Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing a snob can take credit for there.
Consider the following.
The War of 1812 has been identified as the point in time when Canadians gained their identity. No US, no War of 1812.
The British Empire's North American expansion westward was most likely triggered by America's Manifest Destiny. 54-40 or fight, anyone?
Canada gained self-rule in the 1860's, but only after the British Empire realized that there was no way it could protect Canada from annexation by a United States that at the time had the largest, most modern, and most experienced military in the world. With the British flirtation with the Confederacy only a few years back, a glowering United States just might have sent that army into the Great White North to liberate it. Granting Canada self-rule took the "liberation" card off the table. Canada itself was very small when the Dominion was established, basically hugging the Great Lakes, Saint Lawrence River, and then extending to the Atlantic Ocean from there.
Canada's current industrial strength came from its integration into the American automotive industry. No United States, no American industrial revolution, no American auto industry, no Canadian industrialization.
Canada was always going to be affected by its larger neighbor to the south. Right now, it's population is 40 million vs the US's 330 million. Back in 1800, it was 650 thousand to 4 million. Any change in the status of the US over the historical timeline would definitely echo in Canada.
At the time of the American Revolution, despite of their well founded grievances, under Great Britain, free white men enjoyed more freedom than anywhere else on the planet. They still were of lesser status than the free white men of Great Britain. Forced servitude in the mines in Scotland wasn't abolished until 1775 (Colliers and Salters Act 1775). Much of this was due to not only the system they had, but King George not only knew his role, but had a good sense of humor collecting the cartoons which made fun of him. He was not the ogre commonly portrayed. (King George was mortified at what the Swedish king had done.)
That the Crown owns this and that is true. Even in the UK today, in theory if one fails to pay taxes, the land returns to the Crown - the property owner has a freehold from the Crown; but the same is true in the US except it just reverts to the government. (The geese which make a mess of my yard are protected and hence I can't do anything but run out there and yell at them like a fool - it doesn't matter if the government protects them or if they belong to King Charles.). Eminent domain is an example in the US where the govt. can take one's land; it's called compulsory purchase in the UK.
IF King Charles III is YOUR monarch, you are a subject not a sovereign.
Watch "Fly Away Home," and you'll see the Canadian Game warden tell the school children, "THESE are the Queen's Geese."
WHOA, doggy.
Wild geese in Canada are the property of the CROWN.
No sovereignty, no freedom, no independence from dominion of the Crown.
The Canadians, Australians, NZs etc, do not think their monarch is foreign. They also have sovereignty, freedom and independence. They can get rid of the King very quickly if they want to.
The War of 1812 has been identified as the point in time when Canadians gained their identity. No US, no War of 1812.
The British Empire's North American expansion westward was most likely triggered by America's Manifest Destiny. 54-40 or fight, anyone?
Canada gained self-rule in the 1860's, but only after the British Empire realized that there was no way it could protect Canada from annexation by a United States that at the time had the largest, most modern, and most experienced military in the world. With the British flirtation with the Confederacy only a few years back, a glowering United States just might have sent that army into the Great White North to liberate it. Granting Canada self-rule took the "liberation" card off the table. Canada itself was very small when the Dominion was established, basically hugging the Great Lakes, Saint Lawrence River, and then extending to the Atlantic Ocean from there.
Canada's current industrial strength came from its integration into the American automotive industry. No United States, no American industrial revolution, no American auto industry, no Canadian industrialization.
Canada was always going to be affected by its larger neighbor to the south. Right now, it's population is 40 million vs the US's 330 million. Back in 1800, it was 650 thousand to 4 million. Any change in the status of the US over the historical timeline would definitely echo in Canada.
There has been a report on this thread notifying us that some posts are getting into current events and current politicians. Please remember that this is the History forum. Remarks about current politicians and events are not appropriate.
That the Crown owns this and that is true. Even in the UK today, in theory if one fails to pay taxes, the land returns to the Crown - the property owner has a freehold from the Crown; but the same is true in the US except it just reverts to the government. (The geese which make a mess of my yard are protected and hence I can't do anything but run out there and yell at them like a fool - it doesn't matter if the government protects them or if they belong to King Charles.). Eminent domain is an example in the US where the govt. can take one's land; it's called compulsory purchase in the UK.
