OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Lytle v. Household Manufacturing Inc./Concurrence O'Connor

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion O'Connor
Justice O'CONNOR, with whom Justice SCALIA joins, concurring.
I join the Court's opinion but write separately to note what the Court acknowledges in the last sentence of a footnote, see ante, at 551-552, n. 3: that the question whether petitioner has stated a valid claim under § 1981 remains open. In the District Court, petitioner claimed that respondent had fired him because of his race and retaliated against him for filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Ante, at 548. As Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164, 109 S.Ct. 2363, 105 L.Ed.2d 132 (1989), was decided after the Court of Appeals issued its decision, the applicability of § 1981 to these claims was not specifically addressed. This Court's usual practice is to decline to address questions raised for the first time here. See United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 551-552, n. 5, 100 S.Ct. 1870, 1875-1876, n. 5, 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980); Youakim v. Miller, 425 U.S. 231, 234, 96 S.Ct. 1399, 1401-02, 47 L.Ed.2d 701 (1976). The Court adheres to this practice, noting that arguments based on Patterson neither were "presented to either court below" nor are to be found "in the record." Ante, at 552, n. 3. The Court correctly concludes that there is "therefore . . . nothing in the record to justify affirming the Fourth Circuit's judgment" at this juncture. Ibid. On remand, therefore, the parties will have ample opportunity to present arguments, and the lower courts will have the first opportunity to consider whether either of petitioner's charges relates to the formation or enforcement of a contract, the two types of claims actionable under § 1981, Patterson, 491 U.S., at 176-178, 109 S.Ct., at 2372-2373, or relates only to "postformation conduct unrelated to an employee's right to enforce [his] contract." Id., at 180, 109 S.Ct., at 2374.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lysistrata

* related portals: Ancient Greek drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
"Lysistrata" (Λυσιστράτη) is a comedy by Aristophanes. Originally performed in Athens in 411 BCE, it is a comic account of one woman's extraordinary mission to end the Peloponnesian War. Lysistrata persuades the women of Greece to withhold sexual privileges from their husbands and lovers as a means of forcing the men to negotiate peace—a strategy, however, that inflames the battle between the sexes. Warning: template has been deprecated. As with all ancient Greek dramas, the interpretation may vary, given the condition of available manuscripts, the current study of ancient Greek language, and changes in the English language. As a result, varying English translations exist.
English-language translations of Λυσιστράτη include:
* The Lysistrata, translated by C. A. Wheelwright (1837)
* Lysistrata, translated by William James Hickie (1853)
* The Revolt of the Women, translated by Benjamin Bickley Rogers (1872)
* The Lysistrata, translated by Benjamin Bickley Rogers (1911)
* Lysistrata, published by The Athenian Society (1912), anonymous translator presumed to be Oscar Wilde
This work is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago. Translations of this work may be copyrighted.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Love in a Life

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Love in a Life."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* "Love in a Life", a poem by Robert Browning
* Love in a Life, a novel by Allan Monkhouse
# Love in My Arms Lies Sleeping

“Roses red for the fair young head to weave a crown…”
* Shorter, Dora Sigerson (1893), "Love in My Arms Lies Sleeping" in Verses
* Shorter, Dora Sigerson (1907), "Love in My Arms Lies Sleeping" in The Collected Poems of Dora Sigerson Shorter
# Letter upon receipt of a crystal ball

    Dear Mr. Caspary,
As I was leaving the Hotel shortly after five o'clock, I received from "Frank Partridge & Sons, Ltd." a box that greatly excited my curiosity. I could not refrain from delaying my engagement to open it. I was amazed when I saw it contained the most wonderful crystal I have ever beheld, something that has been in my thoughts almost continuously since I saw it in November last, but which I have continued to regard as wholly beyond my reach. I had a look at it the day I had the pleasure of meeting you and Mr. Partridge, but told Mr. Lipscomb to put it away, and left determined not to seek to see it again.
Surprised as I was to see this perfect crystal ball in the box which I opened, I was even more amazed when on opening the envelope attached to it, I read the words "With Mr. A. H. Caspary's compliments".
Really you must forgive me, if I find it quite impossible to express to you what I feel about your thought and generosity. I have still to fathom the mystery, for it is as if this gift had fallen into my hands from the skies, and, indeed, from beyond the skies, some good angel has been inspiring your heart as well as your mind, and I must find out from you just who it is. I cannot begin to thank you, till I see you. Indeed I feel I cannot accept the gift itself till I see you, and learn from you, youself, that it is not a dream, rather than the fulfillment of a vision.
The moment I came in, I tried at once to reach you but you had left just ten minutes earlier. I shall watch for the first free moments that we each may have, to call upon you. I have felt, however, that I must not wait even for that to express something of my feelings to you. I shall, I fear, never be able to let you know all I feel. Till I do see you, however, please believe that I have never been more deeply touched by any expression of friendship than this one which I owe to your generous heart, and which carries with it, obligations, almost as, if not equally profound, to Mr. Partridge and Mr. Lipscombe.
    Yours very sincerely,
       W. L. Mackenzie King
# Letters (Emerson)

