JACK D. MARIETTA, G. S. ROWE. Troubled Experiment: Crime and Justice in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800. (Early American Studies.) Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2006. Pp. x, 353. $59.95
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jack D. Marietta and G. S. Rowe have produced a solid piece of local crime and criminal justice history, from the initial establishment of Pennsylvania's criminal justice system in 1682 through to 1800. The first two chapters focus on the earliest period of the criminal laws and courts, up to 1718. The next two chapters, more thematic, examine the difficulties faced by an increasingly plural society and the persistence of violence across the period. The last three chapters cover crime and criminal justice during the remainder of the colonial period, under the revolution and during the first decades of the republic. Marietta and Rowe adopt the classic approach of those studying the history of crime and criminal justice, combining a history of the justice system itself (laws, courts, and personnel) with a social history of crime, criminals, and victims. From these two perspectives, they cover themes such as the progressive Anglicization and then Americanization of criminal law and procedure, the professionalization of the magistracy and bar, the justice system's role in relations between whites and Indians, the effects of race and gender on criminalization, and urban-rural differences in crime. Overall, the book presents a system that began with the benevolent ideal of William Penn and at first functioned well, due to Quaker homogeneity, but that faced increasing difficulties in the face of immigration, especially of the Scots-Irish. After an initial period of experimentation, a period of relative stability followed the reception of English criminal law in the late 1710s and lasted through to the 1760s, accompanied nevertheless by a gradual increase in crime. Finally, the American Revolution ushered in a period of profound change in personnel, such as the exclusion of Quakers from judicial office, and the adoption, in the last two decades of the century, of substantial reforms in the laws and in punishment. However, these changes did little to solve the troubles of crime and criminal justice, which continued and amplified prerevolutionary patterns.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.012 |
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".