.
It was still England's to sacrifice; showing again that Canada was not a country in her own right, even though now under her own parliament under the BNA Act, and as such, still under the British appointed Governor General's orders.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sir John A. was a member of this British Commission. There was.no confederation in Canada in 1867. Sir John A. was.a member of the British Government in 1871, three years after the purported Confederation, 1867. And Ottawa continues to allow the distortion to perpetuate; the distortion that Sir John was a 'father' of a confederation in 1867, that in this year of 2006, that Canada on July 1st (Canada Day) in 2007 will be 140 years old. Such crap! Such deceit..

Sir John A., circa 1870, still hoping for progression toward a confederated Canada, sometime yet in the 'near future'. Canadians have been taught it took place in 1867, which it did not.
.
.
.
.
.

Those in the governing of Canada.fully understood that Britain controlled Canada. If Canada was a free and independent confederation, they would not at all be beholding to the British Parliament.
.
.
Sir John A. wanted a centrally controlled government as he earlier wrote in his notes on his copy of the British Document for administration of its Dominion of Canada holding called the BNA Act..

The Statute of Westminster.provides freedom from further British interference such as was under the BNA Act, so that the Provinces would then be able to properly form a federal union..

Showing.Britain had the power.in their appointing of Sir John A. and showing there was no Confederation of Canada in the sense Canadians have assumed. Canada was a Dominion, a self governing nation only so much as allowed under the Governor General whose authority was constituted by Letters Patent and as defined by the BNA Act for administration of affairs under Britain's Dominion of Canada. Canada was a 'holding' of Britain..
.
If.Canada had followed her sisters, and confederated, Canada would have a federal government holding the right of Eminent Domain, instead of one that doesn't own a flagpole, yet acts.(here referring to previous corrupt administrations {current one.may.be different because the prime minister is Christian}).like it has authority to pledge property rights in the provinces to interests of a 'national' debt they alone have incurred and are the sole.debtor for (*).
    In order to enact laws which can be enforced, a properly constituted, say legal, federal district needs to be generated with at least enough land donated by the Provinces for a federal government of their creation to erect a flagpole. Presently Ottawa is in the same status as the Gypsies.

Ottawa is in Ontario and is another reason that the Provinces haven't granted it any authority other than recognition (say, 'put up with') of custom, convention and tradition; Ottawa's.custom being,.assuming. power; their.convention.being, use of techniques to.maintain central control.in order to effectively maintain the disfranchising of individual Provinces rights.(*), and their.tradition.being,.ways passed down from government to government.in order to perpetuate policies the populace would never have allowed, had the truth of the Statute of Westminster been made effectively known to the electorate (*).

And, in order to enact laws which can be enforced, the Central Government must own enough land on which to erect a flagpole. It doesn't, since the Statute of Westminster.
   The Parliament Buildings in Ottawa now are as much a possession of Ontario as any other asset within that province's boundaries. Would a flag erected on a flagpole in Ottawa not be a possession of Ontario? Are the parliament buildings not on Ontario land?

The United States (and others) have created a federal union.(what's a federal union?), where Washingion is in the District of Columbia. Their federal government has the power of Eminent Domain.

If.a federal government holds the legal right of Eminent Domain, it would have had to be conferred by those who before possesed it, such as We the People. Then they would possess "the unrestrained ownership of land" common to Eminent Domain. They would then have their own land.and therefore the necessary sovereign.status that comes with Eminent Domain and could legally do things as regards the interests of the nation..

Power was.never.legally granted by the Provinces by means of them creating a Canadian federal government. The government there simply assumed.domination after Britain.gave it up and carried on as though there had been no changes, in effect, thrusting their middle fingers up Canadians' noses.
   They had absolutely no right to do what they did. They.should.now be allowed to continue to carry on as a provisional government until such time.(*).as We the People in the Provinces instal one proved suitable by tried and proven creation processes.(*)..