Every day brings a ship
* Letters in May-day and other pieces (1867)
* Letters in Poems (Household Edition, 1904)
# Letter to the Speaker of the House on the Temporary Transfer of the Powers and Duties of President of the United States

A letter from President Joe Biden to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi invoking Section 3 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. During the time this letter was in force, Kamala Harris served as Acting President of the United States, making her the first woman to hold presidential power in the United States.
THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON
November 19, 2021
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi Speaker United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Madam Speaker:
Today I will undergo a routine medical procedure requiring sedation. In view of present circumstances, I have determined to transfer temporarily the powers and duties of the office of President of the United States to the Vice President during the brief period of the procedure and recovery.
In accordance with the provisions of section 3 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, this letter shall constitute my written declaration that I am presently unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office of the President of the United States. Pursuant to section 3, the Vice President shall discharge those powers and duties as Acting President until I transmit to you a written declaration that I am able to resume the discharge of those powers and duties.
Sincerely,
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. President of the United States
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Letter to the Sub Inspector of Police Roma Street

* related portals: Queensland.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
​C-O-P-Y. Ref. N$^o$9578/17
Brisbane District,
Roma Street Station.
3rd December, 1917.
Relative to the Police on duty at the Government Printing Office, Time,and and names of the men on each Relief.
Sir,
I beg to report in compliance with the Inspector's Memo dated 30/11/17 attached herewith, that acting under instructions the undermentioned Non Commissioned Officers and men were posted for duty at the Government Printing Office, George & William Streets, City, from 2.p.m. 27/11/17 to 11.15am 29/11/17.
27/11/17. 2p.m. to 10.p.m. Acting Sergeant Howard. Constables May, Bevan, Flynn. Acting Sergeant Todd. Constables Horan, Morris & Horn.
27/11/17. 10.pm to 6.am. Acting Sergeant McCoy. Constable Taylor, Anders & Bannon. Acting Sergeant Claire. Constable McLean, Hogan & Corrigan.
28/11/17. 6.am to 2.pm.
Acting Sergeant Howard. Constables May, Bevan & Flynn. Acting Sergeant Todd. Constables Horan Morris & Casey.
28/11/17. 2.pm to 10.pm.
Acting Sergeant Zillman. Constables Etherson, McCreath & Sobbie. Sergeant Gowran. Constables Kreutzer, Quinn & McKenna, J.
28/11/17. 10.pm to 6 am.
Acting Sergeant McCoy. Constables Taylors, Anders & Bannon. Acting Sergeant Claire. Constable Johnstone,A. Hogan & Corrigan.
29/11/17/ 6.am to 11.15. am.
Acting Sergeant Zillman. Constables Rivett, McCreath & Sobbie. Sergeant Gowran. Constables Kreutzer, Quinn,M.J. & McKenna,J.
Signed Jno M. Brown Sergeant N$^o$ 247
# Manila Investment Company v. Trammell/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
239 U.S. 31
Manila Investment Company v. Trammell
Argued: October 12, 1915. --- Decided: November 1, 1915
This case was begun in the district court of the United States for the southern district of Florida, upon a bill praying to have the title to certain lands decreed to be held in trust for complainants by the board of trustees of the internal improvement fund of Florida, and to recover lands deeded to others, but likewise held in trust for complainants. The court below dismissed the bill for want of jurisdiction.
An examination of the bill shows that the ground of recovery rests upon the allegation that the trustees contracted to convey the lands in question to the complainants, and afterwards, by formal resolution, the board repudiated its former action, and refused to recognize the alleged trust, and declared the complainants' title null and void. Complainants contend that this action by the trustees, as an agency of the state, in repudiation of its former action, and the conveyance of part of the land to others, in violation of the trust, constituted a taking of its property without due process of law, in violation of the provisions of the 14th Amendment. This is the only ground of Federal jurisdiction insisted upon.
The case presented no real and substantial controversy involving the construction or effect of the Federal Constitution. The allegations relied upon to give jurisdiction show a breach of contract merely, and bring the case within the principles decided by this court in St. Paul Gaslight Co. v. St. Paul, 181 U.S. 142, 45 L. ed. 788, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 575; Dawson v. Columbia Ave. Sav. Fund, S. D. Title & T. Co. 197 U.S. 178, 49 L. ed. 713, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 420; Shawnee Sewerage Drainage Co. v. Stearns, 220 U.S. 462, 55 L. ed. 544, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 452; McCormick v. Oklahoma City, 236 U.S. 657, 59 L. ed. 409, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 455.
Affirmed.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Mankin v. United States ex rel. Ludowici-Celadon Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
215 U.S. 533
Mankin v. United States ex rel. Ludowici-Celadon Company
Argued: January 7, 1910. --- Decided: January 17, 1910
Messrs. C. V. Meredith, T. C. Catchings, O. W. Catchings, and J. Jordan Leake for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. C. H. Alexander, W. C. Bowman, Richard F. Reed, and Gerard Brandon for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice Day delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Mankind in the Making

MANKIND IN THE MAKING
MANKIND IN THE MAKING
BY
H. G. WELLS
AUTHOR OF "ANTICIPATIONS," "THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON" AND "THE WAR OF THE WORLDS"
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS NEW YORK::::::::::::::::: 1904
Copyright, 1904, by CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
Published, April, 1904
TROW DIRECTORY PRINTING AND BOOKBINDINO COMPANY NEW YORK
CONTENTS
APPENDIX
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1946, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 77 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Manila Investment Company v. Trammell

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
239 U.S. 31
Manila Investment Company v. Trammell
Argued: October 12, 1915. --- Decided: November 1, 1915
Messrs. N. B. K. Pettingill and Arthur F. Odlin for appellants.
Mr. Thomas F. West, Attorney General of Florida, and Messrs. E. J. L'Engle and P. H. Odom for appellees.
Memorandum opinion by Mr. Justice Day, by direction of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Manion v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
353 U.S. 927
Manion v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Company
Argued: April 8, 1957. ---
Messrs. Ralph M. Jones, Kansas City, Mo., Charles B. Blackmar, Russell B. Day and Harold C. Heiss, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioners.
Mr. Horace F. Blackwell, Jr., Kansas City, Mo., for respondent.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Manion v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
353 U.S. 927
Manion v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Company
Argued: April 8, 1957. ---
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Kansas City Court of Appeals of Missouri must be vacated in the light of our decision in Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago River and Indiana R. Co., 353 U.S. 30, 77 S.Ct. 635, because the dispute here is not pending before the National Railroad Adjustment Board. The cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this decision and without prejudice to the power of the Court of Appeals to reinstate its judgment if the dispute is submitted to the Adjustment Board by either party within a reasonable time.
Judgment vacated and cause remanded.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Letters of Cortes to Emperor Charles V

Letters of Cortes to Emperor Charles V - Vol 1
Letters of Cortes to Emperor Charles V - Vol 2
# Letters of Cortes to Emperor Charles V - Vol 1

Of this limited letterpress edition seven hundred and fifty copies have been printed, and the type has been distributed
Letters of Cortes
The Five Letters of Relation from Fernando Cortes to the Emperor Charles V.
Translated, and Edited, with a Biographical Introduction
and Notes Compiled from Original Sources
By
Francis Augustus MacNutt
In Two Volumes
Volume One
G. P. Putnam's Sons New York and London The Knickerbocker Press 1908
Copyright, 1908 by FRANCIS AUGUSTUS MacNUTT
The Knickerbocker Press, New York
CONTENTS :
| | page |
| Biographical Note: ||
| early days | 3 |
| colonial life in cuba | 8 |
| the conqueror | 25 |
| marques del valle | 52 |
| Last Will and Testament of Fernando Cortes | 77 |
| Bibliographical Note | 101 |
| First Letter, July 10, 1519 | 123 |
| Appendix 1 of the First Letter | 175 |
| Appendix 2 of the First Letter | 177 |
| Appendix 3 of the First Letter | 179 |
| Appendix 4 of the First Letter | 181 |
| Second Letter, October 30, 1520 | 185 |
| Appendix 1 of the Second Letter | 327 |
| Appendix 2 of the Second Letter | 330 |
| Appendix 3 of the Second Letter | 337 |
| Appendix 4 of the Second Letter | 340 |
| Appendix 5 of the Second Letter | 345 |
| Appendix 6 of the Second Letter | 349 |
| Appendix 7 of the Second Letter | 351 |
ILLUSTRATIONS :
| PAGE ||
| Fernando Cortes | Frontispiece |
| From an Engraving by Ferdin Selma, after the Painting by Titian ||
| Cortes Coat-of-Arms | On cover |
| Plan of Mexico — Tenochtitlan | 188 |
| From Conquista de Mexico, vol. iv., by Orozco y Berra ||
| The Wall of Tlascala, | 200 |
| From Storia Antica del Messico, vol. ii., by Clavigero ||
Cortes family crest
# Mackin v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
117 U.S. 348
Mackin v. United States
Argued: March 22, 1886. ---
This was an information filed by the district attorney, on January 20, 1885, in the district court of the United States for the Northern district of Illinois, on section 5440 of the Revised Statutes, which is as follows: 'If two or more persons conspire, either to commit any offense against the United States or to defraud the United States in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such parties do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, all the parties to such conspiracy shall be liable to a penalty of not less than one thousand dollars and not more than ten thousand dollars, and to imprisonment not more than two years.' The information contained seven counts, which were respectively for conspiracies to commit offenses within sections 5512, 5511, and 5403. The substance of the offense, as alleged in different forms in the various counts, was the breaking open of a package containing a return, by the judges and clerks of election, of an election held in a district of the city of Chicago to choose a representative in congress and certain state and county officers; the alteration of the certificate of the result of the election, the poll-book, the tally-list of the votes cast for each candidate, and a large number of the ballots; and the substitution of spurious papers in their stead. In the district court the defendants were tried by a jury, and convicted, and on March 21, 1885, were sentenced to pay a fine of $5,000 each, and to be imprisoned for two years in the penitentiary of the state of Illinois at Joliet, in said district. A writ of error was sued out by the defendants, returnable at May term, 1885, of the circuit court. At the hearing in that court, the two judges presiding were divided in opinion upon five questions of law, and, at the request of the counsel for both parties, certified to this court those questions, two of which were as follows: '(1) Whether the crimes, or any of them, charged against the defendants in the counts of the information are infamous crimes, within the meaning of the fifth article of amendment to the constitution of the United States. (2) Whether the defendants can or not be held to answer in the courts of the United States for the crimes charged, or any of them, against them herein, otherwise than on the presentment or indictment of a grand jury.' The other questions certified related to the sufficiency of the several counts as setting forth any offense, and need not be particularly stated.
John C. Richberg, S. Shellabarger, and J. M. Wilson, for plaintiffs in error.
Atty. Gen. Garland, Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury, John B. Hawley, and Rich'd S. Tuthill, for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice GRAY, after stating the case as above reported, delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Mackie v. Story

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
93 U.S. 589
Mackie v. Story
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
Submitted on printed arguments by Mr. George L. Bright for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. John Finney and Mr. Henry C. Miller, contra.
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Maclaughlin v. Alliance Insurance Company of Philadelphia Insurance Company of Pennsylvania

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
286 U.S. 244
Maclaughlin v. Alliance Insurance Company of Philadelphia Insurance Company of Pennsylvania
Argued: April 13, 14, 1932. --- Decided: May 16, 1932
Mr. Robert T. McCracken, of Philadelphia, Pa., for insurance companies.
[Argument of Counsel from page 245 intentionally omitted]
The Attorney General and Mr. Thomas D.Thacher, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., for MacLaughlin.
[Argument of Counsel from page 246 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse