OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# De Jonge v. Oregon

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause applies to freedom of assembly. The Court found that DeJonge had the right to organize a Communist Party and to speak at its meetings, even though the party advocated industrial or political change in revolution. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Linked case(s)

268 U.S. 652, 274 U.S. 357, 287 U.S. 45, 272 U.S. 312, 274 U.S. 380, 283 U.S. 359, 283 U.S. 697, 297 U.S. 233, 92 U.S. 542
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
299 U.S. 353
De Jonge v. Oregon
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON
No. 123 Argued: December 9, 1936 --- Decided: January 4, 1937
1. The practice of substituting for the evidence a stipulation of facts not shown to have received the approval of the court below is disapproved. P. 358.
2. Upon appeal from a judgment of a state supreme court sustaining a conviction, this Court in this case takes the indictment as construed by the court below. P. 360.
3. Criminal punishment under a state statute for participation in the conduct of a public meeting, otherwise lawful, merely because the meeting was held under the auspices of an organization which teaches or advocates the use of violence, or other unlawful acts [p354] or methods to effect industrial or political change or revolution, though no such teaching or advocacy attended the meeting in question, violates the constitutional principles of free speech and assembly. P. 362.
The Criminal Syndicalism Law of Oregon, as applied in this case, is invalid.
4. The rights of free speech and peaceable assembly are fundamental rights which are safeguarded against state interference by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 364.
5. The fact that these rights are guaranteed specifically by the First Amendment against abridgment by Congress does not argue their exclusion from the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Id.
6. The legislature may protect against abuses of the rights of free speech and assembly by dealing with the abuses; the rights themselves must not be curtailed. Id.
APPEAL from the affirmance of a conviction under the Criminal Syndicalism Law of Oregon. [p356]
# De Haven v. Henderson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
DE HAVEN verʃus HENDERSON.
T
M‘KEAN, Chieƒ Juʃtice.– The oath of the Plaintiff muft be received to prove what has become of the order. Is is, I think, the only way in which fatisfactory information can be obtained on a point of this nature.
The Plaintiff, being accordingly fworn, and proving the lofs of the order, he was allowed to proceed in examining the witnefs as to its contents.
# De Krafft v. Barney/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
67 U.S. 704
De Krafft v. Barney
This case cannot be distinguished from the case of Barry vs. Mercein, (5 How., 103). The controversy in that case was between a husband and his divorced wife, respecting the guardianship of a child of the marriage who was still an infant.
The were living apart, and each of them claimed the right to the guardianship. And after full argument, the Court held that in order to give this Court jurisdiction under the 22d section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, the matter in dispute must be money, or some right, the value of which could be calculated and ascertained in money. And as the matter in controversy between the parties was not money, nor a right which could be measured by money, but was a contest between the father and mother of the infant upon other considerations, the appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
In the case before the Court, it is admitted that Dr Kraft, the appellant, has no pecuniary interest in the controversy. He appears as prochein ami for the children of Barney, whose wife is dead, and from whom the children inherited a large property. De Krafft alleges that Barney, from his character and habits, is unfit to be trusted with the guardianship of the persons or property of his children, and prays that some other persons suitable and trustworthy may be appointed by the Orphans' Court. The guardianship of the persons and property of the children is, therefore, the only matter in dispute, not on account of any pecuniary value attached to the office, but upon other considerations. The case is the same in principle with that of Barry vs. Mercein, above referred to, and the appeal to this Court, for the same reason, must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

## 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
# Darnell v. Indiana

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
226 U.S. 390
Darnell v. Indiana
Argued: December 9, 1912. --- Decided: December 23, 1912
Messrs. Joseph F. Cowern and Merrill Moores for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 390-393 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Morton S. Hawkins, Thomas M. Honan Attorney General of Indiana, James E. McCullough, Edward B. Raub, and Martin M. Hugg for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 393-397 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
# Dartmoor

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Dartmoor."
* 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.
* Dartmoor, a prize poem by Felicia Hemans, the prize being awarded by the Royal Society of Literature in 1820.
* "Dartmoor," in The American Cyclopædia (1879)
* "Dartmoor," in The New International Encyclopædia, New York: Dodd, Mead and Co. (1905)
* Sabine Baring-Gould, A Book of Dartmoor, 1900.
* "Dartmoor," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Dartmoor," in The Encyclopedia Americana, New York: The Encyclopedia Americana Corporation (1920)
# Darr v. Burford

