Reports of the endowment board of the University of Toronto, of Upper Canada college and Royal grammar school, of the caput of the University of Toronto, and of the principal of Upper Canada college, for the year 1851.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Board of Endowment have now the honor to present to the senate of the University of Toronto, their second annual Report of the slate of the property and effects of the said University, as required by the last clause of Section 22 y of the Statute 12. Vic, Cap.82.When last Report was presented, theCommissionofEnquiryinto the affairs of the late King's College, which had been so long in existence, had not finished their labours, and regret was expressed by the Board that they were prevented from giving so full an exhibition of the state of the effects and property of the University, as they could have desired.The final Report of the Commission of Enquiry, has, now for some months been in possession of the authorities of the University: to it, and the set of Books which accompanied it, the Board of Endowment have, of course, had free access, but as the labours of the Commission only reach to the 31st, December, 1849, it is obvious that, until the accounts prepared by them are continued, so as to enable the Board to strike a balance at the end of the year, any attempt to derive a correct esti- mate of the state of the Endowment, as at this date, based upon the Report, would be futile.The Board have commenced the work of continuing these accounts, and hope before the time arrives for the presentation of their third Report, to be in a position to base that Report on the work of the Commission of Enquiry, but they find that to accomplish this the strength of the office must be increased, as it is utterly impossi- ble, with the other demands upon the labour of the officers of the Board, and their assistants, arising out of the immense arrear of work required to be attended to, otherwise to accomplish the continuation of the books of the Commission.In ouch circumstances, this Report will necessarily be somewhat similar in the nature oi the information it conveys, to that which related to the year 1850, embracing merely the transactions of the year.It was stated in last Report, that the balance in Cash, at the credit of the Invest "4.£.__ J _.Havingabolished the use of half-penee in the accounts, this £ s. d. sum stands in the transactions of ihe current year as t 4409 15 7 This fund was in the course of the year increased as fol- ows : -Instalments on sales of Land, 69 18 17 10 Government Debentures were redeemed to the value of £47 14 And there was paid by Messrs. J. G. Ridout, and J. E. Small lo account of the principal sums of their respective Mortgages £89 IS 10 Making together of Investment* returned 137 12 10 o uv ^o 11466 6 3 To which sum there remains to be added, the surplus Income fund, as ordered by Sec.42, of the University Act, 758 1.3 9 Giving a total, at the close of the year, of 12,225 On account of Investment Fund which has been applied as follows : -Invested in Government Debentures 9000 Paid towards the completion of the Medical Building Books for Library Microscopic Specimens Paid on account of the appropriation for the New Building, Premium for de- signs, under the sanction of Statute No. 32 £100To T. Young, the successful competitor
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.123 | 0.018 |
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".