The Quebec Clerk Controversy: A Study in Sociability, the Public Sphere, and the Eighteenth-Century Spirit of Enlightenment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In December 1790, a proposal advocating the creation of a weekly club for merchant clerks was published in the Quebec Herald, sparking a controversy over the propriety of sociability, public debate, and the proper conduct of youth. This article explores the concerns expressed by contributors to the newspaper, many of whom purported to be of the city's young, ambitious – though little-regarded – clerical class. Over a five-month period, letters arguing the importance of personal and civic betterment and valuing free association, rational discussion, and democratic order came into opposition with missives embodying more traditional fears such as the inherent restlessness, disorder, and impatience of youth. The use of the Quebec Herald to voice these concerns illustrates that a dynamic public sphere of opinion existed in late-eighteenth-century Quebec. Furthermore, the controversy provides a window into the diffusion of the spirit of Enlightenment among the colony's English-language society on the eve of the Constitutional Act.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".