Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: US counties, unincorprated territories
Date: Nov 07, 2001 @ 18:45
Author: m donner ("m donner" <maxivan82@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next [All Posts]
Prev    Post in Time    Next


good queries anton
it is true that the republic of texas had to be chopped down to size in
order to become the state of texas
for as big as it is now
formerly it reached all the way to wyoming
but it never lost its 9nm of territorial waters
& i think that is the only remaining difference
anton


>From: "Peter Smaardijk" <smaardijk@...>
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: US counties, unincorprated territories
>Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 18:24:19 -0000
>
>--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., PitHokie <pithokie@y...> wrote:
> > The difference is in name only. Governmentally, there
> > is no difference between a state and a commonwealth.
>
>I know that in Germany, two "Laender" have the official designation
>of "Freistaat": Bavaria and Saxony. I don't know whether this has any
>implications. Does someone know?
>
>And I remember vaguely that the position of Texas is fundamentally
>different from all other states in the US (because it used to be an
>independent republic). Can someone say something about that?
>
>What about the difference between territories in countries like
>Canada, Australia, and Russia (=krai) and the regular subdivisions?
>Why is it like this and what are the practical implications?
>
>Peter S.
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp