OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Camera Work

* related portals: Photography.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
American quarterly photographic journal published by Alfred Stieglitz from 1903 to 1917. It is known for its many high-quality photogravures by some of the most important photographers in the world and its editorial purpose to establish photography as a fine art.

## Issues

* Number 1 (January 1903) (transcription project)
* Number 2 (April 1903) (start transcription)
* Number 3 (July 1903) (start transcription)
* Number 4 (October 1903) (start transcription)
* Number 5 (January 1904) (start transcription)
* Number 6 (April 1904) (start transcription)
* Number 7 (July 1904) (start transcription)
* Number 8 (October 1904) (start transcription)
* Number 9 (January 1905) (start transcription)
* Number 10 (April 1905) (start transcription)
* Number 11 (July 1905) (start transcription)
* Number 12 (October 1905) (start transcription)
* Number 13 (January 1906) (start transcription)
* Number 14 (April 1906) (start transcription)
** Supplement (April 1906) (start transcription)
* Number 15 (July 1906) (start transcription)
* Number 16 (October 1906) (start transcription)
* Number 17 (January 1907) (start transcription)
* Number 18 (April 1907) (start transcription)
* Number 19 (July 1907) (start transcription)
* Number 20 (October 1907) (start transcription)
* Number 21 (January 1908) (start transcription)
* Number 22 (April 1908) (start transcription)
* Number 23 (July 1908) (start transcription)
* Number 24 (October 1908) (start transcription)
* Number 25 (January 1909) (start transcription)
* Number 26 (April 1909) (start transcription)
* Number 27 (July 1909) (start transcription)
* Number 28 (October 1909) (start transcription)
* Number 29 (January 1910) (start transcription)
* Number 30 (April 1910) (start transcription)
* Number 31 (July 1910) (start transcription)
* Number 32 (October 1910) (start transcription)
* Number 33 (January 1911) (start transcription)
* Number 34-35 (April-July 1911) (start transcription)
* Number 36 (October 1911) (start transcription)
* Number 37 (January 1912) (start transcription)
* Number 38 (April 1912) (start transcription)
* Number 39 (July 1912) (start transcription)
* Number 40 (October 1912) (start transcription)
* Number 41 (January 1913) (start transcription)
* Number 42-43 (April-July 1913) (start transcription)
* Number 44 (October 1913) (start transcription)
* Number 45 (January 1914) (start transcription)
* Number 46 (April 1914) (start transcription)
* Number 47 (July 1914) (start transcription)
* Number 48 (October 1916) (start transcription)
# Cambyses

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Cambyses."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.
* "Cambyses," by Eduard Meyer in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Cambyses," in The New Student's Reference Work, Chicago: F.E. Compton and Co. (1914)
# Bryan v. Kales

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Bryan v. Kales."
* 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.
* Bryan v. Kales (134 U.S. 126)
* Bryan v. Kales (162 U.S. 411)
# Bryan v. Forsyth

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    McLean
United States Supreme Court
60 U.S. 334
Bryan v. Forsyth
THIS case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois.
The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the court.
It was argued by Mr. Ballance and Mr. Johnson for the plaintiffs in error, and submitted on a printed argument by Mr. Williams for the defendant.
Mr. Justice CATRON 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
# Bryan v. Brasius/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
162 U.S. 415
Bryan v. Brasius
This case differs from the case of Bryan v. Kales (just decided) 16 Sup. Ct. 802, in the particular that the mortgagee, Kales, is not himself the defendant, but the defendants in possession are his alienees. The question thus presented is precisely the one that was ruled in the case of Brobst v. Brock, 10 Wall. 519, where this court held that a mortgagor of land cannot recover in ejectment against the mortgagee in possession, after breach of the condition, or against persons holding possession under the mortgagee; and also held that an irregular judicial sale made at the suit of a mortgagee, even though no bar to the equity of redemption, passes to the purchaser at such sale all the rights of the mortgagee as such. Gilbert v. Cooley, Walk. (Mich.) 494; Jackson v. Bowen, 7 Cow. 13.
So in Jackson v. Minkler, 10 Johns. 479, it was held that the assignee of a mortgage, in possession of the premises, is protected by the mortgage, though no foreclosure of it was shown, against an action of ejectment by a mortgagor.
The judgment of the court below (Bryan v. Brasius, 31 Pac. 519) was placed on this ground, and it is accordingly 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
# Boehner Talks Balanced Budget, Latest in Benghazi Investigation

* related authors: Hillary Rodham Clinton.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons gallery, quotes, news.
YouTube, also linked at Speaker.gov, and archived by the Internet Archive. March 17, 2015. Speaker of the House John Boehner.
Boehner Talks Balanced Budget, Latest in Benghazi Investigation
United States House of Representatives
March 17, 2015
Boehner Highlights Balanced Budget & The Latest in the Benghazi Investigation
March 17, 2015
Speaker Boehner's Press Office
WASHINGTON, DC – At a press conference with Republican leaders today, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) discussed Republicans’ pro-growth, balanced budget and reiterated the need for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to turn over her e-mail server to a neutral third party. Following are Boehner’s remarks:
“For 53 of the last 60 years, the federal government has spent more than it has taken in - 53 of the last 60 years. It’s unacceptable.
“To this day, now in his seventh year in office, the president has never proposed a budget that balances. Our budget will balance, but it’s also about growing our economy, growing jobs and building economic strength for our future.
“Lastly, let me reiterate that the American people deserve all the facts about what happened in Benghazi. That’s why it’s so important for Secretary Clinton to turn over her personal server to a neutral third party. I think this is the fairest way to make sure that we have all the documents that belong to the public, and ultimately, all the facts.”
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
# Boesch v. Graff

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
133 U.S. 697
Boesch v. Graff
J. J. Scrivner, for appellants.
J. H. Miller, for appellees.
FULLER, C. 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
# Boehmer v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
252 U.S. 496
Boehmer v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
Argued: March 10 and 11, 1920. --- Decided: April 19, 1920
Messrs. E. C. Brandenburg, of Washington, D. C., and Thomas A. Sullivan, of Buffalo, N. Y., for petitioner.
Mr. Frederic C. McKenney, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS 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
# Boehmer v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
252 U.S. 496
Boehmer v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
Argued: March 10 and 11, 1920. --- Decided: April 19, 1920
Relying upon the federal Employers' Liability Act (Comp. St. §§ 8657-8665), petitioner sought damages for personal injuries sustained by him November 8, 1915, while employed by respondent as brakeman. He claimed that the railroad was negligent in using a freight car not equipped with handholds or grabirons on all four outside corners, and also in failing to instruct him that he would be required to work about cars not so equipped. The car in question had secure and adequate handholds on the diagonally opposite corners. Being of opinion that this equipment sufficed to meet the commands of the statute and that under the circumstances disclosed, failure to instruct the petitioner concerning possible use of such car did not constitute negligence, the trial court directed verdict for respondent.
The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the consequent judgment. 252 Fed. 553, 165 C. C. A. 3.
Section 4 of the Safety Appliance Act of 1893 (27 Stat. 531 [Comp. St. § 8608]), provides:
'That from and after the first day of July, eighteen hundred and ninety-five, until otherwise ordered by the Interstate Commerce Commission, it shall be unlawful for any railroad company to use any car in interstate commerce that is not provided with secure grabirons or handholds in the ends and sides of each car for greater security to me in coupling and uncoupling cars.'
Petitioner insists that the act of 1893 was designed for the safety of employes and specified grabirons or handholds in the end and sides of each car as one of the essential requirements. That while it did not specifically command that these should be placed at all four corners, this was the obvious intent, But the courts below concurred in rejecting that construction, and we cannot say they erred in so doing. Section 4 must be interpeted and applied in view of practical railroad operations; and having considered these the courts below ruled against petitioner's theory.
Likewise we accept the concurrent judgment of the lower courts that the carrier was not negligent in failing to give warning concerning the use of cars with handholds only at two diagonal corners. Whether this constituted negligence depended upon an appreciation of the peculiar facts presented, and the rule is well settled that in such circumstances where two courts have agreed we will not enter upon a minute analysis of the evidence. Chicago Junction Railway Co. v. King, 222 U.S. 222, 32 Sup. Ct. 79, 56 L. Ed. 173.
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
# Boering v. Chesapeake Beach Railway Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
193 U.S. 442
Boering v. Chesapeake Beach Railway Company
Argued: March 4, 1904. --- Decided: March 21, 1904
Messrs. Charles F. Carusi, Charles H. Merillat, and Eugene Carusi & Sons for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 442-446 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Frederic D McKenney and John Spalding Flannery for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 446-448 intentionally omitted]
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
# Boesche v. Udall

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
373 U.S. 472
Boesche v. Udall
Argued: Feb. 25, 1963. --- Decided: May 27, 1963
Leon BenEzra, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Archibald Cox, Sol. Gen., for respondent.
Mr. Justice HARLAN 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
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 52/Proclamation, June 20, 1868

* related portals: Canadian Proclamations.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Published in the Canada Gazette, Volume I, Number 52
CANADA.
J. A. Macdonald, Minister of Justice.Whereas by Royal Proclamation dated at Windsor Castle on the 22nd day of May, in the year of Our Lord 1867, Her Most Gracious Majesty did ordain, declare, and command, that on and after the 1st day of July, 1867, the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick should form and be one Dominion under the name of Canada ;
And Whereas the Anniversary of the formation of the Dominion of Canada falls upon Wednesday, the 1st day of July next ensuing ;
And Whereas it is meet and proper that the said Anniversary should be observed and kept ;
Now Know Ye, that I, Charles Stanley Viscount Monck, Governor General of Canada, do hereby proclaim and appoint WEDNESDAY, the FIRST day of JULY next, as the day on which the Anniversary of the formation of the Dominion a Canada be duly celebrated. And I do hereby enjoin and call upon all Her Majesty's loving subjects throughout Canada to join in the due and proper celebration of the said Anniversary on the said FIRST day of JULY next.
MONCK.
By Command,
       HECTOR. L. L ANGEVIN,
             Secretary of State.
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 51/Statement of Provincial Notes in Circulation, June 12, 1868

* related portals: Canadian Government Notices.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Published in the Canada Gazette, Volume I, Number 51
| | $cts. | $cts. |
| Provincial Notes in circulation— | | |
| Payable at Montreal. | 2,718,809 00 | |
| Payable at Toronto. | 1,030,191 00 | |
| | | 3,749,000 00 |
| Specie held— | | |
| At Montreal. | 450,000 00 | |
| At Toronto. | 350,000 00 | |
| | | 800,000 00 |
| Debentures held by the Reciever General under the Provincial Note Act. | | 3,000,000 00 |
JOHN LANGTON, Auditor.
Audit Office, Ottawa, 12th June, 1868.
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 53

The Canada Gazette.
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY.
OTTAWA, SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1868.
CANADA.
* Gold Coins of Sidney Mint made a Legal Tender
OTTAWA:—Printed by Malcolm Cameron, Printer to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty.
This work is in the public domain worldwide because it was prepared or published by or under the direction or control of the Canadian Government or any government department prior to 1974.
Section 12 of the Canadian Copyright Act provides a reservation for Crown rights or privileges. Lack of modern case law on the subject makes it unclear whether perpetual prerogative rights over these documents still apply, or whether these rights have lapsed. Notwithstanding, these documents are reproducible under the terms of the Reproduction of Federal Law Order.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 52/Militia General Orders, June 19, 1868

* related portals: Canadian Militia General Orders.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Published in the Canada Gazette, Volume I, Number 52
HEAD QUARTERS,
Ottawa, 19th June, 1868
General Orders,
VOLUNTEER MILITIA.
No. 1.
Officers Commanding Corps and Battalions are requested to read publicly on the first parade of their Corps or Battalions after the receipt of this Order, the following extract from the existing Volunteer Militia Law.
"The Volunteer Force and every officer and man belonging to it, shall be subject to the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Army, and shall from the time of being called out for actual service, and also during the period of annual drill prescribed by this Act or by any Act amending the same, or by any Order of the Commander in Chief, under the authority thereof, and also during the continuance of any drill or parade of his corps at which he shall be present, be subject to the Rules and Articles of War, and to the Act for punishing mutiny and desertion, and all other laws then applicable to Her Majesty's Troops in this Province, and not inconsistent with this Act."
No. 2.
SERVICE MILITIA. Province of Ontario.
The Oshawa Grammar School Drill Association.
A Drill Association is hereby authorized at Oshawa, in the Regimental Division of Ontario, under the Command of Lt.-Col. Fairbanks, to be composed of the masters and pupils of the Oshawa County Grammar School, and to be styled the Oshawa Grammar School Drill Association.
       P. L. MacDOUGALL, Colonel,
          Adjutant General of Militia,
Canada.
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 51/Railway Traffic Returns, June 12, 1868

