MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380421505 · doi:10.1017/9781800107786.008

National and local politics, 1768–1774

2012· other· en· W4380421505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National politics, 1768–1769: John Wilkes The 1768 election passed reasonably quietly apart from Cumberland, where James Lowther attempted unsuccessfully to gain all the seats, and Middlesex where the radical John Wilkes was elected. King, cabinet and a substantial number of MPs, including Whitbread, united to prevent him sitting. The full implications of this did not fully emerge till 1769. On 27 January 1769 Wilkes presented a petition complaining of his arrest and imprisonment. A division on a government amend¬ment that only part of the petition should be heard was won: for the amendment 278, against it 131 (including Whitbread). On 3 February the House of Commons voted to expel Wilkes by 219 (including Whitbread) to 1372 because Wilkes's article in the Saint James Chronicle of 17 April 1768 was seen as a seditious libel. On 17 February Whitbread spoke to defend the expulsion of Wilkes. On 15 April a government motion was passed declaring Henry Lawes Luttrell MP for Middlesex in Wilkes's place, despite Wilkes having been elected three times as MP for Middlesex and despite Luttrell polling only 297 votes against Wilkes's 1143. The attack by Bernard on Bedford borough, 1769 Outside Parliament there was considerable campaigning in favour of Wilkes. Sir Robert Bernard of Brampton in Huntingdonshire, a leading supporter of Wilkes, decided to try to overthrow the Duke's interest in Bedford. Bernard, MP for Hunting-donshire since 1765, wished to extend his radical empire. He was no doubt aware of the anti-Duke party in the Corporation and the antagonism within the town generally to the coalition between Vernon and Hatton in 1767. He was also conscious of the considerable support for Whitbread among Bedford residents. Whitbread's interest after 1768 supported the Duke. Whitbread had voted against Wilkes and would be unlikely to support Bernard or his allies. It was also unlikely that the Radicals would gain a majority from local resident voters. To defeat the Duke, therefore, Bernard would have to get the Corporation to appoint huge numbers of freemen, loyal to him. The vagaries and difficulties, however, of getting reliable support from London out-setters by the Bedford interest had been shown in the 1768 election. Bernard gathered his supporters from his native Huntingdonshire, who were easier to control. John Heaven, who came from the Harpur Trust estate in Holborn, became mayor of Bedford on 5 September 1768.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→