Latest news with #KingGeorgeIII
BBC News
2 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
Royal ring bought at Leicester charity shop could fetch £5k
A rare ring made to commemorate the death of a Royal princess, which was picked up in a charity shop for £15, is expected to sell for up to £5, mourning ring was commissioned following the death of Princess Amelia, the youngest daughter of King George III, in V, her brother, commissioned 52 of the rings and distributed them among family and close friends after her funeral in of the rings, purchased in a Leicester charity shop, is expected to fetch between £3,000 and £5,000 at auction. Charles Hanson, owner of Hansons Auctioneers, said he was "stunned" by the discovery which he described as "the most important" charity shop find he had heard of in a decade. It was brought to him by a client who purchased it in a charity shop, unaware of its historical Amelia died on 2 November 1810, aged 27, having battled ring bears the words "remember me" after the princess reportedly pressed a ring into her father, King George III's hands, on her death bed, whilst she whispered those Hanson said: "This find proves treasures still lie hidden on our high streets."It's not just the monetary value - it's the emotion, history and humanity behind this ring that truly moves you."
The Sun
3 days ago
- Business
- The Sun
Rare royal mourning ring commissioned by King George IV bought in charity shop for just £15 – here's what it's worth
A RARE mourning ring commissioned by King George IV has been found in a charity shop – and snapped up for just £15. The gold band, engraved with the touching words 'Remember me', was created to honour the death of Princess Amelia, youngest daughter of King George III. 5 5 The historic piece was discovered in a charity shop in Leicester and is now set to go under the hammer at Hansons Auctioneers, where it could fetch between £3,000 and £5,000. Charles Hanson, owner of Hansons Auctioneers, said: 'It's the most important charity shop find I've heard about in a decade.' The unsuspecting buyer had picked up the ring from a local shop, unaware of its royal connection. Mr Hanson recalled: 'I was stunned and dazzled. From a simple box emerged a piece of deeply personal Royal history – commissioned by the Royal family itself to honour a lost loved one.' Princess Amelia was born on 7 August 1783 and died aged 27 in 1810 after a long battle with tuberculosis. Her death is thought to have devastated King George III, accelerating his mental decline. She was believed to be his favourite child. The ring, crafted by top royal jewellers Rundell, Bridge & Rundell, was one of only 52 made on the orders of the Prince Regent – who later became King George IV. They were handed out to close family and friends after her funeral in Windsor. 'The white enamel used in the ring denotes that Amelia was unmarried at the time of her death,' Mr Hanson said. 'White enamel symbolised purity and innocence in mourning jewellery, particularly for those who died young or unmarried. "It contrasts with the more commonly used black enamel, which signified general mourning.' In a final act of love, Princess Amelia is said to have pressed a ring containing a lock of her hair into her father's hand as she lay dying, whispering the words now inscribed on the newly discovered ring – 'remember me'. A matching mourning ring was later bought by Queen Mary in 1935. Back in 1810, each ring cost 58 shillings to make. 'This find proves treasures still lie hidden on our high streets,' said Mr Hanson. 'It's not just the monetary value – it's the emotion, history and humanity behind this ring that truly moves you.' Experts believe the ring could attract international interest when it goes under the hammer, thanks to its royal provenance and remarkable condition. Collectors of royal memorabilia are expected to watch the auction closely. Jewellery historian Alexandra Michell said: 'It's incredibly rare to find such a piece outside of established collections. "Mourning jewellery from this era, especially tied to a royal figure, is both historically and emotionally valuable.' The ring has now been placed in secure storage until its auction day to ensure its protection. It will feature as a highlight item in Hansons' Summer Fine Art Jewellery Auction. The auction will take place on 12 June 2025, and bids are expected to come in from across the UK and abroad. 5
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion: Does the jury system work?
As I looked at the faces populating my computer screen and listened to a judge and two attorneys ask them the sorts of questions you might encounter at one of those awkward mixers — what sort of books do you read? What are your hobbies? — one question kept popping into my head. If I were on trial, would I want these people to decide my guilt or innocence? To my surprise, I now have an answer to that question because, against all odds, I was chosen for a jury that heard a criminal case. Dozens were interviewed. Six were chosen (along with one alternate who was excused before we started deliberating). I have been called a few times before in my life. Each time, I lasted about as long as it took to say I was a member of the media. This time, I was the first name selected. I have no idea why I was considered a good compromise choice by the two attorneys involved. But I do appreciate, now, how serving on a jury can erase cynicisms and mistrust. The legislative and executive branches could do with some sort of similar plan to inject regular people into their processes, giving them real power. On second thought, maybe appointing a president for a day wouldn't be such a great idea. Jury service, though, is a unique opportunity to become both a check against tyranny and a powerful voice in the system. It has an honored history. Among the many offenses listed against King George III in the Declaration of Independence was this: 'For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of trial by jury.' The founders included the right to a jury in the sixth and seventh amendments to the Constitution. That's something to think about on Memorial Day weekend. Thomas Jefferson said, 'I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.' That's all pretty serious stuff for people like myself and the five other regular folks from the Wasatch Front – three men and three women, of various ages, backgrounds and professions — who all wondered what the heck we were doing in a courtroom, feeling various shades of curiosity and apprehension. I won't go into the specifics of the case or the names involved. Those aren't relevant. It could have involved any set of facts, with people eager to provide two sides to the story, and with a defendant facing possible jail time. It included a judge, a prosecutor and a defense attorney, all with legal training and experience, and six ordinary and diverse people, lacking in legal training, for whom everyone in the courtroom had to stand at attention whenever they entered or left. One minute we were wondering what to wear for work on a Friday. The next, we were deciding a man's guilt or innocence. And it all worked beautifully. My fellow jurors took the duty just as seriously as I did. When we were sent on breaks to the jury room, no one spoke a word about the ongoing trial. When the time came to deliberate, our foreman led a serious, count-by-count discussion of the evidence, with various jurors offering serious counter arguments or raising doubts. We persuaded each other with facts and evidence, not emotion. This was not '12 Angry Men,' the play that became a memorable 1957 movie with Henry Fonda. It was six reasonable people measuring whether reasonable doubts existed, and finally, with solemnity, reaching a guilty verdict. Comedian Groucho Marx used to quip that he was married by a judge but he should have asked for a jury. It's a funny joke, but it contains hidden wisdom. Dictators don't let juries decide important cases. The judicial system is kept honest by the collective wisdom of people chosen at random. I suspect it's similar to the way the collective choices of millions of consumers make a free market work better than one where choices are dictated by a few people with power, or how frequent elections work better than appointments from an all-powerful ruler. Juries don't always get verdicts right, of course. Neither do judges. We live in an imperfect world. A few years ago, the Pew Research Center did a poll that found 67% of American adults agreeing with the notion that answering the call to jury duty 'is part of what it means to be a good citizen.' My guess is that if the other 33% tried it, they would agree, as well. To the answer I posed at the beginning of this column — yes, I would trust a jury of regular people to decide my guilt or innocence, provided I had a good lawyer, of course.
