1924, whose grand master, the king of Italy, objected to the awarding of the order to leading Italian noblemen, the Holy See felt the close relationship with Prince Alfonso, Count of Caserta might prove an obstacle to settling the Roman question. It was, therefore, decided not to reappoint a successor to Cardinal Ranuzzi de' Bianchi at his death in 1927. Disputed succession, further schism of the Order The succession to the grand magistry of this order has been disputed among as many as three branches of Bourbons since 1960. The dispute is rooted in different interpretations of the so-called "Act of Cannes" of 14 December 1900 in which the count of Caserta's second son, Prince Carlo (grandfather of Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria), promised that he would renounce his succession to the crown of the Two Sicilies in execution of the "Pragmatic Decree" of 1759. This decree required that if the king of Spain, or his immediate heir, should inherit the Two Sicilies crown, he would renounce the latter to the next in line. Whether the "Pragmatic Decree" applied to Prince Carlo's situation in 1900, and whether the grand magistry of the order was included in such a renunciation, are both issues in dispute, yet within the world of academia, the latter has been, almost without exception, ruled in favour of the Hispano-Neapolitan branch. The Act of Cannes literally states: Supporters of the late Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria and his only son and heir, Prince Pedro, Duke of Calabria assert that Prince Carlo's renunciation was conditional on his actually inheriting both the Spanish and Two Sicilies crowns and/or that, even in that circumstances, such a renunciation did not include the position of grand master of the Constantinian order, which they regard as separate from the crown. Indeed, the Act of Cannes never mentioned the order at all, although most authors argue that even if it had, its grand magistry is by nature a trustee Farnesian dynastic legacy that is not linked in any shape or form to the throne of the Two Sicilies. The official Spanish branch website, headed by Prince Pedro, asserts that the renunciation was conditioned on facts that never arose, and that the order and the crown are governed by separate rules. Further, supporters of Infante Carlos argue that the "Act of Cannes" was legally defective and thus void. The Infante Don Carlos died on the