WI: King Earnest of Britain in the 1820s

Maybe he could bring the people to their senses, and remind them why democracy hasn't always been a great idea.
 
Would his iffy marriage (subsequently annulled) in contravention of the Royal Marriage Act in the 1790s do anything to effect people's willingness to put him on the throne?

Parliament could always make a new law allowing it.

Britain did come quite close to revolution, with the severe Days of May riots after the Great Reform Act was temporarily blocked. Assuming no Catholic Emancipation, and therefore no Great Reform Act, revolution is more than plausible.

But I'm unsure that you'd necessarily have Catholic emancipation blocked.

The first thing he did as King of Hannover was abolish the constitution. I can't see him being a shrinking violet.

Could there be some sort of compromise, hashed out between the King and Wellesley, on Catholic Emancipation whereby Catholics get the vote but are prohibited from standing for office. It may be enough to convince Parliament that the King can be reasoned with. It may also serve to give Ernest the motivation to build up some sort of Parliamentary support base to prevent these sorts of compromises coming up again. At the very least he could appoint more like-minded people to the Lords and maybe make some concerted effort to get his supporters elected in Rotten Boroughs.

By the way, @Alexander the Average? It's Ernest. No 'a'. Similarly, his elder brothers were George and William IV, not VI.

Damn dyslexia acting up again.

Maybe he could bring the people to their senses, and remind them why democracy hasn't always been a great idea.

I think he'd be more likely to remind people that violent revolution butchering the aristocracy is still an option.
 
The first thing he did as King of Hannover was abolish the constitution. I can't see him being a shrinking violet.
Yeah, I through it out as a possible change, but I don't expect him to moderate too much.

His treatment of the Goettingen Seven suggests that, whatever the factors on the ground, he'd be an arch-reactionary.
 
Given that he was quite keen on ensuring that the union between Britain and Hanover was maintained, would he attempt to change Hanover's succession laws to harmonise them with Britain's and avoid the potential splitting that could occur if Britain had a female heir, as happened IOTL?
 
Parliament could always make a new law allowing it.





Could there be some sort of compromise, hashed out between the King and Wellesley, on Catholic Emancipation whereby Catholics get the vote but are prohibited from standing for office. It may be enough to convince Parliament that the King can be reasoned with. It may also serve to give Ernest the motivation to build up some sort of Parliamentary support base to prevent these sorts of compromises coming up again. At the very least he could appoint more like-minded people to the Lords and maybe make some concerted effort to get his supporters elected in Rotten Boroughs.



Damn dyslexia acting up again.



I think he'd be more likely to remind people that violent revolution butchering the aristocracy is still an option.
Butcher the aristocracy and do what next? They'll do what's happened now. Become sheep for someone else.
 
Given that he was quite keen on ensuring that the union between Britain and Hanover was maintained, would he attempt to change Hanover's succession laws to harmonise them with Britain's and avoid the potential splitting that could occur if Britain had a female heir, as happened IOTL?

Ernest was a stickler for things being done properly. This was the main reason why he abolished the new constitution in Hanover: as the future king, he had not been consulted regarding the constitution. He didn't necessarily support or oppose things from a personal interest, but rather a dedication to what he thought right and proper. On that basis, I can't see him changing Hanover's succession laws, regardless of his own opinions about them.
 
"Could there be some sort of compromise, hashed out between the King and Wellesley, on Catholic Emancipation whereby Catholics get the vote but are prohibited from standing for office."

That was already the situation before Catholic Emancipation.
 
"I thought that emancipation expanded the franchise?"

I didn't think so, and went to the relevant Wikipedia article to double check, and found out that in tact the Catholic Relief Act of 1829 further restricted the franchise.
 
Assuming that Ernest Augustus' reign ends in a revolution, what does the post-Revolution government do? Do they proclaim some sort of British Republic or do they ask some noble sympathetic to reformist causes to become King?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
That's a difficult question to answer, but it's possible they'd import a Royal from somewhere else (or just go down the line of succession until they found someone who worked, with Augustus Frederick looking like a winner). Otherwise Republic seems likely - there seems to have been a general belief that it took being royal not noble to become the king or queen.

Bold is DnB:

Line of Succession prior to the Birth of the Princess Royal in November 1840:

Descendants of George III

Ernst August Duke of Cumberland King of Hannover
Prince George of Cumberland (Crown Prince of Hannover)
Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex (no legitimate issue) His liberal political views estranged him from his father and the court, and excluded him from lucrative employments similar to those enjoyed by the other royal dukes. He supported the progressive political policies of his time, including the abolition of the slave trade, Catholic emancipation, the removal of the civil disabilities of Jews and dissenters, the abolition of the corn laws, and parliamentary reform...The Times commented that ‘No death in the royal family short of the actual demise of a monarch could have occasioned a stronger feeling of deprivation’
Prince Adolphus Duke of Cambridge The administration of Hanoverian affairs by the duke of Cambridge was characterized by wisdom, mildness, and discretion, and by the introduction of timely and conciliatory reforms. He successively weathered the storms, both political and academic, of the revolutionary period of 1831, and his prudent management of affairs was said to have gone ‘a great way to preserve the Hanoverian crown for his family’.
Prince George of Cambridge
Declare the Duke of Cumberland to be naturally dead, and there you go.
 
That's a difficult question to answer, but it's possible they'd import a Royal from somewhere else (or just go down the line of succession until they found someone who worked, with Augustus Frederick looking like a winner). Otherwise Republic seems likely - there seems to have been a general belief that it took being royal not noble to become the king or queen.

Bold is DnB:


Declare the Duke of Cumberland to be naturally dead, and there you go.

What's DnB?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
So, what happens if Ernest Augustus flees to Hannover after the revolution which overthrows him? What do the monarchs of Europe do?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
If Augustus Frederick took the throne, who would succeed him after he died without issue?
Well, he might have issue! He died in 1843 OTL, and if he married upon taking the throne he might well have a child before his death - if he had a child within a few years they'd be in their teens upon accession.
If not it would devolve upon Prince Adolphus and then to his son Prince George (assuming that part goes as OTL).
 
Top