OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Seibert v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Seibert 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.
* Seibert v. United States (122 U.S. 284)
* Seibert v. United States (129 U.S. 192)
# Sehnsucht

Whence are ye, vague desires, Which carry men along, However proud and strong; Which, having ruled to-day, To-morrow pass away? Whence are ye, vague desires? Whence are ye?
Which women, yielding to, Find still so good and true; So true, so good to-day, To-morrow gone away. Whence are ye, vague desires? Whence are ye?
From seats of bliss above, Where angels sing of love; From subtle airs around, Or from the vulgar ground, Whence are ye, vague desires? Whence are ye?
A message from the blest, Or bodily unrest; A call to heavenly good, A fever in the blood What are ye, vague desires? What are ye?
Which men who know you best Are proof against the least, And rushing on to-day, To-morrow cast away. What are ye, vague desires? What are ye?
Which women, ever new, Still warned, surrender to; Adored with you to-day, Then cast with you away, What are ye, vague desires? What are ye?
Which unto boyhood’s heart The force of man impart, And pass, and leave it cold, And prematurely old, What are ye, vague desires? What are ye?
Which, tremblingly confest, Pour in the young girl’s breast Joy, joy, the like is none, And leave her then undone, What are ye, vague desires? What are ye?
Ah yet! though man be marred, Ignoble made, and hard; Though broken women lie In anguish down to die; Ah yet! ye vague desires, Ah yet!
By Him who gave you birth, And blended you with earth, Was some good end designed For man and womankind; Ah yet! ye vague desires, Ah yet!
The petals of to-day, To-morrow fallen away, Shall something leave instead, To live when they are dead; When you, ye vague desires, Have vanished;
A something to survive, Of you though it derive Apparent earthly birth, But of far other worth Than you, ye vague desires, Than you.
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
# Seibert v. United States (129 U.S. 192)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 192
Seibert v. United States
E. John Ellis, John Johns, and D. A. McKnight, for plaintiff in error.
Clinton Rowell, for defendant in error.
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
# Seibert v. United States (129 U.S. 192)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 192
Seibert v. United States
The facts of this case are similar to those in Seibert v. Lewis, before the court at its October term, 1886, (122 U.S. 284, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1190,) and it is admitted by the counsel for the plaintiff in error that the decision there, if adhered to, will control here. He, however, asks us to reconsider our rulings, and reverse our former judgment. We see no reason to justify such reconsideration and change of position. The very elaborate argument of counsel is but a re-presentation of the reasons originally offered against the decision in that and analogous cases. Seibert v. Lewis was very carefully and elaborately considered, and to the doctrines there announced we adhere. Upon its authority the judgment of the court below must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

## 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
# Sigler v. Losieau

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
396 U.S. 988
Sigler v. Losieau
Clarence A. H. Meyer, Atty. Gen. of Nebraska, and Melvin Kent Kammerlohr, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Mr. Chief Justice BURGER, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART joins, 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
# Sigler v. Parker/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinions Black Douglas
United States Supreme Court
396 U.S. 482
Sigler v. Parker
Mr. Justice BLACK, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, dissenting.
This Court in Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed.2d 908 (1964), held over my dissent that the question of the voluntariness of a defendant's alleged confession must be made by the trial judge in a separate proceeding prior to the submission of the confession to the jury, and that insofar as federal questions concerning coercion under the Fifth Amendment were involved the decision of the trial judge forecloses the jury from passing upon the voluntariness question. In my dissent I said:
'Whatever might be a judge's view of the voluntariness of a confession, the jury in passing on a defendant's guilt or innocence is, in my judgment, entitled to hear and determine voluntariness of a confession along with other factual issues on which its verdict must rest.' Id., at 401, 84 S.Ct., at 1794.
I adhere to that dissent and hope that at some future time this Court will restore to defendants their right to have the voluntariness of alleged confessions determined by the jury as the Sixth Amendment requires.
I would not object if the Court were remanding the case for a new and complete retrial in which a Nebraska jury of the defendant's peers could determine after hearing the evidence whether the alleged confessions had been voluntarily given. Clearly, when a jury passes upon the truthfulness of a confession, as it must do when a confession is offered, the jury must also be allowed to determine whether the confession was caused by police coercion or whether it was freely given. Jackson v. Denno thus took away a defendant's traditional right to have the jury decide for itself whether a confession was tainted and probably untrue because it was coerced. The vital importance of this issue to defendants tried in this country is a sufficient reason for me to continue my protest against the Court's holding in Jackson v. Denno.

## 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
# Sights from My Window

From Godey's Lady's Book and Magazine, Volume 20 (1840)
I sit beside my window, And see the crowds go by, With joy on every countenance, And hope in every eye, And hear their blended voices, In many a shout and song, Borne by the spring's soft breezes Through all the streets along.
And peering through a lattice Of a humble cottage near, I see a face of beauty, Adown which glides a tear,— A rose amid her tresses Tells that she would be gay, But a thought of some deep sorrow Drives every smile away.
She whom I see there weeping, Few save myself do know,— A flower in blooming blighted By blasts of keenest wo. She has a soul so gentle, That as a harp it seems, Which the light airs wake to music Like that we hear in dreams.
A common fate is that poor girl's, which many yet must share,— In the crowd how little know they What griefs its members bear! One year ago a radiance Like sunlight round her played, Heart felt, eyes spoke of gladness,— She was not then betrayed.
There was one of gentle manners, Who e'er met her with a smile, And a voice so full of kindness, That she could not deem it guile, And her trusting heart she gave him,— She could give to him no more,— Oh! daughter of the poor man, Soon thy dream of bliss was o'er!
'T were vain to tell the story Of fear, hope, and joyous passion; She forgot her father's station, He forsook the halls of fashion; She loved him well-he knew it,— 'T was a pleasing interlude, Fitting to enjoy more keenly Scenes the poor might ne'er intrude.
Hark! the sound of music swelling!— Now the crowd are rushing by, Horses prancing, banners flying, Shouts ascending to the sky:— There's a sea of life beneath me, And his form is there,— For his fearful sin who spurns him? On his brow what sign of care?
I see her now-she trembles— There is phrensy in her eye; Her blanched lip is quivering; There is no good angel nigh;— She falls,-the deep-toned bugle Breaks on the quiet air; Look to the calm blue heaven— That sound-her soul-are there!
In the cavalcade she saw him, In his plumes and armor drest, And more closely to her bosom His treasured gifts she prest; Her eye met his-'t was finished— Not a word my tongue was spoken; A cold glance-a look of passion— And her heart was broken!
How common are such histories, In the cottage and the hall; From prison bars how many eyes Look on life's carnival! The joys we seek are phantoms That fade ere closed the hand In the dark reached forth to grasp them, But the brain receives their brand.
# Sights from a Steeple

published in Twice-Told Tales
# Sigler v. Parker

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinions

    Black
    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
396 U.S. 482
Sigler v. Parker
Clarence A. H. Meyer, Atty. Gen. of Nebraska, and Ralph H. Gillan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Richard J. Bruckner, for respondent.
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
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 39

April 1914
SOUTHERN
Historical Society Papers
NEW SERIES—NUMBER I
WHOLE NUMBER XXXIX
SEPTEMBER, 1914
Publication Committee
| W. GORDON McCABE | GEORGE L. CHRISTIAN |
| ARCHER ANDERSON |||
Secretary
JAMES POWER SMITH
2304 West Grace Street
Richmond, Va.
page
WM. ELLIS JONES' SONS, INC.
PRINTERS,
RICHMOND. VA.
page
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
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
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 39/The House of Broken Swords

Southern Historical Society Papers (1914)
THE HOUSE OF BROKEN SWORDS.
On one side marshes met the snarling sea, And on the other, three gaunt mountain peaks Shot up mid screaming eagles; and between, Beetling above an inky tarn, upclomb That hostelry.
Cloud-high it loomed and dark As Amazonian forests. Far overhead Its shadowy roof, sometimes was spindrift dim, Sometimes was heaven, with lucent twilight skies Besprent with stars; and round each echoing hall From carven ambrys quaint, old storied arms Blazoned the walls. There on Goliath's blade Goliath's blood still rusted; there sea-born Excalibur flaunted his wizard hilt. And Soldan's yataghan and Richard's brand Hung with the baton that in Caesar's grasp Dispeopled nations.
But the loftiest nave In that strange house was hung with broken swords, Whereof the chiefest three had shields beneath, Scrolled each with shining names. One shield was his Who long time humbled Rome, and one. blood-red. Recalled the Corsican; and last, a shield Now wet with old men's tears, proclaimed the chief Whose ramparts moulder mid Virginian pines.
Untenanted the place, to casual eyes. And silent; but anon began afar Onset of armed feet, and thunders rolled,
Lifted a veil; and Lo! a marching host Swept through the aisles, while on amazed ears Sea-like uprose The Prayer of Beaten Men.
"We are the fallen, who with helpless faces Hid in the dust, in stiffening ruin lay. Felt the hoofs beat, and heard the rattling traces. As o'er us drove the chariots of the fray.
"We are the fallen, who by ramparts gory Awaiting death, heard the far shouts begin. And with our last glance glimpsed the victor's glory For which we died, but dying might not win.
"We were but men. Always our eyes were holden, We could not read the dark that walled us round, Nor deem our futile plans with thine enfolden— We fought, not knowing God was on the ground,
"Give us our own; and though in realms eternal The potsherd and the pot. belike, are one. Make our old world to know that with supernal Powers we were matched, and by the stars o'erthrown.
"Aye, grant our ears to hear the foolish praising Of men—old voices of our lost home-land. Or else, the gateways of this dim world raising, Give us our swords again—and hold thy hand!"
Thus prayed they; and no spoken answer fell. But whoso watched, saw the dark roof again Flash into sudden heaven aglow with stars That aimed their rays, straight as God's glances, on Those shields alone beneath the broken swords.
—William Hervey Woods, Scribner for March, 1910.
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 40

September 1915. Volume 2 of the "New Series".
SOUTHERN
Historical Society Papers
NEW SERIES—NUMBER II
WHOLE NUMBER XL
SEPTEMBER, 1915
Publication Committee
| W. GORDON McCABE | GEORGE L. CHRISTIAN |
| ARCHER ANDERSON |||
Secretary
JAMES POWER SMITH
2120 Stuart Avenue
Richmond, Va.
page
WM. ELLIS JONES' SONS, INC.
PRINTERS,
RICHMOND, VA.
page
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
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
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 40/Lecky on the South

LECKY ON THE SOUTH.
"The Southern States proclaimed the right of nationalities, demanded their independence and proved their earnestness and their unanimity by arguments that were far more unequivocal than any doubtful plebiscite. For four years they defended their cause on the battlefield with heroic courage against overwhelming odds and at the sacrifice of everything that men most desire. American and indeed European writers are accustomed to speak of the heroism of the American colonies in repudiating imperial taxation and asserting and achieving their independence against all the force of Great Britain. But no one who looks carefully into the history of the American Revolution, who observes the languor, the profound divisions, the frequent pusilanimity, the absence of all strong and unselfish enthusiasm that were displayed in great portions of the revolted colonies and their entire dependence for success on foreign assistance, will doubt that the Southern States in the war of secession exhibited an incomparably higher level of courage, tenacity and self-sacrifice. No nation in the nineteenth century has maintained its nationhood with more courage and unanimity. But it was encountered with an equal tenacity and with far greater resources, and after a sacrifice of life unequaled in any war since the fall of Napoleon, the North succeeded in crushing the revolt and establishing its authority over the vanquished South."
# Schultz v. Live Stock National Bank of Chicago/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
302 U.S. 766
Schultz v. Live Stock National Bank of Chicago
Miss Catherine Schultz, pro se.
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of the State of Illinois, First District.
For opinion below, see 289 Ill.App. 626, 7 N.E.2d 636.
The motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis is denied for the reason that the Court, upon examination of the papers herein submitted, finds no ground upon which writ of certiorari should be issued. The petition for writ of certiorari is therefore also 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
# Schultz v. Wheaton Glass Co.

* related portals: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article.
Shultz v. Wheaton Glass Co., 421 F.2d 259 (3rd Cir. 1970) was a case heard before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1970. It is an important case in studying the impact of the Bennett Amendment on Chapter VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, helping to define the limitations of equal pay for men and women.
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
* Wikipedia article
* 421 F.2d 259
* George P. Shultz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellant
* v.
* Wheaton Glass Company, Appellee
* No. 17517
* United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
* January 13, 1970, Decided
Freedman, Seitz and Aldisert, Circuit Judges.
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
# Schuler v. Israel

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
120 U.S. 506
Schuler v. Israel
D. P. Dyer, for plaintiff in error.
J. E. McKeighan, for defendants 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
# Schultz v. Diehl

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 594
Schultz v. Diehl
Mr. Charles W. Fulton for appellants.
No appearance for appellees.
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
# Schultz v. Diehl/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 594
Schultz v. Diehl
Decree reversed, with costs, and cause remanded, to be proceeded in according to law. Jellenik v. Huron Copper Min. Co. 177 U.S. 1, 44 L. ed. 647, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 559; 18 Stat. at L. 470, chap. 137, § 8, U.S.C.omp. Stat. 1901, p. 513; Oregon Code, §§ 5064, 300, 301.

## 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
# Schulte v. Gangi

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
328 U.S. 108
Schulte v. Gangi
Argued: March 1, 1946. --- Decided: April 29, 1946
Dissenting Opinion As Amended June 10, 1946.
Mr. Edwin A. Falk, of New York City, for petitioner.
Mr. Isidore Entes, of New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice REED delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

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

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
328 U.S. 108
Schulte v. Gangi
Argued: March 1, 1946. --- Decided: April 29, 1946
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, with whom Mr. Justice BURTON concurs, dissenting.
Substantially for the reasons given by Judge Rifkind, 53 F.Supp. 844, I would restore his judgment in the District Court and reverse that of the Circuit Court of Appeals. 150 F.2d 694. For purposes of judicial enforcement, the 'policy' of a statute should be drawn out of its terms, as nourished by their proper environment, and not, like nitrogen, out of the air. Before a hitherto familiar and socially desirable practice is outlawed, where overreaching or exploitation is not inherent in the situation, the outlawry should come from Congress. To that end, some responsibility at least for a broad hint to the courts, if not for explicitness, should be left with Congress.
The late CHIEF JUSTICE participated n the hearing and disposition of this case and had joined in this dissent.

## 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
# Schultz v. Live Stock National Bank of Chicago

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
302 U.S. 766
Schultz v. Live Stock National Bank of Chicago

## 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
# Rude v. Buchhalter

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
286 U.S. 451
Rude v. Buchhalter
Argued: April 28, 1932. --- Decided: May 23, 1932
Mr. Ernest Morris, of Denver, Colo., for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 452-453 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Henry E. Lutz, of Denver, Colo., for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from page 454 intentionally omitted]
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
# Rude Stone Monuments in All Countries/Map

Map designed to illustrate the distribution of Dolmens, and probable migrations of the Dolmen builders.
# St. Louis Railway Company v. Nattin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
277 U.S. 157
St. Louis Railway Company v. Nattin
Argued: March 2, 1928. --- Decided: May 14, 1928
Messrs. J. D. Wilkinson and C. Huffman Lewis, both of Shreveport, La., for appellant.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS 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