MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W135184481

"Tyrant and Oppressor!"1: Colonial Press Reaction to the Quebec Act

2006· article· en· W135184481 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul D. Langston

Notice bibliographique

RevueHistorical journal of Massachusetts · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOpposition (politics)ColonialismDissentNewspaperLawDissenting opinionAudience measurementLegislationIndependence (probability theory)Resistance (ecology)HistoryPolitical scienceSociologyMedia studiesPolitics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

September 1774, Guy Carleton, lieutenant governor of the Quebec province, arrived in Quebec to make official the news that would escalate the rising tensions experienced throughout the British North American Colonies. Carleton was received by the lieutenant Governor, and all the French clergy, at his landing, when he had the honor to be kissed by the Bishop, and afterwards very genteelly introduced Popery.2 The Quebec Act, while an attempt to appease the dominant Roman Catholic religion in the province, resulted in an increased opposition to the arbitrary nature of British government throughout the North America colonies. Opposition toward the Crown on this matter was expressed through colonial newspapers. This emerging platform spread dissent among its colonial readership.3 The increased distribution of the press in the years preceding the American War of Independence provided editors with a method to express concern regarding the Quebec Act, legislation that many feared would establish a more despotic government over North America. Historians have examined the impact of the colonial press upon the mounting resistance to Britain following the Seven Years War. Arthur M. Schlesinger stated, Not until the rise of troubles with Britain did the editor come to think of himself as a maker of opinion as well as a transmitter of news and literary offerings. Yet he unwittingly did something, however little, in that direction by the very act of deciding what to put in or leave out of his paper, and once in a great while he offered a terse comment of his own.4 This surge of antagonism being presented by the colonial press resulted in editors becoming players in shaping public opinion. With the enduring opposition in the newspapers pertaining to the Tea Act and the Coercive Acts, the Quebec Act provided these individuals another such opportunity.5 However, historians have rarely examined press opinion solely concerning the Quebec Act. The more common practice is to incorporate this bill into press opinion regarding the Coercive Acts of 1774 or inclusion into a larger overarching presentation.6 Absent are examinations of the colonial newspapers' response to the Quebec Act and an assessment of the messages being expressed by these colonial presses regarding this legislation. Such an approach is necessary given that the Quebec Act was not a punitive measure, as the Coercive Acts were upon Boston; therefore, the bill could be perceived as an expression of Britain's constitutional intentions in North America. An examination of press opinion concerning the Quebec Act provides significant insight into the motives of colonial editors, illustrating that colonial newspapers used the Quebec Act as a metaphor for the continuing loss of within Britain's North American colonies.7 printing anti-government writings, these editors and their allies and sponsors sought to establish opposition to the Crown and Parliament. The enactment of the Coercive Acts earlier in 1774 and the enforcement of perceived tyrannical laws in Quebec confirmed, according to colonial papers, that colonists' liberties were being systematically eliminated.8 Such an interpretation alters the notion that the colonies possessed resentment toward the once French colony of Quebec, when in fact empathy was demonstrated for the fellow British colony. Consequently, editors used the Quebec Act as a catalyst against the use of arbitrary power that would deny the colonies their existing liberties. When discussing the term liberty during the colonial era, one must recognize the evolution of its meaning over time and examine the interpretation of this word as perceived by eighteenth century society.9 John Phillip Reid stated, In the meaning of during the age of the American Revolution the equation was plural, not singular. Liberty meant that individuals had rights, true enough, but so did society.10 Colonial subjects feared that the use of arbitrary power by the British government would deny colonists these rights:11 Americans as well as some sympathetic British understood primarily in terms of their desire to secure freedom against arbitrary governmental power. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,072
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,291

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0260,009
Communication savante0,0100,002
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0170,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,210
Écart entre enseignants0,189 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHistorical journal of MassachusettsMême sujetHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisTravaux en français237 207