|WikiProject Canada / Ontario||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Politics / Political parties||(Rated Start-class)|
Do double spaces even show up after periods? I know I type them out of habit (I just did right there), but I never see them afterwards. And, just out of curiosity, why are they annoying? Adam Bishop 18:56 7 Jul 2003 (UTC)
This phrase is also used commonly in Toronto to describe the various ways the Law Society of Upper Canada and Liberal Party of Ontario have set up a legalized monopoly over certain aspects of the legal system, which are in effect under the control of a very small number of people and law firms that have many of "the right family names". This modern usage should be dealt with.
- That's a good idea...you should mention it yourself, if you want :) Adam Bishop 18:33, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Isn't there also a play called "The Family Compact?" I believe it was written by Hugh Scobie. Does anyone ahve any informantion regarding this play?
Isn't there also a play called "The Family Compact?" I believe it was written by Hugh Scobie. Does anyone have any information regarding this play?
Neutrality of this article is questionable
I have some doubts about the neutrality of this article. The opening para in particular. While the Family Compact was doubtless not a paragon of virtue, to call it an oligarchy with closed admission is really going a bit too far. In fact, there is evidence that the Family Compact was quite willing to engage new members, given that the new member presented himself through the usual channels. I think the Family Compact was likely not worse and no better than any other informal political organization of the day. CJ_WeißSchäfer 20:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CJ3370 (talk • contribs)
This topic is written like a prime example of Whig History http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Whig_history&oldid=548601942 and does not take into account the bigger themes and events or the impact of social, demographic, economic or political developments elsewhere in the British Empire that had a major influence on the governing of the colony, including the reasons for the very existence of that 'thing' called "Loyalists." — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeInOttawa (talk • contribs) 01:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
This section should be updated based on recent scholarship. Even by 1965-1975, the Canadian establishment was dominated by the descendants of "yeomen" settlers, e.g., the Masseys, Eatons, and of course the descendants of other colonial elites (e.g., from Quebec) should be mentioned. TFD (talk) 14:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
"The loyalist tradition included its class structure society and amongst the elite, such as John Beverley Robinson and John Strachan, it was considered the ideal. "
If someone could rewrite this into comprehensible English, that would be great. It looks like it's been garbled somehow, or maybe badly translated from another language? It's not clear at all what it's supposed to mean. --Jfruh (talk) 20:07, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, that was gibberish! Not at all sure how that happened, but I've re-written a more comprehensible sentence. Thanks for catching that CJ_WeißSchäfer
Present: reference to Canadian Club (presumably)
I have added a citation needed tag to the last sentence of this section. Perhaps amusing, it is may not be useful, true or noteworthy content. Unless this is fixed in a month or so, I'll delete this. Cheers! SuW (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)