News1 min ago
Why Does The Beaufort Estate Own So Much Land
Swansea city council have paid large amounts of money to the Duke of Beaufort estate for building on land said to be owned by him including the bed of the river Tawe,how can this be correct in the 21st century when these lands are nothing to to do with him & were probably stolen hundreds of years ago ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by yansee. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The lands were far more likely to have been given to him by a past King in return for some Dukely favour in war - that's what happened in the Early and Middle Ages. Do me a big favour and I'll give you a swathe of land for your estate. The Duchy of Cornwall owns a lot of stuff which is nowhere near Cornwall.
As boxtops advises, a lot of land was given out by past kings in return for financial or court support.
For instance, one of the original Dukes Of Westminster was given a load of useless boggy and marshy land outside the original London city walls.
Fortuantely for the current Duke, that turned into Mayfair and Belgravia!
For instance, one of the original Dukes Of Westminster was given a load of useless boggy and marshy land outside the original London city walls.
Fortuantely for the current Duke, that turned into Mayfair and Belgravia!
I would suggest any land given to or by the crown has been stolen from the people by those with might and power, and should be returned to them. It becomes a little more difficult to unravel where land has been bought & sold a number of ties on route, but it can not be beyond the wit of mankind to agree a fair return of such ill gotten gains and receiving of stolen goods.
Failing that it's a case of awaiting the revolution and the putting of the elites against the wall.
Failing that it's a case of awaiting the revolution and the putting of the elites against the wall.
OG, before it was gifted by the King, mostly it was either owned by the king or owned by other nobles who had lost the battle or otherwise peeved the sovereign.
so basically it was stolen from other people slightly less mighty and powerful....who stole it from people who were on the wrong side at the time....who stole it from people who were on the wrong side at the time...and so on ad infinitum.
so basically it was stolen from other people slightly less mighty and powerful....who stole it from people who were on the wrong side at the time....who stole it from people who were on the wrong side at the time...and so on ad infinitum.
In many cases, in mediaeval times, land married land. A woman who was to inherit large estates would be matched by her parents to a man with large estates, to ensure that the grandchildren were well provided for. Inequality of property ownership in a marriage was most unlikely among the upper classes. And, remember, land meant titles, and titles meant that their owners were in the House of Lords which in mediaeval times was Parliament and wielder of power, before the Commons took over.
Stolen from whom, yansee ?
The state does its best to deprive the next generation of its parents' property by taxing it at 40 per cent on inheritance, for any over the tax free threshold.
But farm land actively farmed by the deceased passes tax free as does any house, however grand, which is seen as the farmhouse for tax purposes. It may be that the Duke and his predecessor had that happy position. Would you like it to be taxed ? Before you say that you would, remember the same rule applies to any business, however large, which the family owns. Would you make factories taxable at 40 per cent?
The state does its best to deprive the next generation of its parents' property by taxing it at 40 per cent on inheritance, for any over the tax free threshold.
But farm land actively farmed by the deceased passes tax free as does any house, however grand, which is seen as the farmhouse for tax purposes. It may be that the Duke and his predecessor had that happy position. Would you like it to be taxed ? Before you say that you would, remember the same rule applies to any business, however large, which the family owns. Would you make factories taxable at 40 per cent?
yansee, do you not think that any owner of land, any farmer, however modest their holding, be it few acres or hundreds, would not try to get £280,000 for the bridge? How does this indicate the 'greed of the aristocracy' or 'the robber barons' ? It's just business.
And you still haven't specified who the land was 'stolen' from.
And you still haven't specified who the land was 'stolen' from.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.