|I'm sure that in Bill Bryson's book Down Under he says that Australian citizenship didn't exist until 1949 (I think). Therefore, people born in Australia before that date were British, there was no such thing as being Australian.|
|In British nationality law, the term British subject has at different times had different meanings. The current definition of the term British subject is contained in the British Nationality Act 1981.
Prior to 1 January 1949, the term "British Subject" was used to describe any person who owed allegiance to the British Crown, wherever he was born in the British Commonwealth and Empire. Within the Empire, the only people who were not British subjects were the rulers of native states formally under the "protection" of the British Crown, and their peoples. Although their countries may for all practical purposes have been ruled by the imperial government, such persons are considered to have been born outside the sovereignty and allegiance of the British Crown, and were (and, where these persons are still alive, still are) known as British Protected Persons.
Between 1947 and 1951 each of the various existing members of the Commonwealth of Nations created its own national citizenship. In 1948, the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed the British Nationality Act 1948, which came into effect on 1 January 1949 and introduced the concept of "Citizenship of the UK & Colonies".
After 1 January 1949, every person who was a British subject by virtue of a connection with the United Kingdom or one of her crown colonies became a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
However, UK & Colonies citizens, in common with citizens of other Commonwealth countries, also retained the status of British subject.
Hence, from 1949 to 1982, a person born in London, England, would have been a British Subject and Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, while someone born in Sydney, Australia, would have been a British Subject and Citizen of Australia.
Between 1949 and 1982 (and as late as 1987 in Australian law), the status of British Subject was a common status held by citizens of countries throughout the Commonwealth, and many Commonwealth countries had statutes defining the term "British Subject" in their laws, in much the same way as the status of Commonwealth citizen is now defined.
In Australia, the status of British Subject in Australian law was retained until it was removed by provisions of the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 which came into force on 1 May 1987. Hence between 1 January 1983 and 1 May 1987 a British citizen and an Australian citizen were both British subjects under Australian law, but not under United Kingdom law.
On 1 January 1983, upon the coming into force of the British Nationality Act 1981, every Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies became either a British Citizen, British Dependent Territories Citizen or British Overseas Citizen.
The use of the term "British subject" was discontinued for all persons who fell into these categories, or who had a national citizenship of any other part of the Commonwealth. British citizens are not British subjects under the 1981 Act. The status of British subject cannot now be transmitted by descent, and will become extinct when all existing British subjects are dead.
|I've always taken it as what your parents are. After all, if it's where you were born, if you're born in a biscuit tin,does that make you a biscuit?|
|Arthur Wellesley (ex-prime minister of the UK), who was born in Dublin, Ireland, famously said when asked about his Irish connections: "Being born in a stable does not make one a horse."|
|"No, it doesn't," retorted Anne. "Wasn't it Dan O'Connell who said that if a man was born in a stable it didn't make him a horse? I'm Island to the core."|
This crops up a lot in my field, because people tend to move around a lot, and marry internationally, so you could have a child born in Canada to an English citizen and an American citizen, which would, I think, give them three citizenships initially.
|But what would say Elisaveta have had to promise?|
|Up went Elisaveta's hand to the half-salute as she replied in clear tones, "I promise on my honour to do my best to be loyal to God and the King; to help other people at all times; and to obey the Guide Law!"|
|It doesn't specify WHICH king - Elisaveta would take THE king as being her grandfather, rather than the British King|
|Back on the topic of Daisy though, I never ever get a sense that she considers herself the least bit Australian... Is it ever mentioned apart from the intial explanation of where Margot has been?|
|Is it me or does that imply Daisy's been back to Australia as an adult?
Surely as a nine year old she wouldn't have been bringing back opal rings for Robin.
|Dreaming Marianne wrote:|
Interestingly, my children do NOT have automatic right of abode in the UK - fortunately my husband is UK-born.
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT + 1 Hour