OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Sonnet 29

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sonnet 29."
* 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.
* Sonnet 29, by William Shakespeare.
* Sonnet 29, by Edmund Spenser, part of Amoretti
* A sonnet by Petratch
# Sonnet 25 (Shakespeare)

One of the 154 sonnets by Shakespeare from the collection Shakespeare's Sonnets (1609).
* "Sonnet 25," in Shake-speares Sonnets, Never before Imprinted (1609)
* "Sonnet 25," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by William J. Rolfe (1883)
* "Sonnet 25," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by Edward Bliss Reed, The Yale Shakespeare (1923)
The Sonnets of William Shakespeare
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
# Sonnet 26 (Shakespeare)

One of the 154 sonnets by Shakespeare from the collection Shakespeare's Sonnets (1609).
* "Sonnet 26," in Shake-speares Sonnets, Never before Imprinted (1609)
* "Sonnet 26," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by William J. Rolfe (1883)
* "Sonnet 26," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by Edward Bliss Reed, The Yale Shakespeare (1923)
The Sonnets of William Shakespeare
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
# Sonnet 27

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sonnet 27."
* 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.
* Sonnet 27, by Ján Kollár
* Sonnet 27, by William Shakespeare.
* Sonnet 27, by Edmund Spenser, part of Amoretti
# Sonnet 28 (Shakespeare)

One of the 154 sonnets by Shakespeare from the collection Shakespeare's Sonnets (1609).
* "Sonnet 28," in Shake-speares Sonnets, Never before Imprinted (1609)
* "Sonnet 28," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by William J. Rolfe (1883)
* "Sonnet 28," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by Edward Bliss Reed, The Yale Shakespeare (1923)
The Sonnets of William Shakespeare
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
# Takuji Yamashita v. Hinkle/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
260 U.S. 199
Takuji Yamashita v. Hinkle
Argued: October 3 and 4, 1922. --- Decided: Nov 13, 1922
This case presents one of the questions involved in the case of Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178, 43 Sup. Ct. 65, 67 L. Ed. --, this day decided, viz.: Are the petitioners, being persons of the Japanese race born in Japan, entitled to naturalization under section 2169 of the Revised Statutes of the United States?
Certificates of naturalization were issued to both petitioners by a superior court of the state of Washington prior to 1906, when section 2169 (Comp. St. § 4358) is conceded to have been in full force and effect.
The respondent, as Secretary of State of the state of Washington, refused to receive and file articles of incorporation of the Japanese Real Estate Holding Company, executed by petitioners, upon the ground that, being of the Japanese race, they were not at the time of their naturalization and never had been entitled to naturalization under the laws of the United States and were therefore not qualified under the laws of the state of Washington to form the corporation proposed, or to file articles naming them as sole trustees of said corporation. Thereupon petitioners applied to the Supreme Court of the state for a writ of mandamus to compel respondent to receive and file the articles of incorporation, but that court refused and petitioners bring the case here by writ of certiorari.
Upon the authority of Takao Ozawa v. United States, supra, we must hold that the petitioners were not eligible to naturalization, and as this ineligibility appeared upon the face of the judgment of the superior court, admitting petitioners to citizenship, that court was without juris diction and its judgment was void. In re Gee Hop (D. C.) 71 Fed. 274; In re Yamashita, 30 Wash. 234, 70 Pac. 482, 94 Am. St. Rep. 860.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of the state of Washington is therefore
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
# Talbert v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
155 U.S. 45
Talbert v. United States
S. S. Henkle, for appellant.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Conrad, for the United States.
Mr. Chief Justice FULLER.

## 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
# Talbert v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
155 U.S. 45
Talbert v. United States
This was a suit brought in the court of claims under an act of congress entitled 'An act for the relief of William Talbert,' approved June 30, 1886, and reading as follows: 'That the claim of William Talbert, of Moutgomery county, Maryland, for the use by the government of his patented improvement for marine railways, be, and the same is hereby, referred to the court of claims, with authority to take jurisdiction thereof, and to award judgment thereon, as the merits of the case may demand, according to its value to the government during the existence of such patent.' 24 Stat. 822, c. 591.
The court filed findings of fact and a conclusion of law; rendered an opinion, reported in 25 Ct. Cl. 141; and gave judgment in claimant's favor for $6,564.30, from which both parties appealed, but argument is waived by the government on its cross appeal. Among the findings of fact was the following: '(8) The value to the government of plaintiff's patented improvement for marine railways during the existence of his patent was $6,564.30, being 2 per cent. upon the amount earned by the railway cradle as improved during said period.' On this appeal, only questions of law can be reviewed, and none such are presented for our consideration. The contention is that the sum awarded was far less than it should have been; but the eighth finding was one of fact, and there is nothing in the other findings or elsewhere in the record which authorizes us to go behind that finding and conclude that there was error in respect thereof.
Judgment 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
# Takuji Yamashita v. Hinkle

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
260 U.S. 199
Takuji Yamashita v. Hinkle
Argued: October 3 and 4, 1922. --- Decided: Nov 13, 1922
Messrs. Geo. W. Wickersham, of New York City, and Corwin S. Shank, of Seattle, Wash., for petitioners.
Mr. Lindsay L. Thompson, of Olympia, Wash., for respondent.
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND 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
# Sophocles (Collins)

* related portals: Ancient Greek drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, quotes, Wikidata item.
Volume X of the "Ancient Classics for English Readers" series, the books of which series are useful as a preliminary acquaintance to readers that wish to read the ancient texts for the first time and also a nice interpretation of them for readers that are already acquainted with them. In this volume, the plays of Sophocles are translated into an edited and abbreviated form, with explanatory notes and interpretive background placed among the text.
SOPHOCLES
BY
CLIFTON W. COLLINS, M.A.
H.M. INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS
EDINBURGH AND LONDON
MDCCCLXXI
CONTENTS.
| | | | PAGE |
| CHAP. | I. | INTRODUCTION, | 1 |
| „ | II. | ŒDIPUS THE KING, | 20 |
| „ | III. | ŒDIPUS AT COLONUS, | 45 |
| „ | IV. | ANTIGONE, | 70 |
| „ | V. | THE DEATH OF AJAX, | 98 |
| „ | VI. | THE MAIDENS OF TRACHIS, | 123 |
| „ | VII. | PHILOCTETES, | 136 |
| „ | VIII. | ELECTRA, | 162 |
The Writer desires to express his acknowledgments to Professor Plumptre for permission to make use of his translation of these tragedies; and to Mr D'Arcy Thompson for a similar courtesy in the case of his 'Sales Attici.'
Use has also been made of M. Patin's 'Studies on Sophocles,' Mr Jebb's edition of the 'Ajax and Electra,' and the last chapter of Lord Lytton's 'Athens.'
Of the translations, those marked (A.) are by the late Professor Anstice; those marked (D.) are by Dale; and those distinguished by (P.) are from Professor Plumptre's translation, to which reference has been made above.
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
# Slater v. Mexican National Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
194 U.S. 120
Slater v. Mexican National Railroad Company
Argued: and submitted February 29, 1904. --- Decided: April 11, 1904
Messrs. Mason Williams, C. A. Keller, and E. A. Atlee for petitioners.
[Argument of Counsel from Page 121 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Leroy G. Denman, T. W. Dodd, and Denman, Franklin, & McGown for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from Pages 122-124 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
# St. Paul Company v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States, Northern Pacific Railway.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
139 U.S. 1
St. Paul Company v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company
Page 2 S. U. Pinney and G. B. Young, for appellants.
A. H. Garland, Heber J. May, and James McNaught, for appellee.
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
# St. Paul Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
112 U.S. 733
St. Paul Company v. United States
J. F. Farnsworth, for appellant.
Sol. Gen. Phillips, for appellee.
MATTHEWS, 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
# St. Paul Fire Marine Insurance Company v. Bachmann

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
285 U.S. 112
St. Paul Fire Marine Insurance Company v. Bachmann
Argued: Jan. 12, 1932. --- Decided: Feb 23, 1932
Messrs. James M. Guiher, Philip P. Steptoe, and Louis A. Johnson, all of Clarksburg, W. Va., for petitioner.
Messrs. Charles J. Schuck and Carl G. Bachmann, both of Wheeling, W. Va., for respondent.
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
# St. Paul, Minneapolis, & Manitoba Railway Company v. Minnesota ex rel Minneapolis/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 497
St. Paul, Minneapolis, & Manitoba Railway Company v. Minnesota ex rel Minneapolis
Judgment affirmed on authority of Northern P. R. Co. v. Minnesota, 208 U.S. 583, 52 L. ed. 630, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 341.

## 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
# St. Paul Company v. Winona & St. Peter Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
112 U.S. 720
St. Paul Company v. Winona & St. Peter Railroad Company
E. C. Palmer, for plaintiffs in error.
Thos. Wilson, 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
# Supervisors v. Kennicott (94 U.S. 498)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
94 U.S. 498
Supervisors v. Kennicott
When this case was here on a former appeal, we decided that the mortgage in controversy was valid in favor of bona fide holders of the bonds it was given to secure, and that the complainants were entitled to a decree for the amount of the bonds held by them. Kennicott v. Supervisors, 16 Wall. 468, 471. These questions are, therefore, no longer open; for it is settled in this court, that whatever has been decided here upon one appeal cannot be re-examined in a subsequent appeal of the same suit. Such subsequent appeal brings up for consideration only the proceedings of the Circuit Court, after the mandate of this court. Himely v. Rose, 5 Cranch, 314; Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 355; Browden v. McArther, 12 id. 53; Sibbard v. United States, 12 Pet. 492; Corning v. Troy Iron and Nail Co., 15 How. 466; Sizer v. Manry, 16 id. 103; Roberts v. Cooper, 20 id. 481; Tyler v. Maguire, 17 Wall. 283.
It is true that, after reversing the decree of the Circuit Court upon the former appeal, it was further ordered that the cause be remanded 'with directions to award a new trial;' but the mandate as sent down 'commanded that such execution and further proceedings be had in conformity to the opinion and decree of this court, as according to right, &c., ought to be had.' Technically, there can be no 'new trial' in a suit in equity; and as our mandates are to be interpreted according to the subject-matter of the proceeding here, and, if possible, so as not to cause inj stice, Story v. Livingston, 13 Pet. 359, it is proper to inquire what must have been intended by the use of that term in the decree, since it cannot have its ordinary meaning. For that purpose, we held, in West v. Brashaer, 14 Pet. 51, that resort might be had to the opinion delivered at the time of the decree. Availing ourselves of this rule, it is easy to see that there could have been no intention to open the case for further hearing upon the issues presented and decided here. There is not an expression of any kind in the opinion indicating any such determination. On the contrary, it is distinctly declared that the mortgage was valid, and that the complainants were entitled to their judgment. Under these circumstances, it is apparent that the words 'new trial' were used to convey the idea of such further action as should be found necessary to carry into effect what had been already decided. No error has been assigned upon the proceedings in the Circuit Court under the mandate construed in this way, and the decree of the Circuit Court is, therefore,
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
# Supervisors v. Kennicott (103 U.S. 554)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
103 U.S. 554
Supervisors v. Kennicott
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
The case was argued by Mr. C. C. Boggs for the plaintiff in error, and by Samuel J. Crooks for the defendant in error.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE 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
# Supervisors v. Stanley

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 305
Supervisors v. Stanley
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Rufus W. Peckham and Mr. Wheeler H. Peckham for the plaintiffs in error.
Mr. George F. Edmunds and Mr. Matthew Hale for the defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE MILLER 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
# Supervisors v. Kennicott (94 U.S. 498)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
94 U.S. 498
Supervisors v. Kennicott
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois.
Argued by Mr. A. L. Knapp for the appellants. The court declined to hear further argument.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE 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
# Supervisors v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Supervisors 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.
* Supervisors v. United States (71 U.S. 435)
* Supervisors v. United States (85 U.S. 71)
# Taylor v. Drainage District Number Fifty-Six of Emmet County Iowa

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
244 U.S. 644
Taylor v. Drainage District Number Fifty-Six of Emmet County Iowa
Mr. Edgar A. Morling for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Hugh H. Obear, Charles A. Douglas, Thomas Ruffin, and James W. Morse for defendants in error.
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
# Taylor v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
296 U.S. 594
Taylor v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
For opinion below, see 76 F.(2d) 904.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

## 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
# Taylor v. Georgia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
315 U.S. 25
Taylor v. Georgia
Argued: Dec. 15, 16, 1941. --- Decided: Jan 12, 1942
Messrs. Leonard Haas, of Atlanta, Ga., and Thomas Taylor Purdom, of Sparta, Ga., for appellant.
Mr. C. S. Baldwin, Jr., of Madison, Ga., for appellee.
Mr. Justice BYRNES 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
# Taylor v. Drainage District Number Fifty-Six of Emmet County Iowa/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
244 U.S. 644
Taylor v. Drainage District Number Fifty-Six of Emmet County Iowa
Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Huling v. Kaw Valley R. & Improv. Co. 130 U.S. 559, 32 L. ed. 1045, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 603; Winona & St. P. Land Co. v. Minnesota, 159 U.S. 540, 40 L. ed. 252, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 88; Leigh v. Green, 193 U.S. 79, 48 L. ed. 623, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 390; Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U.S. 241, 261, 262, 51 L. ed. 461, 474, 475, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 261; American Land Co. v. Zeiss, 219 U.S. 47, 55 L. ed. 82, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 200.

## 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
# Slee v. Erhard 7 F.3d 220 (1993)

7 F.3d 220 (Table). United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Slee v. Erhard. NO. 93-7180. Sept 08, 1993
7 F.3d 220 (Table)
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit. Slee v. Erhard NO. 93-7180 Sept 08, 1993
Appeal From: D.Conn.
Prior History: United States District Court for the CT. 84-cv-497.

## AFFIRMED.

C.A.2 1993. Slee v. Erhard 7 F.3d 220 (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
# Sleep

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sleep."
* 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.
* "Sleep", a poem by Richard Aldington. (If but to sleep alone be fair)
* "Sleep", a poem by Mathilde Blind. (Love-cradling Night, lit by the lucent moon.)
* "Sleep", a poem by Florence Earle Coates. (Say, hast thou never been compelled to lie)
* "Sleep", a poem by Abraham Cowley. (In vain, thou drowsy God! I thee invoke;)
* "Sleep", a poem by Julia Caroline Dorr
* "Sleep", a poem by Algernon Charles Swinburne. (Sleep, when a soul that her own clouds cover)
# Sleeping Beauty

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sleeping Beauty."
* 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.

### Folk tale

* Sleeping Beauty, a European folk tale
* "Sleeping Beauty", also called "The Sleeping Beauty in the Wood", Charles Perrault's version of the folk tale
* "Sleeping Beauty", also called "Little Briar-Rose", the Brothers Grimm's version of the folk tale

### Poems

* "The Sleeping Beauty", a poem by Louise-Victorine Ackermann
* "The Sleeping Beauty", a poem by Mathilde Blind
* "The Sleeping Beauty", a poem by Letitia Elizabeth Landon
* "Sleeping Beauty", a poem by Walter de la Mare
* "The Sleeping Beauty", a poem by Alfred Tennyson

### Other works

* "Sleeping Beauty", a play by Robert E. Howard
# Sleeper

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sleeper."
* 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.
* The Sleepers, a short story by August W. Derleth
* The Sleepers, or The Sleeper, versions of a poem by Felicia Hemans
* The Sleeper, a poem by Edgar Allan Poe
* The Sleepers, a poem by Walt Whitman
# Sleeping Child

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Sleeping Child."
* 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.
* Sleeping Child, a poem by Letitia Elizabeth Landon
* Sleeping Child, a poem by Lydia Sigourney