<\/p>\n
On April 21 1926, the papers had an early start. Breaking news
\nin the early hours of the morning meant the front pages had to be
\nheld. When they appeared, they heralded a moment of history. A baby
\ngirl had been born and she would change the Monarchy forever.<\/p>\n
\u2018Daughter for Duchess of York\u2019 was a typical headline on the In the spirit of the age, the details of the \u201daccouchement\u201d as The Leeds Mercury had to find space on its front page for the It didn\u2019t even get as far as reporting the baby had been born at Meanwhile, the Birmingham Daily Gazette got the story to print As the day went on, fresh editions brought fresh updates. The The Press Association also said that the proud new father, then As was customary then, a senior government official had to be The Dundee Evening Telegraph tackled the issue of the baby\u2019s There was no announcement of the royal baby\u2019s name just yet. <\/div>\n \u2018 The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties \u2019 <\/em><\/p>\n \u2018 Some details of this article were extracted from the following source royalcentral.co.uk \u2019 <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" On April 21 1926, the papers had an early start. Breaking news in the early hours of the morning meant the front pages had to be held. When they appeared, they heralded a moment of history. A baby girl had been born and she would change the Monarchy forever. To the duchess, a daughter \u2018Daughter […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2382093,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":[],"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_social_meta":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2382092","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-royalty"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/How-the-world-first-heard-about-the-baby-who-became.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2382092","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2382092"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2382092\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2382094,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2382092\/revisions\/2382094"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2382093"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2382092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2382092"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2382092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nmorning of April 21 1926. The Derby Daily Telegraph reported that
\n\u201dHer Royal Highness The Duchess of York was safely delivered of
\na Princess at 2.40 this morning. Both mother and daughter are doing
\nwell.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n
\nthe paper so delicately labelled it, were discreet but said so much
\nwhile saying very little. The Derby Daily Telegraph continued
\n\u201dprevious to the confinement (says the official bulletin), a
\nmedical consultation took place and a certain line of treatment was
\nsuccessfully adopted.\u201d<\/em> The Duchess of York had had a
\nCaesearean section but those actual words weren\u2019t used.<\/p>\n
\nlate breaking news. It spread it out with a headline saying \u201dThe
\nDuchess of York\u201d followed by \u201dHappy Event This Morning\u201d and finally
\n\u201dA Daughter\u201d.<\/p>\n
\n17 Bruton Street, London, the home her parents had moved at the
\nstart of April 1926.<\/p>\n
\nbut only just. It ran the story as \u201dThe Duchess of York delivered
\nof a Princess at 2.40 this morning. Both mother and daughter are
\ndoing well.\u201d It then reported, in far greater detail, another story
\nof the day, headlined \u201dTerrier\u2019s attack on a tortoise, both under
\ntreatment at animals\u2019 hospital. Not everyone was a royalist, even
\nin 1926.<\/p>\nCongratulations all round<\/h2>\n
\nCoventry Evening Telegraph, using Press Association reporting,
\nnoted that \u201dmany messages of congratulations continue to arrive
\nat 17 Bruton Street. It is probably that The King and Queen will
\nmotor up from Windsor today. This is Their Majesties first
\ngranddaughter, Princess Mary having two sons.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n
\nDuke of York \u201dwas at home for the important occasion and was
\nthe recipient of many early congratulations from the various
\nmembers of the two families.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\nTradition must be upheld<\/h2>\n
\npresent at the birth of a baby so close to the throne. And so the
\nLincolnshire Echo reported that \u201dThe Home Secretary, Sir William
\nJoynson-Hicks, was summoned to Bruton Street in accordance with the
\ncustom where births in the Royal Family are concerned, and was
\npresent in the house at the time of the birth.<\/p>\nA title for a baby girl<\/h2>\n
\ntitle. It reported that \u201dthe child will be called Princess and
\nis entitled to be styled Her Royal Highness. This is in accordance
\nwith the King\u2019s proclamation of 1917, adopting the family name of
\nWindsor. His Majesty then stated his intention of restricting the
\nstyle and title of \u201dRoyal Highness\u201d and to confine it in future to
\nall children of the Sovereign and to grandchildren of the Sovereign
\nin the male line only.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n
\nInstead, on April 21 1926, she was the much loved daughter of a
\nduke and duchess with a life on the periphery of the Royal Family
\nstretching out ahead of her. And then history happened.<\/p>\n