OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Who's Who in the Far East/GROLEAU, Elie Jean Henri

Layout 2
​ GROLEAU, Elie Jean Henri (NAMDixiii), Inspector, Civil Service, Indo-Chiua, Chief of Nam-Dinh Province; 6. Feb. 16, 1859.. Entered Civil Service, Indo-China, Aug. 11, 1882; 3rd class Administrator, Jan., 1891; 2nd chifs, Jan., 1895; 1st hiss, Jan., 1898; Inspector, Jan., lsx)2. Address: Nam-Dinh, Tonkin, Indo-China.
# Weird Tales/Volume 1/Issue 1/"Evil Demon" Drives Man to Orgy of Crime

From Weird Tales, Volume 1, Issue 1
"Evil Demon" Drives Man to Orgy of Crime
SPURNED by his young niece, Estanislao Puyat, a Filipino, ran amuck in the streets of Manila, after throwing the girl from an upper window to the ground and almost killing her. Grabbing his bolo, he rushed down the street, stabbed an aged woman in the eye, cut off the hands of two other women, slashed another, stabbed a Chinese merchant and a cart driver, cut another woman on the forehead, wounded a child and a young Filipino girl, and then, reaching the Bay, threw himself into the water in an effort to commit suicide. Capt. H. H. Elarth threw a noose over his head and dragged him ashore. The Filipinos say that Puyat was "de malas," meaning he was possessed of an evil demon.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
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
# Weird Tales/Volume 1/Issue 1

WEIRD TALES
Printed in U.S.A.
The Unique Magazine
MARCH, 1923
25 Cents
"OOZE"
An Extraordinary Novelette
By ANTHONY M. RUD
The Tale of A Thousand Thrills
Complete in This Issue
WEIRD TALES THE UNIQUE MAGAZINE
EDWIN BAIRD, Editor
Published monthly by Rural Publishing Corporation, 934 North Clark Street, Chicago, Ill. Application made for entry at the postoffice at Chicago, Ill., as second class matter. Single copies, 25 cents: subscription, $3 a year in the United States, $3.50 in Canada. The publishers are not responsible for the loss of unsolicited manuscripts in transit, by fire, or otherwise, although every precaution is made with such material. All manuscripts should be typewritten and must be accompanied by stamped and self-addressed envelopes. The contents of this magazine are fully protected by copyright, and publishers are cautioned against using the same, either in whole or in part.
Copyright 1923, by the Rural Publishing Corporation.
Contents for March, 1923
TWENTY-TWO REMARKABLE SHORT STORIES
A story of blood-curdling realism, with a smashing surprise at the end.
A soul-gripping story of terror.
An uncommon tale that will cling to your memory for many a day.
A "spooky" tale with a grim background.
An amazing yarn of weird adventure in the frozen North.
Showing how fear can drive a strong man to the verge of insanity.
What two hours in a prison "solitary" did to a man.
A brief story powerfully written.
An unusual tale of a terrifying monster.
A queer little story about San Francisco.
The singular experience of Allen Defoe.
A new conclusion to Edgar Allen Poe’s "Cask of Amontillado."
Chet Burke's strange adventures in a haunted house.
An odd, fantastic little story of the Stone Age.
An anonymous author submits a startling answer to the question, "What comes after death?"
A tale with an eerie thrill.
An eccentric doctor creates a frightful living thing.
A "creepy" tale that ends in a shuddering, breathtaking way.
The strange secret of a lonely woman.
An out-of-the-ordinary story.
A grim tale with a terrifying end.
A Jungle tale that is somehow "different."
THREE UNUSUAL NOVELETTES
An astounding yarn that will hold you spellbound and make you breathe fast with a new mental sensation.
A Remarkable short novel by a master of "gooseflesh" fiction.
Craigie is at his best here.
A STRANGE NOVEL IN TWO PARTS
Don't start this story late at night.
Also a number of odd facts and queer fancies, crowded in for good measure
For Advertising Rates in WEIRD TALES apply to YOUNG & WARD, Advertising Managers, 168 North Michigan Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
Queer Tribe of Savages Found in Africa
African Brides Must Be Plump
Ten Pallbearers For This Mammoth Woman
Woman Starves Herself To Feed Cats
Unearth Vast Wealth in Egyptian Tomb
"Evil Demon" Drives Man to Orgy of Crime
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
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
# Weird Tales/Volume 1

Content exists for this periodical, though at this stage it is not specifically organised beyond a basic hierarchy.
The pages listed below are an automatically generated listing.
Special:PrefixIndex/Weird Tales/Volume 1/
# Wage-Labor and Capital (Lothrop)/Wage-Labor and Capital/Chapter 4

Chapter IV
By what are wages determined?
Now, the same general laws which regulate the price of commodities in general, naturally regulate wages, or the price of labor-power. Wages will now rise, now fall, according to the relation of supply and demand, according as competition shapes itself between the buyers of labor-power, the capitalists, and the sellers of labor-power, the workers. The fluctuations of wages correspond to the fluctuations in the price of commodities in general. But within the limits of these fluctuations the price of labor-power will be determined by the cost of its production, by the labor-time necessary for the production of this commodity: labor-power.
What, then, is the cost of production of labor-power?
It is the cost required for the maintenance of the laborer as a laborer, and for his education and training as a laborer.
Therefore, the shorter the time required for training up to a particular sort of work, the smaller is the cost of production of the worker, the lower is the price of his labor-power, his wages. In. those branches of industry in which hardly any period of apprenticeship is necessary and the mere bodily existence of the worker. is sufficient, the cost of his production is limited almost exclusively to the commodities necessary for keeping him in working condition. The price of his work will therefore be determined by the price of the necessary means of subsistence. ​Here, however, there enters another consideration. The manufacturer who calculates his cost of production and, in accordance with it, the price of the product, takes into account the wear and tear of the instruments of labor. If a machine costs him, for example, one thousand dollars, and this machine is used up in ten years, he adds one hundred dollars annually to the price of the commodities, in order to be able after ten years to replace the worn-out machine with a new one. In the same manner, the cost of production of simple labor-power must include the cost of propagation, by means of which the race of workers is enabled to multiply itself and to replace worn-out workers with new ones. The wear and tear of the worker, therefore, is calculated in the same manner as the wear and tear of the machine.
Thus, the cost of production of simple labor-power amounts to the cost of the existence and propagation of the worker. The price of this cost of existence and propagation constitutes wages. The wages thus deter- mined are called the minimum of wages. This minimum wage, like the determination of the price of commodities in general by cost of production, does not hold good for the single individual, but only for the race. Individual workers, indeed, millions of workers, do not receive enough to be able to exist and to propagate themselves; but the wages of the whole working class adjust themselves, within the limits of their fluctuations, to this minimum.
Now that we have come to an understanding in regard to the most general laws which govern wages, as well as the price of every other commodity, we can examine our subject more particularly.
# Wager v. Hall

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
83 U.S. 584
Wager v. Hall

## 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
# Why was Cupid a Boy

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
From Notebook c.1808-1811 p.56. See also: Songs and Ballads.

#### Edited text:

  WHY was Cupid a boy,
And why a boy was he?
He should have been a girl,
For aught that I can see.
  5For he shoots with his bow,
And the girl shoots with her eye,
And they both are merry and glad,
And laugh when we do cry.
  And to make Cupid a boy
10Was the Cupid girl’s mocking plan;
For a boy can’t interpret the thing
Till he is become a man.
  And then he’s so pierc’d with cares,
And wounded with arrowy smarts,
15That the whole business of his life
Is to pick out the heads of the darts.
  ’Twas the Greeks’ love of war
Turn’d Love into a boy,
And woman into a statue of stone—
20And away fled every joy.
________________________________________

#### The original text:

Why was Cupid a Boy
And why a boy was he
He should have been a Girl
For ought that I can see
5For he shoots with his bow And the Girl shoots with her Eye
And they both are merry & glad
And laugh when we do cry
And to make Cupid a Boy
10Was the Cupid Girls mocking plan
For a boy cant interpret the thing
Till he is become a man
And then hes so piercd with care
And wounded with arrowy smarts
15That the whole business of his life Is to pick out the heads of the darts
Twas the Greeks love of war
Turnd Love into a Boy
And Woman into a Statue of Stone
20And away fled every joy
________________________________________

## Notes

* ↑ The Poetical Works of William Blake, including the unpublished French Revolution together with the Minor Prophetic Books and Selections from The Four Zoas, Milton & Jerusalem; edited with an introduction and textual notes by John Sampson, Hon. D.Litt. Oxon., 1862–1931. London, New York: Oxford University Press, 1908.
* ↑ 9–12 In the first draft: Then to make Cupid a boy Was surely a woman’s plan, For a boy ne’er learns so much Till he is become a man.
* ↑ "The Complete Poetry & Prose of William Blake", ed. by David V. Erdman, Anchor Books, 1988, p. 479.
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
# Whyte v. Gibbes

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
61 U.S. 541
Whyte v. Gibbes
THESE were cross appeals from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Maryland, and were argued together with the preceding case by the same counsel.
Mr. Justice NELSON 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
# Whyte v. Gibbes/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
61 U.S. 541
Whyte v. Gibbes
This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Maryland.
The case in principle is similar to the case of Williams v. The Executors of Robert Oliver, in which the opinion has just been delivered, with the exception of a question made upon a bill of revivor.
The suit was originally brought by John Gooding, jun., administrator de bonis non of the estate of John Gooding, sen. After the determination of the cause by this court, reversing the decree below, and sending it back with directions to enter a decree for the complainant, and to take an account, the complainant died. Thereupon, Whyte, the present complainant, was appointed administrator de bonis non, and filed a bill of revivor of the original suit, and presented a petition to the court, praying that, as the defendants were residents of the city of New York, the subpoena may be served upon the counsel of the defendants in the original suit, which was granted. The defendants appeared, and filed an answer to the bill of revivor under protest, and insisted that the court had not jurisdiction of the original suit, as the complainant in that suit was a citizen and resident of Virginia, and the defendants were residents of New York. There does not appear to have been any order of the court upon the question presented in this answer; but the cause proceeded before the master, where it was pending at the time of filing the bill of revivor and answer to the same.
The point is now taken, that as it appears the defendants were citizens and residents in New York at the time of the filing of the original bill, and also the bill of revivor, the court below had no jurisdiction in the case.
The answer to this objection is, that no want of jurisdiction appeared on the face of the original bill, and the defendants appeared and defended the suit; and, as the bill of revivor is but a continuance of that suit, the residence of the parties at the time it was filed is altogether immaterial.
This question arose in the case of Clarke v. Matthewson et al., (12 Peters, 164,) and was decided in conformity with the rule above stated.
In respect to the other objection, that the court had not jurisdiction in the original suit, we may add, in addition to what we have said, it comes too late after the mandate has gone down to the court below. (3 How., 413.)
The decree of the court below affirmed.
Mr. Justice GRIER dissented.

## 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
# Wiborg v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
163 U.S. 632
Wiborg v. United States

## 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
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A1S09

SCENE IX.
To them enter the Countess.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A1S12

SCENE XII.
Countess, Duchess, Thekla.
END OF ACT I.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S01

ACT II.
Scene, a spacious Room in the Duke of Friedland's Palace.
SCENE I.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A1S11

SCENE XI.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A1S10

SCENE X.
To these enter Butler.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S04

SCENE IV.
To these enter Butler.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S05

SCENE V.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S02

SCENE II.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S03

SCENE III.
# Wallenstein/The Death of Wallenstein/A2S06

SCENE VII.
* ↑ I have here ventured to omit a considerable number of lines. I fear that I should not have done amiss, had I taken this liberty more frequently. It is, however, incumbent on me to give the original with a literal translation.Weh denen die auf dich vertraun, an Dich Die sichre Hütte ihres Glückes lehnen, Gelockt von deiner gastlichen Gestalt. Schnell unver hofft, by nächtlich stiller Weile Gährts in dem tückschen Feuerschlunde, ladet Sich aus mit tobender Gervalt, und weg Treibt über alle Pflanzunger der Menschen Der wilde Strom in grausender zerstöhrung. WALLENSTEIN. Du schilderst deines Vaters Herz. Wie Du's Beschreibst, so ists in seinem Eingeweide, In dieser schwarzen Heuchlers Brust gestaltet. O mich hat Höllenkunst getäuscht. Mir sandte Der Abgrund den verflecktesten der Geister, Den Lügekundigsten herauf, und stellt' ihn Als Freund an meine Seite. Wer vermag Der Hölle Macht zu widerstehn! Ich zog Den Basilisken auf an meinem Busen, Mit meinem Herzblut nährt ich ihn, er sog Sich schwelgend voll an meiner Liebe Brüsten, Ich hatte nimmer Arges gegen ihn, Weit offen liess ich des Gedankens Thore, Und warft die Schlüssel weiser Vorsicht weg, Am Sternenhimmel, &c. Literal Translation. Alas! for those who place their confidence on thee, against thee lean the secure hut of their fortune, allured by thy hospitable form. Suddenly, unexpectedly, in a moment still as night, there is a fermentation in the treacherous gulf of fire; it discharges itself with raging force, and away over all the plantations of men drives the wild stream in frightful devastation. Wallenstein. Thou art portraying thy father's heart, as thou describest, even so is it shaped in his entrails, in this black hypocrite's breast. O, the art of hell has deceiv'd me! The Abyss sent up to me the most spotted of the spirits, the most skilful in lies, and placed him as a friend at my side. Who may withstand the power of hell? I took the basilisk to my bosom, with my heart's blood I nourished him; he sucked himself glut-full at the breasts of my love. I never harboured evil towards him; wide open lid I leave the door of my thoughts; I threw, away the key of wise foresight. In the starry heaven, &c.—We find a difficulty in believing this to have been written by Schiller.
* ↑ This is a poor and inadequate translation of the affectionate simplicity of the original—Sie alle waren Fremdlinge, Du warst Das kind des Hauses. Indeed the whole speech is in the best style of Massinger. O si sic omnia!
# Will v. United States

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
389 U.S. 90
Will v. United States
Argued: Oct. 17 and 18, 1967. --- Decided: Nov 13, 1967
Harvey M. Silets, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Richard A. Posner, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Chief Justice WARREN 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
# Will v. Tornabells

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 47
Will v. Tornabells
Argued: December 10, 1909. --- Decided: March 14, 1910
Messrs. N. B. K. Pettingill and Frederick L. Cornwell for appellants.
No brief was filed for appellees.
Mr. Justice White 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
# Will v. United States/Concurrence Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
389 U.S. 90
Will v. United States
Argued: Oct. 17 and 18, 1967. --- Decided: Nov 13, 1967
Mr. Justice BLACK, concurring.
I concur in the Court's judgment to vacate and agree substantially with its opinion, but would like to add a few words, which I do not understand to be in conflict with what the Court says, concerning the writ of mandamus. I agree that mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which should not be issued except in extraordinary circumstances. And I also realize that sometimes the granting of mandamus may bring about the review of a case as would an appeal. Yet this does not deprive a court of its power to issue the writ. Where there are extraordinary circumstances, mandamus may be used to review an interlocutory order which is by no means 'final' and thus appealable under federal statutes. Finality, then, while relevant to the right of appeal, is not determinative of the question when to issue mandamus. Rather than hinging on this abstruse and infinitely uncertain term, the issuance of the writ of mandamus is proper where a court finds exceptional circumstances to support such an order. In the present case it is conceivable that there are valid reasons why the Government should not be forced to turn over the requested names and that compliance with the order would inflict irreparable damage on its conduct of the case. The trouble here, as I see it, is that neither of the courts below gave proper consideration to the possible existence of exceptional facts which might justify the Government's refusal to disclose the names. Having no doubt as to the appropriateness of mandamus, if the circumstances exist to justify it, I would vacate the judgment below and remand the case to the Court of Appeals for further deliberation on whether there are special circumstances calling for the issuance of mandamus.

## 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
# Will you meet us?

This is a traditional American camp song. The tune originally used with this song was later used for many popular songs, including "John Brown's Body" and "Battle Hymn of the Republic". This edition is from The African Methodist Episcopal Hymn and Tune Book, 6th ed., 1902
Say brothers, will you meet us, Say brothers, will you meet us, Say brothers, will you meet us, On Canaan's happy shore?
By the grace of God we'll meet you, By the grace of God we'll meet you, By the grace of God we'll meet you, Where parting is no more.
Jesus lives and reigns for ever, Jesus lives and reigns for ever, Jesus lives and reigns for ever, On Canaan's happy shore.
Glory, glory, hallelujah, Glory, glory, hallelujah, Glory, glory, hallelujah, For ever, evermore.
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
# Willamette Iron Bridge Company v. Hatch

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
125 U.S. 1
Willamette Iron Bridge Company v. Hatch
Rufus Mallory and John Mullan, for appellants.
J. N. Dolph, for appellees.
BRADLEY, 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
# Wandering shepherdess, or, The betrayed damsel/The Wandering Shepherdess

The Wandering Shepherdess.