Clik here to view.
What has become of the Guardian's once energetic republicanism, when all you can muster on your front page (Report, 20 April) on the impending creation of a college girlfriend as a "duchess" and of a "coat of arms" for her (and her family!) are some smirking comments on the family's commercial background? Duchesses might be seen as pantomime or Gilbert and Sullivan, were it not that they underwrite an entire system of patronage and obeisance. One of the most notable recent examples of this is David Cameron's appointment in the past year of 117 "lords", who henceforward, unelected, will have the right to determine matters of state for the rest of us.
Emeritus professor William R Roff
Columbia University, New York
• I imagine numerous Guardian readers of ancient loyalty, like me, chuckled knowingly on 1 April (Editorial) at your embrace of the monarchical cause but who now, as such coverage in your pages becomes ever more extensive, are ruefully concluding they were the victims of a right-royal double-take.
Richard Allen
Cambridge
• April Fools' Day is over. Do we have to endure the Middletons' coat of arms on the front page? The NHS is being destroyed, youth clubs closing, the poor suffering and so on. These should be the headlines, not the costly royals.
Bob Holman
Glasgow
• Please put all articles and photos about the royal wedding in a separate supplement so that it can go straight in the bin.
Clea Cook
Bicknoller, Somerset
