To be consistent with other former jurisdictions that now reside in countries in the main list, since territory is now all within Australia, should Hutt River be moved in the Coin and Banknote catalogues to sub-issuer status under Australia? The fact that it was a micronation should have no effect on this decision.
No, it shoudn't, just like Hawai'i should not have been moved under the United States and Newfoundland should not have been moved under Canada. When they made their coins, they were not part of the country they are apart of now. The fact that they became part of a bigger country later changes nothing about the sovereign status they had when they made their coins.
The problem here is that it never was not a part of Australia just because a nutcase says otherwise doesn't make it true. Regardless why give it more credibility then it ever had by moving it in an official country list, keep it in the imaginary land / tourist attraction section.
Quote: "Idolenz"The problem here is that it never was not a part of Australia just because a nutcase says otherwise doesn't make it true. Regardless why give it more credibility then it ever had by moving it in an official country list, keep it in the imaginary land / tourist attraction section.
I totally agree with you. The guy that thought he was some kind of King was actually just a farmer with a grudge against the Government.
Cheers Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
