Despite this attitude, Walshe had outlined some of the reasons why Edward VIII marrying a divorcée would create grave problems for continuing with his role as sovereign and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.
The prime minister, with the support of the cabinet, the hierarchy of the Church of England, the rest of the royal family, and the bulk of public opinion at home and in the dominions, told the king he could not, as King of England, marry a woman who was twice divorced. The king, with some support from a "King's Party" consisting of Winston Churchill and press magnates Lords Beaverbrook and Rothermere, hoped he could, and desparately sought a solution. The idea of a morganatic marriage, in which the king would legally marry a woman who would not be raised to his royal rank, was suggested but ultimately rejected as being a concept alien to the English constitution. Finally, on December 10, 1936, after days of wild newspaper speculation about the constitutional crisis, the king abdicated. He could not, as he said in his famous radio speech on December 11, 1936, continue to perform his duties without the support of the "woman I love," and he left the throne to his brother, who became George VI. Throughout the crisis Edward, separated, if only temporarily, from his beloved Wallis, plagued by the controversies reported in the press, unable to find (or unwilling to listen to) wise advisers, and under great stress, acted inconsistently and unwisely. And if no other vindication for the views and actions of Baldwin and his party existed, it would be enough that the abdication of a popular king was accepted by the public so calmly and the succession of a new monarch occurred so smoothly.
King Edward VIII Abdicated for Love - ThoughtCo
The uncertainty as to parliament's inherent authority to violate rights guaranteed by earlier law thus indicated is also reflected in the comments of Sir Edward Coke upon the procedure by bill of attainder in the case of Thomas Cromwell in 1540. In the section on the High Court of Parliament in his Fourth Institute, he says, "And albeit I finde an attainder by Parliament of a subject of High Treason being committed to the Tower, and forth-comming to be heard, and yet never called to answer in any of the Houses of Parliament, although I question not the power of the Parliament, for without question the attainder standeth of force in law; yet this I say of the manner of the proceeding, : for the more high and absolute the jurisdiction of the court is, the more just and honourable it ought to be in the proceeding, and to give example of justice to inferiour Courts. But it is demanded, since he [Cromwell] was attainted by Parliament, what should be the reason that our Historians do all agree in this, that he suffered death by a law which he himselfe had made. For answer hereof, I had it of Sir Thomas Gawdye Knight, a grave and reverend Judge of the King's Bench who lived at that time, that King Henry VIII commanded him to atend the chiefe Justices, and to know whether a man that was forth-comming might be attainted of High Treason by Parliament and never called to his answer. The Judges answered, that it was a dangerous question, and that the High Court of Parliament ought to give examples to inferiour Courts for proceeding according to justice, and no inferiour Court could do the like; and they thought that the High Court of Parliament would never do it. But being by expresse commandement of the King and pressed by the said Earle [Cromwell] to give a direct answer: they said that if he be attainted by Parliament, it could not come in question afterwards, whether he were called or not called to answer. And albeit their opinion was according to law, yet might they have made a better answer, for by the Statutes of . ca. 29, 5E. 3, cap. 9 et 28E. 3, cap. 5. No man ought to be condemned without answer ... which they might have certified, but ; the act of Attainder being passed by Parliament, did bind, as they resolved. The party against whom this was intended was never called in question, but the first man after the said resolution that was so attainted, and never called to answer, was the said Earl of Essex. ... The rehearsall of the said Attainder can work no prejudice for that I am confidently perswaded that such honourable and worthy members shall be from time to time of both Houses of Parliament, as never any such Attainder where the party is forth comming, shall be had hereafter without hearing of him" (, pp. 37-38).
tapped phones of King Edward VIII and his brother amid abdication crisis, ..Think of the words which Edward VIII used on that fateful day. "I have found it impossible," he said, "to carry the heavy burden of responsibility and to discharge my duties as king as I would wish to do without the help and support of the woman I love."
Due to the break with Rome effected by Henry VIII, Edward had been ..If someone asked you to give up your relationship for the sake of your career, would you do it? It would be a terrible thing to ask of anyone. And yet why should Edward VIII have been expected to do exactly that? Yes, being king is no ordinary job, but let's treat this as objectively as possible. Let's consider the basic fact of the matter, which is that a human being in love with another human being was expected to sacrifice that love - a real and deep love - for his job.
14/11/2013 · 0380: EDWARD VIII ABDICATION NEWSPAPER : Lot 380- Subscribe!
The King's Speech hits theaters on November 24th, 2010.
Cast: Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter, Jennifer Ehle, Guy Pearce, Derek Jacobi, Timothy Spall, Michael Gambon
Firth will play George VI, known as Bertie, the father of the current Queen Elizabeth II, who assumed the throne when his brother Edward VIII abdicated in 1936 to marry Wallis Simpson. The film will focus on his efforts to overcome a nervous stammer with the help of speech therapist Lionel Logue (Rush).
The King's Speech trailer courtesy The Weinstein Company.