OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Letters to Atticus/4.11

Translated by Evelyn Shuckburgh

## To Atticus at Rome
### Cumae, April 55 BC

I was delighted with your two letters which I received together on the 26th. Go on with the story. I long to know all the facts of what you write about. Also I should like you to find out what this means: you can do so from Demetrius. Pompey told me that he was expecting Crassus in his Alban villa on the 27th: that as soon as he arrived, they were going at once to Rome to settle accounts with the publicani. I asked, "During the gladiatorial exhibitions?" He answered, "Before they were begun." What that means I wish you would send me word either at once, if you know, or when he has reached Rome. I am engaged here in devouring books with the aid of that wonderful fellow Dionysius, for, by Hercules, that is what he seems to me to be. He sends compliments to you and all your party.
   No bliss so great as knowing all that is.
Wherefore indulge my thirst for knowledge by telling what happened on the first and on the second day of the shows: what about the Censors, what about Appius, what about that she-Appuleius of the people? Finally, pray write me word what you are doing yourself. For, to tell the truth, revolutions don't give me so much pleasure as a letter from you. I took no one out of town with me except Dionysius: yet I am in no fear of wanting conversation—so delightful do I find that youth. Pray give my book to Lucceius. I send you the book of Demetrius of Magnesia, that there may be a messenger on the spot to bring me back a letter from you.

## Footnotes

* ↑ A learned freedman of Atticus's.
* ↑ See Letter CXII. Censors were elected this year, but the powers of the censorship had been much curtailed by a law of Clodius in B.C. 58.
* ↑ Appius Claudius (brother of Clodius) was a candidate for the consulship of B.C. 54.
* ↑ Clodius, a revolutionary, like Appuleius Saturninus. The feminine gender is an insult.
* ↑ Either his poem "On his own Times," or the notes of events which he had promised in Letter CVIII.
* ↑ A treatise on union (peri homonoias). The rhetorician Dionysius of Magnesia had been with Cicero during his tour in Asia.
# Letters to Atticus/4.10

Translated by Evelyn Shuckburgh

## To Atticus at Rome
### Cumae, 20 April 55 BC

At Puteoli there is a great report that Ptolemy has been restored. If you have any more certain news, I should like to know it. I am here devouring the library of Faustus. Perhaps you thought I was feasting on the beauties of Puteoli and the Lucrine lake. Well, I have them too. But I declare to heaven that the more I am debarred from the enjoyment of ordinary pleasures, owing to the political situation, the more do I find support and refreshment in literature; and I would rather be sitting in that charming seat of yours, under your bust of Aristotle, than in their curule [official] chair, and be taking a stroll with you rather than with the great man with whom I see I shall have to walk. But as to that walk, let fortune look to it, or god, if there is any god who cares for such things. I wish, when possible, you would come and see my walk and Spartan bath, and the buildings planned by Cyrus, and would urge Philotimus to make haste, that I may have something to match with yours in that department. Pompey came to his Cuman property on the Parilia (19th April). He at once sent a man to me with his compliments. I am going to call on him on the morning of the 20th, as soon as I have written this letter.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Son of the dictator Sulla, who is known to have brought back from Athens a famous Aristotelian library.
* ↑ Pompey and Crassus, the consuls
* ↑ Pompey, as the context shows
* ↑ In the next clause ambulatio has a double meaning of physical walking and of a political course of conduct.
* ↑ Philotimus, a freedman of Terentia's, seems to have been engaged at Rome in the reconstruction of Cicero's house. The Spartan bath (Laconicum) was a hot-air bath, like a Turkish bath.
# Letters to Atticus/4.12

Translated by Evelyn Shuckburgh

## To Atticus at Rome
### Cumae, April 55 BC

Egnatius is at Rome. But I spoke strongly to him at Antium about Halimetus's business. He assured me that he would speak seriously to Aquilius. You will see the man therefore, if you please. I think I can scarcely be ready for Macro: for I see that the auction at Larinum is on the Ides and the two days following. Pray forgive me for that, since you think so much of Macro. But, as you love me, dine with me on the 2nd, and bring Pilia. You must absolutely do so. On the 1st I think of dining at Crassipes' suburban villa as a kind of inn. I thus elude the decree of the senate. Thence to my town house after dinner, so as to be ready to be at Milo's in the morning. There, then, I shall see you, and shall march you on with me. My whole household sends you greeting.

