“...a fair show and a square deal”: New Brunswick and the Renegotiation of Canadian Federalism, 1938-1951
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the 1935 Dominion-Provincial Conference, New Brunswick was a stalwart defender of provincial rights, but by the 1940s it was among the first provinces to cede Ottawa certain tax fields in exchange for a fixed payment, thereby contributing to the centralization of power in federal hands. This article documents the evolution of New Brunswick’s constitutional position during the late 1930s and 1940s. It shows that although financial exigencies helped shape the province’s constitutional stance, the structure of the 1940’s tax rental agreements also contributed to New Brunswick Premier John McNair’s willingness to centralize tax authority in Ottawa. The agreements’ temporary nature meant that upon their expiry New Brunswick would retain the right to the tax fields. Resume A la conference federale-provinciale de 1935, le Nouveau-Brunswick a defendu vigoureusement les droits provinciaux. Or, dans les annees 1940, le Nouveau-Brunswick etait l’une des premieres provinces a ceder a Ottawa certains domaines fiscaux en echange d’un paiement fixe, contribuant ainsi a la centralisation du pouvoir a Ottawa. Cet article atteste l’evolution de la situation constitutionnelle du Nouveau-Brunswick vers la fin des annees 1930 et 1940. De plus, il enonce que, meme si des exigences financieres ont renforce la situation constitutionnelle de la province, la structure des accords de 1940 sur la location de domaines fiscaux a aussi contribue a ce que le premier ministre du Nouveau-Brunswick, John McNair, veuille centraliser l’administration fiscale a Ottawa. La nature provisoire de l’entente prevoyait par ailleurs qu’a son echeance, le Nouveau-Brunswick garderait le droit des domaines fiscaux.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".