Tories take senate with 2 new appointments.

Pliny · December 21, 2010

Democracy, as with most things in this era of sound bites, has been in the popular consciousness diluted down to simple majoritarianism; many perceive anything that didn't win a vote and isn't then constantly seen on television dancing for more votes to be an illigitimate barrier against democracy. Which is odd - in Canada, anyway - given all the crowing about rights that goes on simultaneously. The ochlocrats (though they're likely unaware that's what they are) never seem to understand that without limitations on populism, minorities (in which they might well find themselves one day) would easily fall victim to the whims of the majoirty in total control.

Ochlocracy is equivalent to mob rule or rule by the masses. It would, in my view, be government by force over reason rather than reason over force. A revolution perhaps fits the definition, or tyrants like Ghenghis Khan and Stalin who steam rolled surrounding nations.

Are the majority a mob? I would say in most cases they are fairly reasonable.

Discrimination for is just as bad as discrimination against.

A democracy should be about everyone not minorities or majorities. If federal legislation is not about Canadians then there should be no legislation. If provincial legislation is not about citizens of the province then there should be no legislation. If people separate themselves as minorities and wish legislation to favour them they should form their own communities where they can be the majority and freely discriminate in favour of themselves.

Yes there would be Irish communities or Ukrainian or French communities or Moslem and Hindu communities, even gay communities. As long as they respected other communities and didn't discriminate "against" them and commerce was freely allowed everything would be fine. Perhaps not a hundred percent but they aren't fine by a hundred percent now.

The federal government should only concern itself with Canada and Canadians for instance not cultures within Canada nor should it favour genders, races, Unions or businesses. Any laws it makes regarding favouring these "minorities", even if they form a majority, can only be divisive. If the law states that everyone has a right to the security of person and property it could be a legitimate federal law. It deos not make a minority or majority out of anyone and everyone can agree to it. I would think that only a person who is a criminal would be against such a law and perhaps that "minority" should be ignored. Also that would make involuntary or compulsory taxation illegal. Income taxes would be illegal. A consumption tax would be OK because choice to buy is in the equation, unless they are staples such as food, clothing and shelter that everyone needs. Redistributive taxation would be illegal because government must decide who is rich and who is poor and discriminate for one and against the other now recognizing that there are differences between Canadians. Essentially, this removes the blindfold of justice. And form that point cannot legitimately deliver justice. It is an indicator of the beginning point of a nation's or society's decline.

Saipan · December 21, 2010

The Tories senators said NO to a Bill that wasn't even debated!

So how do you know?

Saipan · December 21, 2010

I wish people were smart enough to realize there's a difference.

Maybe one day Canadians will attain the heights of your intelligence.

g_bambino · December 21, 2010

When was the title given to the newfoundland itself..

It wasn't.

show me the title transfer event.

Right here.

Pliny · December 21, 2010

I'm not the hypocritical one here. I didn't make a promise about not appointing even 1 unelected senator and then destroyed it with the largest patronage appointment in Canadian history. (kind of like no deficits smashed with the largest deficit in Canadian history)

Then again, Conservatives don't really care about their professed ideology so it clearly doesn't matter as you've shown above. The CPC is all about tough talk and no action.

I said Harper got over his loss of having a triple E senate. If he seems to be high-lighting it's flaws it isn't like they weren't obvious before but were somehow overlooked or considered unimportant by the Liberals and others. Now according to Liberals they are glaring flaws and the Senate should be abolished. That's hypocritical.

It's sort of like me paying taxes for health care. I disagree with our health care system and am forced to pay into it. Should I then refuse to seek medical attention because it would be hypocritical of me to do so? I have to live with the system and until change can be effected I have no choice.

Pliny · December 21, 2010

You're a tool. Yet another CPC playing card. If someone disagrees with you in debate, act as if they're trying to censor you. I wish people were smart enough to realize there's a difference.

If they were simply disagreeing that would be ok. They aren't. They are pro-claiming the end of democracy and the nation as they consider it should be.

Saipan · December 21, 2010

The CPC is all about tough talk and no action.

Do you propose action over the heads of the Parliament?

That can be done in China or Cuba.

Wild Bill · December 21, 2010

You're a tool. Yet another CPC playing card. If someone disagrees with you in debate, act as if they're trying to censor you. I wish people were smart enough to realize there's a difference.

And you can't read English! And not just my post here. You must not have read anything else I've ever posted if you think I'm a conservative or a blind supporter of the CPC. Either that or you have no idea of what such definitions actually mean!

I took issue with the first opening posts. The implications were quite clear that the idea of having a Tory majority in the Senate was a BAD thing and that they would certainly use it to get their own ideas passed and those of their opponents thwarted!

The exact same situation has occurred for most of the life of our Senate, only with the Liberals in control! Where was the outrage then? It only seemed obvious that to some the only problem must be that now it is Tories instead of Liberals.

As I've said time and time again, I'm more of a classic Liberal. Of course, to a socialist like yourself I must be a Tory because I'm not the same as you!

Just more evidence that we're doomed, I guess. Wiser older folks are dying off and the new generation appears to have nothing in their heads but placards.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us!" ---Walt Kelly as Pogo

Moonlight Graham · December 21, 2010

That just isn't true. The Senate in Canada operates the way it does because of its function, not because you don't perceive it as legitimate. It is a place of debate and thought, not of rash action.

The Senate was meant to be a place of "sober second thought", to debate bills, suggest revisions etc. However, it still has the power of "rash action" as seen by the snap vote by Conservative Senators to block a climate change bill passed by the House, upon which there was no debate in the Senate on the matter. That is undemocratic and illegitimate.

Due to the way the system works? We have an unelected Senate, so obviously the system and the people who have the power to change the system don't agree or just don't care.

Senators are powerful lawmakers. That said, because of their function and the general way things go in the Senate, that power is used sparingly and with great thought. It's the way that the system was designed, and it works well.

The system doesn't work well. Look at what just happened with the blocked bill without debate. To claim the system works well or that the system would be changed if it was thought by the House that the Senate didn't work properly is just not true. There has been great debate over Senate reform almost since the time the country was formed, similar debates and reforms implemented in similar systems ie: the UK/Australia. Some Cnd policy makers want an elected Senate (ie: Triple-E), many others want it abolished altogether. Much of the reason these reforms haven't been been instituted is due to the fact that such a major change in the Senate would mean that it would need the approval of the provinces and therefore the Constitution would need to be re-opened and debated. And we all know what happened the last time the Constitution was reopened for debate...the country was came a splinter away from literally falling apart.

You seem to be (and you aren't alone) of the mistaken view that democracy is about nothing but voting. That just isn't true. Our form of democracy at least, is about far more. It's about representation, stability, and in some cases tradition. To say that the Senate lacks legitimacy just because it doesn't jive with that many people think that our system and voting is about, well, it just doesn't make it so.

Here's the dictionary definition of democracy:

de·moc·ra·cy (d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

2. A political or social unit that has such a government.

3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.

4. Majority rule.

5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

Sounds to me like you've been sucked in to some twisted belief of what democracy is based on your faith in the hodge-podge frankenstein of a democratic government that is the Canadian system. Canada's system is not 100% democratic, neither is the US or UK system. They are flawed in their own unique ways. Hell, Canada couldn't even sign its own laws without the Brit Empire until 1931, or amend its own Constitution until 1982.

When Canada was formed in 1867 they chose to institute the Westminster model. The Westminster system was not derived from scratch via purely democratic ideals like the US Constitution, it has evolved over many centuries into a more democratic form of what was a controlling, undemocratic monarchy. Remnants of this remain today in both Canada/UK via the monarchy and House of Lords/Senate, but the powers and the legitimately of using their historic powers have been reduced because it has come to be seen that use of these powers if they went against the will of the elected House (except in cases on extreme circumstance) would be undemocratic and illegitimate.

The Senate isn't a powerful lawmaking institution. It's dysfunctional, increasingly irrelevant, and is a great at wasting taxpayer money. It serves some useful functions, but one of its most important functions is to serve as a sweet place to chill for old farts who want to have a fantastic salary, great job security, and only work a few days a week.

Wild Bill · December 21, 2010

Sounds to me like you've been sucked in to some twisted belief of what democracy is based on your faith in the hodge-podge frankenstein of a democratic government that is the Canadian system. Canada's system is not 100% democratic, neither is the US or UK system. They are flawed in their own unique ways. Hell, Canada couldn't even sign its own laws without the Brit Empire until 1931, or amend its own Constitution until 1982.

The Senate isn't a powerful lawmaking institution. It's dysfunctional, increasingly irrelevant, and is a great at wasting taxpayer money. It serves some useful functions, but one of its most important functions is to serve as a sweet place to chill for old farts who want to have a fantastic salary, great job security, and only work a few days a week.

It's nice to see someone tell it like it actually is, MG! I have to keep shaking my head at those who continually quote the OFFICIAL definition of something as if that's the way it is in reality. Our Senate is a perfect example. Officially it is defined as a Chamber of sober second thought but in reality it usually strikes out on all three!

Money talks and BS walks! Actions speak louder than words! In politics perhaps more than in any other area it is important to look at things the way they actually are and not just quack out the words in the press kit!

Trudeau had so little respect for the Senate he actually appointed his chauffeur!

Until and unless we get a true Triple E Senate we will just have an extension of the PMO, where party bagmen can receive their rewards and sleep away the day, rubber-stamping the occasional missive from their party masters.

Smallc · December 22, 2010

The Senate was meant to be a place of "sober second thought", to debate bills, suggest revisions etc. However, it still has the power of "rash action" as seen by the snap vote by Conservative Senators to block a climate change bill passed by the House, upon which there was no debate in the Senate on the matter. That is undemocratic and illegitimate.

No it isn't. That's only your opinion. That's what you aren't understanding. Democracy does not necessarily need to involve elections. The appointment of senators is advised to the Governor General by the head of the government appointed by the people of Canada's elected representatives. There's nothing wrong with it.

The system doesn't work well. Look at what just happened with the blocked bill without debate. To claim the system works well or that the system would be changed if it was thought by the House that the Senate didn't work properly is just not true. There has been great debate over Senate reform almost since the time the country was formed, similar debates and reforms implemented in similar systems ie: the UK/Australia. Some Cnd policy makers want an elected Senate (ie: Triple-E), many others want it abolished altogether. Much of the reason these reforms haven't been been instituted is due to the fact that such a major change in the Senate would mean that it would need the approval of the provinces and therefore the Constitution would need to be re-opened and debated. And we all know what happened the last time the Constitution was reopened for debate...the country was came a splinter away from literally falling apart.

In other words, people don't really care, or they don't really want to change it.

Here's the dictionary definition of democracy:

That's not the definition of our particular form of democracy (at least it isn't complete) or any real country today.

Sounds to me like you've been sucked in to some twisted belief of what democracy is based on your faith in the hodge-podge frankenstein of a democratic government that is the Canadian system. Canada's system is not 100% democratic, neither is the US or UK system. They are flawed in their own unique ways. Hell, Canada couldn't even sign its own laws without the Brit Empire until 1931, or amend its own Constitution until 1982.

And your point is? I'm not seeing one here. I haven't been sucked into anything. You're the one claiming that a completely legitimate government system isn't.

When Canada was formed in 1867 they chose to institute the Westminster model. The Westminster system was not derived from scratch via purely democratic ideals like the US Constitution, it has evolved over many centuries into a more democratic form of what was a controlling, undemocratic monarchy. Remnants of this remain today in both Canada/UK via the monarchy and House of Lords/Senate, but the powers and the legitimately of using their historic powers have been reduced because it has come to be seen that use of these powers if they went against the will of the elected House (except in cases on extreme circumstance) would be undemocratic and illegitimate.

The elected house isn't already right and they don't have all of the say. If they were there wouldn't be a Senate or a Crown. The founders of this country saw fit to put in place balancing entities: the Senate, and the Crown.

The Senate isn't a powerful lawmaking institution. It's dysfunctional, increasingly irrelevant, and is a great at wasting taxpayer money. It serves some useful functions, but one of its most important functions is to serve as a sweet place to chill for old farts who want to have a fantastic salary, great job security, and only work a few days a week.

So no proof then, it seems.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Smallc

Smallc · December 22, 2010

It's nice to see someone tell it like it actually is, MG!

I like how you believe yourself so right as to be above actual constitutional and legal information.

Moonlight Graham · December 22, 2010

No it isn't. That's only your opinion. That's what you aren't understanding. Democracy does not necessarily need to involve elections. The appointment of senators is advised to the Governor General by the head of the government appointed by the people of Canada's elected representatives. There's nothing wrong with it.

well, i suppose our understandings are a bit different then. I know what you're trying to say. To me, what you're saying sounds closer to a social contract.

I don't know why you think that just because people are willing to live with or accept a governing system, that there is nothing wrong with it. There are many flaws with our system of government, unfortunately the problems are so fundamental to the system that changing them is not very realistic.

In other words, people don't really care, or they don't really want to change it.

They care, just not enough to risk the insane mess that occurred in the 80's and 90's re: opening the Constitution, and opening old/new wounds in Quebec.

nicky10013 · December 22, 2010

Do you propose action over the heads of the Parliament?

That can be done in China or Cuba.

Huh? All I ever claimed is that the CPC are hypocrites. They support an elected senate. Except when it benefits them. Just like pretty much every other policy they've rolled over on.

Saipan · December 22, 2010

Huh? All I ever claimed is that the CPC are hypocrites. They support an elected senate.

Why don't the Liberals and NDPs?

How to pass elected Senate by only minority government? Can you explain?

nicky10013 · December 22, 2010

And you can't read English! And not just my post here. You must not have read anything else I've ever posted if you think I'm a conservative or a blind supporter of the CPC. Either that or you have no idea of what such definitions actually mean!

Every one of your posts indicates that.

I took issue with the first opening posts. The implications were quite clear that the idea of having a Tory majority in the Senate was a BAD thing and that they would certainly use it to get their own ideas passed and those of their opponents thwarted!

No, the problem is that they're killing bills. I don't think anyone would care if the senate just sent back recommendations as has been tradition for the past, oh, 80 years. They haven't though. They've killed 2 pieces of legislation as passed by an elected body. I do think that's undemocratic. It hasn't happened in ages.

The exact same situation has occurred for most of the life of our Senate, only with the Liberals in control! Where was the outrage then? It only seemed obvious that to some the only problem must be that now it is Tories instead of Liberals.

The Liberals never killed any piece of legislation while the CPC has been in government, at least in the last 40 years.

As I've said time and time again, I'm more of a classic Liberal. Of course, to a socialist like yourself I must be a Tory because I'm not the same as you!

See, this is why you're a tool. You yell at me for lacking the knowledge of definition yet you know neither the definition of a socialist or classical liberal. Also, hilariously, you're too stupid to realize that you're doing the same thing to me as you're accusing me of doing to you since you had the gall of (however wrongly) calling me a socialist.

Just more evidence that we're doomed, I guess. Wiser older folks are dying off and the new generation appears to have nothing in their heads but placards.

Ahahaha. Every new generation is the worst generation. The Human Race seems to be moving along fine.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us!" ---Walt Kelly as Pogo

Is this supposed to be insightful?

nicky10013 · December 22, 2010

Why don't the Liberals and NDPs?

How to pass elected Senate by only minority government? Can you explain?

the NDP did, now they just support an abolition of the Senate. I don't and neither do the Liberals.

Also, I never said that I expected them to get an elected senate. They never will and they should know that by now. My only point was that Stephen Harper specifically promised never to appoint any unelected senators. He has. Despite the fact that he can't get an elected senate, he could at least keep his symbolic promise. Then again, he doesn't have any morals so why should anyone expect the CPC to keep any promise they ever made, even when they literally have to do NOTHING to keep it. Easiest type of promise TO keep and they still failed to keep it. What a bunch of losers. I can't believe the level of stupidity of some morons who get sucked into believing this ideological bullshit. Well, I can understand how they bought in to begin with. After 5 years of doing pretty much exactly the opposite of what they've promised, I can't understand how people still trust this government. I just can't.

M.Dancer · December 22, 2010

No, the problem is that they're killing bills. I don't think anyone would care if the senate just sent back recommendations as has been tradition for the past, oh, 80 years.

More hyperventilating from Nicky

Liberal Senators have vowed to kill the Conservative government's bill to establish a goods and services tax. But they are caught off-guard when Prime Minister Brian Mulroney uses an obscure power to make eight appointments, creating an instant Conservative majority in the Senate. The unprecedented move, made with the consent of the Queen, has the Opposition fuming with outrage. But Mulroney is defiant. He accuses the Liberal senators of trying to subvert democracy

.

http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/federal_politics/clips/12071/

The Senate at times is more active at reviewing, amending, and even rejecting legislation. The late 1980s and early 1990s was one of those periods. During this period the Senate opposed legislation on issues such as the 1988 free trade bill with the U.S. (forcing the Canadian federal election of 1988), and the Goods and Services Tax (GST).[11][12] In the 1990s, the Senate rejected four pieces of legislation: a bill passed by the Commons restricting abortion (C-43), a proposal to streamline federal agencies (C-93), a bill to redevelop the Lester B. Pearson airport (C-28), and a bill on profiting from authorship as it relates to crime (C-220).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_Canada

Edited December 22, 2010 by M.Dancer

William Ashley · December 22, 2010

It wasn't.

Right here.

Sorry try again

The correct answer is The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763

AND IT IS STILL ROYAL TITLE more or less.

The citation you provide actually only states this against your ascertation

11. All powers, authorities, and functions that under any statute were at or immediately prior to the date of Union vested in or exercisable by the Governor of Newfoundland, individually, or in Council, or in Commission,

(a) as far as they are capable of being exercised after the date of Union in relation to the Government of Canada, shall be vested in and shall or may be exercised by the Governor General, with the advice, or with the advice and consent, or in conjunction with, the King's Privy Council for Canada or any member or members thereof, or by the Governor General individually, as the case requires, subject nevertheless to be abolished or altered by the Parliament of Canada under the authority of the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1940; and

( as far as they are capable of being exercised after the date of Union in relation to the Government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, shall be vested in and shall or may be exercised by the Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, with the advice, or with the advice and consent, or in conjunction with, the Executive Council of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador or any member or members thereof, or by the Lieutenant Governor individually, as the case requires, subject nevertheless to be abolished or altered by the Legislature of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador under the authority of the Constitution Acts. 1867 to 1940.