## Footnotes

* ↑ L. Egnatius, who owed Q. Cicero money.
* ↑ C. Aquilius Gallus, Cicero's colleague in the praetorship, and a busy advocate. See Letter X.
* ↑ Apparently a money-lender.
* ↑ Perhaps at his sponsalia, as he was married towards the end of the year.
# Louis Athanasaw v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
227 U.S. 326
Louis Athanasaw v. United States
Argued: and submitted January 7 and 8, 1913. --- Decided: February 24, 1913
Messrs. W. A. Carter and John P. Wall for plaintiffs in error.
Assistant Attorney General Harr 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
# Loudon v. Taxing District/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
104 U.S. 771
Loudon v. Taxing District
The questions in this case are,--
1. Whether, because the city of Memphis neglected to pay the debts it owed the appellant when they fell due, it must make good to him the losses he sustained on that account through exactions of extraordinary interest and discounts on sales of securities to raise money to meet his own obligations; and,
2. Whether, upon the facts as shown, a decree should be passed rescinding the contract under which the appellant received bonds to the city in settlement of what was due him on certain of his claims.
As to the first of these questions, it is sufficient to say that all damages for delay in the payment of money owing upon contract are provided for in the allowance of interest, which is in the nature of damages for withholding money that is due. The law assumes that interest is the measure of all such damages.
As to the second, we are satisfied that the only contract which was entered into by the parties is that expressed in the resolution of the city council accepting the proposition of the appellant to take bonds of the city in payment of what was due him on the designated claims. This required the city only to set apart, for the payment of the judgments which the appellant held, three tenths of the specified tax levied to defray the expenses of the city for the year 1872. That was done, and large sums of money collected and paid over under the appropriation. There was no fraud in the inception of the contract. The value of the bonds accepted by the appellant was well understood by him, and it is not denied that the officers of the city at the time acted in good faith. The failure of the city since 1874 to keep its contract and pay over the taxes of 1872 collected after that time is certainly no ground for setting aside the contract altogether. The more appropriate relief certainly is that which was granted; to wit, provision for the payment of the balance that remains due out of the future collections of taxes levied or to be levied in that behalf.
The city took an appeal from that part of the decree which gave the appellant affirmative relief; but that appeal has been dismissed, under the ninth rule, for want of prosecution. The case stands here now as though no such appeal had been taken. The city can, therefore, only be heard in support of the decree as it stands. This has long been the settled rule in this court. Canter v. American and Ocean Insurance Companies, 3 Pet. 307; Chittenden v. Brewster, 2 Wall. 191; The Stephen Morgan, 94 U.S. 599. An appeal brings up for review only that which was decided adversely to the appellant. It is unnecessary to determine what might have been done in this case if the appeal of the city had not been formally dismissed for want of prosecution.
Decree 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
# Loughborough v. Blake

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
18 U.S. 317
Loughborough v. Blake
March 7th.
THIS case, which was an action of trespass
March 7th. for the district of Columbia, to try the right of Congress to impose a direct tax on that district, and in which the Court below gave judgment for the defendant, was argued by Mr. Jones for the plaintiff, and by the Attorney General for the defendant.
Mr. Chief Justice MARSHALL 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
# Louis-Philippe to Mary Todd Lincoln, Friday, May 5, 1865

A letter of condolence to Mary Todd Lincoln, widow of Abraham Lincoln, from Louis Philippe, Orleanist pretender to the throne of France. In his letter, the prince makes reference to his service in the Army of the Potomac under General George McClellan and to the premature death of his own father, Prince Ferdinand-Philippe in 1842.
May 5th
Madam,
The overwhelming affliction which has befallen you and which has spread mourning not only over your country but over the whole world ought perhaps to command my silent sympathy. But that national calamity is also a personal loss to me who had many opportunities of appreciating himself the noble heart, the great qualities of M. Lincoln, who held from him his commission in the Federal Army and who gratefully remembers the gracious and friendly manner in which it was tendered to him. I hope therefore that you will excuse the liberty I take to offer you the expression of my sincere condolence with your grief. It is an impulse which I could not resist, an hommage [sic] which I am anxious to pay to a great and respected memory.
Nobody pretends to offer you any consolation for what mean the voices of the whole world when the only voice which we long to hear once more is silent for ever? But the expressions of sympathy are, perhaps, more acceptable when they come from one who has gone himself through the terrible ordeal of great and untimely family losses.
It is with these feelings that I beg you, Madam, to believe me,
Your most devoted
Louis Philippe D'Orléans
# Loughran v. Loughran

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
292 U.S. 216
Loughran v. Loughran
Argued: March 7, 1934. --- Decided: April 30, 1934
[Syllabus intentionally omitted]
Mr. Robert H. McNeill, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Wm. E. Leahy, of Washington, D.C., for respondents.
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
# Marchand v. Emken

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
132 U.S. 195
Marchand v. Emken
B. F. Lee and W. H. L. Lee, for appellant.
BLATCHFORD, 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
# Marchant v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
153 U.S. 380
Marchant v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
M. Hampton Todd, for plaintiff in error.
A. H. Wintersteen and Wayne MacVeagh, for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 381-383 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice SHIRAS, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# Marchand v. Griffon

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
140 U.S. 516
Marchand v. Griffon
C. W. Hornor and Geo. A. King, for plaintiff in error.
E. H. Farrar, E. B. Kruttschnitt, and B. F. Jonas, for defendant in error.
LAMAR, 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
# March of the Volunteers

* information about this edition.
* related portals: National anthems.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
March of the Volunteers (traditional Chinese: 義勇軍進行曲; simplified Chinese: 义勇军进行曲; pinyin: Yìyǒngjūn Jìnxíngqǔ) is the national anthem of the People's Republic of China, written by the noted poet and playwright Tian Han with music composed by Nie Er. This composition is a musical march. The piece was first performed as part of a 1934 Shanghai play and its original lyrics are the official lyrics of the national anthem. In 2004, a provision that the March of the Volunteers be the national anthem was added to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China as Article 136.

## English translation

| Original | Mao Zedong version (1978–1982) |
| Arise, ye who refuse to be slaves! With our flesh and blood, let us build a new Great Wall! As China faces its greatest peril From each one the urgent call to action comes forth. Arise! Arise! Arise! Millions of but one heart Braving the enemies' fire! March on! Braving the enemies' fire! March on! March on! March, march on! | March on! Heroes of every nationality! The great Communist Party leads us in continuing the Long March! Millions with but one heart toward a communist tomorrow Bravely struggle to develop and protect the motherland. March on! March on, March on! We will for many generations Raise high Mao Zedong's banner! March on! Raise high Mao Zedong's banner! March on! March on! March on! On! |
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Marchand v. Livandais

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
127 U.S. 775
Marchand v. Livandais
C. W. Hornor and W. S. Benedict, for plaintiff in error.
Edgar H. Farrar and Ernest B. Kruttschnitt, for defendant in error.
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
# Marchand v. Livandais/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
127 U.S. 775
Marchand v. Livandais
*A motion is made to dismiss this cause because Charles Lafitte, the husband of the defendant in error, is not named in the writ of error as a party to the proceedings. The judgment was in favor of his wife, Josephine, and he was a party authorizing her in the suit below, according to the forms of the Louisiana law, which require that the husband must be joined with the wife when she sues, whether he has any interest or not; and the plaintiff in error has served a citation on Lafitte, although he was not named in the writ of error. It may be doubtful whether Lafitte is a necessary party in this court, seeing he was not a party to the judgment. If for conformity's sake he ought to have been brought here to aid his wife in the writ of error, the citation to him is sufficient for that purpose. The motion to dismiss the case is overruled.

