Choosing pragmatism: The dominion's Indian land policy in British Columbia between 1871-1927
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Once British Columbia became a province in 1871, the Dominion took over an Indian policy that had differed significantly from the Imperial policy set out by the Royal Proclamation of 1763. Most Aboriginals had not been dealt with by treaties, reserve sizes were smaller than what the Dominion preferred, and the legal concept of Indian title was strongly denied by the local government. The process was also incomplete, as most Aboriginals in the province had not yet been confined to reserves. For the next fifty years, the Dominion tried to fill in this reserve map and have the title to the land legally conveyed from the province. This was difficult to achieve because, similar to the colonial government before 1871, the provincial government in British Columbia wanted an Indian policy without title or large reserves. After years of protracted negotiations, the reserve map was almost entirely completed by 1927. By then the Dominion had given up on both the legality of Indian title and the need for large open reserves. In the following analysis, I argue that the Dominion warped its own principles largely because by 1876, it was primarily concerned with finalizing the reserve map. For most in Ottawa, the only way to achieve this was by dealing with the issue pragmatically and letting go of certain principles. In addition, the land policy was entirely intertwined with other peripheral issues between the Dominion and the province and its outcome was determined by this relationship.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".