Louis Pierard Flogging off the family silver is normally the inalienable right of heirs. Why should the late Princess Margaret's descendants be any different? There has been a flurry of official protest since it was discovered the Princess' children plan to sell off their mother's valuables, because they include a gift fromNew Zealand. The sale is to help pay off inheritance taxes on the Princess' estate and is expected to raise between £2 million and £3 million - clearly a case of one's duty being to defer to another's. Two silver kiwi are among hundreds of items and state gifts being offered for auction at Christie's to raise money for the next Viscount Linley and Lady Sarah Chatto. The collection also includes a tiara worn by the Princess and an antique diamond necklace, estimated to fetch up to £300,000. Highlights of the collection have been displayed around the world in recent weeks for potential buyers to view and submit written bids. Prime Minister Helen Clark said New Zealand had lodged an objection with Buckingham Palace when it was learned the kiwi would be sold. They were a wedding gift to the Princess and Anthony Armstrong-Jones (later Earl of Snowdon and Viscount Linley) in 1960. After the intervention of their aunt to avoid the criticism of Viscount and his sister cashing up gifts donated by heads of state, the young blue bloods agreed the proceeds from the kiwi should go to charity. However, Miss Clark has tartly remarked that it would be nice if the gifts were returned. Why should they be? It puts an interesting perspective on Kiwi generosity that our gifts should have such stout strings attached. There's a censorious and busybodying tone to the official complaint. However intense one's dislike of privilege, it seems petty to cavil about a gift made 40 years ago; certainly no less petty than the row that followed the sale in 1991, by former Prime Minister David Lange, of a ceremonial Arab sword. (It had been a state gift by the Emir of Bahrain six years earlier and Mr Lange's wife Margaret Pope reportedly couldn't bear having it in the house). Admirably, the kiwi's maker, Professor John Simpson, would not be drawn to comment on the sale but said it was the family's business, not his. Would that others followed his example.
