OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln/Volume 3/Were I President

"Were I President."
Policies Jotted Down as Appropriate for General Taylor, Whig Candidate for President, to Enunciate. About July 1, 1848.
The question of a national bank is at rest. Were I President, I should not urge its reagitation upon Congress; but should Congress see fit to pass an act to establish such an institution, I should not arrest it by the veto, unless I should consider it subject to some constitutional objection from which I believe the two former banks to have been free.
It appears to me that the national debt created by the war renders a modification of the existing tariff indispensable; and when it shall be modified I should be pleased to see it adjusted with a due reference to the protection of our home industry. The particulars, it appears to me, must and should be left to the untrammeled discretion of Congress.
As to the Mexican war, I still think the defensive line policy the best to terminate it. In a final treaty of peace, we shall probably be under a sort of necessity of taking some territory; but it is my desire that we shall not acquire any extending so far south as to enlarge and aggravate the distracting question of slavery. Should I come into the presidency before these questions shall be settled, I should act in relation to them in accordance with the views here expressed.
Finally, were I President, I should desire the legislation of the country to rest with Congress, uninfluenced by the executive in its origin or ​progress, and undisturbed by the veto unless in very special and clear cases.
# Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln/Volume 4/Preface

PREFACE
The present volume begins with Lincoln's speeches in the Frémont campaign and ends with his opening address in the Fourth Joint Debate with Senator Douglas, at Charleston, Ill. Between these debates Mr. Lincoln delivered several speeches, fragments of which were jotted down by Mr. Horace White, now of the Evening Post of New York, and then reporter of the Lincoln-Douglas debates for the Chicago Tribune. These are printed here in their chronological sequence, as is also the correspondence of the principals preliminary to the Debate.
With the exception of two legal arguments, all the speeches in the volume relate to the extension of slavery, the burning political issue of the time, which had been kindled by Senator Douglas's Nebraska Act, repealing the guaranty in the Missouri Compromise of free soil to the new territories north of the southern boundary of Missouri, and which had been fanned by the Dred Scott Decision into a flame endangering the freedom even of the States already established with a constitutional prohibition of slavery.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1916/"At Dawn he Marks the Smoke among the Trees"

"At Dawn he Marks the Smoke among the Trees"
At dawn he marks the smoke among the trees, From hearths to which his daily footsteps go; And hopes, and fears, and ponders on his knees, If his poor sheep will heed his voice or no; What wholesome turn will Ailsie’s sorrow take? Her latest sin will careless Annie rue? Will Robin now, at last, his wiles forsake? Meet his old dupes, yet hold his balance true? He prays at noon with all the warmth of heaven About his heart, that each may he forgiven; He prays at eve; and through the midnight air Sends holy ventures to the throne above; His very dreams are faithful to his prayer, And follow, with closed eyes, the path of love.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1916/"The Cow Low'd Sadly o'er the Distant Gate"

"The Cow Low'd Sadly o'er the Distant Gate"
The cow low’d sadly o’er the distant gate,  In the mid-field and round our garden rail; But nought her restless sorrow could abate,  Nor patting hands nor clink of milking-pail; For she had lost the love she least could spare.  Her little suckling calf, her life of life,  In some far shambles waited for the knife, And spent his sweet breath on the murderous air.  One single yearning sound, repeated still,  Moan’d from the croft, and wander’d round the hill The heedless train ran brawling down the line;  On went the horsemen and the market-cart, But little Rose, who loved the sheep and kine,  Ran home to tell of Cushie’s broken heart.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1918/In the Mirror

What are they doing up yonder, Those two in the concave glass? We speak, we smile, I watch, you know, The dusky light in your dark eyes glow; I hear the ring in each word you say, If the tone be mocking, or soft, or gay; But those two, our shadows, they sit up there, The tiny, defined, bright miniature pair; They never alter, unless the flash Of firelight leaps from the hoary ash, Athwart their rest to pass.
Who has sate there before us? When these faded tapestries shone, Bright from the dead hands' patient toil (May Christ the parted souls assoil), When the storied panes glowed fresh and rich, New set in you window's carven niche, And the knightly heads and the golden curls Of the old past, peopled with boys and girls, Gleamed there in the days long gone.
Well, they are asleep with their shadows, We live, love, say it, mine own! Will you give me your little hand to hold? Will you let me try it, this hoop of gold? Will you smile, sweet eyes, and soft red lips? Will you seal in the hearth-light's warm eclipse The lover's pledge and the lover's vow? See, what a pretty picture now, On the mirror's face is shown!
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 149/Issue 1921/Alma minha gentil, que te partiste

