Dominion, Colony or Dependancy

[paulmason]

Bermuda is a crown colony, the Falklands is a Dependancy, and Australia and Canada used to be Dominions. What defines one from the other ? Why would an Island be a Crown Colony that a Crown dependancy ?

[geofbob]

In fact, Bermuda, the Falkland Isles and the other 12 former "colonies" - most of which are in fact self-governing - are now all known as "British Overseas Territories" and the word "Dependent" has been dropped. The former "Dominions" were so termed because they had dominion over their own affairs - ie were self-governing - and their relationship with the UK was voluntary, as of course it still is, though some like Australia and Canada still have the Queen as their Head of State.

[paulmason]

I was aware of this, I was actually looking for more detail. What parameters had actually defined one from the other in the past. But thanks anyway.

[paulmason]

Thanks Tartanwizard! - So, in times past, when an island was discovered, taken in conflicy, colonised etc, what parameters would dictate it being a Dependancy (say Gibralter or the Falklands) or it being a Crown colony (like Burmuda) and what difines one from the other. Thanks for assistance so far.

[paulmason]

Tartanwizard, thanks once again. The clearest definitions I can find is as follows : Dominion : - Self-governing, with complete independance and autonomy, with equal status to the United Kingdom. Colonies and Dependancies : - Colonies may either be formed in "Dependance" on the mother-country (ie, British Dependancy) or in "independance" of the mother country. In the case of the latter, the name of "Crown Colony" is retained, but only in the historical sense, if it is retained at all. In these politically correct times, "British Overseas Territories" is thought to be better that either "Colony or Dependancy" and has replaced both terms. Originally, "Dependancies" were self governing, with the UK being responsible for defence, but also retaining the power to veto legislation, "Dependency" government's have no UK appointed officials,except the Governor. Crown Colonies, were originally governed by crown officials, at the native population was considered upfit for political activity. This would decrease as the political education of the local populus increased. However, in more modern times the "Crown Colony" title has nothing more than historic significance, although the UK still apoints a Governor and has responsibility for Defence. Do you concur with these definitions ?