OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Ex parte Endo

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Ex parte Endo, or Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court decision, handed down on December 18, 1944, the same day as their decision in Korematsu v. United States. In their decision, the Supreme Court ruled that, regardless of whether the United States Government had the right to exclude people of Japanese ancestry from the West Coast during World War II, they could not continue to detain a citizen that the government itself conceded was loyal to the United States. This decision helped lead to the re-opening of the West Coast for resettlement by Japanese-American citizens following their internment in camps across the United States during World War II. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
323 U.S. 283
Ex parte Endo
Argued: Oct. 12, 1944. --- Decided: Dec 18, 1944
Mr. James C. Purcell, of San Francisco, Cal., for Mitsuye endo.
Mr. Charles Fahey, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., for Eisenhower, Director.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# Ex parte First National Bank of Chicago

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
207 U.S. 61
Ex parte First National Bank of Chicago
Argued: May 13, 1907. --- Decided: October 28, 1907
A WRIT of error to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to review a judgment issuing a peremptory mandamus requiring the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to modify its judgment entered in supposed compliance with the mandate of the Supreme Court. Reversed.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Messrs. Henry S. Robbins, Wallace Heckman, and James G. Elsdon for petitioners and plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 61-63 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Newton Wyeth and Joseph E. Parden for respondents and defendants in error.
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
# Ex parte Fassett

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
142 U.S. 479
Ex parte Fassett
Sol. Gen. Taft, for petitioner.
Elihu Root and S. B. Clarke, for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLATCHFORD 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
# Ex parte Fahey et al

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 258
Ex parte Fahey et al
Argued on Return to Rule to Show Cause
April 30, 1947.
Decided June 23, 1947.
Mr. Oscar H. Davis, of Washington, D.C., for petitioners on support of the motion for leave to file.
Messrs. Welburn Mayock, of Los Angeles, Cal., and Charles K. Chapman, of Long Beach, Cal., for respondent Peirson M. Hall, Judge, in opposition thereto.
Mr. Justice JACKSON 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
# Ex parte Fahey et al/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 258
Ex parte Fahey et al
This petition by John H. Fahey, individually and as Federal Home Loan Bank Commissioner, and A. V. Amman, individually and as Conservator for the Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, invokes the original jurisdiction of this Court. They ask leave to file petition fr a writ o f 'mandamus and/or prohibition and/or injunction' against Judge Peirson M. Hall of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California to vacate his order allowing fees to counsel in Fahey v. Mallonee, 332 U.S. 245, 67 S.Ct. 1552, to prohibit any further allowance therein, and to enjoin any payments heretofore allowed.
While an appeal in the principal case was pending in this Court, application was made by various counsel for the plaintiffs and associated interests therein for allowance of fees aggregating some $125,000. The District Court allowed counsel for plaintiffs $50,000 as a partial payment on account of services, but withheld action on other applications. Certain costs and expenses of the plaintiffs in the amount of $17,295.13 were also ordered reimbursed.
The petition involves serious questions of law and of fact. Whether, because of the pendency of the appeal and the stay order granted therein, the District Court had power to entertain the application, whether before the final outcome of the case could be known an allowance was premature, whether the source of the fund on deposit with the court was so related to the services as to be subject to disbursement for their compensation, and whether one judge can make allowances in a case before a three-judge court, are, with other questions, much contested. We do not decide any question as to the merits.
Mandamus, prohibition and injunction against judges are drastic and extraordinary remedies. We do not doubt power in a proper case to issue such writs. But they have the unfortunate consequence of making the judge a litigant, obliged to obtain personal counsel or to leave his defense to one of the litigants before him. These remedies should be resorted to only where appeal is a clearly inadequate remedy. We are unwilling to utilize them as a substitute for appeal. As extraordinary remedies, they are reserved for really extraordinary causes.
We find nothing in this case to warrant their use. An allowance of $50,000 will hardly destroy a twenty-six million dollar association during the time it would take to prosecute an appeal. The status of one of the applicants in the principal case is now settled so that he has standing to take all authorized appeals. We hold that the applicants' grievance is one to be pursued by appeal at the proper time and to the appropriate court, rather than by resort to our original jurisdiction for extraordinary writs.
The petition is denied.
Petition 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
# Ex parte Engles

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
146 U.S. 357
Ex parte Engles
Suit by Henry H. McMullen against the United States to recover fees for attending court. The court of claims gave judgment for defendant. 24 Ct. Cl. 394. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Statement by Mr. Justice HARLAN
The appellant was United States marshal for the district of Delaware from February 1, 1880, to July 24, 1885. The terms of the district court for that district began on the second Tuesdays in January, April, June, and September in each year, and continued until the Friday or the day preceding that for opening the next succeeding term. The terms of the circuit court began on the third Tuesdays in June and October in each year, and continued until the Tuesday or the day preceding that for opening the next succeeding term.
It is found by the court of claims (finding 2) that the appellant, as marshal, 'attended the circuit and district courts when in session, during the terms of said courts, nine hundred and five days;' that those days were charged by him in his account at $5 per day; that the account, being verified, was approved by the court as just, and in accordance with law, but its payment was refused at the treasury department; and that appellant's whole compensation, if the above charges were added, would not have exceeded in any one year the maximum of $6,000.
Finding 7 was in these words: 'Claimant has been paid in full at the rate of $5 per day for every day whilst the circuit and district courts of the United States in the state of Delaware were sitting or in session, from and including October term, 1879, to and including June term, 1885. The 905 days referred to in finding 2 were days occurring between sessions of the courts.'
C. C. Lancaster, for appellant.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Cotton, for the United States.
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 Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 27

Chap. ⅩⅩⅦ.—An Act authorizing the erection of a Lighthouse on Cape Cod, in the State of Massachusetts.
A lighthouse to be erected on Cape Cod.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury, to provide, by contract, which shall be approved by the President of the United States, for building a lighthouse on Cape Cod, in the state of Massachusetts, (as soon as the necessary cession of land for the purpose shall be made by the said state to the United States;) and to furnish the same, with all necessary supplies: And also, to agree for the salaries, or wages of the person, or persons, who may be appointed by the President, for the superintendence and care of the same: And that the number or disposition of the light or lights in the said lighthouse, be such, as may tend to distinguish it from others, as far as is practicable; and that the light or lights on Gurnet head, at the entrance of Plymouth harbour, be altered or diminished, if necessary: Appropriation therefor.And that eight thousand dollars be appropriated for the same, out of any monies not otherwise appropriated.
Approved, May 17, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 22

Chap. ⅩⅩⅡ.—An Act making further provision relative to the Revenue Cutters.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That from ​Alteration of the compensation to the officers and mariners of the revenue cutters.and after the first day of May, in the present year, there be allowed, in lieu of the compensation now established, to the master of each revenue cutter, fifty dollars per month; to each first mate, thirty-five dollars per month; to each second mate, thirty dollars per month; to each third mate, twenty-five dollars per month; and to each mariner, not exceeding twenty dollars per month; to be paid by the collectors of the revenue, who shall be designated for that purpose.
Forfeitures under the impost laws, recovered in consequence of information given by officers of the revenue cutters, how to be disposed of.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That all penalties, fines and forfeitures which may be incurred under the impost laws of the United States, and recovered in consequence of information given by any officer of a revenue cutter, shall, after deducting all proper costs and charges, be disposed of, as follows: One fourth part shall be for the use of the United States, and be paid into the treasury thereof; one fourth part, for the officers of the customs, to be distributed in the manner now provided, relative to that part of forfeitures they are now entitled to; and the remainder thereof, to the officers of such cutter, to be divided among them, in proportion to their pay.
President to cause other revenue cutters to be built or purchased in lieu of such as become unfit for service.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is authorized, to cause other revenue cutters to be built or purchased, in lieu of such as are or shall, from time to time, become unfit for further service; the expense whereof, as well as all future expenses of building, purchasing or repairing revenue cutters, shall be paid out of the product of the duties on goods, wares and merchandise, imported into the United States, and on the tonnage of ships or vessels.
Those which are unfit for service to be sold.Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized to cause such revenue cutters as shall, from time to time, become unfit for service, to be sold at public auction, and the proceeds of such sales to be paid into the treasury of the United States.
Limitation of the first section. Act of March 2, 1799, ch. 22.Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That so much of this act as fixes the compensation of the officers and men on board the said cutters, shall be, and remain in force, for the term of one year, and from thence to the end of the next session of Congress thereafter, and no longer.
Approved, May 6, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 24

