Talk:Extraterritoriality of Princess Margriet's birth

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Canada: Ottawa / Law / History / The 10,000 Challenge Low‑importance

Canada
portal

WikiProject
Canada

Canada
notice board

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Ottawa.

This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

This article is supported by WikiProject History of Canada.

Canada
10,000

This article was created or improved as part of The Canada 10,000 Challenge - You can help!

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands

Royalty and Nobility

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of royalty and nobility on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Royalty and NobilityWikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityTemplate:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityRoyalty and Nobility

A fact from Extraterritoriality of Princess Margriet's birth appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 January 2025 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Princess Margriet of the Netherlands (pictured) was born in Canada's capital, but outside the country's legal jurisdiction?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2025/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Extraterritoriality of Princess Margriet's birth.

George VI didn't issue the proclamation

I've reviewed the sources, and I don't see any evidence that the King had anything to do with the proclamation. It was signed by the GovGen, the Earl of Athlone, on the advice of the federal Cabinet. It has the King's name and titles on it, but that's standard for all proclamations. Proclamations are issued in the King's name, but the King isn't personally involved. Tellingly, the proclamation doesn't have the key words "Signed with our Royal Hand" which you find on the Letters Patent constituting the office of the Governor General, or "GIVEN under Our Royal Hand", on the Letters Patent terminating Julie Payette as Governor General. Absent those words that show the monarch did it personally, the document is issued in the King's name by the Gov Gen. See for example the Proclamation proroguing Parliament, which reads:

Proclamation Proroguing Parliament to March 24, 2025|

Mary May Simon

[L.S.]

Canada

Charles the Third, by the Grace of God King of Canada and His other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth.

Samantha Maislin Dickson

Acting Deputy Attorney General

Great Seal of Canada

It's issued in the King's name, but by the Gov Gen, who's the actual one who signs it. Similarly, when the election is called, all the writs for each riding (343 writs in the next election) are issued in the King's name, but the King doesn't sign them. They're issued by the Gov Gen on advice. See the form for the writ here at the guide to Parliamentary practice, Figure 4.3.

I think the mention of the King need to be taken out and replaced with statements that the proclamation was issued by the Gov Gen, the Earl of Athlone, on the advice of the federal cabinet. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: Thanks for this information. The proclamation says that the gov gen ordered that the proclamation be issued and that he was witness to it.

Would it be alright to just say (first sentence of Proclamation): The proclamation was issued in the name of George VI...

Who do you feel I should put as the author of the proclamation in the citation template? Athlone, Varcoe (in charge of the team that wrote the legalese) or Coleman (the senior government official in charge)? Or maybe just leave it blank? – Reidgreg (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reidgreg, I would say none of them, and would recommend "Government of Canada" as the cleanest, least ambiguous author. Who is Coleman? not mentioned in the article or the proclamation? Varcoe's not the author; his name is on the proclamation to satisfy the formal requirements of responsible government (a formality initially recommended by Lord Durham), showing that the GovGen is acting on the advice of the government, and in any event, public servants' work is only significant if adopted by the government. Athlone was acting on the advice of the federal Cabinet, not on his own initiative, so it would be giving undue emphasis to him. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see Coleman, at the bottom of the Proclamation. Missed that. No, he's not the author. He's the public official charged with publishing the proclamation. That's what the "By command" line means, that he is publishing it by command of the Governor General. "By command" is the traditional abbreviation for the older, much longer traditional recital that the person has been commanded by the King or GovGen to formally publish the document, etc. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much thanks for your work on this! I changed authorship of the proclamation in the citations and made the "in the name of George VI" change. In the footnote, I had cut parts of the supreme court quote because it was a bit long and the sentence structure a bit complex, but it's a footnote so not like it's interrupting the main body text. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I just made one tweak: changing "royal decree" to "statutory order". Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Sometimes I wonder about the line of "original research" though, when the Globe and Mail called it a "royal decree" and I don't have any sources for "statutory order". – Reidgreg (talk) 05:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new explanatory footnote. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went hunting and found that the formal term used for delegated legislation is "Statutory instrument", not "statutory order", so I changed it to "statutory instrument". See the Statutory Instruments Act, RSC 1985, c S-22. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:20, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]