Talk:Act for annexation of Orkney and Shetland to the Crown 1669

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Scottish Islands Low‑importance

	Scottish islands portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Scottish IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish IslandsTemplate:WikiProject Scottish IslandsScottish Islands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

Neilking2706 (talk) 02:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)== Effect of this Act ==[reply]

I would also humbly submit the Act for Annexation of Orkney and Shetland in 1669 did not "restore" the original situation prior to 1472 in the least. In fact, and historically speaking, the Scottish Parliament dissolved and the English Crown absorbed Orkney and Shetland as an expansion of the United Kingdom, thus continuing the issue-at-hand of the displacement of the Islands. Referendums in Orkney have been unsuccessful in recent years, therefore, only one other option to restore the Islands to the original situation exists. Blakenator (talk) 17:27, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MacRusgail - I see you've altered my edit to go back to the position that the 1669 Act had the effect of removing the islands from the jurisdiction of parliament and placed them under the personal care of the king as "Crown Dependencies" similar to the constitutional status of the Isle of Man and Channel Islands.

This is the Stuart Hill of www.forvik.com position and it is, with respect, a misunderstanding of the 1669 Act. All the Act did was "annex" the islands to the Crown which in this context means that the Crown could not alienate its interests in Orkney & Shetland without the consent of parliament. To me that seems to place the islands specifically within the influence and jurisdiction of parliament.

The relevant wording of the 1669 Act is "[the islands] shall not nor may be given away [by the Crown] in fie and heretage, nor in frank tenement, lyverent, pension or tack, except for the full duetie which may be gotten from and payed by the tennents, nor by any other maner of alienation, right or disposition whatsomever to any person or persons of whatsoever estate, degree or qualitie they be, without advice, decreit and deliberation of the whole parliament; and for great, weighty and reasonable causes concerning the good weillfare and publict interest of the whole kingdom, first to be proposed and to be advised and maturely pondered and considered by the estates re integra,"

I don't know what happened in 1742 but in 1707 the Crown Estates in O&S were granted to Morton perfectly legally in terms of an Act of Parliament passed within the procedure envisaged by the 1669 Act (the 1707 Act specifically refers to the 1669 Act).

For now, I've not done a "tit for tat" re-write of the entry but just a minor typo to get your attention as I would prefer to debate the point with you (here or in any other forum) first. [EDIT to say I forgot to sign this comment before saving it] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilking2706 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neilking is absolutely right about this entry, which is based on the entirely inaccurate work of Stuart Hill. Orkney and Shetland were annexed to the crown on several occasions after 1470, for different reasons. In 1669 the background to the annexation was a dispute between the crown and the Earl of Morton about a shipwreck. The situation reverted to normal in 1707. It is fatuous to say that Charles II wanted to make Shetland and Orkney into a 'crown dependency' like the Isle of Man. It's wishful history. The article as it stands is a disgrace and should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.235.40.126 (talk) 16:05, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]