header-logo header-logo

28 April 2017 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Features , Public , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

What’s in a name? (Pt 1)

nlj_7743_nash

In its centenary year, Michael L Nash reflects on the birth of the House of Windsor

It was the King’s secretary who thought of it. ‘Do you realise,’ wrote Lord Rosebery to Arthur Bigge, later Lord Stamfordham, ‘that you have christened a dynasty? There are few people in the world who have done this, none I think. It is really something to be historically proud of. I admire and envy you.’

Thus it was that on 24 June 1917, Lord Stamfordham suddenly and simply put forward the name ‘Windsor’ when there appeared to be a deadlock in choosing a name for the Royal Family of Britain. Why was this necessary? Because, in response to disturbing rumours of the German connections and origin of the Royal Family during World War I, King George V took not one, but a series of actions which, at least on the surface, changed the face of that family, and ensured it took a different direction. The legal nature of these changes was, and has always been, of great interest not only to lawyers and legal historians,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll