Subject: Re: capital city info for Peter<br/>
Date: Jun 12, 2001 @ 22:24<br/>
Author: Peter Smaardijk (&quot;Peter Smaardijk&quot; &lt;smaardijk@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="2805.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="2813.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic2804.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="2810.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="2812.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-992999458">Apart from Amsterdam being the constitutionally defined capital of <br/>
the Netherlands, it is the only city that is called &quot;city&quot; as well, <br/>
by virtue of the former (Capital in Dutch is &quot;hoofdstad&quot;, <br/>
meaning &quot;main city&quot;). Lots of localities have old (medieval) city <br/>
charters, but these don&#39;t have any legal powers (that I&#39;m aware of, <br/>
anyway) anymore. The low administrative subdivision is the <br/>
municipality, and that&#39;s it. I know that in some countries (e.g. <br/>
Poland), there is a difference between municipalities and cities). In <br/>
Britain I have heard of cities getting a city charter in the 1970&#39;s <br/>
(I think one was Sheffield, although I&#39;m not sure). Is there anything <br/>
legal/administrative attached to the honour of having the right to be <br/>
a city (other than perpetual glory)?<br/>
<br/>
BTW: The Hague has been the seat of the government of the Netherlands <br/>
for most of the last four centuries, but hasn&#39;t always been the place <br/>
where the Queen/King lived. The mother of the present Queen Beatrix, <br/>
Queen Juliana, lived in a palace in the municipality of Baarn, and <br/>
her mother, Queen Wilhelmina, in a palace in the municipality of <br/>
Apeldoorn (apart from five years in London, of course, although I <br/>
don&#39;t know whether that was in the City or somewhere else...).<br/>
<br/>
Peter S.<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michaelstride@h... wrote:<br/>
&gt; Well, I checked my databases for legislation that defines London, <br/>
or <br/>
&gt; indeed the City of Westminster as the &#39;Capital&#39; and drew a blank <br/>
(Im <br/>
&gt; a lawyer). As I&#39;m sure your aware we don&#39;t actually have a written <br/>
&gt; constitution. Arnt we the lucky ones! We do have definitions of <br/>
what <br/>
&gt; a city is, but not in a&#39;legal&#39; sense, which generally is a place <br/>
with <br/>
&gt; an Anglican Cathedral, but nowadays the government can confer city <br/>
&gt; status on conurbations of an undefined size, undefined facilities, <br/>
&gt; and undefined qualities.(Typical) Recently a number of cities <br/>
applied <br/>
&gt; and if my memory serves me, Brighton and possibly Wolverhampton <br/>
&gt; became cities in the eyes of the government. I do know that Luton <br/>
and <br/>
&gt; Milton Keynes applied and failed.<br/>
&gt; As for legal definitions of London as a Capital City, i&#39;ll search a <br/>
&gt; little more. Its interesting the Hague is not a Capital, cos I <br/>
always <br/>
&gt; thought it was. You live and learn. Michael </span></blockquote></div>