Some Observations on the Queen, the Crown, the Constitution, and the Courts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EnglishCanada was established in 1867 as a Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom, with a Constitution similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. Th e concept of the Crown has evolved over time, as Canada became a fully independent state. However in 2017, Canada remains a constitutional monarchy within what is now the Commonwealth, and the offi ces of the Queen, the Governor General, and the provincial Lieutenant Governors are constitutionally entrenched. Indeed, in elucidating the meaning of the Crown, an abstraction that naturally gives rise to academic debate and divergent perspectives, it is important not to lose sight of the real person who is Her Majesty, given the importance that our constitutional framework attaches to her role, status, and powers. Canada has played a signifi cant role in influencing developments in the body of law that relates to royal succession, through its continuing adherence to the constitutional convention that requires the Parliament of Canada’s assent to any alteration in the law respecting the succession to the Throne or the royal style and titles. Parliament has also enacted legislation which has modernized aspects of Canada’s monarchical institutions without modifying their fundamental characteristics. In the Canadian context, the courts have been principled, prudential, and pragmatic in resolving legal disputes in relation to the Queen and the Crown, in a manner that takes due account of both constitutional theory and sound practice. None of this is inconsistent with modern Canada’s independent place on the world stage. francaisLe Canada fut fonde en 1867 comme un dominion sous la Couronne du Royaume-Uni, avec une constitution semblable en principe a celle du Royaume-Uni. Le concept de la Couronne a evolue au fi l du temps, au fur et a mesure que le Canada est devenu un etat entierement independant, mais en 2017 le Canada demeure une monarchie constitutionnelle a l’interieur de ce qui est maintenant le Commonwealth et les fonctions de la Reine, du gouverneur general et des lieutenants-gouverneurs des provinces ont ete constitutionnalisees. En fait, en elucidant le sens de la Couronne, une abstraction qui donne naturellement lieu a des debats theoriques et des points de vue divergents, il est important de ne pas perdre de vue la vraie personne qui est Sa Majeste, etant donne l’importance que notre cadre constitutionnel attache a son role, son statut et ses pouvoirs. Le Canada a infl ue de facon importante sur l’evolution des lois relatives a la succession royale, grâce a son adhesion continue a la convention constitutionnelle qui exige la sanction du Parlement du Canada pour toute modifi cation a la loi visant la succession au trone ou les titres royaux. En outre, le Parlement a edicte des lois qui modernisent des aspects des institutions monarchiques au Canada sans modifi er les traits fondamentaux de celles-ci. Dans le contexte canadien, les tribunaux ont agi conformement a des principes, ils ont ete prudents et pragmatiques dans le reglement de differends juridiques concernant la Reine et la Couronne, d’une maniere qui tient pleinement compte a la fois de la theorie constitutionnelle et de la saine pratique. Rien de cela contredit la place independante du Canada moderne sur la scene mondiale.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".