* related portals: Canadian Government Notices.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Published in the Canada Gazette, Volume I, Number 51
RAILWAY TRAFFIC RETURNS for the month of May 1868.
| NAMES OF THE RAILWAYS. | Passengers. | Mails and sundries. | Freight. | Total 1868. | Total 1867. | Miles in opera- tion. 1868. | Miles in opera- tion. 1867. |
| Great Western Railway. | 138,036 | 15,573 | 206,521 | 360,130 | 335,508 | 349¾ | 349¾ |
| Grand Trunk Railway.† | 163,641 | 19,700 | 330,381 | 513,722 | 444,242 | 1,377 | 1,377 |
| London and Port Stanley Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| Welland Railway. | 1,150 | 1,258 | 8 | 10,793 | 6,362 | 25 | 25 |
| Northern Railway. | 14,921 | 2,701 | 55,049 | 74,671 | 64,940 | 97 | 97 |
| Port Hope, Lindsay and Beaverton Railway and Peterborough Branch. | 3,222 | 247 | 23,804 | 27,273 | 21,968 | 56 | 56 |
| Cobourg, Peterborough and Marmora Railway. | 94 | | 3,773 | 3,867 | | 22 | 22 |
| Brockville and Ottawa Railway. | 3,511 | 260 | 12,785 | 16,556 | 11,746 | 86 | 86 |
| St. Lawrence and Ottawa Railway. | 5,572 | 1,496 | 3,195 | 10,263 | 8,542 | 54 | 54 |
| Carillon and Grenville Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| Stanstead, Shefford and Chambly Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| St. Lawrence and Industry Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| New Brunswick and Canada Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| European and North American Railway.* | 5,830 | 406 | 8,636 | 14,872 | 14,783 | 108 | 108 |
| Nova Scotia Railway.* | | | | | | | |
| Total. | | | | | | | |
    * No Returns. † 4 weeks.
JOHN LANGTON, Auditor.
       Audit Office, Ottawa, 12th June, 1868.
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 52

The Canada Gazette.
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY.
OTTAWA, SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1868.
CANADA.
Militia General Orders
Proclamations
* Proclamation, June 19, 1868
* Proclamation, June 20, 1868
Parliamentary Notices
* Parliamentary Notice, January 2, 1868
* Parliamentary Notice, January 13, 1868
Government Notices
* Government Notice, Customs, June 19, 1868
* Free Bank Return, June 10, 1868
* Railway Traffic Returns, June 12, 1868
* Order-in-Council, Inland Revenue, May 30, 1868 (1)
* Order-in-Council, Inland Revenue, May 30, 1868 (2)
* Order-in-Council, Inland Revenue, May 30, 1868 (3)
* Order-in-Council, Inland Revenue, May 30, 1868 (4)
* List of Pensions, Gratuities, and Amounts for Medical Services, June 1st, 1868
* Statement of Banks, May 31, 1868
Applications to Parliament
OTTAWA:—Printed by Malcolm Cameron, Printer to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty.
This work is in the public domain worldwide because it was prepared or published by or under the direction or control of the Canadian Government or any government department prior to 1974.
Section 12 of the Canadian Copyright Act provides a reservation for Crown rights or privileges. Lack of modern case law on the subject makes it unclear whether perpetual prerogative rights over these documents still apply, or whether these rights have lapsed. Notwithstanding, these documents are reproducible under the terms of the Reproduction of Federal Law Order.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Canada Gazette/Volume I/No. 52/Government Notice, Customs, June 19, 1868

* related portals: Canadian Government Notices.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Published in the Canada Gazette, Volume I, Number 52
Customs Department,
Ottawa, 19th June, 1868.
AUTHORIZED discount on American Invoices until further notice: 28 per cent.
R. S. M. BOUCHETTE,
Commissioner of Customs.
☞ The above is the only notice to appear in newspapers authorized to copy.
# Brooklyn Mining Milling Company v. Miller

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
227 U.S. 194
Brooklyn Mining Milling Company v. Miller
Argued: January 23 and 24, 1913. --- Decided: February 3, 1913
Messrs. F. S. Howell, John J. Hawkins, Thomas C. Job, and A. W. Jefferis for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from Pages 195-197 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. T. G. Norris, John M. Ross, Reese M. Ling, and E. J. Mitchell for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from Page 197 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Holmes 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
# Brooklyn Insurance Company v. Dutcher

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
95 U.S. 269
Brooklyn Insurance Company v. Dutcher
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Missouri.
This was a bill in equity filed by Clinton O. Dutcher and wife against the Brooklyn Insurance Company of New York, claiming that Mrs. Dutcher, under her contract with the company, and by reason of her payment of certain annual premiums, was entitled to a paid-up policy of insurance upon the life of her husband for $4,000, and praying for a specific performance. A decree was rendered for the complainants, and the company appealed here.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Submitted by Mr. J. O. Broadhead, for the appellant.
There was no opposing counsel.
MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE 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
# Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
287 U.S. 170
Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal v. United States
Argued: Oct. 21, 1932. --- Decided: Nov 14, 1932
Messrs. Leonard J. Matteson and Oscar R. Houston, both of New York City, for petitioner.
The Attorney General and Mr. Thomas D.Thacher, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., for the United States.
[Argument of Counsel from page 171 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice CARDOZO 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
# Burnet v. Huff

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
288 U.S. 156
Burnet v. Huff
Argued: Dec. 6, 1932. --- Decided: Feb 6, 1933
The Attorney General and Mr. Paul D. Miller, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Harry C. Weeks, of Wichita Falls, Tex., for respondents.
Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES 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