User blog:DragonEditsArticles/Annals of Mountchristen-Windsor Royal History (vol. 1 iss. 2): Marital Mysteries: The Union of Catherine, Princess of Wales, and Mr. Arthur Fox, Its Validity, and Issue

Background & Historical Context
The marriages of members of royal families are of particular interest to their respective dynastic houses. Historically, matrimony served as an important means of forming and strengthening alliances between kingdoms. Senior members of ruling houses—particularly monarchs—therefore take a keen interest in ensuring the suitability of each match in terms of political advantage and the likelihood of producing heirs.

Because of the importance of arranging optimal royal marriages, restrictions have, at various times in history, been placed upon them. Until 2015, for example, marriages among the British Royal Family were regulated by the Royal Marriages Act 1772. This act—named in full An Act for the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family—stipulated that no descendant of King George II (excepting the issue of princesses who had or might thereafter marry into foreign families) could contract a valid marriage without the consent of the reigning monarch.

Members of the Royal Family over the age of 25 who were denied permission to marry could still do so one year after notifying the Privy Council of their intent to marry, provided disapproval was not expressly declared by both houses of Parliament.

Marriages performed in contravention of the act were automatically rendered void. Though the offending dynast did not automatically lose their own place in line for succession to the throne by entering an unapproved marriage, because the marriage itself was invalidated, any offspring issuant therefrom were inherently illegitimate and therefore ineligible for succession to the throne.

The Royal Marriages Act 1772 was repealed as a result of the 2011 Perth Agreement, which resulted in the Succession to the Crown Act 2013. This act, which came into effect on 26 March 2015, removed the requirement for members of the Royal Family (excepting the first six dynasts in the line of succession) to obtain the sovereign’s consent prior to entering into a marriage. The full name of the act is “An Act to make succession to the Crown not depend on gender; to make provision about Royal Marriages; and for connected purposes;” it also replaced male-preference primogeniture with absolute primogeniture for dynasts born into the line of succession after 28 October 2011. Other notable changes implemented by the act include that marriage to a Roman Catholic no longer renders a dynast ineligible to inherit the throne.

The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 also exerted some effects almost opposite to those of the Royal Marriages Act 1772. For example, if a dynast subject to the new act contracted a marriage without the consent of the sovereign, the marriage remains valid, but the dynast and their issue—even though they are legitimate offspring—are removed from the line of succession.

The Marriage of Catherine, Princess of Wales and Mr. Arthur Fox
In Red, White and Royal Blue, the marriage of Her Royal Highness Catherine, Princess of Wales to Arthur Fox is stated to have taken place despite the objections of The Queen (presumably Queen Mary). It is noted that Catherine first met her future husband during her mid twenties. Consequently, it is possible she was older than the minimum age of 25 required for a member of the Royal Family to enter a marriage without the consent of the sovereign. The only known instance in which a member of the British Royal Family married without the consent of the sovereign was that of Prince George William of Hanover to Princess Sophie of Greece and Denmark (the brother of Prince Philip, later Duke of Edinburgh and consort of Queen Elizabeth II). In this case, no official response was issued due to political sensitivities surrounding World War II. British officials at the time were of the opinion that the marriage and its issue would be illegitimate, apparently despite the absence of explicit objection by Parliament. If this marriage and its offspring were viewed as invalid, it is almost certain the marriage of a much more senior royal, such as Catherine, direct heir to the throne, would be met with even more resistance if it were contracted not only without the sovereign’s consent, but over The Queen’s expressly forbidding it. It is virtually inconceivable Parliament would overrule the monarch in such a case.

Implications
It is known Catherine’s marriage to Arthur Fox was contracted despite the objection of The Queen. If Catherine was under 25 years of age at the time of the marriage, it would be automatically rendered null. If she were over the age of 25, Parliament could still prevent the marriage even if Catherine gave proper notice of her intent to marry to the Privy Council and observed the requisite waiting period a year. A marriage that proceeded despite these obstacles would also be invalidated. In either of these eventualities, Prince Henry and his siblings would have been born outside the line of succession. Indeed, because they would not be the issue of a legitimate marriage, they would not be legitimate heirs and would not hold the rank of princes or princesses. Many questions remain surrounding the marriage of the Princess of Wales and the resulting status of her children.