OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Smyth v. Asphalt Belt Railway

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
267 U.S. 326
Smyth v. Asphalt Belt Railway
Argued: January 20, 1925. --- Decided: March 2, 1925
Messrs. Robert H. Kelley, Frank Andrews, and T. W. Gregory, all of Houston, Tex., for appellants.
Messrs. Mason Williams and J. D. Wheeler, both of San Antonio, Tex., for appellees.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Smyth v. Strader

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
45 U.S. 404
Smyth v. Strader

## 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
# Skelton v. Dill

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
235 U.S. 206
Skelton v. Dill
Argued: November 5, 1914. --- Decided: November 30, 1914
Messrs. Charles J. Kappler and Charles H. Merillat for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Van Devanter 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
# Skelly Oil Company v. Phillips Petroleum Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
339 U.S. 667
Skelly Oil Company v. Phillips Petroleum Company
Argued: Dec. 9, 1949. --- Decided: June 5, 1950
Mr. Charles L. Black, Austin, Tex., for petitioners.
Mr. Harry D. Turner, Oklahoma City, Okl., for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from page 668 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER 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
# Sonata quasi una fantasia

The Piano Sonata No. 14 in C-sharp minor "Quasi una fantasia", Op. 27, No. 2, popularly known as the Moonlight Sonata, is a piano sonata by Ludwig van Beethoven. Completed in 1801 and dedicated in 1802 to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi, it is one of Beethoven's most popular compositions for the piano. Warning: template has been deprecated.
150569
Sonata quasi una Fantasia
per il Clavicembalo o Piano-Forte
composta; e dedicata
alla Damigella Contessa
Giulietta Guicciardi
* DA
Luigi van Beethoven
Opera 27 No. 2.
In Vienna presso Cappi e Comp:
879
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
# Song: "For Me the Jasmine Buds Unfold"

For me the jasmine buds unfold
* "Song" from Harper's Weekly (21 February 1891)
* "Song" from Poems (1898)
* "Song" from Poems Vol. I (1916)
# Song: "Stay, Stay at Home, my Heart, and Rest."

* "Stay, Stay at Home, my Heart, and Rest" in Birds of Passage, 1847.
* "To stay at Home is best" in The Riverside song book, 1893.
# Song: "Sweet is the Birth of Love"

"Sweet is the birth of love, and the awaking"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Song: "Sweet is the Birth of Love"" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Song: "Sweet is the Birth of Love"" in Poems II.
# Song. Maryland in Fetters

Song.
Maryland
in Fetters!
How beautiful in tears! Dear noble State; Encumbered round with cares, Thy grief, how great. The spoiler’s foot upon thee, His ruthless hand is on thee, With manacles he’s bound thee, Hard is thy fate!
Mother of wretchedness I feel for thee! Bow’d down in deep distress, I kneel to thee! I see thy wretched woes, Thy agonizing throes, And sympathize with those Who’d set thee free!
Thy tears are those of blood, Sweet mother dear! An accumulated flood Of wrongs severe! Thy honor’s trampled under, Thy peace is rent asunder, God of the rattling thunder, Oh! lend an ear.
Break! break! the traitor’s chain, Oh! God of heaven; And from our down trod land Let them be driven! Let Lincoln know his place, Let black men know their face, And from our injured race All wrongs be riven!
This work was published before January 1, 1929 and is anonymous or pseudonymous due to unknown authorship. It is in the public domain in the United States as well as countries and areas where the copyright terms of anonymous or pseudonymous works are 95 years or less since publication.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Song: "If Love Were But a Little Thing"

"If love were but a little thing"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1907), "Song" in Harper's Bazar (September 1907) V. 41 No. 9 p. 854.
* Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Song" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Song" in Poems II.
# Song. To Amarantha, That she would dishevel her hair

I
 Amarantha sweet and faire, Ah brade no more that shining haire!  As my curious hand or eye, Hovering round thee let it flye.
II
 Let it flye as unconfin'd As its calme Ravisher, the winde;  Who hath left his darling th' East, To wanton o're that spicie Nest.
III
 Ev'ry Tresse must be confest; But neatly tangled at the best;  Like a Clue of golden thread, Most excellently ravelled.
IV
 Doe not then winde up that light In Ribands, and o're-cloud in Night;  Like the Sun in's early ray, But shake your head and scatter day.
V
 See 'tis broke! Within this Grove The Bower, and the walkes of Love,  Weary lye we downe and rest, And fanne each others panting breast.
VI
 Heere wee'l strippe and coole our fire In Creame below, in milke-baths higher:  And when all Well's are drawne dry, I'le drink a tear out of thine eye.
VII
 Which our very Joyes shall leave That sorrowes thus we can deceive;  Or our very sorrowes weepe, That joyes so ripe, so little keepe.
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
# Song: "My Love is Fairer than the Tasselled Corn"

"My love is fairer than the tasseled corn"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1912), "Song—My Love is Fairer than the Tassled Corn" in The Unconquered Air, and Other Poems (1912).
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Song" in Poems I.
# Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Music

This collection of six poems originally appeared as the final section of The Passionate Pilgrim, separated by a title page mid-volume.
This collection has often been attributed to Shakespeare, but only the second composition (On a Day, Alack the Day) is clearly his, with lines that occur in Love's Labour's Lost. The fifth (The Passionate Shepherd to His Love) is verse nearly universally credited to Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593), and the sixth (Address to the Nightingale) to Richard Barnfield (1574-1627)
* Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Musicke, in A Collection of Poems (1709).
* Included in The Passionate Pilgrim, facsimile of the 1599 edition, (ed.) by Sidney Lee (1905). IA
* Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Music, in Venus and Adonis, Lucrece, ⁠and the Minor Poems, (ed.) by Albert Feuillerat for The Yale Shakespeare (1927).

## See also

* The Passionate Pilgrim
# Sordello
## Dedication

TO J. MILSAND, OF DIJON.
Dear Friend,—Let the next poem be introduced by your name, therefore remembered along with one of the deepest of my affections, and so repay all trouble it ever cost me. I wrote it twenty-five years ago for only a few, counting even in these on somewhat more care about its subject than they really had. My own faults of expression were many; but with care for a man or book such would be surmounted, and without it what avails the faultlessness of either? I blame nobody, least of all myself, who did my best then and since; for I lately gave time and pains to turn my work into what the many might—instead of what the few must,—like: but after all, I imagined another thing at first, and therefore leave as I find it. The historical decoration was purposely of no more importance than a background requires; and my stress lay on the incidents in the development of a soul: little else is worth study. I, at least, always thought so—you, with many known and unknown to me, think so—others may one day think so; and whether my attempt remain for them or not, I trust, though away and past it, to continue ever yours, R. B.
London, June 9, 1863.

## Contents

* Book the First
* Book the Second
* Book the Third
* Book the Fourth
* Book the Fifth
* Book the Sixth
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
# State Corporation Commission of Kansas v. Wichita Gas Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
290 U.S. 561
State Corporation Commission of Kansas v. Wichita Gas Company
Argued: Nov. 16, 1933. --- Decided: Jan 8, 1934
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Kansas.
Messrs. E. H. Hatcher, of Topeka, Kan., Charles D. Welch, of Coffeyville, Kan., Louis R. Gates, of Kansas City, Kan., and Charles W. Steiger, of Topeka, Kan., for appellants.
Mr. Robert D. Garver, of Kansas City, Mo., for appellees Wichita Gas Co. and others.
Mr. James W. Finley, of Bartlesville, Okl., for appellee Cities Service Gas Co.
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
# State Documents on Federal Relations/11

Resolved, That as it is the opinion of this House that the principles contained in the resolutions of the Legislature of Virginia, relative to certain measures of the general government, are calculated to excite unwarrantable discontents, and to destroy the very existence of our government, they ought to be, and are hereby, rejected.
[Journal of House of Representatives, ix, 289.]
# State Corporation Commission of Kansas v. Arrow Transportation Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
361 U.S. 353
State Corporation Commission of Kansas v. Arrow Transportation Company
Mr. Byron M. Gray, for appellants in No. 526.
Messrs. R. W. Henriott and M. L. Cassell, for appellants in No. 527.
Messrs. Robert W. Ginnane and Isaac K. Hay, for appellant in No. 528.
Messrs. MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen. of Alabama, George F. McCanless, Atty. Gen. of Tennessee, Donald Macleay, George Shuff, John A. Caddell and Charles J. McCarthy, for appellees.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is 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
# State Documents on Federal Relations

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
A collection of documents published by state governments concerning their relationships with each other and the federal government of the United States. Originally published in six volumes between 1900 and 1904, the volumes were combined for publication in 1906.
Page scans of 1906 collection are available. Relevant internal links and links to Wikipedia have been added to the text, but all footnotes are directly from the original.
STATE DOCUMENTS
ON
Federal Relations:
THE STATES AND THE UNITED STATES.
EDITED WITH NOTES BY
HERMAN V. AMES, Ph.D.
PUBLISHED BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY,
OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA.
Sold by the Department of History, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa., and by Longmans, Green & Co., New York.
PHILADELPHIA, 1906.
Copyright, 1906.
By HERMAN V. AMES.
CONTENTS.
PREFACE.
The following collection of documents on the relations of the States to the Federal Government, 1789–1861, comprises typical papers covering the official action of various states in different sections of the country, relative to the chief political and constitutional issues in our history. The documents have been selected especially with a view to illustrate the development of the doctrines of broad and strict construction, the prevalence of the "compact theory" of the Constitution and the doctrine of "State Rights," State opposition to the Federal Judiciary, and the different phases of the slavery controversy, culminating in the secession movement. The truth of the statement of Alexander Johnston, that "Almost every State in the Union in turn declared its own sovereignity and denounced as almost treasonable similar declarations in other cases by other States," is fully sustained by the following documents.
​This compilation was prompted primarily to meet the need for illustrative material in connection with courses in the Constitutional History of the United States given in the University of Pennsylvania. In view of the fact that so few of the resolutions of the State Legislatures and other official documents of the various States were accessible to the general reader, it was believed that the publication of a series of selections from these important, but little used sources would be welcomed by others. This expectation has been fulfilled by the reception given to the successive numbers as they have appeared. With the completion of the series, in the hope of increasing their value and facilitating their use, the several numbers are now presented in one volume.
Philadelphia, October 30th, 1906.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1935, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 88 years or less. 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
# State Documents on Federal Relations/12

In Senate, March 5, 1799.
Whereas, the people of the United States have established for themselves a free and independent national government: And ​whereas it is essential to the existence of every government, that it have authority to defend and preserve its constitutional powers inviolate, inasmuch as every infringement thereof tends to its subversion: And whereas the judicial power extends expressly to all cases of law and equity arising under the Constitution and the laws of the United States, whereby the interference of the legislatures of the particular states in those cases is manifestly excluded: And, whereas, our peace, prosperity, and happiness, eminently depend upon the preservation of the Union, in order to which a reasonable confidence in the constituted authorities and chosen representatives of the people is indispensable: And whereas, every measure calculated to weaken that confidence has a tendency to destroy the usefulness of our public functionaries, and to excite jealousies equally hostile to rational liberty, and the principles of a good republican government: And, whereas, the Senate, not perceiving that the rights of the particular states have been violated, nor any unconstitutional powers assumed by the general government, cannot forbear to express the anxiety and regret with which they observe the inflammatory and pernicious sentiments and doctrines which are contained in the resolutions of the legislatures of Virginia and Kentucky—sentiments and doctrines no less repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, and the principles of their union, than destructive to the Federal Government, and unjust to those whom the people have elected to administer it; wherefore,
Resolved, That while the Senate feel themselves constrained to bear unequivocal testimony against such sentiments and doctrines, they deem it a duty no less indispensable, explicitly to declare their incompetency, as a branch of the legislature of this state, to supervise the acts of the General Government.
Resolved, That his excellency, the governor, be, and he is hereby requested to transmit a copy of the foregoing resolution to the executives of the states of Viringia and Kentucky, to the end that the same may be communicated to the legislatures thereof.
[Elliot's Va. and Ky. Res., 13, 14.]
# Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 770 F.2d 1075 (1985)

770 F.2d 1075 (Table)
770 F.2d 1075 (Table)
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit. Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 84-1320 5/9/85
E.D.Pa., 572 F.Supp. 1251

## AFFIRMED

C.A.3 1985. Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 770 F.2d 1075 (Table) END OF DOCUMENT
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
# Simpson v. Florida

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
403 U.S. 384
Simpson v. Florida
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
No. 1267.
A store manager and a customer were robbed by two armed men. Petitioner was tried and convicted of robbing the manager, but on retrial after reversal he was acquitted. He was then charged with robbing the customer, his motion to quash the information on double jeopardy grounds was overruled, and he was found guilty. Each jury verdict was a general one. The District Court of Appeal, after the decision in Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, held as a matter of law that, while the acquittal at the second trial entitled petitioner to invoke collateral estoppel, his conviction at the first trial gave rise to a "double collateral estoppel," allowing the State to rely on the finding of the jury at the first trial that he was a participant in the robbery. The State Supreme Court denied review.
Held: As stated in Ashe, supra, "mutuality" is not an ingredient of the collateral estoppel rule imposed on the States by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; and unless the jury verdict in the second trial "could have [been] grounded... upon an issue other than that which the defendant seeks to foreclose from consideration" the double jeopardy provision vitiates petitioner's conviction.
Certiorari granted; 237 So. 2d 341, vacated and remanded.
PER CURIAM.

## 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
# Simpson v. Greeley

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
87 U.S. 152
Simpson v. Greeley
ERROR to the Supreme Court of Kansas.
Carlos Greeley sued William A. Simpson and eight other persons in one of the county courts of Kansas, to recover certain lands, together with damages for the detention of them; and for waste committed by the whole nine.
The nine defendants filed a joint answer.
The plaintiff replied; and after a trial judgment was given—
'That the plaintiffs have and recover of and from said defendants the lands and tenements described in the declaration; that they also have and recover of the said William A. Simpson the sum of $4300, the value of the rents, issues, and profits of said lands and tenements, and for the timber taken from said land by the said defendant; that the plaintiffs also have and recover of the other defendants the sum of $2600, to be credited as part of the said $4300, if collected, it being the value of the rents above found.'
Simpson-none of his co-defendants joining-filed a petition in error to the Supreme Court of Kansas, alleging that the consent of none of his co-defendants could be obtained to join him in the proceeding. However, very soon afterwards they all did file a petition in error just like his own, and praying that the judgment rendered against them be reversed, for the causes and reasons set forth in his petition. The Supreme Court of Kansas affirmed the judgment, and a mandate was issued out of that court reciting,
'That a judgment in a certain civil action, wherein Carlos Greeley et AL. were plaintiffs, and William A. Simpson et AL. were defendants, was rendered by the latter court in favor of the said Greeley et AL., on a transcript of which judgment and record said Simpson et AL. prosecuted a petition in error to the Supreme Court within and for the State of Kansas.'
From this judgment of the Supreme Court of the State, Simpson alone took this writ of error, assigning no cause why the others were not joined.
Mr. W. T. Otto (with whom was Mr. J. P. Usher), preliminary to argument upon the merits, asked to have the writ dismissed, observing that it was obvious that the whole nine original defendants were plaintiffs in error in the Supreme Court of Kansas, and that a joint judgment affirming the judgment of the inferior court had been rendered against them. It was perfectly settled, he observed, that such a writ as the present one would be dismissed, there having been no effort made by Simpson to have the other co-defendants join in it, and no cause shown or alleged why they did not.
Mr. W. W. Nevison, contra.
Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

* ↑ See Masterson v. Herndon, 10 Wallace, 416.
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
# Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 774 F.2d 1153 (1985)

774 F.2d 1153 (Table)
774 F.2d 1153 (Table)
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit. Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 84-1455 5/9/85
E.D.Pa.

## APPEAL DISMISSED

C.A.3 1985. Simpson v. Lifespring, Inc. 774 F.2d 1153 (Table) END OF DOCUMENT
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
# Simpson v. David C Shepard

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
230 U.S. 352
Simpson v. David C Shepard
Argued: April 9, 10, 11, and 12, 1912. --- Decided: June 9, 1913
Messrs. Thomas D. O'Brien for appellants:
[Argument of Counsel from pages 356-361 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Edward T. Young, also for the appellants:
[Argument of Counsel from pages 361-363 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Lyndon A. Smith, and Mr. George T. Simpson, Attorney General of Minnesota, for appellants.
Clifford Thorne, H. T. Clarke, Jr., George A. Henshaw, John Marshall, Royal C. Johnson, P. W. Dougherty, Grant G. Martin, U. G. Powell, J. H. Henderson, Dwight N. Lewis, William D. Williams, W. H. Stutsman, and H. R. Oglesby as amici curiae.
Messrs. Charles W. Bunn,
Mr. 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
# Southworth v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Southworth v. United States."
* 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.
* Southworth v. United States (151 U.S. 179)
* Southworth v. United States (161 U.S. 639)
# Souvenir de Jeunesse

"When Sibyl kept her tryst with me, the harvest moon was rounded"
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1897), "Souvenir de Jeunesse" in Poems, now first collected.
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1908), "Souvenir de Jeunesse" in The poems of Edmund Clarence Stedman.