Talk:County corporate

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

According to this [1] Counties corporate were considered seperate from their original counties. Which contradicts what is said here. G-Man 20:49, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. The traditional counties people (can't remember their exact name) seem to hold the view I've stated in the article. Warofdreams 10:33, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It probably needs more research, frankly I dont trust anything the traditional counties people say. G-Man 19:01, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Caernarfon[edit]

Do we have any source for Caernarfon being a county corporate? It definitely wasn't in 1802, according to the Militia Act of that year (which lists them all), or the Militia Act 1882 or the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act 1907. Lewis's Topographical Dictionary of Wales [2] of 1849 has some detail on the civic history of the borough: no mention of county status. I suggest it can be removed. Lozleader 23:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this quite right?[edit]

The article says:

In the late nineteenth century counties corporate lost their independence from their parent counties. By the Militia Act 1882 the lieutenancies of the cities and towns were combined with those of their surrounding counties, while those that were not created county boroughs by the Local Government Act 1888 became part of the administrative county in which they were situate. There were two exceptions: the City of London, which retained its status until the creation of Greater London in 1965 and Haverfordwest which had a separate lieutenancy until 1974.

The County of the City of Coventry was abolished by a specific piece of legislation in 1842, which would make the above incorrect. Were there any other CCs which were abolished by specific legislation? G-Man * 00:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The exception that proves the rule? I believe Lincoln "liberty and county of itself" included five rural parishes until some time in the 1840s, (Youngs doesn't seem to know exactly when or by what authority) although the city itself continued to be a county corporate. The others seem to follow the rules set in the paragraph.Lozleader 10:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you saying then that Coventry city remained a CC after 1842?. G-Man * 20:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on County corporate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070227182259/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Newcastle-upon-Tyne to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070211055827/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Norwich%2C_England to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Norwich%2C_England
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070302024524/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Worcester%2C_England to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Worcester%2C_England
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070302024402/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/York%2C_England to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/York%2C_England

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:31, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for the “From the 17th century, the separate jurisdictions”[edit]

From the 17th century, the separate jurisdictions of the counties corporate were increasingly merged with that of the surrounding county

—->Sorry, don’t know how to edit and add the citations for it to link to citations/references area. Hopefully someone can help add it.

For the entry:

Citation found [that may fit]:

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/laworder/court/overview/assizes/

Bishopesoteria (talk) 07:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]