Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fredericton and parishes

The article says that the city of Saint John did not report to any parishes, which was true. But I always thought that Fredericton (at least until it annexed Devon in 1945) had a similar setup to Saint John in that it was not considered part of any parish, but was simply another division of York County. Anyone have any conclusive proof that Fredericton, as it existed in the early 20th century, was in some parish or another? Kirjtc2 17:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Fredericton was incorporated as a city in 1848; 1850 was the first time the parish was replaced by the city in legislation dividing the province into counties and parishes. [EDIT: forgot to sign this years ago] G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 02:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
As it relates in part here, the matter of how to discuss current and former organization structures and their relationships remains unresolved.
With the demise of the county, the tiered structure (where a district or municipality might reside within or be seen as a division of the upper tier entity), their notability diminishes. Presentation of the former organizational units as "divided for governance purposes" perhaps does not stand up to scrutiny as we move forward. This is because the civil parishes do not relate to the current local entities nearly so neatly as they used to, even though (if) their territory may reside wholly or mostly in the territories of the current entities Service commissions. The assumptions about 'certain areas' nonetheless being made on the parish articles is a consequent matter requiring attention if that exercise is to be accurate. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 14:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I have no idea what most of that was supposed to mean. As to the supposed demise of the county, the provincial government still uses them on its current maps; one example of many is here. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 17:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Fixing preamble

Some issues of accuracy and amplification:

  • Counties began incorporating as municipalities in the mid-nineteenth century.
  • Parishes were never "subdivided into municipalities"; incorporated municipalities were an overlay whose territory was still legally part of the parish they were in.
    • The sole exception was Grand Falls, and the parish was separated from the municipality, not the other way around, in 1912.
  • I think municipalities had seats on the county councils but I don't have a reference available. This still does not count as parishes being subdivided into municipalities.
  • The distinction of either municipality or parish is a census usage, not a legal one.
  • Parishes were referred to as "parish or town" in their erecting legislation at least through the 1870s. I'm currently in the 1870s in transcribing Acts of the General Assembly affecting parishes and should have the exact year the practice in the near future.
  • Saint John was a chartered city and originally the county was The City and County of Saint John in government legislation. I can find the date when that changed if you wish.
  • Fredericton was originally a parish.
  • Counties have no effect on real estate taxation.
  • Albert county was formed only from Westmorland County. Saint John's eastern boundary was moved back to match King's and Queen's in 1837. (Chapter 35 in that year's Acts of the Assembly, available from Canadiana.ca and Google Books as a free download.)
  • Charlotte County's shire town is legally spelt Saint Andrews, not St. Andrews. Refer to Regulation 85-6 and the town's official website, not the tourist St. Andrews by the Sea site. St. Andrews currently links to a redirect page.
  • Victoria's shire town is Perth-Andover, not "Andover, now part of Perth-Andover" (R.S. 1973, Chapter T-3, available on the GNB website)
  • Technically, the shire towns of Kent, Kings, Queens, Sunbury, and Westmorland were the parishes, not the towns. Wikilinks should be changed accordingly. Footnotes might be a good idea. (Again, R.S. 1973, Chapter T-3)

G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 14:47, 29 July 2020 (UTC) reply

The preamble can be improved by clarifying that today counties remain a territorial division (as far as my understanding) but are no longer a unit or jurisdiction of the lowest level of government in new brunswick. Territorial division being used next to local government makes that distinction harder should ine wish to make it. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 16:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC) reply
And, not just as traditionally defined, Also they no longer serve as a unit of the more modern definition of County as a region of municipal government. We will do well to demystify this as the major work of maintaining pages continues. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 17:01, 16 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Shire town vs. county seat

@ G. Timothy Walton: is there a reference that you know of to support the second column in the list and that confirms whether they are regarded as shire towns, county seats, or both interchangeably? Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 23:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Hwy43: Territorial Division Act of 1973, still in force, has "shire or county towns", as does the original 1786 Laws of the Province of Province of New-Brunswick. Without checking each one of the consolidations in between, that seems good enough. It's late, so I won't get around to fixing it tonight. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 04:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC) reply
Perfect. I will add the reference. Hwy43 ( talk) 05:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC) reply
Why would you have a shire/county town? They all exist in law. They can be defined. But, presenting counties, or what became their municipal centre, as current and not former based on vestigial legislation, arguing only "they still exist in law", represents a roadblock and perhaps indicates an attachment on the part of an editor. The act maintains the existence of the former jurisdiction area boundaries only, not the substance of the "county" which was the administrative and political corporate person that had been dissolved along with it's enabling legislation. Therefore, it is not sufficient to present the county as current.
Please do not roll-back the edit that describes the county as former without first adding to the discussion.
Regardless of the encyclopedic use of it, the broader outlook is one that sees the consequences of the robust continuation of the vestigial entity. Perhaps also it's over-emphasis and disconnect with the evolved administrative landscape. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 14:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Okay, sockpuppet. Now go away. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 14:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Hey @ G. Timothy Walton @ Hwy43, I simplified "shire town" to being just "seat", among other edits I made to the article. Let me know if you'd rather have it changed back to "shire town" instead. B3251 ( talk) 01:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
Hey @ B3251. Counties haven't had their own governments in more than fifty years, so seat doesn't work at all; shire town is the term used in the legislation the defines them. I'll change it back. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 01:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
That makes sense, thank you B3251 ( talk) 01:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
You're welcome. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 02:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
Counties, as mere outlines, cannot "have" anything. Counties ARE governments, and it was the government that had territorial jurisdictions and not the other way around. so it makes not one iota of difference what you call the administrative centre since there is no county to have a seat or shire town. The county territorial divisions, shire towns, and parishes are vestiges of the former counties. It is a skewed logic that claims otherwise unfair of editors to force others to reconcile with sentimental attachments. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 12:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Okay, one more time. COUNTIES STILL EXIST. The provincial government still has them in use and in legislation. The federal government still uses them as census divisions. The only thing that dissolved in 1967 was the second-level municipal governments. They're right, I'm right, and you're wrong. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 21:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree with G. Timothy Walton. I was new to editing when I made that question last year and had little knowledge about New Brunswick acts at the time. The official term "shire town" as per the Territorial Division Act should be used. B3251 (talk) 22:16, 8 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Adherence to the language in the act does not change the pith and substance of shire town or county seat, nor what was left of the county. @ G. Timothy Walton would seem to inflate what he's right about.
Simply put, as the county no longer functions as it was intended - to be an administrative organizational unit having certain autonomy and jurisdiction over it's division, and having a seat of power; and even though the territorial division remained (less and less) in official use - so too does the existence of the county. These county territorial divisions, without jurisdictions or oversight, are not counties but former counties by all convention. The county was an official organizational structure relating to administration of the colony and province that required a seat of power.
I suggest readers interested in the discussion consider the edits to parish divisions by @ G. Timothy Walton where one can see the lengths gone to in order to maintain a relevancy of the county subdivision, and the assumptions made about their correspondence with present day jurisdictional extents, as it would seem to illustrate investments affecting the development of articles. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 16:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC) reply

To-do list

I have a couple of suggestions I would like to implement into the article that I think would help improve its quality. I'll probably work on them whenever I find the time to. If anybody would like to comment or give suggestions, feel free to. :)

  • (Incomplete) History section/background information: A section (or just background information) in the article briefly explaining the history behind the creation of New Brunswick's counties and changes that have been made. If possible, I'll try to find as much as I can, because I would like to try separating the distance between the infobox from the wikitable by a little bit.
  • (Completed) Wikitable map entry: This will be the very last entry in the wikitable, which will contain an image of New Bunswick's counties with the county highlighted in red. You can see this in many of the corresponding lists made for various U.S. states.

Potentially useful info:

B3251 ( talk) 03:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply

That's a good place to start. Canadiana.ca has Ganong's monograph on the evolution of the province's boundaries, including this map showing when county lines changed; PANB might also have it. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 04:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC) reply
I have the resource that can be used to highlight counties, I just don't know how to export this into an image of a map yet. I'll figure it out if I can when I have the time
https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/bdd7282b-85b9-1667-9091-7861da409065 B3251 ( talk) 18:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Abolition of county governments vs. continued existence of counties.

To quote directly from the Municipalities Act of 1966, Section 194:

194. Upon the coming into force of this section
(a) every county council
(i) shall forthwith deliver to the Minister all its records and documents, and
(ii) ceases to function; and
(b) every incorporation under the Counties Act is rescinded.

To translate: The governments of the counties ended; all other uses in law continued. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 22:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC) reply

The editor may do with counties as he likes in his translations and interpretations of spent legislation, but no argument in favour of the continued existence of counties has been made here. More unwilling than willing to discuss how the demise of the legislative body and enabling legal makeup determines what would continue to exist, an insistence is shown in the topic comparison itself. The editor should not be allowed to hinder the development of the article.. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 16:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC) reply
The above editor is incorrect in his understanding of what constitutes a county, as shown by their continued use by the provincial government in non-municipalities legislation and by the federal government in census data; their fixation on the use of the term in a single act, ignoring every single other use of the term, is not supported by evidence. The above editor's unwillingness to accept that their usage is singular and incorrect should be allowed to force inaccurate information upon any article.
Take it to arbitration if you don't like the facts. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 00:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC) reply
The editor @ G. Timothy Walton has resorted to forceful methods by acting authoritatively about what constitutes a county, and falsely ascribing to this user a particular position and character.
It is unreasonable for that editor, above, to refuse to qualify an argument, ignore the discussion provided, and instead attack the presenter of the counter argument, misconstruing that argument.
Their continued unwillingness to differentiate between the territory and the jurisdiction by rolling back the article without adding something valuable will simply indicate a users bad faith. PonapsqisHous ( talk) 16:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Rolling back demonstrably false statements, repeatedly shown to be demonstrably false with evidence of why it's demonstrably false, is not bad faith. Constantly ignoring evidence is. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 16:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC) reply

There's now an RfC about this subject, linked in the next section of this page. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 19:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Scope of county articles

There is an RfC that might be of interest to editors at WikiProject:New Brunswick G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 16:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:List_of_counties_of_New_Brunswick&oldid=1235122019"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE