“To the Interests and Conscience of the Great Mass of the Community:” The Evolution of Temperance Societies in Nineteenth-Century Central Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The resilience of nineteenth-century temperance societies as a cultural force in central Canada is a testament to their adaptability towards shifting societal trends, as well as their ability to utilize diverse strategies in the war against the liquor traffic. And yet the inclusive appeal of these organizations among all members of the community masked the conflicts and contentions found within the temperance movement. Pre-Confederation temperance societies established a large constituency of support culled from middle-class evangelicals and the skilled working class, although the measured withdrawal from the benefit system of mutual aid eroded the enthusiasm of skilled workers for temperance societies. However, the sectarian and political turmoil from within temperance associations clearly resulted in the irrelevance of temperance societies by mid-century. While temperance societies experienced a marked escalation in influence by the last two decades of the nineteenth century, a divergent approach taken by rural and urban temperance advocates in relation to legislative prohibition led to more discord and disagreements over the ultimate direction of the temperance movement. The openness of late nineteenth-century temperance societies was once again exposed as empty rhetoric, as the spectre of prohibition became a political hurdle too strong for a divided temperance community to overcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".