## 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
# Lykins v. McGrath

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
184 U.S. 169
Lykins v. McGrath
Argued: and Submitted January 13, 1902. --- Decided: February 24, 1902
Under and by virtue of the provisions of a treaty between the United States of America and the Kas-kas-kia, Peoria, and other confederated tribes of Indians, concluded on the 30th day of May, 1854, proclaimed August 10, 1854 (10 Stat. at L. 1083), and an act of Congress approved March 3, 1859 (11 Stat. at L. 431, chap. 82), the southeast quarter of section No. fifteen (15), in township No. seventeen (17), south of range No. twenty-three (23) east, in the territory, now state, of Kansas, and other lands, were on November 1, 1859, conveyed by the United States of America by letters patent to Ma-cha-co-meyah, or David Lykins, a memeber of the said Peoria tribe of Indians, being 'Peoria Reserve No. 14.' The patent contained the following provision: 'That said tracts shall never be sold or conveyed by the grantee or his heirs without the consent of the Secretary of the Interior for the time being.' On June 3, 1864, the patentee, David Lykins, conveyed the land to one Baptiste Peoria, by deed of that date, which deed was on March 10, 1865, presented to the Secretary of the Interior, and by him approved. Intermediate the making of the deed and the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, to wit, on August 14, 1864, the patentee died, leaving the two plaintiffs in error (plaintiffs below) as his sole heirs. This action in ejectment was commenced by them on March 18, 1899, in the cirucit court of the United States for the district of Kansas against the defendant, in possession and claiming title under the deed to Baptiste Peoria. A demurrer to an amended petition was sustained, and judgment entered in favor of the defendant, whereupon this writ of error was sued out.
Messrs. William M. Springer and Robinson, Bowler & McCluer for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. W. C. Perry, D. B. Holmes, and Frank M. Sheridan for defendant in error.
Mr Justice Brewer 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
# Lyle v. Foreman

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
COURT of COMMON PLEAS of
Philadelphia County:
LYLE, Admor. verʃus FOREMAN.
T
SHIPPEN, Preʃident, obferved, that while a man remained in the State, though avowing an intention to withdraw from it, he muft be confidered as an inhabitant, and, therefore, not an object of the Foreign Attachment. If an inhabitant clandeftinely withdraws, or fecretes himfelf, to avoid his creditors, he becomes liable to the Domeʃtic Attachment. The having once been an inhabitant will not, however, protect a man forever from a Foreign Attachment, where he has notorioufly emigrated from the State, and fettled eflewhere. But the cafe before the Court, is that of a Foreign Attachment iffued at the very time that the Defendant was an inhabitant of the State, which cannot be maintained.
Let the rule be made abfolute.
Wilcocks and Sergeant, for the Plaintiff ; Ingerʃol, for the Defendant.
# Lykes v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
343 U.S. 118
Lykes v. United States
Argued: Nov. 29, 30, 1951. --- Decided: March 24, 1952
See 343 U.S. 937, 72 S.Ct. 768.
Mr. George W. Ericksen, Tampa, Fla., for petitioner.
Mr. Harry Baum, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BURTON 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
# Lyle Branson Fawcett Letter 1834-01-02

Handwritten original in the private collection of the Chambless family. Transcribed to softcopy by Susan D. Chambless, 1998.
Envelope, To:
Mr Joseph Fawcett, Post Master, St. Charles, Missouri,
Gainesville Jany 2nd 1834
Dear Father
I need not apologize to you for my long silence, when I tell you that I have our store, the Post Office & some land speculation, besides being one of the board of Directors for the Gainesville & Narketa Rail Road Company, all on my hands and have but Bob & our clerk to help me, and last tho not the less important I am about to be married – yes I am serious when I say I am to be married on the 10th inst to Mrs. Elizabeth Bell, Sister to Col Scott who married Elizabeth Smith who you all know – as to the character of my intended I know you and my dear old mother will be entirely satisfied, whenever Willis writes to you of her – he has settled in the neighborhood where she now resides – she is a widow – without property of any account – some 7 or 8 years my junior – reminds me often of aunt Phoebe altho not so tall. I should like to have had Erasmus present at the wedding but thought his arrival rather uncertain, and therefore followed the promptings of my own heart which bids me use all haste.
Our business continues very fair the only difficulty we have is getting money – we have to shift the best we can and run our credit.
I received a letter from Willis yesterday three days old – he has begun operations in these new hours and from what a friend says, they will doo[sic] very well.
I have anxiously expected Erasmus for the last month – I have great need of him and intend taking him from Willis. I am interested in a considerable quantity of land in the county of Kemper and have sent some goods there also, now if Ras was there I would feel more safe, and could often sell land that no one now knows the owner of .
I, according to promise, placed $100 to your credit with Archer & Ellison and subject to your order – did you draw for it?
Willis and myself have several projects in view – I will write to you on my return, from my weding [sic] trip, more fully and give the result of our conference
Remember me to my dear mother & the family – tell my pet that if I ever get my hands on him, I intend making a clerk of him.
I must close – Bob is waiting on me.—
Your affte son L. B. Fawcett
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse