OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Georgia Guidestones Text

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) between 1929 and 1977 (inclusive) without a copyright notice.
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

## Main Inscription

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.
Unite humanity with a living new language.
Rule passion – faith – tradition – and all things with tempered reason.
Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth – beauty – love – seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the Earth – Leave room for nature – Leave room for nature.

## Explanatory Text

The Georgia Guidestones
Center cluster erected March 22, 1980
Let these be guidestones to an Age of Reason

### Astronomic features

* Channel through stone indicates celestial pole
* Horizontal slot indicates annual travel of sun
* Sunbeam through capstone marks noontime throughout the year
Author: R.C. Christian (a pseudonyn)
Sponsors: A small group of Americans who seek the Age of Reason

### Time Capsule

Placed six feet below this spot on
To be opened on

## Physical Data

* Overall height – 19 feet 3 inches.
* Total weight – 237,746 pounds.
* Four major stones are 16 feet, Four inches high, each weighing An average of 42,437 pounds.
* Center stone is 16 feet, four- Inches high, weighs 20,957 Pounds.
* Capstone is 9-feet, 8-inches Long, 6-feet, 6-inches wide; 1-foot, 7-inches thick. Weighs 24,832 pounds.
* Support stones (bases) 7-feet, 4 inches long 2-feet wide. 1 foot, 4-inches thick, each Weighing an average of 4,875 Pounds.
* Support stone (base) 4-feet, 2½ inches long, 2-feet, 2-inches Wide, 1-foot, 7-inches thick. Weight 2,707 pounds.
* 951 cubic feet granite.
* Granite quarried from pyramid Quarries located 3 miles west Of Elberton, Georgia.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) between 1929 and 1977 (inclusive) without a copyright notice.
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
# Georgia Ordinance of Secession

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
Adopted January 19, 1861. This edition from the Journal of the public and secret proceedings of the Convention of the people of Georgia.
AN ORDINANCE
To dissolve the Union between the State of Georgia and other States united with her under a compact of Government entitled "the Constitution of the United States of America."
We, the people of the State of Georgia, in Convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained:
That the ordinance adopted by the people of the State of Georgia in Convention on the second day of January in the year of our Lord seventeen hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was assented to, ratified and adopted; and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying and adopting amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed, rescinded and abrogated.
We do further declare and ordain, That the Union now subsisting between the State of Georgia and other States, under the name of the "United States of America," is hereby dissolved, and that the State of Georgia is in the ​full possession and exercise of all those rights of sovereignty which belong and appertain to a free and independent State.
# Georgia Hardwood Lumber Company v. Compania De Navegacion Transmar Sa the Kotor

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
323 U.S. 334
Georgia Hardwood Lumber Company v. Compania De Navegacion Transmar Sa the Kotor
Argued: Dec. 14, 1944. --- Decided: Jan 2, 1945
Mr. John Tilney Carpenter, of New York City, for petitioner.
Mr. Wilbur E. Dow, Jr., of New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# Georgia Power Company v. City of Decatur

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
281 U.S. 505
Georgia Power Company v. City of Decatur
Argued: April 16, 17, 1930. --- Decided: May 19, 1930
Messrs. Walter T. Colquitt and Ben J. Conyers, both of Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner.
Mr. Hooper Alexander, of Atlanta, Ga., for respondent.
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
# Helena Waterworks Company v. Helena

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
195 U.S. 383
Helena Waterworks Company v. Helena
Argued: October 28, 1904. --- Decided: November 28, 1904
This case was begun by a bill filed in the circuit court of the United States by the Helena Waterworks Company, successor to the Helena Consolidated Water Company, to restrain the city of Helena from erecting purchasing, or acquiring a waterworks system for said city, and from acquiring water for such purpose, except it purchase the plant of the complainant company, and from incurring any indebtedness or expenditure of money for such purpose.
The rights in controversy are alleged to result from a contract made by the passage, and acceptance by the company, of a certain ordinance, number 248, passed and approved in January, 1890.
It is also alleged that the Helena Consolidated Water Company, predecessor of the complainant company, complied with all the terms of the ordinance, and expended large sums of money in erecting and maintaining the plant for supplying water to the inhabitants of the said city of Helena.
It is averred that the said city has adopted certain ordinances and taken certain proceedings to acquire and build a water system of its own, and that said ordinances and proceedings are in violation of the contract rights of the complainant company, guaranteed by § 11 of article 3 of the Constitution of the state of Montana, and § 10 of article 1 of the Constitution of the United States, and that the proceedings of the city in this behalf will amount to taking the property of the complainant company without just compensation, in violation of § 14 of article 3 of the Constitution of the state of Montana, and that its rights and property will be taken without due process of law, in violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
It is further averred that the taxation necessary for the construction of the city plant is in excess of any that can be lawfully levied for such purpose.
The case was tried upon an agreed statement of facts. In the circuit court a decision was rendered in favor of the waterworks company. Upon appeal to the circuit court of appeals that court reversed the decision of the circuit court, and remanded the case, with instructions to dismiss the bill. 58 C. C. A. 381, 122 Fed. 1.
The terms of the ordinance relied upon, and so much of the agreed statement of facts as is necessary to a determination of the case, sufficiently appear in the opinion.
Messrs. M. S. Gunn, B. Platt Carpenter, and Stephen Carpenter for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 384-386 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Edward Horsky, Edwin W. Toole, Thomas C Bach, E. C. Day, and R. Lee Word for appellee.
Statement by Mr. Justice Day: 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
# Helis v. Ward

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
308 U.S. 365
Helis v. Ward
Argued: Dec. 6, 1939. --- Decided: Dec 18, 1939
See 308 U.S. 640, 60 S.Ct. 385, 84 L.Ed. --.
Mr. Eugene D. Saunders, of New Orleans, La., for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from page 366 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. William N. Bonner, of Houston, Tex., and W. D. Gordon, of Beaumont Tex., for respondents.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1; 117th Congress)/Division C/Title VIII/Subtitle I

117th congress (2021-2022)

#### SEC. 8081. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this title or any amendment made by this title, or any application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of the provisions of this title and the amendments made by this title, and the application of the provision or amendment to any other person or circumstance, shall not be affected.
# For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1; 117th Congress)/Division C/Title VIII/Subtitle H

117th congress (2021-2022)

#### SEC. 8071. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the “Stop Waste And Misuse by Presidential Flyers Landing Yet Evading Rules and Standards” or the “SWAMP FLYERS”.

#### SEC. 8072. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR TRAVEL ON PRIVATE AIRCRAFT.

    (a) In General.—Beginning on the date of enactment of this subtitle, no Federal funds appropriated or otherwise made available in any fiscal year may be used to pay the travel expenses of any senior political appointee for travel on official business on a non-commercial, private, or chartered flight.
    (b) Exceptions.—The limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply—
       (1) if no commercial flight was available for the travel in question, consistent with subsection (c); or
       (2) to any travel on aircraft owned or leased by the Government.
    (c) Certification.—
       (1) IN GENERAL.—Any senior political appointee who travels on a non-commercial, private, or chartered flight under the exception provided in subsection :(b)(1) shall, not later than 30 days after the date of such travel, submit a written statement to Congress certifying that no commercial flight was available.
       (2) PENALTY.—Any statement submitted under paragraph (1) shall be considered a statement for purposes of applying section 1001 of title 18, United States Code.
    (d) Definition Of Senior Political Appointee.—In this subtitle, the term “senior political appointee” means any individual occupying—
       (1) a position listed under the Executive Schedule (subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code);
       (2) a Senior Executive Service position that is not a career appointee as defined under section 3132(a)(4) of such title; or
       (3) a position of a confidential or policy-determining character under schedule C of subpart C of part 213 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations.
# For the People Act of 2021 (H.R. 1; 117th Congress)/Sec. 4.

117th congress (2021-2022)
    (a) In General.—For any action brought for declaratory or injunctive relief to challenge, whether facially or as-applied, the constitutionality or lawfulness of any provision of this Act or any amendment made by this Act or any rule or regulation promulgated under this Act, the following rules shall apply:
       (1) The action shall be filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and an appeal from the decision of the district court may be taken to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. These courts, and the Supreme Court of the United States on a writ of certiorari (if such a writ is issued), shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear such actions.
       (2) The party filing the action shall concurrently deliver a copy the complaint to the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate.
       (3) It shall be the duty of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of the action and appeal.
    (b) Clarifying Scope Of Jurisdiction.—If an action at the time of its commencement is not subject to subsection (a), but an amendment, counterclaim, cross-claim, affirmative defense, or any other pleading or motion is filed challenging, whether facially or as-applied, the constitutionality or lawfulness of this Act or any amendment made by this Act or any rule or regulation promulgated under this Act, the district court shall transfer the action to the District Court for the District of Columbia, and the action shall thereafter be conducted pursuant to subsection (a).
    (c) Intervention By Members Of Congress.—In any action described in subsection (a), any Member of the House of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress) or Senate shall have the right to intervene either in support of or opposition to the position of a party to the case regarding the constitutionality of the provision. To avoid duplication of efforts and reduce the burdens placed on the parties to the action, the court in any such action may make such orders as it considers necessary, including orders to require interveners taking similar positions to file joint papers or to be represented by a single attorney at oral argument.
# For the Services in Memory of Abraham Lincoln

Choral: "Luther's Judgment Hymn"
O thou of soul and sense and breath  The ever-present Giver, Unto thy mighty Angel, Death,  All flesh thou dost deliver; What most we cherish we resign, For life and death alike are thine,  Who reignest Lord forever!
Our hearts lie buried in the dust  With him so true and tender, The patriot's stay, the people's trust,  The shield of the offender; Yet every murmuring voice is still, As, bowing to thy sovereign will,  Our best-loved we surrender.
Dear Lord, with pitying eye behold  This martyr generation, Which thou, through trials manifold,  Art showing thy salvation! Oh let the blood by murder spilt Wash out thy stricken children's guilt  And sanctify our nation!
Be thou thy orphaned Israel's friend,  Forsake thy people never, In One our broken Many blend,  That none again may sever! Hear us, O Father, while we raise With trembling lips our song of praise,  And bless thy name forever!
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
# Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company (129 U.S. 170)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 170
Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company
E. Walker and W. C. Goudy, for the motion.
Gordon E. Cole, contra.
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
# Hill

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Hill."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, taxonomy, 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.
* The Hill, a poem by Rupert Brooke
* "Hill" in Great Leaders and National Issues of 1896
* "Hill," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* Various authors surnamed Hill
# Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company."
* 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.
* Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company (129 U.S. 170)
* Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company (140 U.S. 52)
# Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company (140 U.S. 52)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
140 U.S. 52
Hill v. Chicago E. Railroad Company
M. D. Grover, for appellant.
John W. Cary and John N. Jewett, for appellees.
FIELD, 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
# Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/137. The Interrogative Pronouns

Layout 2
a The interrogative pronoun מִי who may refer either to a masculine or feminine person (Ct 3), or even to a plural, e.g. מִי אַתֶּם who are ye? Jos 9; מִי־אֵ֫לֶּה Gn 33, Nu 22 (more minutely, מִי וָמִי Ex 10, i.e. who exactly, who in particular?). It is used of the neuter only when the idea of a person is implied, e.g. מִֽי־שְׁכֶם who are the Shechemites? Ju 9, 13, Gn 33, Mi 1; even more boldly, with the repetition of a מִי used personally, in 1 S 18, 2 S 7.—Another interrogative is אֵי־זֶה which, what?; of persons only in Est 7.
b Moreover, מִי may also be used in the sense of a genitive, e.g. בַּת־מִי אַתְּ whose daughter art thou? Gn 24, 1 S 17, 56, 58; דְּבַר מִי whose word? Jer 44, 1 S 12; in the accusative, אֶת־מִי quemnam? 1 S 28, Is 6; with prepositions, e.g. בְּמִי 1 K 20 (in an abrupt question by whom?); לְמִי Gn 32; אַֽחֲרֵי מִי 1 S 24.—Similarly מָה, מַה־, מֶה what? is used for the nominative, or accusative, or genitive (Jer 8), or with prepositions, e.g. עַל־מָה whereupon? Is 1, Jb 38; why? Nu 22, &c.; עַד־מָה quousque? ψ 74.
c Rem. Both מִי and מָה are used also in indirect questions (on the merely relative distinction between direct and indirect questions in Hebrew, see the Interrogative Sentences), e.g. Gn 39 (but read מְא֫וּמָה with Samar. and LXX), 43:22, Ex 32.—On the meaning of מִי and מָה as interrogatives is based also their use as indefinite pronouns (equivalent to quisquis, quodcunque or quicquam), e.g. Ex 32, Ju 7, 1 S 20, Is 50 (read יִשְׁמַע in the apodosis), 54:15, Pr 9, 16, 2 Ch 36; even שִׁמְרוּ־מִי have a care, whosoever ye be, 2 S 18 (unless לִי is to be read, with the LXX, for מִי); so also מָה (whatever it be) Jb 13, 1 S 19, 2 S 18, 23; cf. Nu 23 וּדְבַר מַה־יַּרְאֵ֫נִי and whatsoever he showeth me. Cf. also מִי אֲשֶׁר whosoever Ex 32, 2 S 20, and מִֽי־הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר any man who Dt 20 ff., ​Ju 10. A still further weakening of the indefinite use of מָה is the combination מַה־שֶּׁ· that which, Ec 1, 3 (just like the Syriac מָא דְ); cf. Est 8, and בַּל... מָה Pr 9, לֹא... מָה Neh 2, nothing whatever.—On מְא֫וּמָה quicquam, anything at all (usually with a negative), and as an adverb in any way, 1 S 21, see the Lexicon.
# Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/14. Mappîq and Rāphè

Layout 2
a 1. Mappîq, llke Dageš, also a point within the consonant, serves in the letters א ה ו י as a sign that they are to be regarded as full consonants and not as vowel letters. In most editions of the text it is only used in the consonantal ה at the end of words (since ה can never be a vowel letter in the middle of a word), e.g. גָּבַהּ gābháh (to be high), אַרְצָהּ ʾarṣāh (her land) which has a consonantal ending (shortened from -hā), different from אַ֫רְצָה ʾárṣā (to the earth) which has a vowel ending.
b Rem. 1. Without doubt such a Hē was distinctly aspirated like the Arabic Hā at the end of a syllable. There are, however, cases in which this ה has lost its consonantal character (the Mappîq of course disappearing too), so that it remains only as a vowel letter; cf. § 91 e on the 3rd fem. sing.
cThe name מַפִּיק means proferens, i.e. a sign which brings out the sound of the letter distinctly, as a consonant. The same sign was selected for this ​and for Dageš, since both are intended to indicate a hard, i.e. a strong, sound. Hence Rāphè (see e) is the opposite of both.
d 2. In MSS. Mappîq is also found with א, ו, י, to mark them expressly as consonants, e.g. גּוֹיִ (gôy), קָוִ (qāw, qāu), for which וְ is also used, as עֵשָׂוְ, &c. For the various statements of the Masora (where these points are treated as Dageš), see Ginsburg, The Massorah, letter א, § 5 (also Introd., pp. 557, 609, 637, 770), and ‘The Dageshed Alephs in the Karlsruhe MS.’ (where these points are extremely frequent), in the Verhandlungen des Berliner Orientalisten-Kongresses, Berlin, i. 1881, p. 136 ff. The great differences in the statements found in the Masora point to different schools, one of which appears to have intended that every audible א should be pointed. In the printed editions the point occurs only four times with א (אׄ or אּ), Gn 43, Lv 23, Ezr 8 and Jb 33 (רֻאּוּ; where the point can be taken only as an orthophonetic sign, not with König as Dageš forte). Cf. Delitzsch, Hiob, 2nd ed., p. 439 ff.
e 2. Rāphè (רָפֶה i.e. weak, soft), a horizontal stroke over the letter, is the opposite of both kinds of Dageš and Mappîq, but especially of Dageš lene. In exact manuscripts every בגדכפת letter has either Dageš lene or Rāphè, e.g. מֶלֶךְֿ mèlĕkh, תָּפַֿר, שָׁתָֿה. In modern editions (except Ginsburg’s 1st ed.) Rāphè is used only when the absence of a Dageš or Mappîq requires to be expressly pointed out.