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
339 U.S. 200
Darr v. Burford
Argued: Dec. 5, 1949. --- Decided: April 3, 1950
Mr. John B. Ogden, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for petitioner.
Mr. Mac Q. Williamson and Mr. Sam H. Lattimore, Oklahoma City, Okl., for respondent.
Mr. Justice REED 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
# Darrington v. Branch of the Bank of the State of Alabama

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
54 U.S. 12
Darrington v. Branch of the Bank of the State of Alabama
THESE cases were brought up from the Supreme Court of Alabama, by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act. The facts and pleadings are stated in the opinion of the court.
It was argued by Mr. Campbell for the plaintiffs in error, and and Mr. Hopkins for the defendants.
Mr. Campbell contended that the transactions as described by the pleas, fell within the prohibitory clause of the Constitution of the United States, 'that no State shall issue a bill of credit,' and cited 4 Peters, 410; 11 Peters, 313; 7 Alab. Rep. 18.
Mr. Hopkins for the defendants in error.
In the case of Briscoe v. The Bank of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, 11 Peters, 257, this court decided that the notes issued by such a bank as the one which is the defendant in error, were not bills of credit within the prohibition of the Constitution of the United States. In the case of Owen v. The Branch Bank at Mobile, which is the defendant in error, the Supreme Court of Alabama decided that the notes issued by this bank were not bills of credit. 3 Ala. Rep. 258.
The charter of this bank is a public statute of the State of Alabama. 6 Ala. Rep. 289, 294. This court takes notice judicially of such statutes, as it does of the acts of Congress. 9 Peters, 607, 625, 626.
This bank had a large capital, and it is not denied in the pleas, as it was in the case of the Kentucky bank, that the capital was paid. Its notes were received in payment of taxes and debts due to the State of Alabama. As a corporation the bank incurred responsibility, and gave credit to its paper. It was liable for the notes and bills it issued, and its capital was bound, like that of stock banks, for the payment of its notes in gold and silver. All its property, including its capital, was a fund for the payment of the debts of the bank. The notes of the bank were circulated upon its own credit, and every holder of the notes had the power to enforce payment, as the bank could be sued. The notes were not issued by the State, but by the bank in its corporate name, and the bank was not controlled by the State, but by a president and directors appointed by the legislature. For the capital and powers of the bank, see 3 Ala. Rep. 267. According to a previous judgment of this court, the issuance and circulation of its notes as money by such a bank is no violation of the Constitution of the United States. 11 Pet. 311, 315, 318, 320, 321, 322.
Mr. Justice McLEAN 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
# Darnell v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
225 U.S. 243
Darnell v. Illinois Central Railroad Company
Argued: April 1, 1912. --- Decided: June 7, 1912
Messrs. William A. Percy and Allen Hughes for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Charles N. Burch, Blewett Lee, and H. D. Minor for defendants in error.
Memorandum opinion by direction of the court. By Mr. Chief Justice white:

## 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
# Dent v. Emmeger

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 308
Dent v. Emmeger
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Missouri.
Messrs. Glover and Shepley, for the plaintiff in error; Mr. B. A. Hill, contra.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE stated the case, and 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
# Densmore v. Scofield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 375
Densmore v. Scofield
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. J. C. Clayton and Mr. A. Q. Keasbey for the appellants.
Mr. George Willey, contra.
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
# Denny v. Bennett

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
128 U.S. 489
Denny v. Bennett
C. D. O'Brien, for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 490 intentionally omitted]
Ambrose N. Merrick, 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
# Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century/Maximianus, archbp. of Constantinople

Maximianus (5), archbp. of Constantinople, A.D. 431. The action of the council of Ephesus had thrown the churches of Constantinople into direst confusion. A large proportion of the citizens held strongly to Nestorius; the clergy, with one voice, agreed in the anathema; and when the deposition became a fact no longer to be disputed, the excitement was continued about the election of a successor. After four months, agreement was arrived at in the election of Maximian. He had led a monastic life and had entered presbyteral orders; his action in building, at his own expense, tombs for the remains of holy men had obtained for him a reputation of sanctity. In principles he followed the former archbishops, Chrysostom, Atticus, and Sisinnius. Pope Celestine wrote to him in highly complimentary terms on his elevation. The appointment was made by the unanimous vote of clergy, emperor, and people. The letter of Maximian announcing to the pope his succession is lost, but that to S. Cyril remains, with its high eulogium on Cyril's constancy in defending the cause of Jesus Christ. It was the custom for occupants of the principal sees on election to send a synodical letter to the most considerable bishops of the Christian world, asking for the assurance of their communion. Maximian sent his synodical to the Easterns as to the others. Communion was refused by Helladius of Tarsus; and, we may conclude, by Eutherius of Tyana, Himerius of Nicomedia, and Dorotheus of Martianopolis, as Maximian deposed them. John of Antioch approved the refusal of the bp. of Tarsus, and praised him for having declined to insert the name of Maximian in the diptychs of his church. Maximian's earnest appeal for reunion continued. Pope Sixtus wrote to him several times, urging him to extend his charity to all whom he could possibly regain. Maximian spared no effort, and although he was in closest harmony with St. Cyril, he pressed him strongly to give up his anathemas, which seemed an insurmountable obstacle to reunion. He even wrote to the emperor's secretary Aristolaus the tribune, who was greatly interested in the question of peace, almost complaining that he did not press Cyril enough on the point, and to his archdeacon Epiphanius. Harmony being restored, John of Antioch and the other Eastern bishops wrote Maximian a letter of communion indicating their consent to his election and to the deposition of Nestorius. Cyril wrote to him, attributing the blessed result to the force of his prayers. A letter to Maximian from Aristolaus, which Maximian caused to be read in his church to his people, was pronounced spurious by Dorotheus of Martianopolis, evidently because it took the side of Maximian so decidedly. Maximian held the see of Constantinople from Oct. 25, 431, to Apr. 12, 434. Of all his letters, only that to St. Cyril is extant. Mansi, v. 257, 259, 266, 269, 271, 273, 286, 351; Baluz. Nov. Coll. Conc. 581 seq. ed. 1681; Socr. vii. 35. 40; Liberat. Diac. Brev. 19; Ceill. viii. 394.
[W.M.S.]
# Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century/Maximinus, Arian bp. of Hippo Regius

Maximinus (6), Arian bp. of Hippo Regius, who came with the Gothic soldiers into Africa a.d. 427, 428, and held a discussion with St. Augustine on the Trinity. Augustine, later, replied in 2 books, which, with that which contains the discussion, exhibit the arguments for and against the Arian doctrine. The line of argument taken by Augustine resembles so strongly that expressed in our Athanasian creed that if this were lost it might almost be supplied from this treatise. August. Coll. cum Max. and Contra Max. i. ii. Opp. vol. viii. pp. 719–819, ed. Migne; Vit. Poss. 17; Ceillier, vol. ix. 359–361.
[H.W.P.]
# Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century/Maximianus, a Donatist

Maximianus (2), the man from whom a special sect among the Donatists derived its name; that schism within a schism, which rent it asunder and helped to bring about its ultimate overthrow. He is said to have been related to Donatus the Great, and was a deacon at Carthage when, at the death of Parmenian, Primian was appointed bp. of the Donatists there A.D. 391. Primian found fault with four of his deacons, especially Maximian, whom he appears to have disliked most. He tried to persuade the "Seniors" of Carthage to condemn them all, but they refused, and Primian then proceeded to excommunicate Maximian, who was ill and unable to appear. The Seniors summoned Primian to meet them to explain this arbitrariness, but he refused. They then wrote to the bishops of the district, entreating them to meet and inquire into the case. Forty-three met at Carthage; and their proceedings, notwithstanding the violence of the supporters of
Primian, who was himself absent, resulted in his condemnation. In June or July 393, at a second meeting of Donatist bishops at Cabarsussum, a town of Byzacene, Primian was more formally condemned, his deposition pronounced, and a resolution apparently passed that Maximian should be appointed in his place. He was accordingly ordained at Carthage by 12 bishops. But Primian was not crushed by this, for at a council of 310 bishops at Bagai, Apr. 24, 394, at which he himself presided, the supporters of Maximian, of whom none were present, were condemned in most opprobrious language. Notwithstanding the defection of the Maximianists, who appear to have rebaptized those who joined them, the validity of their baptism was not denied by the other Donatists, a point which Augustine frequently uses against them. Unremitting persecution induced many Maximianists to return at length to the Donatist community, but of Maximian himself we hear little or nothing subsequently; other names are most prominent in the party's history. Aug. c. Cresc. iii. 16, 59, iv. 3, 4, 6–9, 55, 57; En. Ps. (Vulg.) xxxvi. 19, 20, 23, 29; Ps. cxxiv. 5; Epp. 43, 26, 76; 44, 71; 53, 3; 141, 6; 185, 17; de Gest. Emer. 9; c. Parm. i. 9; Tillem. Mém. vi. 65–72; Morcelli, Afr. Chr. vol. ii. pp. 310–326; Ribbeck, Aug. und Don. pp. 206–236.
[H.W.P.]
# Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century/Maximinus I., Roman emperor

Maximinus (2) I., Roman emperor, a.d. 235—238. C. Julius Verus Maximinus is conspicuous as the first barbarian who wore the imperial purple, and as one of the emperors whose names are connected with the ten persecutions recorded by ecclesiastical historians. Born in Thrace of a Gothic father and an Alan mother, eight feet high and of gigantic strength, he attracted the notice of Septimius Severus, and rose into favour with Alexander Severus. When that emperor fell into disfavour with his troops, Maximinus seized his opportunity and organized a conspiracy which ended in the murder of Alexander and his mother at Mayence in 235. The praetorian guards elected him emperor, and their choice was confirmed by the senate.
The hostility of Maximinus to his Christian subjects was probably because of the favour they had enjoyed from the eclectic or syncretic sympathies of Alexander Severus. They would appear to him, as to other emperors, a secret, and therefore a dangerous, society, the natural focus of conspiracies and plots. The persecution was limited in its range, and probably was effectual chiefly in removing the restraints which the leanings of Alexander had imposed on the antagonism of the populations and governors of the provinces.
Pontianus, bp. of Rome, was banished with the presbyter Hippolytus to Sardinia, and died there in 235, and, according to Baronius (Ann. 137, 138), his successor Anteros met a like fate in 238. Origen thought it expedient to seek safety with his friend Firmilianus, bp. of the Cappadocian Caesarea. That province was under the government of Serenianus, whom Firmilianus describes (ap. Cyprian, Ep. 75) as "acerbus et dirus persecutor." Frequent earthquakes had roused the panic-stricken population to rage against the Christians as the cause of all disasters (Orig. in Matt. xxiv. 9). This was all the more keenly felt after the comparatively long tranquillity which they had enjoyed under Alexander Severus and his predecessors. &gt;From his retirement Origen
addressed two treatises On Martyrdom and On Prayer to his disciple Ambrosius, a deacon of the church of Alexandria (Eus. H. E. vi. 28), and Protoctetus, a presbyter of Caesarea, both of whom were taken as prisoners to Germany (Orig. Exhort. ad Mart. 41).
The tyranny of Maximin brought about the revolt in Mauritania, which for three months raised the two GORDIANS to the throne of the Caesars. At Aquileia his troops, suffering from famine and disease, became disaffected. A party of praetorian guards rose, and he, with his son and the chief ministers of his tyranny, were slain in his tent. Their heads were cut off and exhibited on the battlements to the gaze of the citizens.
[E.H.P.]
# Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century/Maternus, Julius Firmicus

Maternus (3), Julius Firmicus, an acute critic of pagan rites and doctrines and a vigorous apologist for the Christian faith, known from his treatise de Errore Profanarum Religionum, composed between 343 and 350, very valuable for its details of the secret rites of paganism. It describes every leading form of idolatry then current and gives us information not found elsewhere. It discusses the idolatry of the Persians, Egyptians, Assyrians, the Greek mysteries, the ceremonies and formulae used in the Mithraic worship. Some of the details on this last are very curious, some liturgical fragments being inserted. In opposition to the heathen orgies he presents the pure mysteries of Christianity in his preface, now almost completely lost, and from c. xxiv. to the end. He concludes with earnestly exhorting the emperors to suppress paganism by force; thus giving one of the earliest specimens of Christian intolerance. The work illustrates the small amount of philological and etymological science possessed by the ancients. Maternus, arguing against the Egyptians that Sarapis was originally the patriarch Joseph, derives the name Sarapis from Σαρᾶς ἀπό, because Joseph was the descendant of Sarah. The work is valuable for Biblical criticism, as in it are found quotations from the versions used in N. Africa in St. Cyprian's time. There are probably embodied in it some fragments of the ancient Greek writer Evemerus, whose work upon paganism, now lost, was largely used by all the Christian apologists. In Migne's Patr. Lat. t, xii. is reprinted an ed. of Maternus, pub. by Munter at Copenhagen in 1826, with an introductory dissertation discussing the whole subject. A contemporary pagan Julius Firmicus Maternus, usually styled junior, wrote a work (between 330 and 360) on judicial astrology, mentioned by Sidon. Apoll. in Ep. ad Pont. Leont. Upon this see the above dissertation. There is some reason to suppose that he was converted to Christianity and was identical with the subject of our art. See C. H. Moore, Jul. Firm. Mat. der Heide und der Christ. (Munich, 1897).
[G.T.S.]