35. Newfoundland public works and property not transferred to Canada by or under these Terms will remain the property of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

37. All lands, mines, minerals, and royalties belonging to Newfoundland at the date of Union, and all sums then due or payable for such lands, mines, minerals, or royalties, shall belong to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, subject to any trusts existing in respect thereof, and to any interest other than that of the Province in the same.

to refresh your memory reread the royal proclaimation.

The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763

Annotation Map (unofficial)

Text Laws of New Governments

Grants for Settlement Soldier Settlement

Indian Provisions Link to Law Office

A Brief Introduction to Aboriginal Law in Canada

Annotation

After the Seven Years' War was over, Britain controlled all of North America east of the Mississippi. Settlers from the Thirteen Colonies were anxious to move into the Ohio Valley now that it was free of French influence, but the lands were still in the possession of Indian Nations who were rightly suspicious of 'Yankee' motives and resented their intrusion. Pontiac's Rebellion along the frontier began in August of 1763.

At the same time, Britain was moving to consolidate its gains and implement governing structures. The new territories would be organized into four areas: Quebec, East Florida, West Florida and the island of Grenada. This is set out in the opening paragraphs of the Proclamation, and details of their governance and settlement in later sections.

The lands west of the Appalachian height of land were "reserved" to the Indians as their Hunting Grounds. They were not included in any colony, and colonists were expressly forbidden to enter into land negotiations with the Indians -- because of "great Frauds and Abuses" -- and the Crown reserved to itself the exclusive right to negotiate cessions of Indian title. At the same time, settlement was forbidden. While the Indian Nations governed the Proclamation Territory under their own laws, the Crown also directed that non-Aboriginal fugitives from justice could be pursued and taken within Indian lands. In Canada, the Proclamation is the basis of our understanding of the legal nature of Indian title and an historical root of the treaty process. Its provisions underlie the surrenders and designations of reserve land which still take place pursuant to the Indian Act.

In practice, the Proclamation failed to stifle expansionist ambitions in the Thirteen Colonies. The Crown used the Quebec Act, 1774 as a device to re-assert its control within the Proclamation lands by extending the former boundaries of Quebec down to the Ohio River near what is now Pittsburgh, then down the Ohio the Mississippi and north to Rupert's Land. This was one of the complaints advanced by the colonists two years later in their Declaration of Independence. Historical events subsequently excluded much of the Proclamation territory from British control and from Canada, but it is still relevant to the development of Canadian law. The Proclamation is not formally part of the Constitution of Canada, but it is referred to in section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The headings included in the text below are for convenience; they are not part of the original text. It should also be noted that the map is also a reference tool. It is not an official map and the courts have since applied the Proclamation to areas not shown on it as "Indian Territory". The full extent of the territorial application of the Proclamation in Canada is still subject to dispute and there is little doubt that its reach as a foundation of our Aboriginal law is much broader.

Text of the Royal Proclamation:

Purpose

Whereas We have taken into Our Royal Consideration the extensive and valuable Acquisitions in America, secured to our Crown by the late Definitive Treaty of Peace, concluded at Paris the 10th Day of February last; and being desirous that all Our loving Subjects, as well of our Kingdom as of our Colonies in America, may avail themselves with all convenient Speed, of the great Benefits and Advantages which must accrue therefrom to their Commerce, Manufactures, and Navigation, We have thought fit, with the Advice of our Privy Council. to issue this our Royal Proclamation, hereby to publish and declare to all our loving Subjects, that we have, with the Advice of our Said Privy Council, granted our Letters Patent, under our Great Seal of Great Britain, to erect, within the Countries and Islands ceded and confirmed to Us by the said Treaty, Four distinct and separate Governments, styled and called by the names of Quebec, East Florida, West Florida and Grenada, and limited and bounded as follows, viz.

First--The Government of Quebec bounded on the Labrador Coast by the River St. John, and from thence by a Line drawn from the Head of that River through the Lake St. John, to the South end of the Lake Nipissing; from whence the said Line, crossing the River St. Lawrence, and the Lake Champlain, in 45. Degrees of North Latitude, passes along the High Lands which divide the Rivers that empty themselves into the said River St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Sea; and also along the North Coast of the Baye des Châleurs, and the Coast of the Gulph of St. Lawrence to Cape Rosières, and from thence crossing the Mouth of the River St. Lawrence by the West End of the Island of Anticosti, terminates at the aforesaid River of St. John.

Secondly--The Government of East Florida, bounded to the Westward by the Gulph of Mexico and the Apalachicola River; to the Northward by a Line drawn from that part of the said River where the Chatahouchee and Flint Rivers meet, to the source of St. Mary's River. and by the course of the said River to the Atlantic Ocean; and to the Eastward and Southward by the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulph of Florida, including all Islands within Six Leagues of the Sea Coast.

Thirdly--The Government of West Florida, bounded to the Southward by the Gulph of Mexico, including all Islands within Six Leagues of the Coast; from the River Apalachicola to Lake Pontchartrain; to the Westward by the said Lake, the Lake Maurepas, and the River Mississippi; to the Northward by a Line drawn due East from that part of the River Mississippi which lies in 31 Degrees North Latitude. to the River Apalachicola or Chatahouchee; and to the Eastward by the said River.

Fourthly--The Government of Grenada, comprehending the Island of that name, together with the Grenadines, and the Islands of Dominico, St. Vincent's and Tobago. And to the end that the open and free Fishery of our Subjects may be extended to and carried on upon the Coast of Labrador, and the adjacent Islands. We have thought fit, with the advice of our said Privy Council to put all that Coast, from the River St. John's to Hudson's Streights, together with the Islands of Anticosti and Madelaine, and all other smaller Islands lying upon the said Coast, under the care and Inspection of our Governor of Newfoundland.

We have also, with the advice of our Privy Council. thought fit to annex the Islands of St. John's [now Prince Edward Island] and Cape Breton, or Isle Royale, with the lesser Islands adjacent thereto, to our Government of Nova Scotia.

