The purpose of this research is to confirm that there are different conceptions of equality in the United States, English Canada, and French Canada.

Beginning with the Aristotelian distinction between numerical equality and proportional equality, the article establishes first a typology for the concept of equality. A review of the literature on the subject reveals that Americans and English Canadians can be said to be partial to proportional equality while French Canadians favour numerical equality.

It is then demonstrated that Von Neumann's and Morgenstern's theory of games can be interpreted as an egalitarian theory since the non-discriminatory solution proposed by Von Neumann and Morgenstern corresponds exactly to a proportional division of the stakes according to the strategic importance given to each of the players by the characteristic function of the game.

A series of tests conducted in Quebec and the US and utilizing a three-party game invented by Riker reveals that French Canadians take a numerical-egalitarian stance while Americans and English Canadians play according to a proportional-egalitarian model.

Finally, the results are analysed to try to find the possible reasons for the difference.

For over a decade, a major theme in the literature of social science has been the recognition of the increasing importance of specialized knowledge as a basis of power and wealth in modern societies. A fundamental question for political science hence becomes: how can we best understand the nature of the institutions which govern the acquisition and the application of specialized knowledge? What conceptual tools allow us to analyse the functioning of these institutions at present and to predict their future evolution?

In the literature dealing with the role of the press in Canadian politics one dimension which has attracted the attention of a number of commentators is the effect that chain ownership of large metropolitan dailies may have on influencing the amount, type, and interpretation of news disseminated to the public. The issue of the effects of chain ownership has been examined empirically in the United States, and studies confirm the hypothesis that chains do indeed influence the editorial positions of member newspapers. This note examines through content analysis the effects of chain ownership on editorial treatment of issues, political institutions, and political leaders in the context of the 1974 election.