Chap. ⅩⅩⅣ.—An Act to repeal so much of an act intituled “An act to establish the judicial courts of the United States,” as directs that alternate sessions of the Circuit Court for the district of Pennsylvania shall be holden at Yorktown; and for other purposes.
Act of Sep. 20, 1789, ch. 20. Circuit court for Pennsylvania district to be holden only at Philadelphia, except when the judges direct it to be holden at Yorktown.Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That so much of the fifth section of the act, intituled “An act to establish the judicial courts of the United States,” as directs that alternate sessions of the circuit court for the district of Pennsylvania, shall be holden at Yorktown, be, and the same is hereby repealed; and that all the sessions of the said circuit court, shall, from and after the passing of this act, be holden at the city of Philadelphia, excepting only, when at any session of the said court, the judges thereof shall direct the next session to be holden at Yorktown; which they are hereby authorized and empowered to do, whenever it shall appear to them to be necessary.
Returns and continuances to the 11th of next October at Yorktown changed to the same day at Philadelphia. Notice thereof to be given by the marshal by proclamation.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That all such process of the said court, as may have issued before the passing of this act, and all recognizances returnable, and all suits and other proceedings that were continued to the said circuit court for the district of Pennsylvania, on the eleventh of October next, in Yorktown, shall now be returned, and held continued to the same court, on the same day, at Philadelphia. And to the end, that suitors, witnesses and all others concerned, may have notice of the alteration hereby made, the marshal of the said district of Pennsylvania is hereby required to make the same known, by proclamation, on or before the first day of August next.
Approved, May 12, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 25

Chap. ⅩⅩⅤ.—An Act allowing compensation for Horses killed in battle belonging to officers of the army of the United States.
Officers whose duty requires them to be on horseback, to be paid for horses killed in battle.Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That every officer in the army of the United States, whose duty requires him to be on horseback, in time of action, and whose horse shall be killed in battle, be allowed a sum not exceeding two hundred dollars, as a compensation for each horse so killed.
Act to be retrospective as far as fourth of March, 1789.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the provision contained in this act shall have retrospective operation, so far as the fourth day of March, in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine: Provided, That no person shall receive payment for any horse so killed, until he make satisfactory proofProof to be made to the Secretary of War within a limited time. to the Secretary at War, that the horse, for which he claims compensation, was actually killed under such circumstances, as to entitle him to this provision, in all cases, which have heretofore taken place, within one year after the end of the present session of Congress; and in all cases which may take place hereafter, within one year after such horse shall have been killed.
How proof of the value shall be made.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the proof of the value of such horse shall be, by the affidavit of the quartermaster of the corps, to which the owner may belong, or of two other credible witnesses.
Approved, May 12, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 26

Chap. ⅩⅩⅥ.—An Act declaring the consent of Congress to a certain Act of the State of Maryland, and to continue an act declaring the assent of Congress to certain Acts of the States of Maryland, Georgia and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, so far as the same respects the States of Georgia, and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
Consent of Congress to a certain act of Maryland empowering the wardens of the port of Baltimore to levy and collect the duty therein mentioned.Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the ​consent of Congress be, and is hereby granted and declared to the operation of an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, made and passed at a session begun and held at the city of Annapolis, on the first Mon­day of November, in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety­-one, intituled “An act empowering the wardens of the port of Baltimore to levy and collect the duty therein mentioned.”
Part of the act declaring the assent of Congress to certain acts of the states of Maryland, Georgia, and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations continued in force. 1800, ch. 15.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the act, intituled “An act declaring the assent of Congress to certain acts of the states of Maryland, Georgia and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,” shall be continued, and is hereby declared to be in full force, so far as the same respects the states of Georgia and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That this act shall be, and continue in force for the term of three years, and from thence to the end of the next session of Congress thereafter, and no longer.
Approved, May 12, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 20

Chap. ⅩⅩ.—An Act making Appropriations for defraying the Expenses which may arise in carrying into effect a Treaty made between the United States and certain Indian Tribes, northwest of the river Ohio.
Appropriation for defraying the expenses of carrying into effect a treaty made between the United States and certain Indian tribes, northwest of the river Ohio.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That for the purpose of defraying the expenses which may arise in carrying into effect the treaty made between the United States and the tribes of Indians, called the Wyandots, Delawares, Shawanoes, Ottawas, Chippewas, Putawatimes, Miamis, Eel river, Weaá, Kickapoo, Piankashaw, and Kaskaskias, at Greeneville, on the third day of August, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-five, the monies arising under the revenue laws of the United States, which have been heretofore passed, not already appropriated to any other purpose, or so much thereof as may be necessary, be, and are hereby pledged and appropriated for the payment of the annuity stipulated in the said treaty, to be paid to the said Indian tribes: that is to say; to the Wyandots, one thousand dollars; to the Delawares, one thousand dollars; to the Shawanoes, one thousand dollars; to the Ottawas, one thousand dollars; to the Chippewas, one thousand dollars; to the Putawatimes, one thousand dollars; to the Miamis, one thousand dollars; to the Eel river, Weeá, Kickapoo, Piankashaw and Kaskaskias tribes, each five hundred dollars: And to continue so pledged and appropriated, so long as the said treaty shall be in force. And that a further sum of one thousand five hundred dollars, out of the monies aforesaid, be also appropriated to defray the cost of transportation, and other contingent charges which may arise from the payment of the said annuity, according to the stipulations contained in the said treaty.
Approved, May 6, 1796.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/4th Congress/1st Session/Chapter 23

Chap. ⅩⅩⅢ.—An Act to continue in force, for a limited time, an act intituled “An act declaring the consent of Congress to an act of the State of Maryland, passed the twenty-eighth of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, for the appointment of a Health Officer.”
Consent of Congress granted to the act of Maryland for collecting a duty of one cent per ton on vessels coming into Baltimore district from a foreign voyage.Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the consent of Congress be, and is hereby granted and declared, to the operation of an act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed the twenty-eighth of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, intituled “An act to appoint a health officer, for the port of Baltimore, in Baltimore county,” so far as to enable the state aforesaid to collect a duty of one cent per ton, on all vessels coming into the district of Baltimore, from a foreign voyage, for the purposes in the said act intended.
Limitation of the act. See page 546, post.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That this act shall be in force for one year, and from thence to the end of the next session of Congress thereafter, and no longer.
Approved, May 6, 1796.
# Understanding

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Understanding."
* 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.
* Understanding, a poem by Sara Teasdale.
* Understanding, a poem by John Cowper Powys.
# Understood Betsy

* related portals: Children's literature.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category.
[An audiobook is available at Librivox]
UNDERSTOOD BETSY
BY
DOROTHY CANFIELD Author of "The Bent Twig," etc.
ILLUSTRATIONS BY
ADA C. WILLIAMSON
NEW YORK
HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 1917
COPYRIGHT, 1916, 1917,
BY
THE CENTURY CO.
COPYRIGHT, 1917,
BY
HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY
Published August, 1917
PRINTED IN THE USA
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
ILLUSTRATIONS
FACING
PAGE
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 1958, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 65 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