We have also, with the advice of our Privy Council aforesaid, annexed to our Province of Georgia all the Lands Iying between the Rivers Alatamaha and St. Mary's.

New Governments to have General Assemblies

and Make Laws

And whereas it will greatly contribute to the speedy settling of our said new Governments, that our loving Subjects should be informed of our Paternal care, for the security of the Liberties and Properties of those who are and shall become Inhabitants thereof, We have thought fit to publish and declare, by this Our Proclamation, that We have, in the Letters Patent under our Great Seal of Great Britain, by which the said Governments are constituted, given express Power and Direction to our Governors of our Said Colonies respectively, that so soon as the state and circumstances of the said Colonies will admit thereof, they shall, with the Advice and Consent of the Members of our Council, summon and call General Assemblies within the said Governments respectively, in such Manner and Form as is used and directed in those Colonies and Provinces in America which are under our immediate Government: And We have also given Power to the said Governors, with the consent of our Said Councils, and the Representatives of the People so to be summoned as aforesaid, to make, constitute, and ordain Laws, Statutes, and Ordinances for the Public Peace, Welfare, and good Government of our said Colonies, and of the People and Inhabitants thereof, as near as may be agreeable to the Laws of England, and under such Regulations and Restrictions as are used in other Colonies; and in the mean Time, and until such Assemblies can be called as aforesaid [see Campbell v. Hall (1774), 1 Cowp. 204, 98 E.R. 1045], all Persons Inhabiting in or resorting to our Said Colonies may confide in our Royal Protection for the Enjoyment of the Benefit of the Laws of our Realm of England; for which Purpose We have given Power under our Great Seal to the Governors of our said Colonies respectively to erect and constitute, with the Advice of our said Councils respectively, Courts of Judicature and public Justice within our Said Colonies for hearing and determining all Causes, as well Criminal as Civil, according to Law and Equity, and as near as may be agreeable to the Laws of England, with Liberty to all Persons who may think themselves aggrieved by the Sentences of such Courts, in all Civil Cases, to appeal, under the usual Limitations and Restrictions, to Us in our Privy Council.

Note: English laws were not globally acceptable in Quebec, especially in matters of "property and civil rights". The The Quebec Act, 1774 reinstated French civil law to apply in respect of such matters and the phrase survives in section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The American colonists, however, viewed the extension of the territory of Quebec with alarm and described the French legal regime, then not codified as it is today, as an "arbitrary system of laws" .

Grants for Settlement

We have also thought fit, with the advice of our Privy Council as aforesaid, to give unto the Governors and Councils of our said Three new Colonies upon the Continent, full Power and Authority to settle and agree with the Inhabitants of our said new Colonies or with any other Persons who shall resort thereto, for such Lands, Tenements and Hereditaments, as are now or hereafter shall be in our Power to dispose of; and them to grant to any such Person or Persons upon such Terms, and under such moderate Quit-Rents, Services and Acknowledgments, as have been appointed and settled in our other Colonies, and under such other Conditions as shall appear to us to be necessary and expedient for the Advantage of the Grantees, and the Improvement and settlement of our said Colonies.

Soldier Settlement

And Whereas, We are desirous, upon all occasions, to testify our Royal Sense and Approbation of the Conduct and bravery of the Officers and Soldiers of our Armies, and to reward the same, We do hereby command and impower our Governors of our said Three new Colonies, and all other our Governors of our several Provinces on the Continent of North America, to grant without Fee or Reward, to such reduced Officers as have served in North America during the late War, and to such Private Soldiers as have been or shall be disbanded in America, and are actually residing there, and shall personally apply for the same, the following Quantities of Lands, subject, at the Expiration of Ten Years, to the same Quit-Rents as other Lands are subject to in the Province within which they are granted, as also subject to the same Conditions of Cultivation and Improvement; viz.

To every Person having the Rank of a Field Officer--5,000 Acres.

To every Captain--3,000 Acres.

To every Subaltern or Staff Officer,--2,000 Acres.

To every Non-Commission Officer,--200 Acres.

To every Private Man--50 Acres.

We do likewise authorize and require the Governors and Commanders in Chief of all our said Colonies upon the Continent of North America to grant the like Quantities of Land, and upon the same conditions, to such reduced Officers of our Navy of like Rank as served on board our Ships of War in North America at the times of the Reduction of Louisbourg and Quebec in the late War, and who shall personally apply to our respective Governors for such Grants.

The Indian Provisons

And whereas it is just and reasonable, and essential to our Interest, and the Security of our Colonies, that the several Nations or Tribes of Indians with whom We are connected, and who live under our Protection, should not be molested or disturbed in the Possession of such Parts of Our Dominions and Territories as, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are reserved to them, or any of them, as their Hunting Grounds -- We do therefore, with the Advice of our Privy Council, declare it to be our Royal Will and Pleasure, that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our Colonies of Quebec, East Florida. or West Florida, do presume, upon any Pretence whatever, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass any Patents for Lands beyond the Bounds of their respective Governments. as described in their Commissions: as also that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our other Colonies or Plantations in America do presume for the present, and until our further Pleasure be known, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass Patents for any Lands beyond the Heads or Sources of any of the Rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West and North West, or upon any Lands whatever, which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us as aforesaid, are reserved to the said Indians, or any of them.

And We do further declare it to be Our Royal Will and Pleasure, for the present as aforesaid, to reserve under our Sovereignty, Protection, and Dominion, for the use of the said Indians, all the Lands and Territories not included within the Limits of Our said Three new Governments, or within the Limits of the Territory granted to the Hudson's Bay Company, as also all the Lands and Territories lying to the Westward of the Sources of the Rivers which fall into the Sea from the West and North West as aforesaid.

And We do hereby strictly forbid, on Pain of our Displeasure, all our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved, without our especial leave and Licence for that Purpose first obtained.

And We do further strictly enjoin and require all Persons whatever who have either wilfully or inadvertently seated themselves upon any Lands within the Countries above described. or upon any other Lands which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are still reserved to the said Indians as aforesaid, forthwith to remove themselves from such Settlements.

And whereas great Frauds and Abuses have been committed in purchasing Lands of the Indians, to the great Prejudice of our Interests. and to the great Dissatisfaction of the said Indians: In order, therefore, to prevent such Irregularities for the future, and to the end that the Indians may be convinced of our Justice and determined Resolution to remove all reasonable Cause of Discontent, We do, with the Advice of our Privy Council strictly enjoin and require, that no private Person do presume to make any purchase from the said Indians of any Lands reserved to the said Indians, within those parts of our Colonies where We have thought proper to allow Settlement: but that, if at any Time any of the Said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, the same shall be Purchased only for Us, in our Name, at some public Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians, to be held for that Purpose by the Governor or Commander in Chief of our Colony respectively within which they shall lie: and in case they shall lie within the limits of any Proprietary Government, they shall be purchased only for the Use and in the name of such Proprietaries, conformable to such Directions and Instructions as We or they shall think proper to give for that Purpose: And we do, by the Advice of our Privy Council, declare and enjoin, that the Trade with the said Indians shall be free and open to all our Subjects whatever, provided that every Person who may incline to Trade with the said Indians do take out a Licence for carrying on such Trade from the Governor or Commander in Chief of any of our Colonies respectively where such Person shall reside, and also give Security to observe such Regulations as We shall at any Time think fit, by ourselves or by our Commissaries to be appointed for this Purpose, to direct and appoint for the Benefit of the said Trade:

And we do hereby authorize, enjoin, and require the Governors and Commanders in Chief of all our Colonies respectively, as well those under Our immediate Government as those under the Government and Direction of Proprietaries, to grant such Licences without Fee or Reward, taking especial Care to insert therein a Condition, that such Licence shall be void, and the Security forfeited in case the Person to whom the same is granted shall refuse or neglect to observe such Regulations as We shall think proper to prescribe as aforesaid.

And we do further expressly conjoin and require all Officers whatever, as well Military as those Employed in the Management and Direction of Indian Affairs, within the Territories reserved as aforesaid for the use of the said Indians, to seize and apprehend all Persons whatever, who standing charged with Treason, Misprisions of Treason, Murders, or other Felonies or Misdemeanors, shall fly from Justice and take Refuge in the said Territory, and to send them under a proper guard to the Colony where the Crime was committed, of which they stand accused, in order to take their Trial for the same.

Given at our Court at St. James's the 7th Day of October 1763, in the Third Year of our Reign.

GOD SAVE THE KING

William Ashley · December 22, 2010

It wasn't.

Right here.

Sorry try again

The correct answer is The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763

AND IT IS STILL ROYAL TITLE more or less. (there are potentially a few other items of note though)

The citation you provide actually only states this against your ascertation

11. All powers, authorities, and functions that under any statute were at or immediately prior to the date of Union vested in or exercisable by the Governor of Newfoundland, individually, or in Council, or in Commission,

(a) as far as they are capable of being exercised after the date of Union in relation to the Government of Canada, shall be vested in and shall or may be exercised by the Governor General, with the advice, or with the advice and consent, or in conjunction with, the King's Privy Council for Canada or any member or members thereof, or by the Governor General individually, as the case requires, subject nevertheless to be abolished or altered by the Parliament of Canada under the authority of the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1940; and

( as far as they are capable of being exercised after the date of Union in relation to the Government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, shall be vested in and shall or may be exercised by the Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, with the advice, or with the advice and consent, or in conjunction with, the Executive Council of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador or any member or members thereof, or by the Lieutenant Governor individually, as the case requires, subject nevertheless to be abolished or altered by the Legislature of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador under the authority of the Constitution Acts. 1867 to 1940.

35. Newfoundland public works and property not transferred to Canada by or under these Terms will remain the property of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

37. All lands, mines, minerals, and royalties belonging to Newfoundland at the date of Union, and all sums then due or payable for such lands, mines, minerals, or royalties, shall belong to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, subject to any trusts existing in respect thereof, and to any interest other than that of the Province in the same.

to refresh your memory reread the royal proclaimation.

The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763

Annotation Map (unofficial)

Text Laws of New Governments

Grants for Settlement Soldier Settlement

Indian Provisions Link to Law Office

A Brief Introduction to Aboriginal Law in Canada

Annotation

After the Seven Years' War was over, Britain controlled all of North America east of the Mississippi. Settlers from the Thirteen Colonies were anxious to move into the Ohio Valley now that it was free of French influence, but the lands were still in the possession of Indian Nations who were rightly suspicious of 'Yankee' motives and resented their intrusion. Pontiac's Rebellion along the frontier began in August of 1763.

At the same time, Britain was moving to consolidate its gains and implement governing structures. The new territories would be organized into four areas: Quebec, East Florida, West Florida and the island of Grenada. This is set out in the opening paragraphs of the Proclamation, and details of their governance and settlement in later sections.

The lands west of the Appalachian height of land were "reserved" to the Indians as their Hunting Grounds. They were not included in any colony, and colonists were expressly forbidden to enter into land negotiations with the Indians -- because of "great Frauds and Abuses" -- and the Crown reserved to itself the exclusive right to negotiate cessions of Indian title. At the same time, settlement was forbidden. While the Indian Nations governed the Proclamation Territory under their own laws, the Crown also directed that non-Aboriginal fugitives from justice could be pursued and taken within Indian lands. In Canada, the Proclamation is the basis of our understanding of the legal nature of Indian title and an historical root of the treaty process. Its provisions underlie the surrenders and designations of reserve land which still take place pursuant to the Indian Act.

In practice, the Proclamation failed to stifle expansionist ambitions in the Thirteen Colonies. The Crown used the Quebec Act, 1774 as a device to re-assert its control within the Proclamation lands by extending the former boundaries of Quebec down to the Ohio River near what is now Pittsburgh, then down the Ohio the Mississippi and north to Rupert's Land. This was one of the complaints advanced by the colonists two years later in their Declaration of Independence. Historical events subsequently excluded much of the Proclamation territory from British control and from Canada, but it is still relevant to the development of Canadian law. The Proclamation is not formally part of the Constitution of Canada, but it is referred to in section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The headings included in the text below are for convenience; they are not part of the original text. It should also be noted that the map is also a reference tool. It is not an official map and the courts have since applied the Proclamation to areas not shown on it as "Indian Territory". The full extent of the territorial application of the Proclamation in Canada is still subject to dispute and there is little doubt that its reach as a foundation of our Aboriginal law is much broader.

