, paintings, silver etc in Buckingham Palace or Windsor castle as his. He did, however, assert his ownership of Balmoral and Sandringham, and took furniture, paintings, gemstones etc considered to be his with him, and I have never read of any dispute regarding those items. Much of the Royal Collection has been acquired by individual monarchs and their spouses with private money, especially after the Crown Estates were given into the care of the government at the start of each reign in return for Civil List monies. I believe that various monarch (and their spouses) have indicated what should be private and what should be part of the pool of royal heirlooms. My thinking is partially influenced by having seen information in the auction catalogue of Princess Margaret's possessions. Some of the notes contained information - that there were identification notes on some items of furniture showing that they belonged to her father and then to her etc. To me that suggests that the royals keep an account of what is considered private property, which is theirs to bequeath, give as a gift or sell, as they wish. 3 With regard to jewellery, I believe that anything which is not considered as belonging to the Crown is private property, which can be disposed of freely, in the same way as any private individual can sell, donate, or bequeath their property. For the government or others to suggest otherwise would be a breach of fundamental rights to private property under English Common Law, a cornerstone of English rights. If The Queen should make other dispositions for private property in her possession, then no doubt information will be forthcoming. By this I mean if HM should put jewels into something like a foundation. 4. When The Queen said in the 1990s that she would pay tax on her private income, I believe the announcement left it open to argue that items willed to her by her mother or from her to her successor as monarch could be subject to inheritance taxes and that what we are told is the current arrangement with the government was instituted so that the royal inheritance was not diminished. 4. The present situation, where it is said in the press that The Queen has lent people, such as the Duchess of Cornwall, various items of valuable jewellery is, I think, a manifestation of the agreement with the government, which is designed to ensure that the dignity of the Crown can be upheld for the nation. 5. I know some will mention the issue of valuable gifts given to Royals in the course of their visits to other countries as a representative of the UK. I think the argument is that such gifts were not given privately to the individual, but as a representative of the UK, as was jewellery given to Margaret Thatcher by one foreign government. 6 Needless to say, I am giving only my opinion, and accept that there is insufficient public information to make anything more than an educated guess, but my educated guess is that HM holds the vast majority of her jewellery as private property.
on October 9, 2014, 4:23 am, in reply to "