Not so. John Cabot claimed Newfoundland for the English Crown in 1497, during Henry VII’s reign. Since Cabot’s claim was not limited to the island of Newfoundland (they didn’t know at the time that Newfoundland was an island), his claim is considered the beginning of the assertion of English sovereignty over Canada.
As well, Queen Elizabeth I gave Sir Humphrey Gilbert letters patent to establish a colony in Newfoundland, which he did in 1583.
And of course, in addition to England and Ireland, Queen Elizabeth I was sovereign over Wales.
Thus, Newfoundland (at least), and arguably the mainland of Canada, were under the sovereignty of Elizabeth I, to the extent England’s claims were good.
The earliest official British reference I could find to Canada as a true political entity (two of them, actually) was in 1791: Canadas - Wikipedia. The region was called New France until the end of the French and Indian War, and the Treaty of Paris of 1763 did refer to it as Canada, Treaty of Paris (1763) - Wikipedia. Thereafter it was often referred to just by the names of its various component parts (Quebec, Nova Scotia, etc.).
To try to get it a little bit back on track I will provide an anecdote.
A few years ago the Queen of Whatever visited Lexington, KY, the horse capital of the world. The Royal Family of Whatever is into horses. I’m told from a reliable source in Lexington that the Queen of Whatever wanted the breeders to give her, gratis, shares in horses. Then they could say that the Queen of Whatever was a part owner.
The point being, the Royal Family of Whatever are a bunch of cheap, chiseling bastards with a total sense of entitlement. They probably tip exactly zero. That’s my guess. I would think that anybody that does business with them will include the tip in the initial cost and hope to get paid eventually.
The Royal Family of Whatever and Donald Trump came out of the same mold.
How much do you tip? Then why are you asking how much the Queen of England tips? It is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, nobody’s business except her own. This has to be the stupidest question I have ever seen anyone post. Get a life!
Trump is a very unscrupulous business person. He is the poster child for the saying that “if you owe the bank $1 million and can’t pay it you have a problem. If you owe the bank $100 million and can’t pay it they have a problem.” He’s made absolutely horrible business decisions and then left the investors holding the bag. Look at the number of bankruptcies he’s been part of that have screwed everyone but him. Talk to contractors that have worked for him and they will tell you that he is notorious for never paying the hold-back. The hold-back is the typically 10% that doesn’t get paid until the punch list is completed. With Trump the punch list never gets completed. He’s slime. I wouldn’t live or work in a Trump building if you gave it to me. I can’t take that many showers every day.
For the past twenty years or so Donald Trump has mostly given up any pretense that he’s an investor. Nearly any business deal that he’s associated with is merely him acting as a spokesman for the business. He takes a fee off the top without investing any money of his own. All the money he’s made in the past twenty or so years is either from being a spokesman or from his television shows or other such things. A lot of those businesses associated with him have lost money, while he has lost nothing since he’s not an investor. Even back in his earlier days his investments didn’t do that great. Nobody’s really sure what he’s actually worth. Forbes’s estimate is much smaller than Trump’s own estimate:
He’s also got lots of ridiculous political opinions, but since this is General Questions we can’t discuss that here.
Ironically given the synecdocial usage of “England” for the U.K. that has provoked much of the discussion here, it’s necessary to distinguish between Canada[sub]1[/sub], the 10-province/3-territory realm owing allegiance to the Prince of Wales’s mother in her capacity as Queen of Canada, and Canada[sub]2[/sub], the entity, sometimes divided into Upper and Lower Canada(s), the entity in existence from the late 18th century until Confederation which comprised roughly southern Ontario and the land not otherwise alienated within seven leagues of the St. Lawrence (the only easy way to describe what ‘Quebec’ meant at the time), which had responsible government as the Province of Canada (think Puerto Rico for 21st century analogy) between roughly 1840 and Confederation.
Mot to be a wiseacre here, but it seems evident to me that Dangerosa was addressing the fact there are three Queens Regnant as of 2013.
TTBOMK only the Duchess of Edinburgh, when wearing the crown of one of certain Commonwealth realms including the U.K., and Harald of Norway, retain any personal political power other than as the sock puppet for the Government of the day, and that to be used only in extremely sparing doses to help resolve constitutional crises.
If she looked confused it was probably because she could not imagine putting a £1 bet on a horse!
I’d doubt your “reliable source”. The Queen has been breeding horses for the best part of 60 years and I don’t believe there has ever been a suggestion that she didn’t pay for her interest in the thoroughbreds. Frankly, if there was any truth to it, it is too good a story not to leak.
Just curious, but is your view that the Royal Family are “cheap chiseling bastards” based solely on this anecdote or is there some other evidence you’d like to share?
I doubt very much that there’s any chance that they are going to overhear the behind-the-scenes work conversations of staff. Regardless, I suspect that such etiquette and precedence questions aren’t followed for such purposes. They’ll come up with an ad hoc way to address the situation professionally. Maybe they’ll even use code names.
That’s only her royal style & title when she’s acting as Queen of the UK. She has different royal styles and titles when she’s acting as Queen of the other
Commonwealth realms.
R.P. McMurphy and babyboomer1001, these posts contribute absolutely nothing to the thread and are out of place in General Questions. babyboomer1001, your post also qualifies as threadshitting. No warnings issued, but don’t do this again.
I doubt very much that they wouldn’t pretty much have enough staff so that Liz’s waiter and Margrethe’s waiter don’t really need to talk each other - just say “I need pineapple juice” to the kitchen or runner and it comes back to the waiter - for one of the very few people assigned to them. Those sorts of dinners tend to be overstaffed. But the response was, as Polycarp indicated - supposed to indicate that there are three Queens Regent in Europe - not including Queen Consorts, so “the Queen” isn’t going to add much clarity at the annual royalty convention.
