"Martin" wrote in message
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:00:59 +1000, "FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
"Martin" wrote in message
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:51:24 +1000, "FarmI" ask@itshall be given
wrote:
"Martin" wrote in message
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:46:34 +1000, "FarmI" ask@itshall be given
wrote:
"Martin" wrote in message
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:11:55 +1000, "FarmI" ask@itshall be given
wrote:

Indeed! My ma-in-law is fond of reminding me that when Charles and
Di
got
engaged and she asked me what I thought of it, I predicted that the
marriage
would be a disaster.

The odds on you being right are better than 50/50 in UK for any
marriage.

But given that the common herd can divorce and thus end the disaster
it
is
immaterial what happens in the rest of UK marriages.

Divorce is common in the royal family.

But till the divorce of Charles and Di, it wasn't common for the heir to
the
throne. There was no precedent.

Famous divorces in the royal family are
Henry VIII
Edward almost VIII

Henry VIII was King not heir to the throne

You flipped to heir after saying there was no precedent for divorce in the
Royal
family.

Rubbish! We were discussing the Heir to the throne. There is no precedent
for divorce there. And even if we think of Henry, he is the only one to
have used divorce and he did it in such a way that it can't be a precedent
and especially after the ructions caused by Edward and Mrs Simpson which is
still such close history. I can't be responsible for what is in your mind
but I know what is in mine.

Did you foresee Camilla marriage too?

No, but then I doubted there would ever be a divorce given the
precedents.

Like Princess Margaret, Anne, Prince Andrew ...

None of whom had a realistic chance of succeeding to the throne...

Nobody mentioned succession when you first started this.

I would have thought it was obvious.

(snip)

'Monarch' would apply to us too. Oz won't do anything about getting rid
of
the monarchy till the Queen dies (much to my disgust) and then we'd have
to
have a referendum and to stage that would take so long that a new
monarch
would already be a reality.

I predict that you will wrong

How? We've already had one referendum on the removal of the monarchy and
it
was defeated. I'd be very surprised that there would be another until the
queen dies and from teh instant she dies, there is a new monarch.

You haven't noticed how the post war immigrants are a dying breed in Oz?

I assume you mean British ones? Irrelevant. Apparently non English
speaking migrants voted against the referendum in droves. They liked having
a Monarch - stable and ongoing which apparently was unlike the homelands of
many of the migrants. Can't give a cite, just read it at the time.

Google seems to think a law had to be passed in Oz to make EIIR monarch of
Oz
after George VI died.

Cite?