OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# God Needs Antonio

Your soul was lifted by the wings today Hearing the master of the violin: You praised him, praised the great Sabastian too Who made that fine Chaconne; but did you think Of old Antonio Stradivari?--him Who a good century and a half ago Put his true work in that brown instrument And by the nice adjustment of its frame Gave it responsive life, continuous With the master's finger-tips and perfected Like them by delicate rectitude of use. That plain white-aproned man, who stood at work Patient and accurate full fourscore years, Cherished his sight and touch by temperance, And since keen sense is love of perfectness Made perfect violins, the needed paths For inspiration and high mastery.
No simpler man than he; he never cried, "why was I born to this monotonous task Of making violins?" or flung them down To suit with hurling act well-hurled curse At labor on such perishable stuff. Hence neighbors in Cremona held him dull, Called him a slave, a mill-horse, a machine.
Naldo, a painter of eclectic school, Knowing all tricks of style at thirty-one, And weary of them, while Antonio At sixty-nine wrought placidly his best, Making the violin you heard today-- Naldo would tease him oft to tell his aims. "Perhaps thou hast some pleasant vice to feed- the love of louis d'ors in heaps of four, Each violin a heap--I've naught to blame; My vices waste such heaps. But then, why work With painful nicety?"
Antonio then: "I like the gold--well, yes--but not for meals. And as my stomach, so my eye and hand, And inward sense that works along with both, Have hunger that can never feed on coin. Who draws a line and satisfies his soul, Making it crooked where it should be straight? Antonio Stradivari has an eye That winces at false work and loves the true." Then Naldo: "'Tis a petty kind of fame At best, that comes of making violins; And saves no masses, either. Thou wilt go To purgatory none the less."
But he: "'Twere purgatory here to make them ill; And for my fame--when any master holds 'Twixt chin and hand a violin of mine, He will be glad that Stradivari lived, Made violins, and made them of the best. The masters only know whose work is good: They will choose mine, and while God gives them skill I give them instruments to play upon, God choosing me to help him.
"What! Were God at fault for violins, thou absent?"
"Yes; He were at fault for Stradivari's work."
"Why, many hold Giuseppe's violins As good as thine."
"May be: they are different. His quality declines: he spoils his hand With over-drinking. But were his the best, He could not work for two. My work is mine, And, heresy or not, if my hand slacked I should rob God--since his is fullest good-- Leaving a blank instead of violins. I say, not God himself can make man's best Without best men to help him.
'Tis God gives skill, But not without men's hands: he could not make Antonio Stradivari's violins Without Antonio. Get thee to thy easel."
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
# God Only Wise, and Great, and Strong

God only wise, and great, and strong, Hath made the orbs to run their race: Knowledge and might to God belong, Honor, and majesty, and praise.
Jehovah is unchangeable, His ways and thoughts are not as ours; He cheers the languid souls that fail; And quickens all their drooping powers.
Gently He lifts the fallen up, He gives them faith, and faith’s increase, Revives their feeble, dying hope, And fills with love, and joy and peace.
Blasted, the vigor of the young Shall fade, and suddenly decay; The bold, and confident and strong, Shall fear, despair, and die away.
But they who wait upon the Lord Shall surely find His promise true, Receive the quickening powerful Word, And, born of God, their strength renew.
Their willing souls, from sin set free, Shall swiftly in His statues move, Shall walk in glorious liberty Shall fly upon the wings of love.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 33

Chap. XXXIII.—An Act attaching to the Canton district, in the state of Ohio, the tract of land lying between the foot of the rapids of the Miami of Lake Erie, and the Connecticut western reserve.
Act of Feb. 25, 1811, ch. 25. Lands attached to the district of Canton.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all that tract of land lying between the foot of the rapids of the river Miami of Lake Erie and western line of the Connecticut reserve, in the state of Ohio, which was ceded to the United States by certain tribes of Indians, at a treaty concluded at Brownstown, in the Michigan territory, on the twenty-fifth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and eight, shall be attached to, and made a part of, the district of Canton.
The ordinary modes of surveying public lands to the deviated from in surveying those of the Canton district.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That in surveying and dividing the lands by this act attached to the district of Canton, the ordinary mode of surveying the public lands shall be so far deviated from that the boundary lines of the tracts to be laid off therein shall be run parallel to, and at right angles with, the road laid out in conformity with the said treaty, and in every other respect the surveys shall be made in the same manner, and for the same compensation allowed for the surveying the other public lands north-west of the river Ohio.
Lands attached to the Canton district by this act to be offered for sale.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That all the lands by this act attached to the district of Canton, shall be offered for sale to the highest bidder, under the direction of the register of the land office and the receiver of public moneys of the said district, at such time and place as the President of the United States shall designate by proclamation for that purpose; and the sales shall remain open one week and no longer; and the said lands shall in every respect be sold on the same terms and conditions as have been provided for the sale of other lands of the United States. All the lands in the said tract remaining unsold at the close of the said sales may be disposed of at private sale by the register of the land office of the said district, on the same terms and conditions, as are provided for the sale of other public lands in the same district; and patents shall be obtained in the same manner as in case of other lands of the United States.
Fees to the register and receiver of public moneys.Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the aforesaid register and receiver of public moneys shall each receive four dollars per day for each day’s attendance on the public sales directed by this act.
Approved, February 4, 1815.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 43

Chap. XLIII.—An Act in addition to the act to regulate the laying out and making a road from Cumberland, in the state of Maryland, to the state of Ohio.
Appropriation of $100,000 in addition to the unexpended balance of former appropriation. To be repaid out of the sum reserved by the act of April 30, 1802, ch. 40.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in addition to the unexpended balance of the sum heretofore appropriated for laying out and making a road from Cumberland in the state of Maryland, to the state of Ohio, the sum of one hundred thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, and to be expended, under the direction of the President of the United States, in making said road between Cumberland in the state of Maryland, and Brownsville, in the state of Pennsylvania, commencing at Cumberland; which sum of one hundred thousand dollars shall be repaid out of the fund reserved for laying out and making roads to the state of Ohio, by virtue of the seventh section of an act passed on the thirtieth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and two, entitled “An act to enable the people of the eastern division of the territory north-west of the river Ohio to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the union on an equal footing with the original states, and for other purposes.”
Approved, February 14, 1815.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 39

Chap. XXXIX.—An Act to authorize the purchase of a tract of land for the use of the United States.
A tract of land near Plattsburg to be purchased.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, and he is hereby authorized to cause to be purchased for the use of the United States, the whole or such part of that tract of land situate adjoining the village of Plattsburg, in the State of New York, on which forts Moreau and Brown, and other works, barracks, arsenals, hospitals and other public buildings now stand, as shall be by him judged requisite for the military purposes of the United States.
Approved, February 8, 1815.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 41

Chap. XLI.—An Act making appropriations for repairing or rebuilding the public buildings within the city of Washington.
Buildings in the city of Washington to be rebuilt.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United states cause to be repaired or rebuilt forthwith, the President’s House, Capitol and public offices, on their present sites in the city of Washington, and that he be authorized to borrow, at an interest not exceeding six per centum per annum, from any bank or banks within the District of Columbia, or from any individual or individuals, a sum not exceeding five hundred thousand dollars, to be applied exclusively to that object.
Approved, February 13, 1815.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 34

Chap. XXXIV.—An Act for giving further time to the purchasers of public lands to complete their payments.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That every person who, after ​Act of March 3, 1813, ch. 43. Act of Feb. 19, 1814, ch. 14. Further time allowed to purchasers of public lands.the first day of April, one thousand eight hundred and ten, and prior to the first day of April, one thousand eight hundred and eleven, had purchased any tract or tracts of lands of the United States, not exceeding in the whole six hundred and forty acres, at any of the land offices of the United States, and whose lands have not already been actually sold or reverted to the United States, for non-payment of part of the purchase money, shall be, and they hereby are allowed the further time of three years, from and after the expiration of the period already given by law for completing the payment of the purchase money aforesaid; which further time of three years shall be allowed only on the following conditions: first, all arrears of interest on the purchase money shall be paid on or before the expiration of the time for completing the payment of the purchase moneyConditions. according to former laws: Provided, That in all cases in which the time for completing the payment of the purchase money may have expired, or shall expire before the first day of June next, the interest may be paid on or before that day: second, the residue of the sum due on account of the principal of such purchase shall be paid, with interest thereon, in three equal annual payments, as follows, viz: one third of the said sum, with interest due thereon, within one year; one third of the said sum, with the interest due thereon within two years, and the residue, with the interest due thereon, within three years after the expiration of the time for completing the payments on such purchases according to law. And in case of failure to pay the arrears of interest, or any of the three instalments of principal, with the accruing interest, at the time above-mentioned, the tract of land shall be forthwith advertised and offered for sale in the manner and on the terms directed by law, in case of lands not paid within the time limited by law, and shall revert to the United States in like manner, if the same is hereby not sold at such sale.
Approved, February 4, 1815.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 3/13th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 40

Chap. XL.—An Act to amend an act laying duties on licenses to retailers of wines, spirituous liquors, and foreign merchandise.
Act of Aug. 2, 1813, ch. 39. Act not to extend to vine dressers who sell their wines.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That nothing contained in the first section of the act laying duties on licenses to retailers of wines, spirituous liquors, and foreign merchandise, shall be construed to extend to vine dressers who sell at the place where the same is made, wine of their own growth, nor shall any vine dresser for vending solely at the place where the same is made, wine of his own growth, be compelled to take out license as a retailer of wine.
Approved, February 8, 1815.
# United States v. Cumberland Public Service Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
338 U.S. 451
United States v. Cumberland Public Service Company
Argued: Dec. 12, 1949. --- Decided: Jan 9, 1950
Mr. Hilbert P. Zarky, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Cornelius W. Grafton, Louisville, Ky., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLACK 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
# United States v. Crusell (81 U.S. 1)/Dissent Davis

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Davis
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 1
United States v. Crusell
Mr. Justice DAVIS, with whom concurred Mr. Justice SWAYNE and Mr. Justice MILLER, dissenting.
In my opinion, the burden of proof in this case is on the claimant to show that the money which he seeks to obtain under the Captured and Abandoned Property Act has been paid into the treasury. The court, in its opinion, throws the burden of proof, on this point, on the United States, and on that account I am constrained to dissent from the judgment in the case.

## 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
# United States v. Crusell (79 U.S. 175)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
79 U.S. 175
United States v. Crusell
In the case of the United States v. Ayres this court denied a motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims when the motion was made upon the sole ground that a motion for a new trial had been made by the United States, and was pending in that court, but afterwards dismissed the same appeal when a new trial had been granted. We are satisfied with the rulings then announced, and think that the spirit of them requires us to allow the continuance now asked for. We must not be understood, however, as giving any sanction to the idea that indefinite postponement of final hearing and determination can be obtained by repeated motions for continuance here.
The objection that more than two years had elapsed after judgment in the Court of Claims before the motion for new trial was made should be addressed to that court in opposition to the motion. Its decision, whatever it may be, can be reviewed here.
CONTINUANCE GRANTED.

## 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
# United States v. Crusell (81 U.S. 1)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Davis
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 1
United States v. Crusell
Presuming that the officers of the government performed their duty, there can be no doubt that the quartermaster at Atlanta forwarded to the officer in charge of military railroad transportation the cotton of the claimant; and that this officer turned over the cotton to the agent at Nashville, by whom it was forwarded to Cincinnati and sold by the supervising agent there. The presumption in this case is strengthened by the fact that heavy statutory penalties would be incurred by neglect of duty. There is nothing in the case to repel this presumption. If any evidence to this effect exists, it must be contained in the books of the Treasury Department, and these are under the control of the defendant.
We think, therefore, that the conclusion of the Court of Claims, that the proceeds of the 73 bales of cotton belonging to the claimant were paid into the treasury, and that the claimant was entitled to judgment, was right.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
Mr. Justice DAVIS, with whom concurred Mr. Justice SWAYNE and Mr. Justice MILLER, dissenting.

## 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
# United States v. Cumming

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
130 U.S. 452
United States v. Cumming
Asst. Atty. Gen. Howard, for United States.
Michael Jacobs, Leonard Myers. and David McAdam, for Cumming et al.
Mr. Justice HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# United States v. Crusell (79 U.S. 175)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
79 U.S. 175
United States v. Crusell
THIS was an application by Mr. Bristow, the Solicitor-General, and Mr. Hill, the Assistant Attorney-General, in behalf of the government, for the continuance of an appeal from the Court of Claims, founded upon the fact that evidence had been newly discovered on which a motion in behalf of the United States had been made for a new trial, under the act of June 25, 1868. By that act the Court of Claims is authorized 'at any time, while any suit or claim is pending before, or on appeal from, said court, or within two years next after the final disposition of any such suit or claim,' to grant a new trial on motion of the United States.
The motion was opposed by Mr. J. Hughes, for the appellee,
1st. On account of the fact which he stated, that the record and minutes of the Court of Claims showed, to wit, that more than two years had elapsed after judgment in the Court of Claims was given before a new trial was asked for.
2d. Because if a party, by the mere filing of a motion for a new trial in the court below, after appeal taken here, could get a continuance, an appellee might be delayed in this court indefinitely. The case would be different, he admitted, if a new trial had been actually granted; for then indeed a dismissal of the appeal might be asked.
The CHIEF JUSTICE 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
# United States v. Stone Stone

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
106 U.S. 525
United States v. Stone Stone
Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury, for the United States.
Geo. E. Harris, for Stone and McAlexander.
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
# United States v. Storer Broadcasting Company/Concurrence Douglas

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Douglas Harlan
* Dissenting Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
351 U.S. 192
United States v. Storer Broadcasting Company
Argued: Feb. 28, 29, 1956. --- Decided: May 21, 1956
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS concurs in the result.

## 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
# United States v. Storer Broadcasting Company/Dissent Frankfurter

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Douglas Harlan
* Dissenting Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
351 U.S. 192
United States v. Storer Broadcasting Company
Argued: Feb. 28, 29, 1956. --- Decided: May 21, 1956
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, dissenting.
While I agree that the amendatory Rules promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission relating to Multiple Ownership of standard, FM and television stations constitute a reviewable 'order' within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 1034, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1034, my Brother HARLAN'S reasoning convinces me that the respondent was not on the record before us a 'party aggrieved' under that section. Therefore the court below should not have entertained the petition to review the Commission's order.
Procedural and jurisdictional limitations on judicial action by the federal courts are not playthings of lawyers nor obstructions on the road of justice. Whether formulated by the Constitution, congressional enactments or settled judicial precedents, they are means designed to keep the courts within appropriate limits and to enforce rights according to general standards and not have them depend on the impact of the individual case. To be sure, dealing as we are with general standards, differences of views regarding their scope and applicability are bound to arise from time to time. Who is a 'party aggrieved' or a 'party in interest' turns on the context, often confused and dubious, of a particular set of circumstances and therefore raises issues on which judges not unnaturally divide, as they do on other unmathematical problems of the law. See Singer & Sons v. Union Pacific R. Co., 311 U.S. 295, 61 S.Ct. 254, 85 L.Ed. 198.
To the laity such matters may seem technicalities in a derogatory sense of the term. But this is only one phase of an attitude of mind that thinks ill of law which does not accord with private wishes. When informed by a legal adviser that to carry out his desires would encounter 'technical legal difficulties,' a strenuous President of the United States impatiently observed that 'all law is technicality.' But even professionally competent officials are at times impatient with decisions that fail to adjudicate substantive issues on which light is sought. It seems to me important, therefore, not to minimize the function of jurisdictional limitations upon adjudication by expressing views on the merits. There are, of course, exceptional situations where it is proper for a dissenter to go to the merits when a majority of theCourt removes from the case threshold objections of procedure and jurisdiction. See e.g., Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 341, 56 S.Ct. 466, 480, 80 L.Ed. 688. This is not such a case.

## 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