Yes, but Leopold II was one person - hence autocracy.

Peter S.

--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., Kevin Meynell <kevin@m...> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> >It seems like this is very much comparable to the situation of the
> >Congo in the 19th century, before it became a Belgian colony.
>
> This was actually a fairly common arrangement in the early days of
> colonialism. The British territories in North American were held by
the
> London Virginia Company, the Plymouth Virginia Company and the
Hudson Bay
> Company under charter from the English (and subsequently British)
Crown.
> Similarly, India and many other parts of the Far East were held by
the East
> India Company. It was only (much) later that they were formally
annexed
> into the British Empire.
>
> I believe a similar arrangement existed with the Dutch VOC company
in the
> East Indies, and the Danish in what is now the US Virgin Islands. I
also
> seem to remember reading that the now largely forgotten Swedish
West Indies
> colony on Saint Barthelemy (now part of Guadeloupe) was effectively
the
> personal property of the Swedish monarch.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kevin Meynell