Text of the Royal Proclamation:

Purpose

Whereas We have taken into Our Royal Consideration the extensive and valuable Acquisitions in America, secured to our Crown by the late Definitive Treaty of Peace, concluded at Paris the 10th Day of February last; and being desirous that all Our loving Subjects, as well of our Kingdom as of our Colonies in America, may avail themselves with all convenient Speed, of the great Benefits and Advantages which must accrue therefrom to their Commerce, Manufactures, and Navigation, We have thought fit, with the Advice of our Privy Council. to issue this our Royal Proclamation, hereby to publish and declare to all our loving Subjects, that we have, with the Advice of our Said Privy Council, granted our Letters Patent, under our Great Seal of Great Britain, to erect, within the Countries and Islands ceded and confirmed to Us by the said Treaty, Four distinct and separate Governments, styled and called by the names of Quebec, East Florida, West Florida and Grenada, and limited and bounded as follows, viz.

First--The Government of Quebec bounded on the Labrador Coast by the River St. John, and from thence by a Line drawn from the Head of that River through the Lake St. John, to the South end of the Lake Nipissing; from whence the said Line, crossing the River St. Lawrence, and the Lake Champlain, in 45. Degrees of North Latitude, passes along the High Lands which divide the Rivers that empty themselves into the said River St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Sea; and also along the North Coast of the Baye des Châleurs, and the Coast of the Gulph of St. Lawrence to Cape Rosières, and from thence crossing the Mouth of the River St. Lawrence by the West End of the Island of Anticosti, terminates at the aforesaid River of St. John.

Secondly--The Government of East Florida, bounded to the Westward by the Gulph of Mexico and the Apalachicola River; to the Northward by a Line drawn from that part of the said River where the Chatahouchee and Flint Rivers meet, to the source of St. Mary's River. and by the course of the said River to the Atlantic Ocean; and to the Eastward and Southward by the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulph of Florida, including all Islands within Six Leagues of the Sea Coast.

Thirdly--The Government of West Florida, bounded to the Southward by the Gulph of Mexico, including all Islands within Six Leagues of the Coast; from the River Apalachicola to Lake Pontchartrain; to the Westward by the said Lake, the Lake Maurepas, and the River Mississippi; to the Northward by a Line drawn due East from that part of the River Mississippi which lies in 31 Degrees North Latitude. to the River Apalachicola or Chatahouchee; and to the Eastward by the said River.

Fourthly--The Government of Grenada, comprehending the Island of that name, together with the Grenadines, and the Islands of Dominico, St. Vincent's and Tobago. And to the end that the open and free Fishery of our Subjects may be extended to and carried on upon the Coast of Labrador, and the adjacent Islands. We have thought fit, with the advice of our said Privy Council to put all that Coast, from the River St. John's to Hudson's Streights, together with the Islands of Anticosti and Madelaine, and all other smaller Islands lying upon the said Coast, under the care and Inspection of our Governor of Newfoundland.

We have also, with the advice of our Privy Council. thought fit to annex the Islands of St. John's [now Prince Edward Island] and Cape Breton, or Isle Royale, with the lesser Islands adjacent thereto, to our Government of Nova Scotia.

We have also, with the advice of our Privy Council aforesaid, annexed to our Province of Georgia all the Lands Iying between the Rivers Alatamaha and St. Mary's.

New Governments to have General Assemblies

and Make Laws

And whereas it will greatly contribute to the speedy settling of our said new Governments, that our loving Subjects should be informed of our Paternal care, for the security of the Liberties and Properties of those who are and shall become Inhabitants thereof, We have thought fit to publish and declare, by this Our Proclamation, that We have, in the Letters Patent under our Great Seal of Great Britain, by which the said Governments are constituted, given express Power and Direction to our Governors of our Said Colonies respectively, that so soon as the state and circumstances of the said Colonies will admit thereof, they shall, with the Advice and Consent of the Members of our Council, summon and call General Assemblies within the said Governments respectively, in such Manner and Form as is used and directed in those Colonies and Provinces in America which are under our immediate Government: And We have also given Power to the said Governors, with the consent of our Said Councils, and the Representatives of the People so to be summoned as aforesaid, to make, constitute, and ordain Laws, Statutes, and Ordinances for the Public Peace, Welfare, and good Government of our said Colonies, and of the People and Inhabitants thereof, as near as may be agreeable to the Laws of England, and under such Regulations and Restrictions as are used in other Colonies; and in the mean Time, and until such Assemblies can be called as aforesaid [see Campbell v. Hall (1774), 1 Cowp. 204, 98 E.R. 1045], all Persons Inhabiting in or resorting to our Said Colonies may confide in our Royal Protection for the Enjoyment of the Benefit of the Laws of our Realm of England; for which Purpose We have given Power under our Great Seal to the Governors of our said Colonies respectively to erect and constitute, with the Advice of our said Councils respectively, Courts of Judicature and public Justice within our Said Colonies for hearing and determining all Causes, as well Criminal as Civil, according to Law and Equity, and as near as may be agreeable to the Laws of England, with Liberty to all Persons who may think themselves aggrieved by the Sentences of such Courts, in all Civil Cases, to appeal, under the usual Limitations and Restrictions, to Us in our Privy Council.

Note: English laws were not globally acceptable in Quebec, especially in matters of "property and civil rights". The The Quebec Act, 1774 reinstated French civil law to apply in respect of such matters and the phrase survives in section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The American colonists, however, viewed the extension of the territory of Quebec with alarm and described the French legal regime, then not codified as it is today, as an "arbitrary system of laws" .

Grants for Settlement

We have also thought fit, with the advice of our Privy Council as aforesaid, to give unto the Governors and Councils of our said Three new Colonies upon the Continent, full Power and Authority to settle and agree with the Inhabitants of our said new Colonies or with any other Persons who shall resort thereto, for such Lands, Tenements and Hereditaments, as are now or hereafter shall be in our Power to dispose of; and them to grant to any such Person or Persons upon such Terms, and under such moderate Quit-Rents, Services and Acknowledgments, as have been appointed and settled in our other Colonies, and under such other Conditions as shall appear to us to be necessary and expedient for the Advantage of the Grantees, and the Improvement and settlement of our said Colonies.

Soldier Settlement

And Whereas, We are desirous, upon all occasions, to testify our Royal Sense and Approbation of the Conduct and bravery of the Officers and Soldiers of our Armies, and to reward the same, We do hereby command and impower our Governors of our said Three new Colonies, and all other our Governors of our several Provinces on the Continent of North America, to grant without Fee or Reward, to such reduced Officers as have served in North America during the late War, and to such Private Soldiers as have been or shall be disbanded in America, and are actually residing there, and shall personally apply for the same, the following Quantities of Lands, subject, at the Expiration of Ten Years, to the same Quit-Rents as other Lands are subject to in the Province within which they are granted, as also subject to the same Conditions of Cultivation and Improvement; viz.

To every Person having the Rank of a Field Officer--5,000 Acres.

To every Captain--3,000 Acres.

To every Subaltern or Staff Officer,--2,000 Acres.

To every Non-Commission Officer,--200 Acres.

To every Private Man--50 Acres.

We do likewise authorize and require the Governors and Commanders in Chief of all our said Colonies upon the Continent of North America to grant the like Quantities of Land, and upon the same conditions, to such reduced Officers of our Navy of like Rank as served on board our Ships of War in North America at the times of the Reduction of Louisbourg and Quebec in the late War, and who shall personally apply to our respective Governors for such Grants.

The Indian Provisons

And whereas it is just and reasonable, and essential to our Interest, and the Security of our Colonies, that the several Nations or Tribes of Indians with whom We are connected, and who live under our Protection, should not be molested or disturbed in the Possession of such Parts of Our Dominions and Territories as, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are reserved to them, or any of them, as their Hunting Grounds -- We do therefore, with the Advice of our Privy Council, declare it to be our Royal Will and Pleasure, that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our Colonies of Quebec, East Florida. or West Florida, do presume, upon any Pretence whatever, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass any Patents for Lands beyond the Bounds of their respective Governments. as described in their Commissions: as also that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our other Colonies or Plantations in America do presume for the present, and until our further Pleasure be known, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass Patents for any Lands beyond the Heads or Sources of any of the Rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West and North West, or upon any Lands whatever, which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us as aforesaid, are reserved to the said Indians, or any of them.

And We do further declare it to be Our Royal Will and Pleasure, for the present as aforesaid, to reserve under our Sovereignty, Protection, and Dominion, for the use of the said Indians, all the Lands and Territories not included within the Limits of Our said Three new Governments, or within the Limits of the Territory granted to the Hudson's Bay Company, as also all the Lands and Territories lying to the Westward of the Sources of the Rivers which fall into the Sea from the West and North West as aforesaid.

And We do hereby strictly forbid, on Pain of our Displeasure, all our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved, without our especial leave and Licence for that Purpose first obtained.

And We do further strictly enjoin and require all Persons whatever who have either wilfully or inadvertently seated themselves upon any Lands within the Countries above described. or upon any other Lands which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are still reserved to the said Indians as aforesaid, forthwith to remove themselves from such Settlements.

And whereas great Frauds and Abuses have been committed in purchasing Lands of the Indians, to the great Prejudice of our Interests. and to the great Dissatisfaction of the said Indians: In order, therefore, to prevent such Irregularities for the future, and to the end that the Indians may be convinced of our Justice and determined Resolution to remove all reasonable Cause of Discontent, We do, with the Advice of our Privy Council strictly enjoin and require, that no private Person do presume to make any purchase from the said Indians of any Lands reserved to the said Indians, within those parts of our Colonies where We have thought proper to allow Settlement: but that, if at any Time any of the Said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, the same shall be Purchased only for Us, in our Name, at some public Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians, to be held for that Purpose by the Governor or Commander in Chief of our Colony respectively within which they shall lie: and in case they shall lie within the limits of any Proprietary Government, they shall be purchased only for the Use and in the name of such Proprietaries, conformable to such Directions and Instructions as We or they shall think proper to give for that Purpose: And we do, by the Advice of our Privy Council, declare and enjoin, that the Trade with the said Indians shall be free and open to all our Subjects whatever, provided that every Person who may incline to Trade with the said Indians do take out a Licence for carrying on such Trade from the Governor or Commander in Chief of any of our Colonies respectively where such Person shall reside, and also give Security to observe such Regulations as We shall at any Time think fit, by ourselves or by our Commissaries to be appointed for this Purpose, to direct and appoint for the Benefit of the said Trade:

And we do hereby authorize, enjoin, and require the Governors and Commanders in Chief of all our Colonies respectively, as well those under Our immediate Government as those under the Government and Direction of Proprietaries, to grant such Licences without Fee or Reward, taking especial Care to insert therein a Condition, that such Licence shall be void, and the Security forfeited in case the Person to whom the same is granted shall refuse or neglect to observe such Regulations as We shall think proper to prescribe as aforesaid.

And we do further expressly conjoin and require all Officers whatever, as well Military as those Employed in the Management and Direction of Indian Affairs, within the Territories reserved as aforesaid for the use of the said Indians, to seize and apprehend all Persons whatever, who standing charged with Treason, Misprisions of Treason, Murders, or other Felonies or Misdemeanors, shall fly from Justice and take Refuge in the said Territory, and to send them under a proper guard to the Colony where the Crime was committed, of which they stand accused, in order to take their Trial for the same.

Given at our Court at St. James's the 7th Day of October 1763, in the Third Year of our Reign.

GOD SAVE THE KING

The island itself

In 1497, John Cabot arrived in Newfoundland and made landfall at Bonavista. Here he set up the flag of England and claimed the land as a British colony for his leader Henry VIII.
and in 1583, Sir Humphrey Gilbert reaffirmed the ownership of Britain when he claimed Newfoundland for Queen Elizabeth I

The first colony in Newfoundland was the one established at Cupids in 1610 by a company of London and Bristol merchants which had received a royal charter for this purpose. John Guy was its first governor.

the proprietary system, individuals or companies were granted commercial charters by the King of England to establish colonies