page_title: Constitutional status of Cornwall
section_title: The Duchy of Cornwall
hierarchical_section_title: Constitutional status of Cornwall / Moves for recognition of legal autonomy / The Duchy of Cornwall
caption_attribution_description: Français&#160;: Une carte de la Cornouaille par John Speed en 1614.
context_page_description: Cornwall is an administrative county of England.
  In ethnic and cultural terms, until around 1500, Cornwall and its inhabitants were regarded as a separate people by their English neighbours. One aspect of the distinct identity of Cornwall is the Cornish language, which survived into the early modern period and has been revived in modern times.
  Cornish nationalists argue, whether from a legal, cultural or other basis, that Cornwall should have greater autonomy than the present administrative circumstances give. A manifestation of this is the campaign for a Cornish assembly, along the lines of the Welsh or Scottish legislative institutions. Those who assert that Cornwall is, or ought to be, separate from England do not necessarily advocate separation from the United Kingdom. An important aim is Cornwall's recognition as a British "home nation" in its own right similar to how Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are considered.
context_section_description: The duchy was established in 1337 out of the former earldom of Cornwall by Edward III of England for his son, Edward, Prince of Wales, the "Black Prince", who became the first Duke of Cornwall. The Duke obtained greater rights over Cornwall than the Earls had previously exercised. These increased powers over Cornwall included the right to appoint Sheriffs, bona vacantia, treasure trove, a separate exchequer, and such forth. Most of these rights are still exercised by the Duchy. The Kilbrandon Report (1969–1971) into the British constitution recommends that, when referring to Cornwall, official sources should "on all appropriate occasions" use the designation of Duchy when referring to Cornwall itself, in recognition of its "special relationship" with the Crown.
  In 1780 Edmund Burke sought to curtail further the power of the Crown by removing the various principalities which he said existed as different aspects of the monarchy within the country:
  
  Cross a brook, and you lose the King of England; but you have some comfort in coming again under his Majesty, though 'shorn of his beams', and no more than Prince of Wales. Go to the north, and you find him dwindled to a Duke of Lancaster; turn to the west of that north, and he pops upon you in the humble character of Earl of Chester. Travel a few miles on, the Earl of Chester disappears, and the King surprises you again as Count Palatine of Lancaster. If you travel beyond Mount Edgecombe, you find him once more in his incognito, and he is Duke of Cornwall ... every one of those Principalities has the apparatus of a Kingdom for the jurisdiction over a few private estates, and the formality and charge of the Exchequer of Great Britain for collecting the rents of a country squire. Cornwall is the best of them.
  Some Cornish people, including Cornish Solidarity and the group claiming to be the Revived Cornish Stannary Parliament, argue that Cornwall has a de jure status apart as a sovereign duchy extraterritorial to England. A commonly cited basis for this argument is a case of arbitration between the Crown and the Duchy of Cornwall (1856–1857) in which the Officers of the Duchy successfully argued that the Duchy enjoyed many of the rights and prerogatives of a county palatine and that although the duke was not granted royal jurisdiction, was considered to be quasi-sovereign within his Duchy of Cornwall.
  The arbitration, as instructed by the Crown, was based on legal argument and documentation, and led to the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act 1858. The Officers of the Duchy, based on its researches, made this submission:
  That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England.
  That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.
  That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a great extent by Earls.
  That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending to its creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls enjoyed, but also afforded evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges.
  The Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall.
  However, the term 'county palatine' appears not to have been used historically of Cornwall, and the duchy did not have as much autonomy as the County Palatine of Durham, which was ruled by the Prince-Bishop of Durham. However, whilst not specifically called a county palatine, the Off
caption: John Speed's 1614 map of Cornwall. It features the Royal Arms of England as well as the arms of the Duchy of Cornwall.
exif: {}