Educated to crime: Community and criminal justice in Upper Canada, 1800--1840
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From 1800 to 1840, Upper Canada witnessed a crisis that affected the administration of criminal justice in Upper Canada: the fear that pauper immigration was bringing a criminal element into the province; a growing loss of faith in older systems of punishment; and the overpopulation of district goals. According to recent penal historians, the response of the executive arm of the Tory government reflected its entrenched conservatism. Believing in the efficacy of coercive institutions, the ruling elite initiated two signal events: the Penal Reform Act of 1833 and the construction of what was to become an instrument of social control: the Kingston Penitentiary. This thesis takes the position that the crucial factor that drove the restructuring of criminal law was a breakdown in the administration of punishment. Canadian historians have considerably underestimated the influential role that local communities played in sponsoring penal reform. Prior to 1833, with few exceptions, capital sentences were reduced to banishment to the United States. Many, however, never left the province. Many others returned early. In both cases their communities, believing the system of primary and secondary punishment to be too severe, sheltered them. Interpreted as a demonstrated lack of respect for the legal system, the Tory executive reacted by using its central authority to push through funding legislation for a penitentiary. A legal culture, which included the harbouring of "banished" convicts, operated within and among Upper Canadian communities. Through grand jury addresses published in newspapers and the regular posting of changes to the criminal code, communities were legally educated. In the absence of effective policing, neighbourhoods wielded discretionary power, hunting down criminals and prosecuting them. Within traditionally prescribed limits, they morally policed themselves. The move toward penal reform in Upper Canada was, in part, a reaction to these "democratic incursions."
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".