Not true for the U.S.. If you fail to pay property taxes then your land will be taken over by which ever government you did not pay the taxes to (State, County, or City). It then can be purchased by someone else. When purchase by that someone else the land ownership transfers to that person.
The Federal government currently has no property taxes but does have income and other taxes. The majority of States have income taxes and some counties or cities do as well.
If you fail to pay other taxes you could face jail time, fees, wage garnishment and so on. The IRS(Federal) can seize property for failure to pay taxes but that tends to be rare. If they do take the property it will be sold and the amount raised deduced from the amount of taxes you owe.
In order for the Government to take property(any property), it must prove in court that you did not pay the taxes.
In the U.S. the land is owned by a person and is the property of that person not the Government. In the case of Eminent Domain, the Government must purchase the land at a fair price and they can be taken to Court by the land holder if the land owner does not think the price is fair.
Wild life is protected by laws and are not the property of the Government. Migratory birds I believe are protected but again not the property of the Government to do so as it pleases. You can apply for a permit to remove them but that is that. At one time in past before the law, you could indeed do what ever you wanted to the birds.
In the U.S. laws can bar both the Government and the Citizens from doing things. A lot of this such much of the bill of rights grew out from experiences that led to the revolution.
At the time of the American Revolution, despite of their well founded grievances, under Great Britain, free white men enjoyed more freedom than anywhere else on the planet. They still were of lesser status than the free white men of Great Britain. Forced servitude in the mines in Scotland wasn't abolished until 1775 (Colliers and Salters Act 1775). Much of this was due to not only the system they had, but King George not only knew his role, but had a good sense of humor collecting the cartoons which made fun of him. He was not the ogre commonly portrayed. (King George was mortified at what the Swedish king had done.)
That the Crown owns this and that is true. Even in the UK today, in theory if one fails to pay taxes, the land returns to the Crown - the property owner has a freehold from the Crown; but the same is true in the US except it just reverts to the government. (The geese which make a mess of my yard are protected and hence I can't do anything but run out there and yell at them like a fool - it doesn't matter if the government protects them or if they belong to King Charles.). Eminent domain is an example in the US where the govt. can take one's land; it's called compulsory purchase in the UK.
Royalty stopped having any meaningful power in England and later the UK following the English Civil War (1642 - 1651), when the Royalist Cavaliers were defeated by Cromwell's Parliamentarians known as Roundheads.
King Charles I was then publicly executed outside of Banqueting House in London, and power was transferred to Parliament.
It was later decided that the Monarchy should be restored, but with the real power still remaining in Parliament, and Charles II, the son of Charles I was crowned King.
Charles II was succeeded by James II, who was the last Catholic Monarch, and who was deposed in what was known as the Glorious Revolution, during which Dutch protestant King William III also known as William of Orange was crowned King, and served as Monarch alongside his wife Queen Mary II.
So after 1651, it's Parliament that held much of the power, and not the Monarch.
As for slavery he's gone on for thousands of years, and slavery in Britain was largely stopped by the Norman King William the Conqueror back in 1066.
The British Royals did allow private chartered companies to engage in all kinds of money making schemes, and the Monarchs did have advisers in relation to finances that would help them invest in such companies, such as the Royal African Company, whose original purpose was to exploit the gold fields up the Gambia River, and not in relation to slavery.
Most British involvement in the slave trade was during the seventeen hundreds and by 1807, the transatlantic slaver was abolished by Parliament, who held the power rather than the Monarch, who held no such powers.
As for slavery within the UK, it was mainly related to serfs, who often had very different levels of freedom according to their status, and even serfdom died out in the 14th and 15th centuries.
As for the legal status regarding slavery, it was further established in the case Somerset v Stewart (1772) 98 ER 499 (also known as Sommersett v Steuart, Somersett's case, and the Mansfield Judgment) is a judgment of the English Court of King's Bench in 1772, relating to the right of an enslaved person on English soil not to be forcibly removed from the country and sent to Jamaica for sale. The court held that slavery was not legal and that it was an odious practice that had no legal justification and dismissed the case.
In terms of slavery Britain did much to stop the practice, whether it be through Royal Navy patrols stopping French, Portuguese, Spanish or Brazilian slave boats, or in relation to banning slavery throughout the British Empire in 1832.
Last edited by Brave New World; 04-13-2023 at 05:49 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing a snob can take credit for there.
