Fitting to
return king
to Yorkshire

It is only fitting that King Richard III should be returned to York for many reasons, but most important is that it is a reasonable inference that he himself planned to be buried in the Minster.

Many of the other known combatants at the battle of Bosworth were returned home for interment, as was common in the Middle Ages.

Even today, whenever we can, we in England and the United States return fallen soldiers home and do not leave them lying where they fell.

When King Richard died, his successor denied him a fitting burial, as has been well documented by the team in Leicester.

The new king was certainly not going to allow King Richard to return to Yorkshire, where his remains could have been the centre of continuing resistance, among the people he had worked diligently to benefit.

It is time to put aside the cartoon uncle created by the Tudor regime and recognise the king who first had the laws written in English, who repeatedly emphasised improved access to the law for everyone, improved the bail system, and whose single parliament has been noted as the most progressive on record.

It should also be pointed out that the story blessed by history presumes his guilt in the disappearance of his nephews when, in fact, there are many rumours of their survival after Richard’s reign.

Let’s do right by a king singularly concerned with the rule of law, and, in the absence of proof, presume his innocence.

From: Michael Ellison, Knapping Hill, Harrogate.

I enjoyed reading the article in Country Week (The Yorkshire Post, April 5) about the Washburn Heritage Centre at Fewston Church.

Unfortunately there is one small error – the long winding route is from the edge of Swinsty Reservoir not Fewston.

However, the church and centre are shown on maps at the car parks near both reservoirs.

The work by the archaeologists is supplemented by memories of locals and/or descendants of former residents of the Washburn Valley.

Also they have had access to the original diaries of the former Fewston District registrar John Dickinson.

From the initial planning of the project at Fewston Church, all interested parties have been involved.

This has demonstrated the importance of liaising with everybody, and to continue providing updates.

Unfortunately the same principle was not applied by the Ministry of Justice when the licence was issued to the University of Leicester regarding the remains of King Richard III.

I stand to be corrected, but I understand one of the reasons to retain Richard’s remains at Leicester is to display them as part of an exhibition.

If my assumption is right then I would suggest that, as devout Christians, the senior clergy there re-acquaint themselves with the actions of Jesus towards commercialisation.

As Richard’s body was buried in the Leicester Diocese area (to deprive his then relatives of the opportunity to arrange a burial of their choice), I believe now is the time for the current chief priests and scribes to realise that they have a moral duty to right that wrong.

Don’t leash
trained dogs

From: Mr M J Thompson, Goodison Boulevard, Doncaster.

i FEEL compelled to write in answer to Sarah Todd’s piece (The Yorkshire Post, April 12) indicating that all dogs should be on leads while out walking in farmland.

Firstly there are signs put up in the usual access point stating that dogs be kept “under control” and if the only way to control 
a dog is by putting it on a lead, fine.

But as a keen fell walker and dog owner I have spent many hours training my dog to be under control by command.

My dog is on a verbal leash, just like the shepherd’s border collie who is also not on a lead.

Sarah Todd’s assumption that only country folk know how to behave in the countryside is pompous.

An on-the-spot fine for a dog walking to heel by its owner’s side off the lead is as impractical as it is stupid.

And running a campaign in the Guardian would not have reached my eyes as I am a loyal reader of The Yorkshire Post.

Give us break from shops

From: Tim Mickleburgh, Boulevard Avenue, Grimsby.

i SINCERELY hope that Sunday trading laws are not relaxed (The Yorkshire Post, April 11).

Surely there are enough hours that shops are already open for people to buy the goods they want?

And the staff deserve the chance to spend more time with their families.

Personally, I think a particular loophole in the laws should be tightened.

As things stand, smaller convenience stores can open for longer on Sundays.

The trouble is, the big traders such as Tesco have opened smaller shops which aren’t limited as to what hours they can open on a Sunday.

They should be treated as large enterprises, leaving the field to genuine small traders who struggle enough as it is.