OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Niles-Bement-Pond Company v. Iron Moulders' Union Local No. 68

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
254 U.S. 77
Niles-Bement-Pond Company v. Iron Moulders' Union Local No. 68
Argued: Oct. 22, 1920. --- Decided: Nov 8, 1920
Messrs. Lawrence Maxwell and Murray Seasongood, both of Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner.
Messrs. W. B. Rubin, of Milwaukee, Wis., and Robert J. Shank, of Hamilton, Ohio, for respondent.
Mr. Justice CLARKE 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
# Nil Pejus est Caelibe Vita

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Written in 1787, first published in the collected works of 1893
What pleasures shall he ever find? What joys shall ever glad his heart? Or who shall heal his wounded mind, If tortur’d by Misfortune’s smart? Who Hymeneal bliss will never prove, That more than friendship, friendship mix’d with love.
Then without child or tender wife, To drive away each care, each sigh, Lonely he treads the paths of life A stranger to Affection’s tye: And when from Death he meets his final doom No mourning wife with tears of love shall wet his tomb.
Tho’ Fortune, Riches, Honours, Pow’r, Had giv’n with every other toy, Those gilded trifles of the hour, Those painted nothings sure to cloy: He dies forgot, his name no son shall bear To shew the man so blest once breath’d the vital air.
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
# Niles' Weekly Register/Volume 37

September 1829 to March 1830
# Nil Durpan/Title

NIL DURPAN
or
THE
INDIGO PLANTING MIRROR
NIL DURPAN
or
THE
INDIGO PLANTING MIRROR
Written by Dinabandhu Mitra
and
translated by Michael Madhusudan Dutt
Edited by Sri Sudhi Pradhan in collaboration with Sri Sailesh Sen Gupta
Printed by Sri Shyamal De HIND PAPER PRINTERS 79/9, Lower Circular Road Calcutta—14
Published by Sri Debi Prasad Mukhopadhyaya EASTERN TRADING COMPANY 64A, Dharamtalla Street Calcutta—13
Price—Rs. 10/—
# Niles' Weekly Register

A weekly 19th-century publication containing congressional speeches and other information. Niles' Weekly Register published 75 volumes between 1811 and 1848. The first six volumes were known simply as The Weekly Register and thereafter the title was officially Niles' Weekly Register
* Volume 1 (September 1811–March 1812) (transcription project)
* Volume 2 (March 1812–September 1812) (transcription project)
* Volume 3 (September 1812–March 1813) (transcription project)
* Volume 4 (March 1813–September 1813) (transcription project)
* Volume 5 (September 1813–March 1814) (transcription project)
* Volume 6 (March 1814–September 1814) (transcription project)
* Volume 7 (September 1814–March 1815) (transcription project)
* Volume 8 (March 1815–September 1815) (transcription project)
* Volume 9 (September 1815–March 1816) (transcription project)
* Volume 10 (March 1816–September 1816) (transcription project)
* Volume 11 (September 1816–March 1817) (transcription project)
* Volume 12 (March 1817–September 1817) (transcription project)
* Volume 13 (September 1817–March 1818) (transcription project)
* Volume 14 (March 1818–September 1818) (transcription project)
* Volume 15 (September 1818–March 1819) (transcription project)
* Volume 16 (March 1819–September 1819) (transcription project)
* Volume 17 (September 1819–March 1820) (transcription project)
* Volume 18 (March 1820–September 1820) (transcription project)
* Volume 19 (September 1820–March 1821) (transcription project)
* Volume 20 (March 1821–September 1821) (transcription project)
* Volume 21 (September 1821–March 1822) (transcription project)
* Volume 22 (March 1822–September 1822) (transcription project)
* Volume 23 (September 1822–March 1823) (transcription project)
* Volume 24 (March 1823–September 1823) (transcription project)
* Volume 25 (September 1823–March 1824) (transcription project)
* Volume 26 (March 1824–September 1824) (transcription project)
* Volume 27 (September 1824–March 1825) (transcription project)
* Volume 28 (March 1825–September 1825) (transcription project)
* Volume 29 (September 1825–March 1826) (transcription project)
* Volume 30 (March 1826–September 1826) (transcription project)
* Volume 31 (September 1826–March 1827)
* Volume 32 (March 1827–September 1827)
* Volume 33 (September 1827–March 1828)
* Volume 34 (March 1828–September 1828)
* Volume 35 (September 1828–March 1829)
* Volume 36 (March 1829–September 1829)
* Volume 37 (September 1829–March 1830) (transcription project)
# Ninety-three/1.2.9

CHAPTER IX.
SOME ONE ESCAPES.
The passenger had not left the deck, he was watching everything, unmoved.
Boisberthelot approached him. "Sir," he said, "the preparations are completed. Here we are cramped into our tomb, but we shall not yield. We are prisoners of the squadron or of the reef. To surrender to the enemy or founder on the rocks, we have no other alternative. Only one resource remains, death. To fight is better than shipwreck. I would rather be shot than drowned; if I must die, I prefer fire to water. But to die is our fate, not yours. You are the man chosen by the princes, you have a great mission, to direct the war in La Vendée. Without you, the monarchy may be lost; you must live then. It is our duty to remain here, yours to get away. Go, general,—leave the ship. I will give you a man and a boat. It is not impossible to reach the shore by a roundabout way. It is not yet day, the waves are high, the sea is dark, you will escape. There are times when to flee is to conquer."
With his stern head, the old man made a solemn sign of acquiescence.
The Count de Boisberthelot raised his voice,
"Soldiers and sailors," he cried.
All movement ceased, and from every part of the vessel faces were turned toward the captain.
He continued,—
"The man who is among us represents the king. He has been entrusted to our care, we must preserve him. He is necessary to the throne of France; for want of a ​prince he will be, at least so we hope, the chief of la Vendée. He is a great general. He was to reach France with us, he must reach it without us. To save his life is to save all."
"Aye, aye, aye!" cried all the voices of the crew.
The captain continued,—
"He too, will incur serious dangers. To reach the shore is no easy matter. It ought to be a large boat to brave the high sea, but it must be a small one to escape the cruisers. It is important to land at some point which will be safe, and rather in the vicinity of Fougères than of Coutances. It needs a plucky sailor, a good swimmer, and a good oarsman; one who belongs to this country and knows the channel. It is still dark enough for the boat to get away from the vessel without being discovered. And then we shall have smoke which will help to conceal her. Her small size will take her through shallow water. Where the panther is caught, the weasel escapes. There is no help for us; there is for him. The oars will carry the boat away: the hostile ships will not see it; and besides, we will divert their attention meanwhile. Is it agreed?"
"Aye, aye, sir!" cried the crew.
"There is not a minute to lose," continued the captain, "Is there a man willing to go?"
A sailor stepped out of the ranks in the darkness and said: "I am."
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 14

Chapter XIV.—Concerning Pain.
There are four varieties of pain, viz., anguish, grief, envy, pity. Anguish is pain without utterance: grief is pain that is heavy to bear like a burden: envy is pain over the good fortune of others: pity is pain over the evil fortune of others.

## Footnotes

* ↑ ἄχος.
* ↑ ἄχθος.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 19

Chapter XIX.—Concerning Thought.
The faculty of thought deals with judgments and assents, and impulse to action and disinclinations, and escapes from action: and more especially with thoughts connected with what is thinkable, and the virtues and the different branches of learning, and the theories of the arts and matters of counsel and choice. Further, it is this faculty which prophesies the future to us in dreams, and this is what the Pythagoreans, adopting the Hebrew view, hold to be the one true form of prophecy. The organ of thought then is the mid-ventricle of the brain, and the vital spirit it contains.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Nemes., ch. 11.
* ↑ Greg. Nyss., De opif. Hom., ch. 13.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 2

Chapter II.—Concerning the creation.
Since, then, God, Who is good and more than good, did not find satisfaction in self-contemplation, but in His exceeding goodness wished certain things to come into existence which would enjoy His benefits and share in His goodness, He brought all things out of nothing into being and created them, both what is invisible and what is visible. Yea, even man, who is a compound of the visible and the invisible. And it is by thought that He creates, and thought is the basis of the work, the Word filling it and the Spirit perfecting it.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Greg. Naz., Orat. 38, 42; Dionys., De Eccl. Hier., ch. 4.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 21

Chapter XXI.—Concerning Conception and Articulation.
Again the reasoning part of the soul is divided into conception and articulation. Conception is an activity of the soul originating in the reason without resulting in utterance. Accordingly, often, even when we are silent we run through a whole speech in our minds, and hold discussions in our dreams. And it is this faculty chiefly which constitutes us all reasoning beings. For those who are dumb by birth or have lost their voice through some disease or injury, are just as much reasoning beings. But articulation by voice or in the different dialects requires energy: that is to say, the word is articulated by the tongue and mouth, and this is why it is named articulation. It is, indeed, the messenger of thought, and it is because of it that we are called speaking beings.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 13

Chapter XIII.—Concerning Pleasures.
There are pleasures of the soul and pleasures of the body. The pleasures of the soul are those which are the exclusive possession of the soul, such as the pleasures of learning and contemplation. The pleasures of the body, however, are those which are enjoyed by soul and body in fellowship, and hence are called bodily pleasures: and such are the pleasures of food and intercourse and the like. But one could not find any class of pleasures belonging solely to the body.
Again, some pleasures are true, others false. And the exclusively intellectual pleasures consist in knowledge and contemplation, while the pleasures of the body depend upon sensation. Further, of bodily pleasures, some are both natural and necessary, in the absence of which life is impossible, for example the pleasures of food which replenishes waste, and the pleasures of necessary clothing. Others are natural but not necessary, as the pleasures of natural and lawful intercourse. For though the function that these perform is to secure the permanence of the race as a whole, it is still possible to live a virgin life apart from them. Others, however, are neither natural nor necessary, such as drunkenness, lust, and surfeiting to excess. For these contribute neither to the maintenance of our own lives nor to the succession of the race, but on the contrary, are rather even a hindrance. He therefore that would live a life acceptable to God must follow after those pleasures which are both natural and necessary: and must give a secondary place to those which are natural but not necessary, and enjoy them only in fitting season, and manner, and measure; while the others must be altogether renounced.
Those then are to be considered moral pleasures which are not bound up with pain, and bring no cause for repentance, and result in no other harm and keep within the bounds of moderation, and do not draw us far away from serious occupations, nor make slaves of us.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Reading, οὐκ ἂν εὕροι τις ἰδίας ἡδονάς.
* ↑ Nemes., ch. 18: Chrys., Hom. in Joan., 74.
* ↑ See Chrysostom, Hom. in Joannem, 74; Cicero, De fin. bon. et mal., 1.
* ↑ καλάς, honourable, good.
* ↑ Text, χωρούσας. Variant, παραχωρούσας.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 20

Chapter XX.—Concerning Memory.
The faculty of memory is the cause and storehouse of remembrance and recollection. For memory is a fantasy that is left behind of some sensation and thought manifesting itself in action; or the preservation of a sensation and thought. For the soul comprehends objects of sense through the organs of sense, that is to say, it perceives, and thence arises a notion: and similarly it comprehends the objects of thought through the mind, and thence arises a thought. It is then the preservation of the types of these notions and thoughts that is spoken of as memory.
Further, it is worthy of remark that the apprehension of matters of thought depends on learning, or natural process of thought, and not on sensation. For though objects of sense are retained in the memory by themselves, only such objects of thought are remembered as we have learned, and we have no memory of their essence.
Recollection is the name given to the recovery of some memory lost by forgetfulness. For forgetfulness is just loss of memory. The faculty of imagination then, having apprehended material objects through the senses, transmits this to the faculty of thought or reason (for they are both the same), and this after it has received and passed judgment on it, passes it on to the faculty of memory. Now the organ of memory is the posterior ventricle of the brain, which the Greeks call the παρεγκεφαλίς, and the vital spirit it contains.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Text, αἴτιον. R. 2930, ἀγγεῖον.
* ↑ φαντασία.
* ↑ καὶ νοήσεως is wanting in some mss., nor is it found in Nemesius, who borrowed his description from Origen.
* ↑ Text, σωτηρία. Variant, σωρεία, a heaping up, “coacervatio.” Faber has “confirmatio,” which is nearer σωτηρία, conservatio, which is found in Nemesius, &c.
* ↑ Nemes., ch. 13.
* ↑ τὸ φανταστικόν, the faculty of fantasy.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 16

Chapter XVI.—Concerning Anger.
Anger is the ebullition of the heart’s blood produced by bilious exhalation or turbidity. Hence it is that the words χολή and χόλος are both used in the sense of anger. Anger is sometimes lust for vengeance. For when we are wronged or think that we are wronged, we are distressed, and there arises this mixture of desire and anger.
There are three forms of anger: rage, which the Greeks also call χολή or χόλος, μῆνις and κότος. When anger arises and begins to be roused, it is called rage or χολή or χόλος. Wrath again implies that the bile endures, that is to say, that the memory of the wrong abides: and indeed the Greek word for it, μῆνις is derived from μένειν, and means what abides and is transferred to memory. Rancour, on the other hand, implies watching for a suitable moment for revenge, and the Greek word for it is κότος from κεῖσθαι.
Anger further is the satellite of reason, the vindicator of desire. For when we long after anything and are opposed in our desire by some one, we are angered at that person, as though we had been wronged: and reason evidently deems that there are just grounds for displeasure in what has happened, in the case of those who, like us, have in the natural course of things to guard their own position.

## Footnotes

* ↑ ζέσις, boiling.
* ↑ τοῦ περὶ καρδίαν αἵματος, the blood about the heart.
* ↑ Nemes., ch. 21.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 17

Chapter XVII.—Concerning Imagination.
Imagination is a faculty of the unreasoning part of the soul. It is through the organs of sense that it is brought into action, and it is spoken of as sensation. And further, what is imagined and perceived is that which comes within the scope of the faculty of imagination and sensation. For example, the sense of sight is the visual faculty itself, but the object of sight is that which comes within the scope of the sense of sight, such as a stone or any other such object. Further, an imagination is an affection of the unreasoning part of the soul which is occasioned by some object acting upon the sensation. But an appearance is an empty affection of the unreasoning part of the soul, not occasioned by any object acting upon the sensation. Moreover the organ of imagination is the anterior ventricle of the brain.

## Footnotes

* ↑ φανταστικόν.
* ↑ Or, presented.
* ↑ See Aristotle, De anima, III. c. 7.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II/Chapter 15

Chapter XV.—Concerning Fear.
Fear is divided into six varieties: viz., shrinking, shame, disgrace, consternation, panic, anxiety. Shrinking is fear of some act about to take place. Shame is fear arising from the anticipation of blame: and this is the highest form of the affection. Disgrace is fear springing from some base act already done, and even for this form there is some hope of salvation. Consternation is fear originating in some huge product of the imagination. Panic is fear caused by some unusual product of the imagination. Anxiety is fear of failure, that is, of misfortune: for when we fear that our efforts will not meet with success, we suffer anxiety.

## Footnotes

* ↑ ὄκνος, dread.
* ↑ ἀγωνία.
* ↑ Nemesius and certain manuscripts give these species of fear in a different order, viz., dread, consternation, panic, anxiety, shame, disgrace.
# Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma."
* 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.
* Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma (258 U.S. 234)
* Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma (273 U.S. 257)
# Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma (258 U.S. 234)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
258 U.S. 234
Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma
Argued: March 7, 1922. --- Decided: March 20, 1922
Messrs. C. B. Ames and D. A. Richardson, both of Oklahoma City, Okl., for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Charles H. Ruth, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice McKENNA 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
# Oklahoma Gas Electric Company v. Oklahoma Packing Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
292 U.S. 386
Oklahoma Gas Electric Company v. Oklahoma Packing Company
Argued: May 3-4, 1934. --- Decided: May 21, 1934
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma.
Messrs. Robert M. Rainey, of Oklahoma City, Okl., I. J. Underwood, of Tulsa, Okl., and Streeter B. Flynn, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellants.
Messrs. W. R. Brown, of Chicago, Ill., and Fred Hansen, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellees.
Mr. Justice STONE 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
# Oklahoma Gin Company v. Oklahoma/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
252 U.S. 339
Oklahoma Gin Company v. Oklahoma
Argued: Oct. 9, 1919. --- Decided: March 22, 1920
The Corporation Commission of Oklahoma having found under section 8235 of the Revised Laws of 1910 that the Oklahoma Gin Company and four other concerns in the town of Chandler had combined and raised the charges for ginning cotton, and on October 17, 1913, fixed a schedule of rates lower than those then in force. The company thereafter charged rates in excess of those so fixed, and three separate complaints against it alleging violation of the order were filed with the Commission. Being summoned to show cause why it should not be punished for contempt the company admitted violation of the order, but alleged that it was void, among other reasons, because section 8235 was in conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment. After a full hearing, at which new evidence was introduced, the Commission affirmed, on October 10, 1914, the rates fixed, made a finding that the violation of the order was willful, imposed on the company a fine of $500 and costs under each of the three separate complaints, directed refund of all amounts collected in excess of prescribed rates, and declared also:
'A fine will be imposed for each day the order has been violated, and the matter as to the number of days and the amounts of fines to be imposed upon defendant, other than those mentioned in the information, will be left open for adjustment upon taking of evidence as to the number of days violated.'
An appeal was taken by the company to the Supreme Court of the state, which affirmed the order, and thereafter denied two petitions for rehearing. The case comes here on writ of error under section 237 of the Judicial Code as amended (Comp. St. § 1214).
This case was argued and submitted with Oklahoma Operating Co. v. Love et al., 252 U.S. 331, 40 Sup. Ct. 338, 64 L. Ed. --, decided this day. For the reasons set forth in the opinion in that case, the provision concerning penalties for disobedience to an order of the Commission was void, because it deprived the company of the opportunity of a judicial review. The judgment must therefore be reversed. It is unnecessary to consider other contentions of plaintiff in error.
Reversed.

## 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
# Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma (273 U.S. 257)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
273 U.S. 257
Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Oklahoma (273 U.S. 257)
Submitted on Motions to Substitute Parties Jan. 3 and 10, 1927.
Decided Feb. 21, 1927.
Messrs. Lawrence H. Cake, of Washington, D. C., and David A. Richardson, C. B. Ames, C. B. Cochran and Russell G. Lowe, all of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellant.
Messrs. George F. Short and J. Berry King, both of Oklahoma City, for State of Oklahoma.
Mr. E. S. Ratliff, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for Corporation Commission of Oklahoma.
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT 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