--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "Peter Smaardijk" <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> Do you mean that all those republics were independent at one point?
not sure
i mean the indian stream republic did look awfully real for some time
but not necessarily any of the others
i guess its a question of whether & when a riot or rebellion or movement or whatever it is that manifests like that deserves to be called a state or country etc
m
>
> A bit like the different Boer republics in South Africa in the 19th
> century (not only Transvaal and the Orange Free State I mean)?
>
> Peter S.
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., orc@o... wrote:
> > not to beat a very slow horse
> >
> > but i am seriously wondering what i might have meant by etc
> herebelow
> >
> > besides the mentioned republics of california & dixie
> >
> >
> >
> > probably the indian stream republic
> >
> > since that seems to have been fairly sustantially real
> >
> > from 1829 to 1835
> >
> >
> >
> > probably not the conch republic
> >
> > but i could easily be way wrong about this
> >
> >
> >
> > certainly not the abortive near reunion state of nickajack
> >
> > circa 1861
> >
> > an earlier but failed sort of west virginia in the greater algatn
> area
> >
> >
> >
> > but are there any others perhaps
> >
> > so historically real or so close
> >
> >
> >
> > m
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "m donner" <maxivan82@h...> wrote:
> >
> > > anton
> >
> > > this former power has actually already been discharged in the
> erection of
> >
> > > new mexico oklahoma kansas colorado & wyoming into states out of
> parts of
> >
> > > the republic of texas
> >
> > >
> >
> > > the power probably no longer inheres
> >
> > > per bus&ss
> >
> > >
> >
> > > so texas is not fundamentally different peter
> >
> > > other than in the 2 ways i mentioned previously
> >
> > >
> >
> > > also brendan
> >
> > > lets not write off the confederacy
> >
> > > nor the republic of california
> >
> > > etc
> >
> > > which were independent
> >
> > >
> >
> > > m
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >From: anton_zeilinger@h...
> >
> > > >Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@y...
> >
> > > >To: BoundaryPoint@y...
> >
> > > >Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: US counties, unincorprated
> territories
> >
> > > >Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 16:19:17 -0000
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >Hi,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >also, Texas is the only state in the U.S. which has the power to
> >
> > > >split into not more than four smaller chunks "of convenient size"
> >
> > > >which would have to be admitted to the Union as separate states,
> see:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/index.html
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >text of the resolution:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/march1845.html
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >Anton Z.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >PS: Brendan, though it's not in the continental U.S., wasn't
> Hawaii
> >
> > > >an independent kingdom or something like that?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., PitHokie <pithokie@y...> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Peter et. al,
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Texas is unique in that it's the only part of the
> >
> > > > > continental United States that was ever been
> >
> > > > > independently governed as its own country.
> >
> > > > > It's also been under more official rulers than any
> >
> > > > > other part of the continental U.S. If you travel to
> >
> > > > > the Capitol in Austin, you will find in the rotunda a
> >
> > > > > seal of all the countries Texas has been ruled by:
> >
> > > > > Spain, France, Mexico, Texas, and the United States.
> >
> > > > > Texas was independent from April, 1836 until the U.S.
> >
> > > > > annexed it in 1845.
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Brendan
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > --- Peter Smaardijk <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > --- 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.
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > __________________________________________________
> >
> > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> >
> > > > > Find a job, post your resume.
> >
> > > > > http://careers.yahoo.com
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> >
> > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp