text:
Maurice Benyovszky

Count Maurice Benyovszky de Benyó et Urbanó (Benyovszky Máté Móric Mihály Ferenc Szerafin Ágost; Maurycy Beniowski; Móric Beňovský; 20 September 1746 – 24 May 1786) was a military officer, adventurer, and writer from the Kingdom of Hungary, who described himself as both a Hungarian and a Pole. He is considered a national hero in Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia.

Benyovszky was born and raised in Verbó, Kingdom of Hungary (present-day Vrbové, Slovakia). In 1769, while fighting for the Polish armies under the Bar Confederation, he was captured by the Russians and exiled to Kamchatka. He subsequently escaped and returned to Europe via Macau and Mauritius, arriving in France. In 1773, Benyovszky reached agreement with the French government to establish a trading post on Madagascar. Facing significant problems with the climate, the terrain, and the native Sakalava people, he abandoned the trading post in 1776.

Benyovszky then returned to Europe, joined the Austrian Army and fought in the War of the Bavarian Succession. After a failed venture in Fiume (present-day Rijeka), he travelled to America and obtained financial backing for a second voyage to Madagascar. The French governor of Mauritius sent a small armed force to close down his operation, and Benyovszky was killed in May 1786.

In 1790, Benyovszky's posthumous and largely fictitious account of his adventures, entitled Memoirs and Travels of Mauritius Augustus Count de Benyowsky, Volume 1 and Volume 2 was published to great success.

Biography
Benyovszky's autobiographical Memoirs of 1790 makes many claims about his life. Critics from 1790 onwards have shown that many of these are either false or are highly questionable. Not the least is Benyovszky's opening statement that he was born in 1741, rather than 1746 – a birth-date which allowed him to claim having fought in the Seven Years' War with the rank of lieutenant and having studied navigation. The following biographical account includes only those facts which are (or could yet be) corroborated by other sources. It should also be noted here that, although Benyovszky freely used the titles "Baron" and "Count" for himself throughout his Memoirs and in correspondence up to 1776, he was never a "Baron" (his mother was the daughter of one) and he only became a "Count" in 1778.

Early years

Maurice Benyovszky was born on 20 September 1746 in the town of Verbó (present-day Vrbové near Trnava, Slovakia). He was baptised under the Latin names Mattheus Mauritius Michal Franciscus Seraphinus (Hungarian: Máté Móric Mihály Ferenc Szerafin). The additional name Augustus (Ágost) may also have been given, but this is not clear on his baptismal record.

Maurice was the son of Sámuel Benyovszky, who came from Turóc County in the Kingdom of Hungary (today partially Turiec region, in present-day Slovakia) and is said to have served as a colonel in the Hussars of the Austrian Army. His mother, Rozália Révay, was the daughter of a baron from the noble Hungarian Révay family; she was the great-granddaughter of Péter Révay, and the daughter of Count Boldizsár Révay de Szklabina. When she married Sámuel Benyovszky, she was the widow of an army general (Josef Pestvarmegyey, d.1743).

Maurice was the eldest of four children born to Sámuel and Rozália: he had one sister, Márta, and two brothers, Ferenc (1753–?) and Emánuel (1755–1799). Both brothers followed military careers. In addition, there were three step-sisters and one step-brother, born to Rozália from her previous marriage – Theresia (1735–1763), Anna (b. pre-1743), Borbála (b. 1740), and Peter (b. 1743).

Maurice spent his childhood in the Benyovszky mansion in Verbó and studied from 1759 to 1760 at the Piarist College in Szentgyörgy (present-day Svätý Jur), a suburb of Pressburg (present-day Bratislava). When both his parents died in 1760, the family home and estate was the subject of litigation between the two sets of siblings.

His mother tongue was Hungarian. Though no birth records have survived, his name in the records of the Szentgyörgy college appeared as a Hungarian nobleman, but for unknown reasons the following year's data were re-written to Slovak with a different handwriting.

Marriage and military service
In 1765 Benyovszky occupied his mother's property in Hrusó (present-day Hrušové) near Verbó, which had been legally inherited by one of his step-brothers-in-law. This action led his mother's family to file a criminal complaint against him, and he was called to stand trial in Nyitra (present-day Nitra). Before the conclusion of the trial, Benyovszky fled to Poland to join his uncle, Jan Tibor Benyowski de Benyo, a Polish nobleman. His flight violated a legal edict forbidding him to leave the country.

He was arrested in July 1768 in Szepesszombat (present-day Spišská Sobota), a suburb of Poprád (present-day Poprad) in the house of a German butcher named Hönsch for trying to organize a Confederation of Bar militia. Shortly after his arrest, Benyovszky was briefly imprisoned in the nearby Stará Ľubovňa castle. At around this time, he married the daughter of this butcher, Anna Zusanna Hönsch (1750–1826). A child, Samuel, was born to this marriage on 9 December 1768 (d. Poprad, 22 September 1772.)

Three other children later came from this marriage: Charles Maurice Louis Augustus (b.1774?, Madagascar?, d. 11 July 1774, Madagascar); Roza (b. 1 January 1779, Beczko, Hungary; d. 26 October 1816, Vieszka, Hungary); and Zsofia, (b. after 1779).

Prisoner-of-war in Siberia
This period of Benyovszky's life has only been documented by Benyovszky himself, in his autobiographical Memoirs. There exists no independent verification of his life in the period between July 1768 and September 1770.

In July 1768, Benyovszky travelled to Poland to join the patriotic forces of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, who had organised resistance in the Confederation of Bar (Konfederacja Barska), a movement in rebellion against Polish king Stanisław August Poniatowski, lately installed by Russia. In April 1769, he was captured by the Russian forces near Ternopil in the Ukraine, imprisoned in the town of Polonne, before being transferred to Kiev in July, and finally to Kazan in September. An escape attempt from Kazan brought him to St Petersburg in November, where he was recaptured and sent to the far east of Siberia as a prisoner. In the company of several other exiles and prisoners – most notably the Swede August Winbladh, and the Russian army-officers Vasilii Panov, Asaf Baturin and Ippolit Stepanov, all of whom played a major role in Benyovszky's life in the next two years – he reached Bolsheretsk, at that time the administrative capital of Kamchatka, in September 1770.

Escape from Kamchatka
Over the next few months, Benyovszky and Stepanov, along with other exiles and disaffected residents of Kamchatka, organised an escape. From the list of those who participated in the escape (70 men, women, and children), it is evident that the majority were not prisoners or exiles of any sort, but just ordinary working people of Kamchatka. At the start of May, an armed uprising by the group overcame the garrison of Bolsheretsk, during which the commander, Grigorii Nilov, was killed. The supply ship St Peter and St Paul, which had been overwintering in Kamchatka, was seized and loaded with furs and provisions. On 23 May (Old Style: 12 May), the ship set sail from the mouth of the Bolsha River, and headed southwards.

Benyovszky's Memoirs state that the route taken by the ship, having rounded the southernmost point of Kamchatka, was generally north and eastwards, taking in Bering Island, the Bering Strait, Alaska, and the Aleutian Islands. However, in the time available (four weeks according to Benyovszky's own account), this 6000-mile itinerary is barely credible for a leaky ship and inexperienced crew. Such a route is completely absent from three other separate accounts of the voyage (by Ippolit Stepanov, Ivan Ryumin, and Gerasim Izmailov ). Additionally, some of the events described by Benyovszky are so implausible that the entire voyage in this area must be considered a fiction.

The ship landed at the island of Simushir in the Kuril Islands chain, and stayed there between 29 May and 9 June to bake bread and take stock of their supplies and cargo. During this time, the sailor Izmailov who was judged to be organising a mutiny and two other Kamchatkans were left on the island when the ship finally sailed southwards. Izmailov subsequently carved out a career as an explorer and trader in the Aleutians and the Alaskan coast, providing information to Captain James Cook in the summer of 1778.

Their next known port of call was at Sakinohama on the island of Shikoku in Japan, where they rested between 19 and 23 July, and in the following days at Oshima island in Awa Province. Here the voyagers managed to trade with villagers, despite this being expressly forbidden by the Japanese authorities.

Taiwan
At the end of July, they landed on Amami-Oshima in the Ryükyü islands, where they also traded successfully. At the end of August they arrived on the island of Formosa (present-day Taiwan), probably at Black Rock Bay, where three of the voyagers were killed during a fight with native islanders.

According to a 1790 English translation of the Memoirs, an eighteen-person party landed on Taiwan's eastern shores in 1771. They met a few people and asked them for food. They were taken to a village and fed rice, pork, lemons, and oranges. They were offered a few knives. While making their way back to the ship, they were hit by arrows. The party fired back and killed six attackers. Near their ship, they were ambushed again by 60 warriors. They defeated their attackers and captured five of them. Benyovszky wanted to leave but his associates insisted on staying. A larger landing party rowed ashore a day later and were met by 50 unarmed locals. The party headed to the village and slaughtered 200 locals while eleven of the party members were injured. They then left and headed north with the guidance of locals.

Upon reaching a "beautiful harbor" they met Don Hieronemo Pacheco, a Spaniard who had been living among the aborigines for seven to eight years. The locals were grateful toward Benyovszky for killing the villagers, who they considered their enemies. Pacheco told Benyovszky that the western side of the island was ruled by the Chinese but the rest was independent or inhabited by aborigines. Pacheco told Benyovszky that it would take very little to conquer the island and drive out the Chinese. On the third day, Benyovszky was calling the harbor "Port Maurice" after himself. Conflict broke out again as the party was fetching fresh water and three members were killed. The party executed their remaining prisoners and slaughtered a boatful of the enemies. By the end, they had killed 1,156 and captured 60 aborigines. They were visited by a prince named Huapo who believed Benyovszky was prophesied to free them from the "Chinese yoke." With Benyovszky's arms, Huapo then defeated his Chinese aligned foes. Huapo gifted Benyovszky's crew with gold and other valuables to try to get them to stay but Benyovszky wanted to go so that he could see his wife and son.

There are reasons to suspect this account of events is either exaggerated or fabricated. Benyovszky's exploits have been questioned by several experts over the years. Ian Inkster's "Orientat Enlightenment: The Problematic Military Claims of Count Maurice Auguste Conte de Benyowsky in Formosa during 1771" criticizes the Taiwan section specifically. The population of Taiwan given by Benyovszky's account is inconsistent with estimates of that time. The stretch of coast he visited likely only had 6,000 to 10,000 inhabitants but somehow the prince was able to gather 25,000 warriors to fight 12,000 enemies. Even in Father de Mailla's account of Taiwan in 1715, in which he portrayed the Chinese in a very negative manner, and spoke of the entire east being in rebellion against the west, the aborigines were still unable to put up a fighting force of more than 30 or 40 armed with arrows and javelins. Huaco was also mentioned to have nearly 100 horsemen while having 68 to spare for the European party's use. Horses were introduced to Taiwan starting in the Dutch period but it is highly unlikely that aborigines of the northeast coast had acquired so many that they could train them for large scale warfare. In other 18th century accounts, it was mentioned that horses were in such scarce supply that Chinese oxen were used as substitutes.

Macao
Then they sailed to the Chinese mainland, at Dongshan Island. Following the coast down from there, they finally arrived at Macao on 22 September 1771.

Shortly after their arrival in Macao, 15 of the voyagers died, most likely from the effects of malnutrition. Benyovszky took responsibility for selling the ship and all the furs they had loaded at Kamchatka, and then negotiated with the various European trading establishments for passage back to Europe. In late January 1772, two French ships took the survivors away from Macao. Some of them (13) stopped on the island of Mauritius, others died en route (8), and the remainder (26) landed at the French port of Lorient in July.

First expedition to Madagascar
Benyovszky managed to get a passport to enter the mainland of France and he departed almost immediately for Paris, leaving his companions behind. Over the next months, he toured the ministries and salons of Paris, hoping to persuade someone to fund a trading expedition to one of the several places he claimed to have visited. Eventually, he managed to convince the French Foreign Minister d'Aiguillon and the Navy Secretary de Boynes to fund an expedition of Benyovszky and a large group of ‘Benyovszky Volunteers’, to set up a French colony on Madagascar.

This expedition arrived in Madagascar in November 1773 and were fully established there by the end of March 1774. They set up a trading-post at Antongil on the east coast and began to negotiate with the islanders for cattle and other supplies. It does not appear to have gone well, since the explorer Kerguelen arrived there shortly afterwards to discover that the Malagasy claimed Benyovszky was at war with them: supplies were therefore hard to come by. A ship which called in at Antongil in July 1774 reported that 180 of the original 237 ordinary ‘Volunteers’ had died, and 12 of their 22 officers, all taken by sickness. A year later, despite reinforcements, personnel numbers were still dwindling.

Benyovszky's Memoirs state that a son (Charles) was born to him and his wife Anna at some point during 1773 or 1774, and that the son died of fever in July 1774, though this is not verified anywhere else.

Despite these setbacks, over the following two years, Benyovszky sent back to Paris positive reports of his advances in Madagascar, along with requests for more funding, supplies, and personnel. The French authorities and traders on Mauritius, meanwhile, were also writing to Paris, complaining of the problems which Benyovszky was causing for their own trade with Madagascar. In September 1776, Paris sent out two government inspectors to see what Benyovszky had achieved. Their report was damning – little remained of any of the roads, hospitals or trading-posts of which Benyovszky had boasted. Benyovszky's own journal of events upon Madagascar suggests great successes against a recalcitrant people, who eventually proclaimed him to be their supreme chief and King (Ampansacabe); however, this sits at odds with his own reports (and those of the inspectors) of unceasing troubles and minor wars against those same people. In December 1776, just after the government inspectors had departed, Benyovszky left Madagascar. Following the arrival of the inspectors’ report in Paris, the few surviving ‘Benyovszky Volunteers’ were disbanded in May 1778 and the trading post was eventually dismantled by order of the French government in June 1779.

Europe and America
After leaving Madagascar, Benyovszky arrived back in France in April 1777. He managed to be granted a medal (Order of St Louis) and considerable amounts of money in back-pay, and lobbied the ministers for more money and resources for a different development plan for Madagascar. When this plan was turned down, he then petitioned Empress Maria Theresa of Austria for a pardon (for having fled Hungary for Poland in 1768) and made his way to Hungary where he received the title of ‘Count’ (a title he had been misusing, along with ‘Baron’, for several years before). In July 1778 he joined the Austrian forces fighting in the War of the Bavarian Succession – in which his brother Emanuel was also fighting – and then in early 1780 he formed a plan to develop the port of Fiume (present-day Rijeka) as a major trading-port for Hungary. He was here until the end of 1781, when he abandoned the project, leaving behind several large debts. He then made his way to the United States and, with a recommendation from Benjamin Franklin, whom he had met in Paris, attempted to persuade George Washington to fund a militia under Benyovszky's leadership, to fight in the American War of Independence. (His brother Ferenc was also at that time in America, fighting as a mercenary against the British). Washington remained unconvinced, and Benyovszky then returned to Europe, arriving in Britain in late 1783. Here he submitted a proposal to the British government for a colony on Madagascar, but was again turned down. Instead he managed to persuade the Royal Society of London luminary Jean Hyacinthe de Magellan to fund an independent expedition; in return, Magellan received full publishing rights over the manuscript of Benyovszky's Memoirs, and the grand title of ‘European Plenipotentiary’ for Benyovszky's new trading company. In September 1783, Benyovszky also acquired a document signed by Emperor Joseph II of Austria, which gave Benyovszky Austrian protection for the exploitation and government of Madagascar.

Second expedition to Madagascar
In April 1784, Benyovszky and several trading partners sailed to America, where a contract was agreed to with two Baltimore traders, Zollichofer and Meissonier. The deal was for monetary investment in return for a regular supply of slaves. In October of that year, the ship Intrepid sailed for Madagascar, arriving near Cap St Sebastien in north-west of the island, June 1785. Here the expedition was met with aggression from the Sakalava people; Benyovszky and a number of others were captured and disappeared, presumed dead. The surviving members of the company sailed for Mozambique, sold the ship and dispersed.

In January 1786, however, Benyovszky was reported to be alive and operating at Angonsty (near modern-day Ambohitralanana). Anxious about another disruption to trade, François de Souillac, the French governor of Mauritius waited for fair winds and then sent a small military force over to Madagascar to deal with Benyovszky. On 23 or 24 May 1786, Benyovszky was ambushed and killed by these troops, and was buried on the site of his encampment. (Most biographies cite 23 May based on the statement by Benyovszky's 1790 editor William Nicholson, but French sources documented by Prosper Cultru cite 24 May.)

The Warsaw newspaper Gazeta Warszawska, in its edition of 1 December 1787, reported that the famous Hungarian Baron Beniowski, who was said so many times to have died, was at that time in Vienna, where he had come from Istanbul. However, since there is no further report of Benyovszky being alive, this report was most likely a false rumour or misunderstanding.

Legacy
Much of what Benyovszky claimed to have done in Poland, Kamchatka, Japan, Formosa, and Madagascar is questionable at best, but in any case has left no lasting traces in the history of war, exploration, or colonialism. His legacy resides largely in his autobiography (Memoirs and Travels of Mauritius Augustus Count de Benyowsky), which was published in two volumes in 1790 by friends of Magellan, who was by then, as a result of the failed Malagasy venture, in serious financial difficulties. Even at the time of the first publication of the book, it was met with significant scepticism by reviewers. Despite this criticism, it was a great publishing success, and has since been translated into several languages; (German 1790, 1791, 1796, 1797; Dutch 1791; French 1791; Swedish 1791; Polish 1797; Slovak 1808; and Hungarian 1888).

The Kamchatkan portion of Memoirs was adapted into a number of successful plays and operas (plays by Kotzebue 1792 and Vulpius 1794 and Operas by Boieldieu 1800 and Doppler 1847) which were performed in suitable translation all over Europe and America. The Polish national bard Juliusz Słowacki published a poem about him in 1841. More recently, films and television series have been made – a Slovak-Hungarian television series in 1975 (Vivát Benyovszky!, director: Igor Ciel), “Die unfreiwilligen Reisen des Moritz August Benjowski“ (a television series in four episodes, director: Helmut Pigge, aired by the German ZDF in 1975), a documentary for Hungarian TV in 2009 (Benyovszky Móric és a malgasok földje, director: Zsolt Cseke), and a Hungarian film Benyovszky, the Rebel Count of 2012 (director Irina Stanciulescu).

In Hungary, Slovakia and Poland he is still celebrated as a significant national hero. A Hungarian-Malagasy Friendship organisation promotes the links between Benyovszky and Madagascar, arranges conferences and other meetings, and maintains a website dedicated to the celebration of Benyovszky's life. The Polish writer Arkady Fiedler visited Madagascar in 1937, spent several months in the town of Ambinanitelo and later wrote a popular travel book describing his experiences. In it, he gives a romanticised version of Benyovszky's career. The Hungarian writer Miklós Rónaszegi also wrote a book about him in 1955, titled The Great Game (A Nagy Játszma).

Fiedler appears to have made an effort to find out if Benyovszky was still remembered by the island's people – with mixed results. In fact his name did survive in Madagascar – in recent years, a street in the island capital Antananarivo was renamed 'Lalana Benyowski'. Slovakians reportedly tore down his memorial in Madagascar built by Hungarians and replaced it with their own, aiming to Slovakize the character.

title: Maurice Benyovszky


text:
Lubań County

Lubań County (powiat lubański) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 428.2 km2. Its administrative seat and largest town is Lubań. The county also contains the towns of Olszyna, Leśna and Świeradów-Zdrój.

As at 2006 the total population of the county is 54,493, out of which the population of Lubań is 21,087, that of Leśna is 4,439, that of Olszyna is 4,348, that of Świeradów-Zdrój is 4,147, and the rural population is 20,472.

Neighbouring counties
Lubań County is bordered by Zgorzelec County to the west, Bolesławiec County to the north-east and Lwówek Śląski County to the east. It also borders the Czech Republic to the south.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into seven gminas (two urban, two urban-rural and three rural). These are listed in the following table, in descending order of population.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Lubań County


text:
Lubin County

Lubin County (powiat lubiński) (German:Lüben Kreis) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 712 km2. Its administrative seat and largest town is Lubin, and its only other town is Ścinawa.

As of 2019 the total population of the county is 106,211, out of which the population of Lubin is 72,428, the population of Ścinawa is 5,582, and the rural population is 28,201.

Neighbouring counties
Lubin County is bordered by Głogów County to the north, Góra County to the north-east, Wołów County to the east, Legnica County to the south and Polkowice County to the north-west.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into four gminas (one urban, one urban-rural and two rural). These are listed in the table below, in descending order of population.

title: Lubin County


text:
Milicz County

Milicz County (powiat milicki) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 715 km2. Its administrative seat and only town is Milicz.

As of 2019 the total population of the county is 37,003, out of which the population of Milicz is 11,304 and the rural population is 25,699.

The Milicz County is made up of three boroughs: Milicz, Krośnice, and Cieszków. The county is famous for its forests and ponds. The Milicz Ponds built in the 13th century by the Cistercian monks are nowadays the biggest centre of carp-culture in Poland. The unique flora and fauna of this region were the main reason for which the Nature Centre "the Barycz Valley" was set up here. The Milicz County provides suitable conditions for development of small and average businesses. The county possesses also many grounds prepared for investments - in order to encourage new investors, the local authorities offer them tax privileges. The most important investment carried out over the last few years is the enlargement of the local hospital. The institution opened in 1999 is now a modern establishment providing patients with medical services. The hospital, which has 240 beds at its disposal, possesses 9 common and specialistic departments. The institution has also specialistic dispensaries offering services in the fields of common surgery, traumatology, orthopaedic surgery, gynaecology, allergology, ophthalmology and treatment of glaucoma, otolaryngology, treatment of tuberculosis, and illnesses of lungs.

Neighbouring counties
Milicz County is bordered by Krotoszyn County to the north, Ostrów Wielkopolski County to the east, Oleśnica County and Trzebnica County to the south, and Rawicz County to the west.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into three gminas (one urban-rural and two rural). These are listed in the table below, in decreasing order of population.

title: Milicz County


text:
Lwówek County

Lwówek County (powiat lwówecki) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 709.9 km2. Its administrative seat is the town of Lwówek Śląski, and it also contains the towns of Gryfów Śląski, Mirsk, Wleń and Lubomierz.

As of 2019 the total population of the county is 45,975, the most populated towns are Lwówek Śląski with 8,869 inhabitants and Gryfów Śląski with 6,636 inhabitants.

Neighbouring counties
Lwówek County is bordered by Lubań County to the west, Bolesławiec County to the north, Złotoryja County to the east and Jelenia Góra County to the south. It also borders the Czech Republic to the south.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into five gminas (all of them urban-rural, centred on the five towns). These are listed in the following table, in descending order of population.

title: Lwówek County


text:
Kazusa Province

Kazusa Province (上総国) was a province of Japan in the area of modern Chiba Prefecture. The province was located in the middle of the Bōsō Peninsula, whose name takes its first kanji from the name of Awa Province and its second from Kazusa and Shimōsa provinces. Its abbreviated form name was Sōshū (総州) or Nansō (南総). The borders of Kazusa Province were defined by Shimōsa Province to the north, the Pacific Ocean to the east, Awa Province to the south, and Tokyo Bay to the west. Kazusa was classified as one of the provinces of the Tōkaidō. Under the Engishiki classification system, Kazusa was ranked as a "great country" (大国) and a "far country" in relation to its distance from the capital (遠国). Along with Kōzuke and Hitachi, it was originally one of the provinces where an imperial prince was nominally assigned as governor.

Early history
Kazusa was originally part of a larger territory known as Fusa Province (総国, occasionally 捄国), which was divided into "upper" and “lower” portions (i.e. Kazusa and Shimōsa) during the reign of Emperor Kōtoku (645–654). It was well known to the Imperial Court in Nara -period Japan for its fertile lands, and is mentioned in Nara period records as having supplied hemp to the Court. Kazusa was divided into 15 counties, of which the four counties comprising the district of Awa were separated in 718 into a separate province. The exact location of the capital of Kazusa is not precisely known, but is believed to have been somewhere within the borders of the modern city of Ichihara, Chiba. The ruins of the kokubun-ji, or provincial temple, of Kazusa has been located in the Sōza district of Ichihara. The kokubun-ji was first excavated in 1949, and is on a plateau 30 m above the Yōrō River in close proximity to Tokyo Bay. The site is protected as a Designated Historic Site of Japan. However, the Ichinomiya of Kazusa Province is the Tamasaki Shrine in what is now the town of Ichinomiya, Chiba, on the opposite coast of the province.

During the Heian period, the province was divided into numerous shōen controlled by local samurai clans, primarily the Chiba clan, which sided with Minamoto no Yoritomo in the Genpei War. During the Kamakura period, much of the province was under the control of the Ashikaga clan. By the early Muromachi period, the area was a highly contested region highly fragmented by various samurai clans. However, by the Sengoku period, the Satomi clan had gained control over much of Awa, Kazusa and Shimōsa provinces.

The Satomi provided only lukewarm support to Toyotomi Hideyoshi during the Battle of Odawara against the Later Hōjō clan and were subsequently deprived of their holdings in Kazusa and Shimōsa. After the installation of Tokugawa Ieyasu in Edo, Kazusa became part of the Tokugawa clan holdings, and Tokugawa hereditary retainer Honda Tadakatsu was promoted to daimyō of Ōtaki Domain (50,000 koku).

Edo period
During the Edo period, several small domains were created within the borders of Kazusa, most of which continued to be retained as tenryō territory owned directly by the shōgun and administered by various hatamoto. The entire province had an assessed revenue of 425,080 koku.

Abolishment
Following the Boshin War, Jōzai Domain was abolished for its opposition to the Meiji Restoration, and six minor domains were created for daimyō dispossessed with the creation of Sunpu Domain for the ex-shōgun Tokugawa Yoshinobu. These various domains and tenryō territories were transformed into short-lived prefectures in July 1871 by the abolition of the han system, and the entire territory of Kazusa Province became part of the new Chiba Prefecture on June 15, 1873.

Historical districts
The area of former Kazusa Province was organized into nine districts by the Meiji period cadastral reforms, later reduced to five:
 * Chiba Prefecture
 * Amaha District (ja:天羽郡) - merged with Mōda and Sue Districts to become Kimitsu District (ja: 君津郡) on April 1, 1897
 * Ichihara District (ja:市原郡) - dissolved
 * Isumi District (ja: 夷隅郡)
 * Kamihabu District (ja:上埴生郡) - merged with Nagara District to become Chōsei District (ja: 長生郡) on April 1, 1897
 * Mōda District (ja:望陀郡) - merged with Amaha and Sue Districts to become Kimitsu District on April 1, 1897
 * Musha District (ja:武射郡) - merged with Yamabe District to become Sanbu District (ja: 山武郡) on April 1, 1897
 * Nagara District (ja:長柄郡) - merged with Kamihabu District to become Chōsei District on April 1, 1897
 * Sue District (ja:周淮郡) - merged with Amaha and Mōda Districts to become Kimitsu District on April 1, 1897
 * Yamabe District (ja:山辺郡) - merged with Musha District to become Sanbu District on April 1, 1897

title: Kazusa Province


text:
Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington

Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington, (1673 – 2 July 1743) was a British Whig statesman who served continuously in government from 1715 until his death in 1743. He sat in the English and British House of Commons between 1698 and 1728, and was then raised to the peerage and sat in the House of Lords. He served as the prime minister of Great Britain from 1742 until his death in 1743. He is considered to have been Britain's second prime minister, after Robert Walpole, but worked closely with the Secretary of State, Lord Carteret, in order to secure the support of the various factions making up the government.

Early life and education
Spencer Compton was born in 1673 in Compton Wynyates, a Tudor castle in Warwickshire. He was the third son of James Compton, 3rd Earl of Northampton, who fought for the royalists during the English Civil War and his wife Mary Noel, daughter of Baptist Noel, 3rd Viscount Campden. His father died in 1681 when Spencer was young and his brother, George Compton, become the sole beneficiary of the family's estates. Spencer was educated at St Paul's School and matriculated at Trinity College, Oxford on 28 February 1690, aged 15; thereafter he was admitted into Middle Temple in 1687.

English House of Commons
Although his family were High Tories, Compton turned to the Whigs after a quarrel with his brother, the 4th Earl of Northampton. He first stood for Parliament at East Grinstead on the interest of his kinsman the Earl of Dorset  at the 1695 English general election but was unsuccessful. He was returned unopposed as Member of Parliament for Eye at a by-election on 3 June 1698. In Parliament he soon stood out as prominent amongst the Whigs and began a partnership with Robert Walpole that would last for over forty years. Compton was returned unopposed for Eye at the two general elections of 1701 and in 1702 and 1705.

Paymaster of Pensions
In 1707 Compton became Paymaster of Pensions, a post that he retained for the next six years. He was returned unopposed again at the 1708 British general election and was particularly active in Parliament thereafter. He remained as chairman of the committee of privileges and elections, and was a teller on the Whig side in many divisions. He managed several bills and on 14 December 1709 was nominated to the committee to draw up the articles of impeachment against Dr Sacheverell. At the 1710 British general election he was dropped as a candidate for Eye by his patron Lord Cornwallis after a disagreement, and he was unwilling to risk standing anywhere else because of his involvement with the Sacheverell case. However he retained his post as Paymaster of Pensions after the Tory government took office in that year. It is believed that the Tories retained him because they sought to maintain the support of the Compton family. At the 1713 British general election he was returned as Whig MP for East Grinstead and when the Whigs took power in 1715 he was hopeful that he would enter a high office.

Speaker of the Commons
Instead of the high political office he had hoped for, Compton received the Court appointment of Treasurer to the Prince of Wales (later George II); shortly afterwards, however, he was unanimously elected as Speaker of the House of Commons. He held this post from 1715 to 1727. In 1716, he was invested a Privy Counsellor. He maintained the role of Speaker despite the split in the Whigs in 1717, in which he joined the Walpole-Townshend alliance and found himself in opposition to the government of the day. He managed to maintain his position though until 1720, when the split ended.

Compton had a reputation for being a lax Speaker, once telling an MP who complained of being interrupted, "No sir, you have a right to speak, but the House have a right to judge whether they will hear you." When Walpole became the leading minister of the day in 1721 there was speculation about his future should George I pass away and be succeeded by his son, who was more favourably inclined towards Compton than Walpole and declared that he would replace the latter with the former on accession. In order to avoid this, Walpole sought to keep Compton on the margins of government, though he was appointed as Paymaster of the Forces, a very lucrative post, from 1722 until 1730. In 1725, Compton entered Walpole's government as Lord Privy Seal and was also created a Knight of the Bath.

Accession of George II
In 1727, George II succeeded to the throne and sought to bring about the change in leadership he had promised. However, Compton was not perceived as a man of great ability. He was described by a contemporary as "a plodding, heavy fellow, with great application but no talents". In particular he proved unable to compete with Walpole's proposals for an allowance for the king. At a meeting between the three, Compton declared he was not up to the task of government. He maintained a hatred of Walpole for the humiliation. With this passed his last serious chance of holding real control over policy, and his influence sharply declined as a result.

House of Lords and Patriot Whigs
In order to remove him from the Commons, Walpole raised Compton to the peerage as Baron Wilmington, of Wilmington in the County of Sussex on 8 January 1728; two years later, on 14 May 1730, he was created Viscount Pevensey, of Pevensey in the County of Sussex and Earl of Wilmington and was appointed Lord President of the Council in December of that year. He became increasingly associated with the Patriot Whigs, those most critical of Walpole, but in Parliament generally stuck to the official line of the ministry. In 1730 he attempted to form a coalition between the Patriot Whigs and the Hanoverian Tories to bring down Walpole, but this failed and he continued in office. However, during the Excise Crisis of 1733, he failed to carry through a threat to resign, after being bought off with the promise to make him a Knight of the Garter, which he duly was. This further weakened any following he still commanded. He served as Lord President until 1742.

He was involved in the creation of the Foundling Hospital in 1739, which was an orphanage for abandoned children. This charity became the capital's most popular way to prove one's philanthropic credentials and had very distinguished Board members (including Wilmington).

Prime Minister
In January 1742, he succeeded Walpole as First Lord of the Treasury and head of the Carteret ministry. Wilmington's time in office was short and undistinguished and he was a poor leader. His opposition controlled the House of Commons so his direct influence was greatly limited. His brief premiership was dominated by dealing with foreign affairs, particularly in the War of the Austrian Succession. His strong work ethic took its toll, and his health gradually deteriorated. He remained in office until his death in 1743, when he was succeeded by the Paymaster of the Forces, Henry Pelham.

Personal life
He bought the East Borne estate in Eastbourne, Sussex in 1724 and renamed it Compton Place. He engaged the architect Colen Campbell (and after Campbell's death William Kent) to rebuild the house. It was completed in 1731.

He never married and died without issue, therefore all his titles became extinct upon his death. Over 1110 items from his "large and valuable library" were auctioned by Christopher Cock over 10 evenings, from to 27 February to 7 March 1733. He was buried at the family seat of Compton Wynyates in Warwickshire. Compton Place passed to his nephew, James Compton, 5th Earl of Northampton.

title: Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington


text:
Bowen, Queensland

Bowen is a coastal town and locality in the Whitsunday Region, Queensland, Australia. In the, the locality of Bowen had a population of 11,205 people.

The locality contains two other towns:
 * Heronvale (-20.107°N, 148.2933°W)
 * Merinda (-20.0164°N, 148.1647°W).

The Abbot Point coal shipping port is also within the locality (-19.8816°N, 148.0795°W).

Geography
Bowen is located on the north-east coast in North Queensland, at exactly twenty degrees south of the equator. Bowen is halfway between Townsville and Mackay, and 1130 km by road from Brisbane.

Bowen sits on a square peninsula, with the Coral Sea to the north, east, and south. To the south-east is Port Denison and Edgecumbe Bay. On the western side, where the peninsula connects with the mainland, the Don River's alluvial plain provides fertile soil that supports a prosperous farming industry.

Merinda is a hinterland town 10.3 km west of the town of Bowen.

The Bruce Highway enters the locality from the east, approaches but does not enter the town of Bowen itself, but then turns west to pass through Merinda before exiting the locality to the north-west. The North Coast railway line follows a similar route, approaching the district from the south and served by the Bowen railway station located to the west of the town. After exiting the station, the line turns northwest over the Don river to its next major stop at Home Hill. At Merinda railway station, there is the junction with the Collinsville-Newlands railway line servicing the Bowen basin Coalfields. The Collinsville-Newlands line extends to the coal-handling port at Abbot Point, also within the locality of Bowen. The railway station servicing the port is the Abbot Point railway station.

Heronvale is a small coastal town 21.6 km by road south of the town of Bowen, accessed via the Bruce Highway and then Heronvale Road.

In the west of the locality is the Mount Aberdeen National Park.

Two of Bowen's main streets are named after officers of the British colonial paramilitary Native Police force. Powell Street is named after Lieutenant Walter David Taylor Powell and Williams Street is named after Lieutenant Ewan G. Williams.

History
Biri (also known as Birri) is a language of Central and North Queensland. Biri refers to a language chain extending from Central Queensland towards Townsville and is often used as a universal name for other languages and/or dialects across the region. The language area includes the towns of Bowen, Ayr, Collinsville and Nebo.

Yuru (also known as Juru, Euronbba, Juru, Mal Mal, Malmal) is an Australian Aboriginal language spoken on Yuru country. The Yuru language region includes the landscape within the local government boundaries of the Shire of Burdekin, including the town of Home Hill.

Captain James Cook named Cape Gloucester on his voyage of exploration up the Australian coast in 1770. This "cape" turned out to be an island, and Gloucester Island dominates the view from Bowen's eastern beaches. Behind the island is a bay that forms an excellent port, which the town came to be built around.

Shipwreck survivor, James Morrill, resided briefly in the area around the year 1850 with the local Aboriginal clan during his seventeen years living as a castaway.

In 1859 Captain Henry Daniel Sinclair led an expedition to the area in response to a reward offered by the colony of New South Wales for finding a port somewhere north of Rockhampton. They came across a "most splendid harbour" which Sinclair named Port Denison after the colonial governor of New South Wales, William Denison. On the shore they found "several acres of ground resembling a garden...full of a vegetable resembling nuts" which the local Aboriginal people had constructed.

On 11 September 1860, George Elphinstone Dalrymple on his naval excursion in the schooner Spitfire to search for the mouth of the Burdekin River, landed in Port Denison. He named and climbed Mount Gordon to survey the region and observed that a river (later named the Don River) traversed a valley just behind Port Denison and into the sea. This river was "lined with camps and bush fires of the natives" indicating "the locality to be very thickly inhabited". The Spitfire continued its exploration north to Magnetic Island, but the surveyors came to the conclusion that the northeastern shore of Port Denison was the most suitable site in the region for settlement especially as the large native wells present in a creek bed there could be utilised as a water supply. On 5 October, Dalrymple again came ashore to appropriate control of these wells. He wrote that: "'As I approached the beach a number of armed natives appeared to wish to dispute our landing, but as the object in view was a necessity, I..formed open line and advanced. The natives..retired at our approach into a small strip of scrub commanding the wells. This we entered in the same order, cleared it and placed sentries..'"

Confident in having secured a beach-head, Dalrymple explored the immediate vicinity near the wells that was to become the town of Bowen. He found a large Aboriginal tomb in the hills behind the beach that was in the form of a raised mound covered in bark with its surroundings swept clean and the paths leading to it closed off with branches. A similar tomb was found on nearby Stone Island. After a few days, Dalrymple and his surveying party on the Spitfire returned south. In 1861, George Elphinstone Dalrymple set out again for the area, leading an overland expedition from Rockhampton, complemented with a naval contingent to rendezvous at Port Denison and establish a permanent settlement. Dalrymple planned this two pronged entry into the area because 'a sudden cooperation of land and sea forces..would either strike terror, which would result in immediate flight, or enable a blow to be struck' against the local Aboriginal people of which many had been seen camped around the harbour. To facilitate this plan, Dalrymple travelled with Lieutenant Williams and six Native Police troopers, while Lieutenant Walter Powell and his troopers travelled on the ships. These ships were the Jeannie Dove and the Santa Barbara under the command of Capt. McDermott.

The maritime group arrived first and waited for Dalrymple's overland party by camping on Stone Island at the mouth of the harbour. Dalrymple's group, which included 140 horses and 121 cattle, arrived on 11 April 1861. He rode down to the area on the foreshore 'beside the native wells' (which was to be the water supply of the settlement) in order 'to clear off the aborigines from the same, should such be necessary' and to signal McDermott's group on Stone Island. The local Aboriginal people had already fled. The settlers on Stone Island then came over to the site and the town of Port Denison was founded. Dalrymple wrote that it was 'Deeply gratifying to me to see the British flag flying over the spot where..a few days ago, the wild aboriginal held undisputed sway', and that the settlement marked 'the advance of another great wave of Anglo-Australian energy'.

Within the first six weeks of colonisation, the Native Police and armed colonists conducted at least six operations against the Aboriginal people in the area, driving them off the land and also pursuing them by sea. In one of these missions, the whole available force in the town was utilised in an engagement where a large group of Aboriginal people were "speedily put to rout with a loss sufficient to teach them a severe and it is hoped, useful lesson." Newspapers published reports that the local Aboriginal population were "wretched caricatures of the human race...faithless stewards of the fine property on which they horde," and that it was "the duty of civilisation to occupy the soil which they disregard and disgrace," and that "force and even severity may be necessary to restrain their brutal disposition." Pastoralists were quick to enter the region through this new port and mark out land acquisitions in the hinterland, while buildings within the township were rapidly constructed.

After Queensland had separated from New South Wales, the town was renamed Bowen after the first Queensland colonial governor, Sir George Bowen. Port Denison Post Office opened in April 1861 and was renamed Bowen by 1865.

Between the 1860s and the 1880s, early colonists and settlers forecasted Bowen as the "capital of a new North Queensland Colony". Relics of this particular ambition can be seen today in Bowen's exacting road grid and town plan, and the avenue-like width of its central streets.

In 1863, settlers in the area encountered a sailor, James Morrill, who had been shipwrecked 17 years previously on a shoal in the Coral Sea. He had made it to the Queensland coast on a makeshift raft with a few companions. The others had all died within two years, but Morrill lived with the local Aborigines in the Townsville area. Rejoining European society after white settlement began in North Queensland, he settled in Bowen. His grave is in the Bowen cemetery.

Bowen State School opened in 1865. Between 1877 and 1922, it operated as two schools: Bowen Boys State School and Bowen Girls and Infants State School. A secondary department was added to Bowen State School in 1928. On 23 January 1961, the secondary department was replaced by Bowen State High School.

St Mary's School was opened on 1 September 1872 by Sister M. Gertrude and Sister M. de Sales, both members of the Sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart founded by Mother Mary MacKillop. Following to ongoing conflict between MacKillop and James Quinn, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Brisbane, over who controlled the schools operated by the Sisters in Queensland, Quinn expelled the sisters from his diocese in 1880 and they returned to South Australia where the order was first established. Quinn established a group of Diocesan Sisters using the name Sisters of the Holy Family who operated the school under Quinn's direct authority until 1885, when the Sisters of Mercy took over the running of the school withSister Mary Modwena Taylor, Sister M. Stanislaus Kostka Harding and Sister M. Winifred Duggan being transferred from The Range Convent School in Rockhampton.

The coral reefs around Bowen are the scene of several shipwrecks, including the SS Gothenburg, which sank in 1875 with a loss of more than 100 lives. Numerous relics of Bowen's history, from the Aboriginal past onwards, are on display at the Bowen Historical Society's museum.

On 22 February 1876, an F5 tornado hit the town, causing large amounts of damage.

The location of the Merinda railway station was influenced by the location of the Merinda meatworks (Bowen) for transportation of workers and distribution of meat products.

In 1894 the Bowen Meatworks operation was started but was often the subject of industrial disputes, changes in management and closures. In 1922, the Meatworks was able to process 150 bullocks per day It was a major source of industry and employment until 1997.

Warden Bend Provisional School opened circa 1891. On 1 January 1909 it became Warden Bend State School. It closed in 1912.

Merinda Provisional School opened in 1898 and became Merinda State School on 1 January 1909.

On Sunday 30 April 1911, the foundation stone was laid for St Mary's Catholic Church. On Sunday 2 December 1912, the church was officially opened by James Murray, the Vicar Apostolic of Cooktown.

On 24 February 2006, Bishop Michael Putney dedicated the current St Mary's in Sinclair Street.

Roseville State School opened on 7 July 1913. It was along the Bowen-to-Proserpine tramway. The school closed on 1939.

Don Delta State School opened on 21 July 1913 and closed in 1964.

Eden Lassie Provisional School opened on 16 October 1916. In 1924 it became Eden Lassie State School. It closed in 1951, but later reopened and closed permanently in 1963. Opened as a provisional school in 1916 and was proclaimed a state school in 1924. It closed in 1951 and reopened before finally closing in 1963.

Twenty-five Mile Camp Provisional School opened on circa 1919. It may have been renamed Aberdeen Provisional School. In 1920 it was renamed Bogie Range Provisional School. It closed circa 1922.

Ballast Pit Provisional School opened on 11 April 1922. On 26 July 1923 it was renamed Bin Bee Provisional School. It closed in July 1927. It was on the Bowen Coalfields railway line.

Inverdon Road State School opened on 4 December 1922 and closed on 2 September 1955. It was at 174 Inverdon Road (-19.9896°N, 148.2119°W).

Queens Beach State School opened on 25 November 1940. Elements of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) have been operating from Bowen for almost two decades, beginning in the late 1920s. Three RAAF flying boat squadrons and one flying boat maintenance unit operated from the shores of Port Denison during World War 2 operating PBY Catalina and Martin Mariner amphibious seaplanes. No.55 (RAAF) Radar Station also operated from Cape Edgecumbe north-east of the town. The concrete seaplane aprons and ramps are still present.

In 1944, Bowen elected a Communist, Fred Paterson, to Queensland Legislative Assembly. He was re-elected in 1947, but lost the seat in 1950 when the boundaries were changed to include Bowen in the seat of Whitsunday.

Bowen State High School opened on 23 January 1961, replacing the secondary department at Bowen State School which had operated since 1 July 1928.

Bowen was the administrative centre for the Shire of Bowen. On 15 March 2008, under the Local Government (Reform Implementation) Act 2007 passed by the Parliament of Queensland on 10 August 2007, the Shire of Bowen merged with the Shire of Whitsunday to form the Whitsunday Region. Although Proserpine is the administrative centre for the new regional council, the council maintains offices in Bowen and holds a number of council meetings in Bowen each year.

Demographics
In the, the locality of Bowen had a population of 10,377 people. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people made up 9.2% of the population. 74.2% of people were born in Australia. The next most common countries of birth were New Zealand 2.4%, England 2.0%, South Korea 1.3%, Philippines 1.1% and Taiwan 1.0%. 81.5% of people only spoke English at home. Other languages spoken at home included Mandarin 1.5% and Korean 1.2%, The most common responses for religion were No Religion 25.8%, Catholic 20.5% and Anglican 17.6%.

In the, the locality of Bowen had a population of 11,205 people.

Heritage listings
Bowen has a number of heritage-listed sites, including:
 * Flemington Road: Flemington Road Cemetery
 * 6 Herbert Street: Bowen Harbour Board Building
 * 46 Herbert Street: Bowen Post Office
 * 29 Kennedy Street: Bowen State School
 * 30 Williams Street: Bowen Courthouse

Economy
The town enjoys a diversified economy primarily based on agriculture, fishing, tourism, and mining. Its dry climate plus its fertile alluvial soil, makes it an ideal place to grow a wide variety of small crops, including tomatoes, rockmelons (i.e., cantaloupes), and capsicums (i.e., bell peppers). Outside the alluvial plain, much of the Bowen area is used for beef cattle.. The Merinda meatworks (Bowen) was a source of employment and economic growth of the town for many years.

Just north of Bowen is the Abbot Point coal loading port. Coal mined inland of Bowen in Collinsville and other towns in the Bowen Basin is brought by rail to a deepwater pier to be loaded on bulk carriers. Coal is exported mainly to China and India.

Education
Bowen State School is a government primary (Early Childhood to Year 6) school for boys and girls at 29 Kennedy Street (-20.0101°N, 148.2438°W). In 2015, it had an enrolment of 480 students with 34 teachers (30 full-time equivalent). In 2018, the school had an enrolment of 448 students with 31 teachers (30 full-time equivalent) and 22 non-teaching staff (15 full-time equivalent). It includes a special education program.

Queens Beach State School is a government primary (Prep–6) school for boys and girls at 39 Tracey Street (-19.9761°N, 148.2271°W). In 2014 (when it was a P-7 school), it had an enrolment of 452 students with 32 teachers (30 full-time equivalent). In 2018, the school had an enrolment of 426 students with 35 teachers (31 full-time equivalent) and 22 non-teaching staff (13 full-time equivalent).

Merinda State School is a government primary (Prep–6) school for boys and girls at Bergl Street (-20.0201°N, 148.1636°W). In 2015, it had an enrolment of 87 students with 7 teachers (5 full-time equivalent). In 2018, the school had an enrolment of 55 students with 4 teachers and 6 non-teaching staff (3 full-time equivalent).

St Mary's Catholic School is a Catholic primary (Prep–6) school for boys and girls at 39 Poole Street (-20.0115°N, 148.2421°W). In 2015, it had an enrolment of 83 students. In 2018, the school had an enrolment of 71 students with 11 teachers (5 full-time equivalent) and 9 non-teaching staff (5 full-time equivalent).

Bowen State High School is a government secondary (7–12) school for boys and girls at 1–9 Argyle Park Road (-19.9991°N, 148.2355°W). In 2015, it had an enrolment of 657 students with 58 teachers (56 full-time equivalent). In 2018, the school had an enrolment of 622 students with 58 teachers (56 full-time equivalent) and 37 non-teaching staff (28 full-time equivalent). It includes a special education program.

TAFE Queensland North is a government co-educational tertiary institute for vocational skills. Its Bowen campus is at 98–158 Queens Road. Before 2013, the Bowen campus was part of the Barrier Reef Institute of TAFE.

Amenities
Whitsunday Regional Council operates Bowen Public Library at 67 Herbert Street. The library opened in 1965 with refurbishments in 1978 and 2012.

Major airlines service Proserpine (Whitsunday Coast) airport located south of Bowen, this is the nearest major airport to the town.

The Bowen branch of the Queensland Country Women's Association meets at the QCWA Hall at 52 Herbert Street (-20.0114°N, 148.2463°W).

St Mary's Catholic Church is in Sinclair Street between Poole Street and Gordon Street (-20.0125°N, 148.2416°W). It is part of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Townsville.

Bowen Uniting Church is at 37 Kennedy Street (-20.0105°N, 148.2416°W), which was formerly the hall of the St James' Presbyterian Church. It provides services in English, Korean and Tongan languages.

Attractions
Bowen is on a peninsula, with ocean on three sides. This gives eight beaches surrounding the town, namely Kings Beach, Queens Beach, Horseshoe Bay, Murrays Bay, Greys Bay, Rose Bay, and the Front Beach. There is also the clothing-optional Coral Bay. Kings Beach offers views of nearby Gloucester Island.The "Big Mango", costing $90,000 to create, was erected in 2002 as a tourist attraction at the Bowen Tourist Information Centre. In February 2014, the 10-metre high, seven-tonne fibreglass structure was reported to be "stolen" as part of a publicity stunt for the region.

Sport
The Bowen Showground, off Mount Nutt Road includes a motorcycle speedway and sidecars track within the site. The track (-19.99389°N, 148.22944°W) first held racing on 27 September 1927 and hosted the Queensland Solo Championship in 2020 and 2022.

Climate
Bowen has a tropical savannah climate (Köppen: Aw); with a sweltering wet season from December to April and a cooler, less humid dry season from May to November. Warm to hot weather predominates, with average maxima ranging from 31.5 C in January to 24.5 C in July. A partial rain shadow is produced by the nearby Gloucester Island, resulting in the annual precipitation averaging 894.9 mm. Extreme temperatures have ranged from 39.7 C on the 1st of January 1985 to 3.2 C on the 12th of August 2012.

Television
Bowen is serviced by free to air channels including the ABC, SBS, Seven Queensland (STQ), WIN Television (Nine Network affiliate), Southern Cross Television (Ten Network affiliate).

In popular culture
In December 2006, it was announced that Bowen was chosen as a filming location for part of the production of Australia, directed by Baz Luhrmann and starring Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. Bowen was chosen as a prospect due to the financing of $500,000 by the Queensland Government. The production moved to Bowen on 14 May 2007; the town was used to depict 1940's Darwin.

The Big Mango in Bowen is one of the better known of Australia's big things.

Notable residents

 * Sir Charles Newton Barton (1907–1987), commissioner of main roads and co-ordinator-general of public works.
 * Edith Bethel (1871–1929), political organiser.
 * Douglas James (Jim) Darwen (1906–1988), newspaper-owner and editor.
 * Korah Halcomb Wills (1828–1896), mayor of Bowen

Sister cities

 * 🇯🇵 Oseto-cho, Japan

title: Bowen, Queensland


text:
Tax noncompliance

Tax noncompliance is a range of activities that are unfavorable to a government's tax system. This may include tax avoidance, which is tax reduction by legal means, and tax evasion which is the illegal non-payment of tax liabilities. The use of the term "noncompliance" is used differently by different authors. Its most general use describes non-compliant behaviors with respect to different institutional rules resulting in what Edgar L. Feige calls unobserved economies. Non-compliance with fiscal rules of taxation gives rise to unreported income and a tax gap that Feige estimates to be in the neighborhood of $500 billion annually for the United States.

In the United States, the use of the term 'noncompliance' often refers only to illegal misreporting. Laws known as a General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) statutes which prohibit "tax aggressive" avoidance have been passed in several developed countries including the United States (since 2010), Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Norway and Hong Kong. In addition, judicial doctrines have accomplished the similar purpose, notably in the United States through the "business purpose" and "economic substance" doctrines established in Gregory v. Helvering. Though the specifics may vary according to jurisdiction, these rules invalidate tax avoidance which is technically legal but not for a business purpose or in violation of the spirit of the tax code. Related terms for tax avoidance include tax planning and tax sheltering.

Individuals that do not comply with tax payment include tax protesters and tax resisters. Tax protesters attempt to evade the payment of taxes using alternative interpretations of the tax law, while tax resisters refuse to pay a tax for conscientious reasons. In the United States, tax protesters believe that taxation under the Federal Reserve is unconstitutional, while tax resisters are more concerned with not paying for particular government policies that they oppose. Because taxation is often perceived as onerous, governments have struggled with tax noncompliance since the earliest of times.

Differences between avoidance and evasion

The use of the terms tax avoidance and tax evasion can vary depending on the jurisdiction. In general, "evasion" applies to illegal actions and "avoidance" to actions within the law. The term "mitigation" is also used in some jurisdictions to further distinguish actions within the original purpose of the relevant provision from those actions that are within the letter of the law, but do not achieve its purpose. All pursue the same immediate goal, minimising the amount paid.

In particular, in the American legal system, tax evasion is a criminal action disciplined by 26 US Code §7201, under which the taxpayer who fails to pay or willfully underpays his tax liability (i.e., with criminal mens rea like stated in the James v. United States) will undergo to criminal penalties. On the other side of the coin, tax avoidance happens when the taxpayer tries to lessen his tax obligation using deductions and credits to maximize after-tax income. All of this is considered legal by the IRS even though it foresees civil penalties. All things considered, the main difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance is the taxpayer's guilty mind of minimization or failure to pay the tax liability.

Tax gap
The U.S. Internal Revenue Service provides formal definitions: "The gross tax gap is the difference between true tax liability for a given tax year and the amount that is paid on time. It is comprisedof [sic] the nonfiling gap, the underreporting gap, and the underpayment (or remittance) gap. The net tax gap is the portion of the gross tax gap that will never be recovered through enforcement or other late payments."

Underground economy and tax gap
An important way to study the tax gap is to examine the size of the tax gap in a country by analyzing the size of the underground economy and its influencing factors. The size of the underground economy is directly related to the institutional infrastructure. The institutional infrastructure of a country mainly includes the intensity of government regulation, the establishment and implementation of laws, the degree of judicial independence, the size of effective tax rates, the effective provision of public goods or services, and the effective protection of property rights. It is generally believed that the higher the level of government regulation, the greater the size of its underground economy and the greater the tax gap. And vice versa, when government over-regulation occurs, an alternative relationship exists between the size of the underground economy and the size of the official economy. Representatives of this view are Levenson, Maloney, and Johnson. They believe that higher tax rates can raise higher tax revenues, and the government can provide higher levels of public services accordingly, thereby attracting more companies and individuals out of the underground economy, resulting in a healthy balance of "high tax rates, high taxes, high public services, and small-scale underground economy", but low-tax countries, because they do not have enough income to provide high levels of public services, will form a vicious balance of "low tax rates, low taxes, low public services, and high-scale underground economy." In the above-mentioned healthy balance, the tax gap is relatively small; in the vicious equilibrium, the tax gap is relatively large.

Tax customs and tax gaps
Tax custom is different from tax avoidance or tax evasion. It does not measure the taxation behavior of individuals, but the tax attitude of individuals. The tax custom can also be considered as the moral responsibility of the individual. Making a specific contribution to society by paying taxes on the government must fulfill this responsibility. It embodies the ethical code of conduct for individuals in taxation, although it does not require the form of law. The decline or deterioration of taxation practices will reduce the moral costs of taxpayers engaging in illegal operations or underground economic activities.

An empirical study by ALM on transition countries such as Russia found that there is a strong negative relationship between tax customary variables and underground economic size variables (which represent tax evasion or tax gaps) (correlation coefficient is -0.657). And both variables are significant at the 1% level.

Bird believed that a sustainable and efficient tax system must be based on perceived fairness and goodwill response to taxation. It must be connected organically with the provision of public goods or services. If taxpayers see their preferences reflected in governance and see efficient provision of government services, they stay in the official economy and fulfill tax obligations. Tax revenues increase while the tax gap narrows.

The economic experiments cited by Torgler and Schaltegger show that the extensive exercise of voting rights in tax affairs will significantly increase taxpayer compliance. The deeper the taxpayer participates in political decision making, the higher the tax contract performance efficiency and tax compliance. The taxpayer society in this state is a civil society with tax and good customs, and the taxpayer is a real citizen who has been given a wide range of powers.

Everest Phillips believes that the design of a reasonable and effective tax system is an important part of the construction in a country. The operation of this tax system must be based on the higher compliance of taxpayers and the goodness of taxation rather than relying on coercive measures. He pointed out that as the country's tax system for building important content must have the following five important characteristics:
 * 1) Political participation. The wide participation of taxpayers in the political decision-making process is an important guarantee for establishing social taxation and good customs. When taxpayers lack effective access to decision-making, they will be concerned about tax revenue collection and the lack of efficiency in the provision of public goods or services. Tax compliance will be reduced, and taxation practices are likely to deteriorate. As a result, tax evasion scale will expand and tax gaps will increase. This situation will further weaken the ability of government to provide public goods or services, and thus trap the construction process into a vicious cycle.
 * 2) Responsibility and transparency. The government should have a legitimate duty to use tax revenues, and procedures for providing public goods or services should be transparent to taxpayers.
 * 3) Perceivable fairness. In a reasonable and effective tax system, taxpayers can perceive themselves as being treated equally and justly. With regard to tax incentives or tax exemptions, if taxpayers perceive that they are being treated unfairly, their tax willingness will inevitably decline.
 * 4) Effectiveness. The government should have the ability to transform gradually increasing tax revenues into higher levels of public goods or services and enhance political stability.
 * 5) Sharing a prosperous political commitment. The national taxation system should be closely linked with the national goal of promoting economic growth. Promoting economic growth is one of the strategic goals that the government has promised to taxpayers. The government can promote the realization of this strategic goal through taxation.

Tax collection management efficiency and tax gap
Under the premise of economic development level, the ability of a country to raise tax revenue is mainly determined by the tax system design in the country and the efficiency of its collection and management. From the perspective of taxation practices in various countries, the design of taxation system is affected and restricted by the efficiency of tax collection and management. Therefore, it can be said that the relative size of a country's tax revenue collection and tax gap is closely related to the tax collection and management efficiency of the s tax administration agencies in the country.

A reasonable explanation for the introduction of value-added tax by most developing countries in the world is to increase the taxpayer's compliance with tax payment through the mutual supervision mechanism between taxpayers without increasing the cost imposed by the tax administration authorities. This consideration for the factors of taxation determines that developing countries can only adopt the tax system that is mainly based on turnover tax. From the perspective of taxation, due to restrictions on the level of taxation in developing countries, tax revenues can only be raised through indirect taxes that focus on taxes such as value-added tax and consumption tax, while direct taxes represented by income taxes and property taxes are included in total tax revenue. The proportion is relatively low. Bird and Zolt pointed out that, contrary to the practice of taxation in developed countries, personal income tax still plays a very limited role in developing countries today, both in terms of income mobilization and adjustment of income disparities. In 2000, the income tax income of developed countries was 53.8% of total income, compared with 28.3% in developing countries. They believe that wages and other income of workers in the informal sector in developing countries are still free from tax collection. The same is true of the property tax situation. Due to the lack of necessary information and assessment mechanisms for the assessment of property values, property taxes cannot be successfully implemented in many developing countries; even if developing countries with property taxes exist, their income collection is still insufficient. From the above analysis, we can see that compared with indirect taxes, developing countries still have a large tax gap in terms of direct taxes.

Tax protesters and tax resisters
Some tax evaders believe that they have uncovered new interpretations of the law that show that they are not subject to being taxed (not liable): these individuals and groups are sometimes called tax protesters. Many protesters continue posing the same arguments that the federal courts have rejected time and time again, ruling the arguments to be legally frivolous.

Tax resistance is the refusal to pay a tax for conscientious reasons (because the resister finds the government or its actions morally reprehensible). They typically do not find it relevant whether that the tax laws are themselves legal or illegal or whether they apply to them, and they are more concerned with not paying for what they find to be grossly immoral, such as the bombing of innocents.

United States

In the United States "tax evasion" is evading the assessment or payment of a tax that is already legally owed at the time of the criminal conduct. Tax evasion is criminal, and has no effect on the amount of tax actually owed, although it may give rise to substantial monetary penalties.

By contrast, the term "tax avoidance" describes lawful conduct, the purpose of which is to avoid the creation of a tax liability in the first place. Whereas an evaded tax remains a tax legally owed, an avoided tax is a tax liability that has never existed.

For example, consider two businesses, each of which have a particular asset (in this case, a piece of real estate) that is worth far more than its purchase price.

 * Business One (or an individual) sells the property and underreports its gain. In this instance, tax is legally due. Business One has engaged in tax evasion, which is criminal.
 * Business Two (or an individual) consults with a tax advisor and discovers that the business can structure a sale as a "like-kind exchange" (formally known as a 1031 exchange, named after the Code section) for other real estate that the business can use. In this instance, no tax is due of the provisions of section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code. Business Two has engaged in tax avoidance (or tax mitigation), which is completely within the law.

In the above example, tax may or may not eventually be due when the second property is sold. Whether and how much tax will be due will depend on circumstances and the state of the law at the time.

Definition of tax evasion in the United States
The application of the U.S. tax evasion statute may be illustrated in brief as follows. The statute is Internal Revenue Code section 7201:

"Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution."

Under this statute and related case law, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following three elements:

 * 1) the "attendant circumstance" of the existence of a tax deficiency – an unpaid tax liability; and
 * 2) the actus reus (i.e., guilty conduct) – an affirmative act (and not merely an omission or failure to act) in any manner constituting evasion or an attempt to evade either:
 * 3) the assessment of a tax, or
 * 4) the payment of a tax.
 * 5) the mens rea or "mental" element of willfulness – the specific intent to violate an actually known legal duty.

An affirmative act "in any manner" is sufficient to satisfy the third element of the offense. That is, an act which would otherwise be perfectly legal (such as moving funds from one bank account to another) could be grounds for a tax evasion conviction (possibly an attempt to evade payment), provided the other two elements are also met. Intentionally filing a false tax return (a separate crime in itself) could constitute an attempt to evade the assessment of the tax, as the Internal Revenue Service bases its initial assessment (i.e., the formal recordation of the tax on the books of the U.S. Treasury) on the tax amount shown on the return.

Application to tax protesters
The federal tax evasion statute is an example of an exception to the general rule under U.S. law that "ignorance of the law or a mistake of law is no defense to criminal prosecution". Under the Cheek Doctrine (Cheek v. United States), the United States Supreme Court ruled that a genuine, good faith belief that one is not violating the federal tax law (such as a mistake based on a misunderstanding caused by the complexity of the tax law itself) would be a valid defense to a charge of "willfulness" ("willfulness" in this case being knowledge or awareness that one is violating the tax law itself), even though that belief is irrational or unreasonable. On the surface, this rule might appear to be of some comfort to tax protesters who assert, for example, that "wages are not income." The U.S. courts have consistently rejected arguments that "wages" or "labor" are not taxable as income under the Internal Revenue Code. For example, see United States v. Connor, 898 F.2d 942, 90-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,166 (3d Cir. 1990) (tax evasion conviction under affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; taxpayer’s argument – that because of the Sixteenth Amendment, wages were not taxable – was rejected by the Court; taxpayer’s argument that an income tax on wages is required to be apportioned by population also rejected); Perkins v. Commissioner, 746 F.2d 1187, 84-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9898 (6th Cir. 1984) ( ruled by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to be "in full accordance with Congressional authority under the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution to impose taxes on income without apportionment among the states"; taxpayer's argument that wages paid for labor are non-taxable was rejected by the Court, and ruled frivolous); White v. United States, 2005-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,289 (6th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, ____ U.S. ____ (2005) (taxpayer’s argument that wages are not taxable was ruled frivolous by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; penalty – imposed under for filing tax return with frivolous position – was therefore proper); Granzow v. Commissioner, 739 F.2d 265, 84-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9660 (7th Cir. 1984) (taxpayer’s argument that wages are not taxable was rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and ruled frivolous); Waters v. Commissioner, 764 F.2d 1389, 85-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9512 (11th Cir. 1985) (taxpayer’s argument that income taxation of wages is unconstitutional was rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit; taxpayer required to pay damages for filing frivolous suit).

However, merely asserting that one has such a good faith belief is not determinative in court; under the American legal system the trier of fact (the jury, or the trial judge in a non-jury trial) decides whether the defendant really has the good faith belief he or she claims. With respect to willfulness, the placing of the burden of proof on the prosecution is of limited utility to a defendant that the jury simply does not believe.

A further stumbling block for tax protesters is found in the Cheek Doctrine with respect to arguments about "constitutionality." Under the Doctrine, the belief that the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified and the belief that the federal income tax is otherwise unconstitutional are not treated as beliefs that one is not violating the "tax law" – i.e., these errors are not treated as being caused by the "complexity of the tax law."

In the Cheek case the Court stated:

"Claims that some of the provisions of the tax code are unconstitutional are submissions of a different order. They do not arise from innocent mistakes caused by the complexity of the Internal Revenue Code. Rather, they reveal full knowledge of the provisions at issue and a studied conclusion, however wrong, that those provisions are invalid and unenforceable. Thus, in this case, Cheek paid his taxes for years, but after attending various seminars and based on his own study, he concluded that the income tax laws could not constitutionally require him to pay a tax."

The Court continued:

"We do not believe that Congress contemplated that such a taxpayer, without risking criminal prosecution, could ignore the duties imposed upon him by the Internal Revenue Code and refuse to utilize the mechanisms provided by Congress to present his claims of invalidity to the courts and to abide by their decisions. There is no doubt that Cheek, from year to year, was free to pay the tax that the law purported to require, file for a refund and, if denied, present his claims of invalidity, constitutional or otherwise, to the courts. See 26 U.S.C. 7422. Also, without paying the tax, he could have challenged claims of tax deficiencies in the Tax Court, 6213, with the right to appeal to a higher court if unsuccessful. 7482(a)(1). Cheek took neither course in some years, and, when he did, was unwilling to accept the outcome. As we see it, he is in no position to claim that his good-faith belief about the validity of the Internal Revenue Code negates willfulness or provides a defense to criminal prosecution under 7201 and 7203. Of course, Cheek was free in this very case to present his claims of invalidity and have them adjudicated, but, like defendants in criminal cases in other contexts who "willfully" refuse to comply with the duties placed upon them by the law, he must take the risk of being wrong."

The Court ruled that such beliefs – even if held in good faith – are not a defense to a charge of willfulness. By pointing out that arguments about constitutionality of federal income tax laws "reveal full knowledge of the provisions at issue and a studied conclusion, however wrong, that those provisions are invalid and unenforceable", the Supreme Court may have been impliedly warning that asserting such "constitutional" arguments (in open court or otherwise) might actually help the prosecutor prove willfulness. Daniel B. Evans, a tax lawyer who has written about tax protester arguments, has stated that

"if you plan ahead to use it [the Cheek defense], then it is almost certain to fail, because your efforts to establish your "good faith belief" are going to be used by the government as evidence that you knew that what you were doing was wrong when you did it, which is why you worked to set up a defense in advance. Planning not to file tax returns and avoid prosecution using a "good faith belief" is kind of like planning to kill someone using a claim of "self-defense". If you've planned in advance, then it shouldn't work."

By contrast, under Canadian law, the honesty of a taxpayer in expressing his beliefs can be a mitigating factor in sentencing. In R. v. Klundert, 2011 ONCA 646, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a tax protestor's conviction, but allowed him to serve a conditional sentence in the community on the grounds that his behaviour was neither fraudulent nor deceitful. The one-year custodial sentence imposed by the trial judge was overturned on this basis:

"[23] He went on to hold that, while deceit or fraud may be an aggravating factor, the absence of such features does not create a mitigating factor. While that may be an acceptable general rule of sentencing, the absence of deceit or fraud can nevertheless be a factor in deciding whether or not a conditional sentence is warranted. To the extent the trial judge did consider the appellant's low level of deceit, if any, and lack of fraud, it was not fairly emphasized in his reasons and amounts to error."

Failing to file returns in the United States
According to some estimates, about three percent of American taxpayers do not file tax returns at all. In the case of U.S. federal income taxes, civil penalties for willful failure to timely file returns and willful failure to timely pay taxes are based on the amount of tax due; thus, if no tax is owed, no penalties are due. The civil penalty for willful failure to timely file a return is generally equal to 5.0% of the amount of tax "required to be shown on the return per month, up to a maximum of 25%.

In cases where a taxpayer does not have enough money to pay the entire tax bill, the IRS can work out a payment plan with taxpayers, or enter into a collection alternative such as a partial payment Installment Agreement, an Offer in Compromise, placement into hardship or "currently non-collectable" status or file bankruptcy.

For years for which no return has been filed, there is no statute of limitations on civil actions – that is, on how long the IRS can seek taxpayers and demand payment of taxes owed.

For each year a taxpayer willfully fails to timely file an income tax return, the taxpayer can be sentenced to one year in prison. In general, there is a six-year statute of limitations on federal tax crimes.

The IRS has run several Overseas Voluntary Disclosure Programs in 2009 and 2011, and its current one has "no set deadline for taxpayers to apply. However, the terms of this program could change at any time going forward.".

By contrast, the civil penalty for failure to timely pay the tax actually "shown on the return" is generally equal to 0.5% of such tax due per month, up to a maximum of 25%. The two penalties are computed together in a relatively complex algorithm, and computing the actual penalties due is somewhat challenging.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom and jurisdictions following the UK approach (such as New Zealand) have recently adopted the evasion/avoidance terminology as used in the United States: evasion is a criminal attempt to avoid paying tax owed while avoidance is an attempt to use the law to reduce taxes owed. There is, however, a further distinction drawn between tax avoidance and tax mitigation. Tax avoidance is a course of action designed to conflict with or defeat the evident intention of Parliament: IRC v Willoughby.

Tax mitigation is conduct which reduces tax liabilities without "tax avoidance" (not contrary to the intention of Parliament), for instance, by gifts to charity or investments in certain assets which qualify for tax relief. This is important for tax provisions which apply in cases of "avoidance": they are held not to apply in cases of mitigation.

The clear articulation of the concept of an avoidance/mitigation distinction goes back only to the 1970s. The concept originated from economists, not lawyers. The use of the terminology avoidance/mitigation to express this distinction was an innovation in 1986: IRC v Challenge.

In practice, the distinction is sometimes clear, but often difficult to draw. Relevant factors to decide whether conduct is avoidance or mitigation include: whether there is a specific tax regime applicable; whether transactions have economic consequences; confidentiality; tax linked fees. Important indicia are familiarity and use. Once a tax avoidance arrangement becomes common, it is almost always stopped by legislation within a few years. If something commonly done is contrary to the intention of Parliament, it is only to be expected that Parliament will stop it.

So that which is commonly done and not stopped is not likely to be contrary to the intention of Parliament. It follows that tax reduction arrangements which have been carried on for a long time are unlikely to constitute tax avoidance. Judges have a strong intuitive sense that that which everyone does, and has long done, should not be stigmatised with the pejorative term of "avoidance". Thus UK courts refused to regard sales and repurchases (known as bed-and-breakfast transactions) or back-to-back loans as tax avoidance.

Other approaches in distinguishing tax avoidance and tax mitigation are to seek to identify "the spirit of the statute" or "misusing" a provision. But this is the same as the "evident intention of Parliament" properly understood. Another approach is to seek to identify "artificial" transactions. However, a transaction is not well described as "artificial" if it has valid legal consequences, unless some standard can be set up to establish what is "natural" for the same purpose. Such standards are not readily discernible. The same objection applies to the term "device".

It may be that a concept of "tax avoidance" based on what is contrary to "the intention of Parliament" is not coherent. The object of construction of any statute is expressed as finding "the intention of Parliament". In any successful tax avoidance scheme, a Court must have concluded that the intention of Parliament was not to impose a tax charge in the circumstances which the tax avoiders had placed themselves. The answer is that the expression "intention of Parliament" is being used in two senses.

It is perfectly consistent to say that a tax avoidance scheme escapes tax (there being no provision to impose a tax charge) and yet constitutes the avoidance of tax. One is seeking the intention of Parliament at a higher, more generalised level. A statute may fail to impose a tax charge, leaving a gap that a court cannot fill even by purposive construction, but nevertheless one can conclude that there would have been a tax charge had the point been considered. An example is the notorious UK case Ayrshire Employers Mutual Insurance Association v IRC, where the House of Lords held that Parliament had "missed fire".

History of avoidance/evasion distinction
An avoidance/evasion distinction along the lines of the present distinction has long been recognised but at first there was no terminology to express it. In 1860 Turner LJ suggested evasion/contravention (where evasion stood for the lawful side of the divide): Fisher v Brierly. In 1900 the distinction was noted as two meanings of the word "evade": Bullivant v AG. The technical use of the words avoidance/evasion in the modern sense originated in the US where it was well established by the 1920s. It can be traced to Oliver Wendell Holmes in Bullen v. Wisconsin.

It was slow to be accepted in the United Kingdom. By the 1950s, knowledgeable and careful writers in the UK had come to distinguish the term "tax evasion" from "avoidance". However, in the UK at least, "evasion" was regularly used (by modern standards, misused) in the sense of avoidance, in law reports and elsewhere, at least up to the 1970s. Now that the terminology has received official approval in the UK (Craven v White) this usage should be regarded as erroneous. But even now it is often helpful to use the expressions "legal avoidance" and "illegal evasion", to make the meaning clearer.

UK tax gap
The UK "tax gap" is the difference between the amount of tax that should, in theory, be collected by the tax collection agency HMRC, against what is actually collected. The tax gap for the UK in 2018/19 was £31 billion, or 4.7% of total tax liabilities.

UK tax resistors
In the UK case of Cheney v. Conn, an individual objected to paying tax that, in part, would be used to procure nuclear arms in unlawful contravention, he contended, of the Geneva Convention. His claim was dismissed, the judge ruling that "What the [taxation] statute itself enacts cannot be unlawful, because what the statute says and provides is itself the law, and the highest form of law that is known to this country."

France
France can be considered as having an average level of the European fiscal evasion (in terms of percentage of GDP) but in the upper ranks of the absolute level due to its high GDP. Indeed, the state budget is slashed by more than 160 billion euros every year (80 billion is slashed due to fiscal evasion and another 80 billion due to the abuse of social protection). The fiscal evasion is equivalent to 3% of the French GDP and the social protection is another 3%. In total, the French government is slashed of 6% of the country's GDP.

Europe
Richard Murphy, a professor in Public Policy at City, University of London, produced the following estimates of the tax gap in different European countries.

By region

 * Tax evasion and corruption in Greece
 * Tax evasion in Switzerland
 * Tax gap in the UK
 * Tax evasion in the United States
 * Other countries

General
• Black market

• Bottom of the harbour tax avoidance (Australia)

• Corporate inversion

• Double Irish arrangement

• e-commerce

• Financial transaction tax (less susceptible to evasion)

• Fiscal capacity

• Gaming the system

• Eva Joly

• Land value tax (less susceptible to evasion)

• Richard Murphy (accountant)

• Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act

• Tax deduction

• Tax exile

• Tax farming

• Tax incidence

• Tax loophole

• Tax patent

• Tax protester (United States)

• Tax reform

• Taxation as slavery

• Taxation as theft

• Xenon (program)

title: Tax noncompliance


text:
Świdnica County

Świdnica County (powiat świdnicki) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 742.9 km2. Its administrative seat is Świdnica, and it also contains the towns of Świebodzice, Strzegom, Jaworzyna Śląska and Żarów.

As of 2019 the total population of the county is 157,178. The most populated towns are Świdnica with 57,041 inhabitants, Świebodzice with 22,793 inhabitants, and Strzegom with 16,106 inhabitants.

Neighbouring counties
Świdnica County is bordered by Środa Śląska County to the north, Wrocław County to the north-east, Dzierżoniów County to the south, Wałbrzych County to the south-west and Jawor County to the north-west.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into eight gminas (two urban, three urban-rural and three rural). These are listed in the following table, in descending order of population.

title: Świdnica County


text:
Środa County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship

Środa County (powiat średzki ) is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, south-western Poland. It came into being on January 1, 1999, as a result of the Polish local government reforms passed in 1998. The county covers an area of 703.7 km2. Its administrative seat and only town is Środa Śląska.

As at 2019 the total population of the county is 54,646, out of which the population of Środa Śląska accounts for 9,516, while the rural population is 45,130.

Neighbouring counties
Środa County is bordered by Wołów County to the north, Trzebnica County to the north-east, the city of Wrocław and Wrocław County to the east, Świdnica County to the south, and Jawor County and Legnica County to the west.

Administrative division
The county is subdivided into five gminas (one urban-rural and four rural). These are listed in the following table, in descending order of population.