Informal Land Titles: Snowden v Baker (1844)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snowden v Baker (1844) concerned the judicial recognition of informal land titles. This article compares the treatment of this broad question in Newfoundland and New South Wales, with Snowden v Baker.In Newfoundland and New South Wales, informal titles gained legal recognition. This happened in Newfoundland through judicial creativity, including statutory interpretation. In New South Wales, the formal law was applied more strictly, but was softened when commissioners were appointed to assess whether Crown discretion should be exercised in favour of those dispossessed due to informality.Both methods were used in New Zealand, where the informal titles of British settlers derived from sales by Māori land owners. Titles purchased from Māori owners were declared null and void unless based on Crown grants. As in New South Wales, commissioners were appointed to advise whether such grants should be made. In Snowden v Baker, Martin CJ used statutory interpretation to take a further step, by holding that titles derived from Māori sales had a contingent validity until affirmed or denied by the Crown.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it