Various honorable Ministers of Finance.recognized the true non position of legal governing central control. This was the position Ottawa has been in since the Statute of Westminister.

Four honorable men resigned. Mr. Dunning, who also resigned his seat in the House of Commons, said."No securities issued by this Dominion constitute a mortgage upon any of the business assets of the Dominion".(in other words it {this borrowing money by Ottawa and using assets in the Provinces as surety}.was akin to a con job).
    Mr. Ralston, Mr. Isley and Mr. Abbot, the next three Ministers of Finance, also resigned.
    Therefore debts incurred by those who have governed in Ottawa must realize that property in other parts of the country.(*).is not to be considered an asset in the security of the bonded national debt.
    If Ontario wants, it can keep the Parliament Buildings and other government buildings as part payment for what the fed owes them.

The.Provinces are now free of obligation.and free to form a proper federal union, free to now federate, and free not to if they so wish. Free to go it alone, or with some or all other Provinces; however way the people may decide for their particular Province to be cast. The Provinces can now utilize statements describing what is believed to be true, so that policies and procedures can be formulated as determined by consensus.

As in any relationship, what gets together only stays together if the people want it to; that's freedom!
    How the US separated from Britain and why:.(*).(*).(*).(*)

"One would think from the speech of the Hon. gentlemen (Hon. Sir A. Gait) that the settlement of the Alabama claims was a matter of no importance. Was it of no importance that a terrible war between England and the United States which would subject Canada to all the miseries of the battleground should be avoided? The invitation to Canada to take part in this Commission, showed that Canada had made an additional step in the estimation and favour of England, in this, that he, unworthy as he was, should be chosen to represent the cause of Canada at Washington. (Cheers from the gallery) 
    "There was no fear of England ceding a part of Canada and she would as much be giving up a portion of this country by ceding our rights to the three mile limit as if she gave away one of our cities". 
    "In the joint High Commission about to sit at Washington there would be a sincere desire on both sides he believed for a settlement of the pending disputes, but there was no risk whatever to our interests.
    "Even if we would suppose England were willing to sacrifice us, as a matter of law she could not until the Canadian Parliament ratified the Treaty by its own Act."

Her Majesty's High Commission 
Washington, May 6, 1871. 

"My dear Sir John,I have been thinking over the conversation which took place between us yesterday, and I am anxious to repeat to you the arguments which I then employed with a view to impress upon you the importance of your name being attached to the Treaty, which we hope to sign on Monday next.  "It is not necessary for that purpose that I should enter into any consideration in detail of the merits of that Treaty. I believe it is to be one which, taken as a whole, and regarded as it ought to be, as a broad settlement of the many differences which have lately sprung up between Great Britain and the United States, is fair and honourable to all parties and calculated to confer very important advantages upon our respective countries. I should doubtless have desired to see it differently framed, in some parts, but all negotiations, unless carried on under the shadow of a triumphant army, are necessarily compromises, and I am convinced that the arrangement to which we have come is the best that under the conditions of the problem before us we could have secured.
    "Believing this, I am naturally most anxious not to run any risk of the Treaty being rejected by the Senate, and I cannot doubt that the absence of your signature would lead to that result. It would be a very serious matter if the signature of any member of the Commission were wanting, but any of our names could, I think, be more safely spared than yours. 
    "It appears to me, therefore, that you would incur a responsibility of the gravest kind if you were to withhold your signature; such a step, moreover, would not only be one involving in all probability consequences very greatly to be deprecated but it would, as it seems to me, be inconsistent with your position as a member of the Joint High Commission. We of the English portion of the Commission are not separate members of a conference acting each by himself, but we are jointly the plenipotentiaries, of our Sovereign, bound by the instructions which we receive from Her Majesty's Government and directed now to sign this Treaty.
    "I hold, therefore, that it is our clear duty to sign, that we act under the orders of our Government, and that, in the position we occupy, we should not be justified in disobeying those orders. I trust that, under these circumstances, you will see the great importance, and indeed, as I believe, the absolute necessity of your not separating yourself from your colleagues in the signature of the Treaty, and ...... 
"I remain, yours sincerely,
"De Grey"

"I never worked so hard before and never shall do so again, but I felt it to be necessary this time. I did not want a verdict against the Treaty from the country and besides, I sincerely believe that the advent of the Opposition, as it is now constituted, to power would greatly damage the future of Confederation."

