“Les Miserables” Children of Great Britain in Canada: Maria Rye’s Migration Programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the author explores Maria Susan Rye’s emigration society. She initiated the relocation of British children from workhouses and orphanages to Canada in 1869. Documentary and narrative sources have rarely been used to explore this “inconvenient” topic of British history. Few works by Western researchers of child migration appeared only at the end of the twentieth century. In the article, the author analyses controversial events in the history of Great Britain and Canada in the nineteenth century. The purpose of the work is to consider the reasons for resettlement, Rye’s migration plan, the attitude of the British public towards it, its practical implementation in the Dominion, and the living conditions of minors in Canada. The author notes that the pauperisation of the British population was a major factor in the juvenile emigration in the context of industrialisation and demographic growth of the cities. Rye’s plan was to take children from slums and place them in Canadian families. The author pays special attention to Andrew Doyle’s mission. He was commissioned by the British government to investigate the activities of Rye, her colleagues, and the living conditions of the migrants. The author demonstrates that Doyle exaggerated the abuse and lack of supervision of children in order to discredit Rye’s project and impose the workhouse system on Canada. She concludes that the informal control of migrants practised by Rye should have been supplemented by legislative protection of the rights and interests of British minors in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.047 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".