Originally published in Athenæum.
Alma minha gentil, que te partiste
Ah, gentle soul of me, that didst depart  This life of discontent, so sudden tane;  Rest there eternal in the heavenly reign, Live I here pent to play sad mortal part!
If from th' ethereal seats where homed thou art  Thy mem'ry things of earth may not disdain,  Forget not his dear love, whose ardent strain Thou saw'st so pure in eyes that showed his heart.
And, if thou see my love claim aught of grace,  If aught avail this everlasting care, This yearning care no cure shall e'er displace;
 Pray Him who sborten'd those few years so fair, As soon he bear me hence to see thy face  As from mine eyes thy light so soon he bare.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1915/The New Birth

Originally published in Spectator.
The New Birth
God spake in a voice of thunder,  Of old from Sinai’s hill; And the mystic words of wonder  Thrill the believer still; He sees in the vault above him,  With the eye of faith alone, Gemmed round by the souls that love him,  The great Creator’s throne.
He sees, in the day of danger,  The column of cloud that led, From the land of the alien stranger,  His Israel whom he fed; And knows, tho’ his footsteps wander  Astray in a twilight land, That his home is building yonder,  By the one unerring hand.
He sees, in the night of peril,  The pillar of fire that shone From the halls of pearl and beryl,  To light God’s children on; And feels that straight from Heaven,  When the eye of sense grows dim, Shall a grander sight be given  To all who trust in him.
On the page of the mighty ocean  He reads the mightier still, Who curbs its restless motion  By the law of his royal will; And while in its course diurnal  It murmurs, or sings, or raves, He lists to the voice eternal,  In the language of the waves.
He marks in the plants around him  The throbs of a life their own, While the wordless worlds that bound him  Whisper their undertone. From the hawk and the hound yet clearer  He hears the secret fall, Which nearer to him and nearer  Brings the great God of all.
In the leaves that blow and perish  In the space of a single hour, As the loves that most we cherish  Die like the frailest flower, — In the living things whose living  Withers or e’er they bloom, He reads of the great thanksgiving,  Which breathes from the open tomb.
The bright spring leaves returning  To the stem whence autumn’s fell, And the heart of summer burning,  To change at the winter’s spell, The year that again repasses,  The grain that again revives, Are signs on the darkened glasses  That bar and bound our lives.
I know how the glass must darken  To my vision more and more, When the weak ear strains to hearken,  When the faint eye glazes o’er; But the glass shall melt and shiver,  Once kissed by the fighting breath, And the light beyond the river  Shine full in the face of Death.
Strong-set in a strong affection,  We look to the golden prime, When a mightier resurrection  Shall burst on the doubts of time; And the thoughts of all the sages,  Like the waves of the fretful main, At the base of the Rock of Ages  Shall foam and fume in vain.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1915/The Forest Glade

The Forest Glade
As one dark morn I trod a forest glade,  A sunbeam entered at the further end, And ran to meet me through the yielding shade —  As one who in the distance sees a friend, And smiling, hurries to him; but mine eyes,  Bewilder'd by the change from dark to bright, Received the greeting with a quick surprise  At first, and then with tears of pure delight; For sad my thoughts had been, — the tempest's wrath  Had gloom'd the night, and made the morrow gray; That heavenly guidance humble sorrow hath,  Had turn'd my feet into that forest way, Just when His morning light came down the path,  Among the lonely woods at early day.
# Littell's Living Age/Volume 148/Issue 1918/Wind Fantasies

O wild and woeful wind! Cease for one moment thy complaining dreary, And tell me if thou art not sad and weary, And if thy travel is not long and eerie, -  O wild and woeful wind!
 O houseless, homeless wind! It wrings my heart to hear thy sad lamenting; Hast thou a wound whose pain knows no relenting, Canst never lay thy burden by repenting? -  O houseless, homeless wind!
 O sad and mournful wind! From what wild depths of human pain and sorrow Could'st thou those tones of restless anguish borrow, As of a soul that dreams of no to-morrow? -  O sad and mournful wind!
 O solitary wind! We know not whence thou com'st or whither goest, When round our homes thy wizard blast thou blowest, No home, nor shelter, thou, poor pilgrim, knowest, -  O solitary wind!
 Most melancholy wind! Is thine a requiem o'er the dead and dying, Or art thou some despairing spirit sighing O'er a lost Paradise behind thee lying? -  Most melancholy wind!
 Tell me - I long to know - Art thou a wild and weary penance doing, Thro' the lone wilderness thy way pursuing, Chased by the secret of thine own undoing? -  Tell me; I long to know.
 Hast thou no other voice, No words to whisper thy most grievous story, Where thou did'st lose thine ancient crown of glory, Ere thou wert banished to these deserts hoary? -  Hast thou no other voice?
 O, thou art fierce and wild! Thy nightly chariot through the black skies lashing, The cloud-shapes round the mountain summits dashing, The waves of ocean round the wrecked bark crashing, -  O, thou art fierce and wild!
 Yet, art thou full of woe. Perchance, thou wert earth's angel, when was lighted Sin's lurid torch, and all her bowers were blighted, Thy poor heart by that awful shock benighted, -  Thou art so full of woe.
 Hast thou no hope, no hope? That thy poor, weary pinion thou art flinging Against the star-paved floor, with echoes ringing Of angel footsteps and their anthem singing, -  Hast thou no hope, no hope?
 And hast thou never heard That sin's wild torch is quenched in blood atoning, - And that in days to come creation's groaning Will cease, and rapture fill the place of moaning, -  O, hast thou never heard?
 But thou wilt one day hear! For heaven and earth will stand in silent wonder, When love unites what sin hath rent asunder, Proclaiming victory in music-thunder, -  And thou wilt that day hear.
 In Heaven will all be joy, And there thy wailing, too, will cease forever, And thou, perchance, wilt float o'er life's full river, And join the melody that ceaseth never, -  In Heaven, where all is joy!
# McCorquodale v. Texas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
211 U.S. 432
McCorquodale v. Texas
Argued: and submitted December 3, 1908. --- Decided: December 21, 1908
Messrs. Sam Streetman, Thomas H. Ball, and Andrews, Ball, & Streetman for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. R. V. Davidson and Felix J. McCord for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice McKenna 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
# McCormick v. Talcott

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
61 U.S. 402
McCormick v. Talcott
THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois, sitting as a court of equity.
The bill which was filed by McCormick alleged that the defendants in error had infringed his patent for a reaping machine; called upon them for an account, and prayed for an injunction. The defendants denied the infringement, and claimed a right to construct their machines under letters patent granted to John H. Manny. The Circuit Court dismissed the bill, and McCormick appealed to this court.
McCormick's patents had been twice before this court, as will be seen by referring to 16 Howard, 480, and 19 Howard, 96. The same claims, viz: the fourth and fifth of the patent of 1845, were involved in the case in 19 Howard, and the remaining claim, viz: that relating to the seat of the raker, under the patent of 1847, was before the court in 16 Howard, only that it now comes up under a reissued patent in 1853.
The reporter despairs of giving any intelligible account of the argument in this case. The record was upwards of one thousand pages of printed matter, of which seven hundred and fifty pages were the depositions of witnesses; and the court room was filled with models and drawings, introduced upon either side, to which constant reference was made by the counsel.
The case was argued by Mr. Reverdy Johnson and Mr. Dickerson for the plaintiff in error, and Mr. Stanton and Mr. Harding for the defendants.
Mr. Justice GRIER 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
# Matthews v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
161 U.S. 500
Matthews v. United States
W. J. Townsend and Charles A. Hess, for plaintiff in error.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Whitney, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice PECKHAM, after § ating the above facts, 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
# Matthews v. Warner

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Matthews v. Warner."
* 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.
* Matthews v. Warner (112 U.S. 600)
* Matthews v. Warner (145 U.S. 475)
# Matthews v. Rodgers

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
284 U.S. 521
Matthews v. Rodgers
Argued: Jan. 11, 1932. --- Decided: Feb 15, 1932
Mr. J. A. Lauderdale, of Jackson, Miss., for appellants.
Mr. Edward W. Smith, of Clarksdale, Miss., for appellees.
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
# Matthews v. Warner (112 U.S. 600)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
112 U.S. 600
Matthews v. Warner
W. A. Abbott, for appellant.
C. R. Hoar and Jos. B. Warner, for appellees.
MILLER, J.

## 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
# Matthews v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
161 U.S. 500
Matthews v. United States
The only point suggested by counsel for plaintiff in error upon which to obtain a reversal of the judgment is the fact of the variance between the indictment and the proof as to the day when the alleged perjury was committed. We think the decision of the court below was clearly right. The cases cited by counsel for plaintiff in error, in regard to the necessity for specific and accurate proof of the very day upon which the perjury was alleged to have been committed, were those in relation to records, depositions, or affidavits, which were to be identified by the day on which they were made or taken. Under such circumstances, a misdescription of the date of the particular record, deposition, or affidavit has been sometimes held fatal, on the ground, substantially, that it has not been identified as the particular one in which the perjury is alleged to have been committed, because the record or other paper itself bears one date, and the indictment describing it bears another. It is not the same record, and therefore there is variance, which has been held fatal to a conviction.
In this case there was no record which was contradicted by the proof given upon this trial. The trial was described accurately the parties to it, the court in which to took place, the term and the time at which it was tried; and the only difference between the allegation in the indictment and the proof in the case is that, during this trial, which occupied several days, the plaintiff in error swore, on the 6th of June, instead of on the 7th, as alleged in the indictment, to the matter which was alleged to be false. The date upon which the evidence was given, which was alleged to have been false, appeared by the stenographer's minutes, who took the evidence on the trial, to have been the 6th of June. This is no record, and it is not within the principle upon which the cases relied upon by counsel for plaintiff in error were decided. Such a variance as appears in this case is not material. Rex v. Coppard, 3 Car. & P. 59; Keator v. People, 32 Mich. 484; People v. Hoag, 2 Parker, Cr. R. 1. It will be seen that the time was stated under a videlicet in this indictment, although that fact is probably not very material. The opinion written by the learned judge in denying the motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgment says all that is necessary to be said in this case, and we concur entirely in the conclusion reached by him. 68 Fed. 830.
The judgment must be 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
# McCurdy v. United States (246 U.S. 263)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
246 U.S. 263
McCurdy v. United States
Argued: Jan. 18, 1918. --- Decided: March 4, 1918
[Syllabus from 263-264 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Preston A. Shinn, of Pawhuska, Okl., for appellants.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Kearful, for the United States.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS 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
# McDaniel v. Barresi

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
402 U.S. 39
McDaniel, Superintendent of Schools, et al. v. Barresi et al.
Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia
No. 420. Argued: October 13, 1970 --- Decided: April 20, 1971
The Board of Education of Clarke County, Georgia (with a two-to-one white-Negro elementary school system ratio), devised a student assignment plan for desegregating elementary schools which establishes geographic zones drawn to promote desegregation and also provides that pupils in heavily concentrated Negro "pockets" walk or go by bus to schools in other attendance zones. The resulting Negro elementary enrollment ranges from 20% to 40% in all but two schools, where it is 50%. Respondent parents sued to enjoin the plan's operation. The state trial court denied an injunction. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed, holding that the plan violated (1) equal protection because it "[treated] students differently because of their race," and (2) the Civil Rights Act of 1964, because Title IV prohibits a school board from requiring busing to achieve a racial balance.
Held:
    1. In compliance with its duty to convert to a unitary system, the school board properly took race into account in fixing the attendance lines. P. 41.
    2. Title IV, a direction to federal officials, does not restrict state officials in assigning students within their systems. Pp. 41-42.
226 Ga. 456, 175 S.E. 2d 649, reversed.
BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Eugene A. Epting argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners.
E. Freeman Leverett argued the cause and filed a brief for respondents.
Briefs of amici curiae were filed by Solicitor General Griswold and Assistant Attorney General Leonard for the United States, and by Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Alfred L. Evans, Jr., and J. Lee Perry, Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of Georgia.

## 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
# McDaniel v. North Carolina/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 665
McDaniel v. North Carolina
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment of the Supreme Court of North Carolina is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further consideration in the light of Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 88 S.Ct. 2008, 20 L.Ed.2d 1047.
Mr. Justice BLACK dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S., p. 226, 88 S.Ct., p. 2012.
Mr. Justice HARLAN dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S., p. 226, 88 S.Ct., p. 2012.
Mr. Justice WHITE dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Harrison v. United States, 392 U.S., p. 228, 88 S.Ct., p. 2013.

## 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
# McCurdy v. United States (264 U.S. 484)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
264 U.S. 484
McCurdy v. United States (264 U.S. 484)
Argued: and Submitted. Jan. 4, 1924. --- Decided: April 7, 1924
Mr. Elmer E. Grinstead, of Pawhuska, Okl., for appellants.
The Attorney General and Mr. S. W. Williams, of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
Mr. Justice BUTLER 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