Their father had never forgiven his elder brother for forcing him to be effectively disowned, but King Frederick allowed the Earl of Chester to attend meetings of the privy council. (It had been traditional for some centuries to invest the Prince of Wales with the title of Earl of Chester, but while George had been stripped of Wales, he had been left with Chester.)
[Note: I am sure one of our esteemed British members of this board will be able to tell me if George could have been stripped of just the princely title and not the earldom as I have stated here. There is no precedent for me to follow.]
Interesting premise for a story. The Princely title of Wales could only have been removed from George by statute (although his departure from the line of succession would have been automatic under the Act of Succession) - George could have been left with the Earldom of Chester, however, I think it unlikely. Chester and Wales are simultaneous grants - I think it unlikely Parliament would separate them. Much more likely in my view is that George would be left with the Duchy of Cornwall - this has always automatically gone to the eldest son of the Monarch (at birth or on father's succession). Alternatively, all titles could be removed, and he would then be given another Ducal title by his father or brother. Hereford had historically been used and wasn't "occupied" at the time.
