SR - Principality law question

[Galen Bevel]

Brent & Susan Rachel wrote:
> 
> I received a very good comment/question re the proposed Principality
> laws.
> 
> The proposed laws currently would establish a system in which each
> outgoing Coronet would invest the incoming one.  The investing would
> officially end one reign and begin the next.
> 
> The comment concerned the degree of separation that might create between
> a Principality and it mother Kingdom.  Could we not arrange for the
> Crown to invest each successive Coronet.
> 
> There are pros and cons to each side.  I'll insert our reasoning for
> settling on our proposal if no one else voices it.  Otherwise, I'd like
> to sit back and get a feel for strength of feeling in this question.
> 

> 
> Kazimir Petrovich
> 

Though I am not a resident of the Southern Region and thus will probably
not be a resident of the proposed Principality, I would like to chime in
on this one, as it will affect people outside the Principality borders,
specifically the Crown.  If require the Crown to invest the Coronets,
then obviously, the Crown would be required to attend the event.  While
it is more than likely that the Crown would _want_ to present, I think
it would be good to resist adding more events they are _required_ to
attend.  There might be cases where they could more efficiently use
their time by going elsewhere in the Kingdom.  Perhaps the link to the
Mother Kingdom could be preserved by requiring the Prince and Princess
to attend upon the Crown within a specified time limit (one month?)
after the investiture to swear their fealty to the Crown and Kingdom. 
This could take place anywhere, inside the Principality, or outside, and
would leave a little more flexibility in everyones schedules.

Graf Galen K.

===========
Galen W. Bevel
galenbv at ix.netcom.com
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.