Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She was a housemaid that got sent on her way after she hit on Tom.
To be fair Tom did encourage the slapper of a housemaid, but he was lonely for a woman as Sybil had just passed on, and he was feeling out of sorts about his position within the family. If all this sounds familiar.......
I may be borrowing trouble here but I wonder what will happen with Edith's beau deciding to move to Germany and gaining German citizenship. GB did not allow dual citizenship at that time, right? So he would have to give up his British citizenship to gain German citizenship.
No one on the continent and in England liked Germany and that is really too kind a way to put it. They hated Germany. Is he possibly a German spy now? He well could be. I know this is a subplot in the show but I find it interesting. I hope Edith has not picked another loser. Frankly, I shouldn't even care because I am not fond of Edith. The things she said to and about Mary in season one still bother me. That bit about sending a letter to the Turkish embassy still makes me mad. LOL. It's fiction, Ketabcha, give it a rest.
Mr. Gregson (Charles Edwards) is one tall ginger cold glass of water. Married with a wife in an asylum or not one wouldn't think twice if one was Lady Edith. I mean he's streets above that old man she was going to marry.
You *KNEW* something was going to happen the way Lady Edith, Mr. Gregson and everyone else kept placing emphasis on the word "Germany" each time it was mentioned. Why not Portugal is anyone's guess.
Assuming DA drags on til the 1940's then things would get very interesting. Many high born English girls married into German nobility and or ran with such circles before WWI and after. This as you can imagine caused all sorts of problems when WWII broke out.
I kept thinking that Robert was going to throw Matthew's letter in the fireplace. In every scene where he was talking about it, they made a point to show that he was standing in front of a roaring fire.
How soon is eventually? George is just a baby. Although they don't know it, with Robert at the helm they would lose it sooner or later.
I wonder if they would eventually go with the model for the real home, where everything on the estate makes money. It's their only option for keeping it and keeping it maintained.
Robert would probably make that argument, but mostly since he's lost without his job.
Ironically the same situation (high death tax bill) happened to the real Downton Abbey (Highclere Castle)and almost forced the family to sell up.
Eventually is when Mary dies. There are two sets of taxes. The ones in question are from his father, Matthew. If his father's money goes directly to George (and not via Mary), Matthew's estate only has to pay taxes once. If Mary inherits, Mary and George both have to pay taxes, effectively taxing that portion of the estate twice.
Say the estate tax is 50 percent (I'm not sure of the actual figure in 1922, but I know later taxes were at least that much). If Matthew's estate is £100,000. On his death the estate is now down to £50,000. If Mary is unable to build the capital back up during her lifetime, Matthew's estate could be down to £25,000 by time George inherits.
Of course, George will also have to pay taxes on Lord Grantham's estate as well.
The whole point was a slow destruction of inherited wealth. The societal shock of abolishing the aristocracy and confiscating the wealth would have risked destabilizing the country, and even revolution. This was a "kinder and gentler" way of achieving the same result.
On a related note, in the U.S. spouses inherit tax free, so this particular situation wouldn't arise. I don't know if that's true in the UK. It obviously wasn't in 1922.
Yes, that's exactly what I was saying in my previous post. I didn't think that British law would be any different from American probate law since our laws are based on theirs for the greater part. I worked in a probate court and I saw a lot of these holographic wills. It doesn't necessarily have to be witnessed though. Lord Grantham made mention of that Matthew's letter wouldn't have been because it was a private letter.
The court will always want whatever the deceased's desires as to the distribution of his or her estate to be fulfilled. Any indication of that will be honored. The problem with that is A. The signature must be valid and sometimes that will be challenged and B. Others who feel they were in line to inherit if the deceased dies intestate might challenge the validity of the will and possibly the intent because if it wasn't witnessed or properly done.
There would have been no doubt as to whether or not the letter had Mathew's signature and it was legitimate but Lord Grantham could have challenged the entire issue. Of course he was wise to consult his attorneys first because he probably wouldn't have been able to overturn it's validity as a bonafide will and the family would have been scandalized to have him challenge his own daughter's rights. Going behind her back would have been one thing but to publicly fight against her would be quite something else. These things can get quite ugly.
Eventually is when Mary dies. There are two sets of taxes. The ones in question are from his father, Matthew. If his father's money goes directly to George (and not via Mary), Matthew's estate only has to pay taxes once. If Mary inherits, Mary and George both have to pay taxes, effectively taxing that portion of the estate twice.
Say the estate tax is 50 percent (I'm not sure of the actual figure in 1922, but I know later taxes were at least that much). If Matthew's estate is £100,000. On his death the estate is now down to £50,000. If Mary is unable to build the capital back up during her lifetime, Matthew's estate could be down to £25,000 by time George inherits.
Of course, George will also have to pay taxes on Lord Grantham's estate as well.
The whole point was a slow destruction of inherited wealth. The societal shock of abolishing the aristocracy and confiscating the wealth would have risked destabilizing the country, and even revolution. This was a "kinder and gentler" way of achieving the same result.
On a related note, in the U.S. spouses inherit tax free, so this particular situation wouldn't arise. I don't know if that's true in the UK. It obviously wasn't in 1922.
There is a maximum amount of the estate in order for it to be tax free. That amount has changed over the years. Some states have separate inheritance taxes. That's something British subjects escape.
You *KNEW* something was going to happen the way Lady Edith, Mr. Gregson and everyone else kept placing emphasis on the word "Germany" each time it was mentioned. Why not Portugal is anyone's guess.
.
I just hope Fellowes isn't planning on turning Edith into a proto-fascist a la Unity Mitford.
First appeared in OED around 1928 in some form, so would say yes.
Good job!! I knew someone would figure it out!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A Little Different Role For Lady Mary