Extract from a letter Sir John A. Macdonald wrote at the time to Dr. Tupper.(Sir John A.'s assistant and later short term Prime Minister (1896):."I must say that I am greatly disappointed at the course taken by the British Commissioners. They seem to have only one thing on their minds, that is, to go home with a Treaty in their pockets, settling everything, no matter at what cost to Canada. ... The effect which must be produced on the public mind in Canada by a declaration from both parties in the Imperial Parliament against our course, will greatly prejudice the idea of British connections, as British connection will have proved itself a farce. I do not like to look at the consequences, but we are so clearly in the right that we must throw the responsibility on England".

Victoria, by the grace of God, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc. etc. etc., To all and singular to whom these Presents shall come, Greetings. 
    Whereas, for the purpose of discussing in a friendly spirit with Commissioners to be appointed on the part of Our Good Friends the United States of America, the various questions on which differences have arisen between Us and Our said Good Friends the United States of America, and of treating for an Agreement as to the mode of their amicable settlement, We have judged it expedient to invest fit persons with full power to conduct on Our part the discussions in this behalf: Know ye, therefore, that We, reposing especial trust and confidence in the wisdom, loyalty, diligence, and circumspection of Our right trusty and right well-beloved Cousin and Councillor George Frederick Samuel, Earl de Grey and Ripon, Viscount Goderich, a Peer of Our United Kingdom, President of Our Most Honourable Privy Council, Knight of Our Most Noble Order of the Garter, etc, etc, of Our right trusty and well beloved Councillor Sir Stafford Henry Northcote, Baronet, a Member of Parliament, Companion of Our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, etc, etc,; of Our trusty and well-beloved, Sir Edward Thornton, Knight Commander of Our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Our Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Our Good Friends the United States of America, etc, etc, of our Trusty and well beloved.Sir John Alexander Macdonald, Knight Commander of Our Most Honourable Order of the Bath, a Member of Our.(Britain's).Privy Council.for Canada, Minister of Justice and Attorney General in Our Dominion of Canada, etc, etc., and of Our trusty and well beloved Montague Bernard, Esquire, Chichele Professor of International Law in the University of Oxford; — have named, made, constituted, and appointed, as We do by these presents name, make, constitute, and appoint them Our undoubted High Commissioners, Procurators, and Plenipotentiaries: Giving to them, or to any three or more of them, all manner of power and authority to treat, adjust, and conclude with such Minister or Ministers as may be vested with similar power and authority on the part of Our Good Friends the United States of America, any Treaties, Conventions, or Agreements that may tend to the attainment of the above mentioned end, and to sign for Us and in Our name everything so agreed upon and concluded, and to do and transact all such other matters as may appertain to the finishing of the aforesaid work in as ample manner and form, and with equal force and efficacy, as We Ourselves could do if personally present: Engaging and promising upon Our Royal Word, that whatever things shall be so transacted and concluded by Our said High Commissioners, Procurators and Plenipotentiaries shall be agreed to, acknowledged, and accepted by Us in the fullest manner, and that We will never suffer, either in the whole or in part, any person whatsoever to infringe the same, or act contrary thereto, as far as it lies in Our power. 
    In witness whereof.We have caused the Great Seal of Our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland to be affixed to these Presents, which We have signed with Our Royal Hand. 

Given at Our Court at Windsor Castle, the sixteenth day of February in the year of Our Lord.one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one, and in the thirty-fourth year of Our reign.
. PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES, 3 SERIES, CCIV. page 2046