'Too Well Used by His Master': Judicial Enforcement of Servants' Rights in Montreal, 1830-1845
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nineteenth century in Montreal was a formative era in the development of modem labour relations. In particular, from 1830 to 1845 the contractual nature of master-servant relations became increasingly apparent, and resort to the local courts as a mechanism for resolving master-servant disputes became commonplace. Master-servant law was comprised of sometimes-competing sources such as notarial contracts and oral agreements, provincial statutes, and municipal bylaws, as well as common law principles and judicial discretion. Other complexities resulted from the discord between the relevant laws governing such relations within the city of Montreal and beyond its limits. Through analysis of primary sources, the author examines the nature and extent of servants rights in the judicial district of Montreal during this period. He devotes particular attention to both the constituent elements of master-servant relations and the most common types of disputes. He begins with an overview of the various forms of nineteenth century labour relations in the Montreal area. Next, he undertakes to elucidate the legal nature of these relations, the roles performed by notaries, and the use of indentures to record the reciprocal contractual obligations of masters and servants. He also considers the differences in master-servant law in the two principal areas of the judicial district of Montreal. Specifically, he considers thoroughly the types of suits brought within the city of Montreal and beyond its limits and the impact of the different governing laws on their chances of success. Ultimately, servants, through the courts, were generally able to protect their rights by bringing suits against their masters for various forms of misconduct.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".