LETTER:The royal 'gift' had strings
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.JENNIFER Miller is mistaken (Letters, 14 January), both in fact and her historical assertions. George III gave up the revenues from the Crown Estates in 1760 not out of any philanthropic zeal, but to gain a guaranteed income, in perpetuity, and to be absolved from the costs of maintaining the offices of state and the civil service, which at that time were the responsibility of the Crown. The true cost of the monarchy is accepted to be in excess of pounds 150m not counting the perks and privileges that the taxpayer provides.
As to descent from the Saxon Kings I would think that any English man or woman would have a better claim than the House of Windsor.
Mark Unsworth
Sproxton, Leicestershire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments