OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Royal Naval Biography/Onslow, John James

Layout 2
JOHN JAMES ONSLOW, Esq. [Captain of 1834.]
A younger son of the late Admiral Sir Richard Onslow, Bart., G.C.B., Lieutenant-General of Marines (who so highly distinguished himself as second in command of the ​British fleet under Duncan at the memorable battle off Camperdown, Oct. 11th, 1797), by Anne, daughter of Commodore Matthew Mitchell.
This officer was made lieutenant on the 5th Sept. 1816; promoted to the rank of commander on the 23d April, 1822; and appointed to the Clio sloop, fitting out for the South American station, April 30th, 1830. During the ensuing two years, he was actively employed round Cape Horn, and visited all the principal ports in Chili, Peru, Panama, and the western coast, as far as Guagmas, in the Gulph of California, said to be one of the finest harbours in the world. On his return from the Pacific, he was sent by Rear-Admiral Sir Thomas Baker to reclaim possession of the Falkland Islands, which lapse of time had encouraged the Buenos Ayreans and other foreigners to consider as absolutely abandoned by the British. In Dec. 1832, he arrived at Port Egmont (West Falkland), exercised the rights of sovereignty, and employed his boats in examining Brett’s Harbour, Byron’s Sound, and other anchorages as far to the westward as Point Bay, a distance of sixty miles from where the Clio lay. He then proceeded to Berkeley Sound (East Falkland), anchored at Port Louis, and ejected a Buenos Ayrean force stationed there under the protection of a schooner of war. He arrived at Portsmouth on the 3d June 1833, from Rio Janeiro, bringing home upwards of 880,000 dollars on merchants’ account; and was put out of commission on the 17th of the same month. His advancement to the rank of captain took place on the 27th Aug. 1834.
# Royal Naval Biography/Ormond, Francis

Layout 2
FRANCIS ORMOND, Esq. [Commander.]
Was made a lieutenant on the 3d Dec. 1810; and appointed to the Endymion frigate. Captain Henry Mope, fitting out for the North American station. May 19th, 1813. He commanded a division of boats, under the orders of Captain (now Commodore) Robert Barrie, in the expedition up the Penobscot river, on which occasion the towns of Castine, Hamden, and Bangor fell into our possession, and the United States’ corvette Adams (formerly a 32-gun frigate), a brig pierced for eighteen guns, a large privateer, and eight ​merchant vessels were destroyed by the enemy. He served under the same officer in the action which led to the capture of the American frigate President, in Jan. 1815; and was second lieutenant of the Impregnable 104, bearing the flag of Rear-Admiral (now Sir David) Milne, at the battle of Algiers, in Aug. 1816. His commission as commander bears date May 27th, 1825.
This officer married, in 1822, Fanny, daughter of J. Hedges, Esq., of Wallingford.
# Royal Naval Biography/Oliver, Robert

Layout 2
ROBERT OLIVER, Esq. [Commander.]
Obtained the rank of lieutenant in Jan. 1806; and commanded the boats of the Espoir sloop. Captain Robert Mitford, in a dashing little affair on the coast of Calabria, April 4th, 1810. He soon afterwards assisted at the capture of an armed ship and three barks, under the castle of Terrecino. We lastly find him serving under the late Sir George Burlton, in the Ville de Paris 110, and Boyne 98, on the Mediterranean station. His promotion to the rank of commander took place Aug. 27th, 1814.
# Seward v. Corneau/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 161
Seward v. Corneau
The bond in this case is insufficient in form either for the purposes of a supersedeas or an appeal, inasmuch as it contains no security for costs. This, however, does not necessarily avoid the appeal; but we may impose such terms on the appellants for the omission as, under the circumstances, shall seem to be proper. Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304; Davidson v. Lanier, 4 Wall. 447. The appeal will, therefore, be dismissed, unless the appellants, on or before the first Monday in January next, give bond, with good and sufficient security, in due form of law, to prosecute their appeal to effect, and to answer all damages and costs if they fail to make their plea good; the bond to be in the penal sum of $1,000, and the security taken and approved by the justice of this court assigned to the fifth circuit; 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
# Seward v. Corneau

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 161
Seward v. Corneau
MOTION to dismiss an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
This suit, brought in a State court of Louisiana, to enjoin a proceeding known as an order of seizure and sale, was, on the petition of the complainants, removed to the Circuit Court, where, on a final hearing, their bill was dismissed. From the decree they prayed for an appeal, which was allowed, with an order that it should 'operate as a suprersedeas and stay of execution until the final decree of the Supreme Court should be rendered therein, on the complainants giving bond in the sum of $1,000.'
The bond given was approved by the district judge. It is subject to the condition that we, the appellants, 'will well and truly pay to the said defendants in said appeal and suit all such damages as they may recover against us in case it should be decided that the said appeal was wrongfully obtained.'
The appellees now move to dismiss the appeal, upon the ground that the bond does not conform to the requirements of the statute or to the twenty-ninth rule of this court.
Mr. Edwin T. Merrick and Mr. George W. Race in support of the motion.
Mr. John D. McPherson and Mr. Calderon Carlisle, contra.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

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

* information about this edition.
* related portals: Sexuality.
Published 1922. See talk page for difficulties.
SEX
AVOIDED SUBJECTS DISCUSSED IN PLAIN ENGLISH
By
HENRY STANTON
SOCIAL CULTURE PUBLICATIONS 151 FIFTH AVENUE · NEW YORK
Copyright, 1922 SOCIAL CULTURE PUBLICATIONS MANUFACTURED IN U. S. A.

## Contents

* Chapter I: SEX
* Chapter II: THE TRANSITION FROM CELL TO HUMAN BEING
* Chapter III: SEX IN MALE CHILDHOOD
* Chapter IV: SEX IN FEMALE CHILDHOOD
* Chapter V: SEX IN THE ADOLESCENT MALE
* Chapter VI: SEX IN THE ADOLESCENT FEMALE
* Chapter VII: SEX IN THE MARRIAGE RELATION—THE HUSBAND
* Chapter VIII: SEX IN THE MARRIAGE RELATION—THE WIFE
* Chapter IX: SEX DISEASES
* Chapter X: LOVE AND SEX
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
# Sex/Chapter IX
## Sex diseases

The sex diseases are the same in both sexes, whether developed by direct or accidental infection. They are the greatest practical argument in favor of continence, morality and marriage in the sex relation.

## Gonorrhea

Gonorrhea is a pus-discharging inflammation of the canal known as the urethra, which passing through the entire length of the organ, carries both the urine and the seminal fluid. It is caused by a venereal bacillus, the gonococcus. Under favorable conditions and with right treatment, gonorrhea may be cured, though violently painful, in fourteen days. Often the inflammation extends, becomes chronic and attacks other organs. This chronic gonorrhea often causes permanent contraction of the urethra, which leads to the painful retention of urine, catarrh of the bladder, and stone. Chronic gonorrhea, too, often ends in death, especially if the kidneys are attacked. A cured case of gonorrhea does not mean immunity from further attacks. New infections are all the more easily acquired. Gonorrhea has even more dangerous consequences in women than in men. The gonococcus bacilli infect all the inner female genital organs. They cause frequent inflammations and lead to growths in the belly. Women thus attacked usually are apt to be sterile; they suffer agonies, and often become chronic invalids. The child born of a gonorrheal mother, while passing through the infected genital organs, comes to life with infected eyelids. This is Blennorrhea, which may result in total blindness. Gonorrhea also causes inflammation of the joints, gonorrheal rheumatism, testicular inflammations which may lead to sterility. Some authorities claim that fully half the sterility in women is caused by gonorrheal infection of the Fallopian tubes. Gonorrheal infection of the eyes at birth is now prevented by first washing them in a saturated solution of boric acid, then treating them with a drop of weak silver solution.

## The soft chancre

The soft chancre is the third form of venereal disease (the hard chancre being the first stage of syphilis). It is the least dangerous of the venereal diseases, but unfortunately, relatively the one which occurs most seldom. When not complicated with syphilis, it appears locally. It is a larger or smaller sore feeding and growing on the genital organs.

## Venereal in advocate of continence

The most tragic consequence of all venereal disease is the part it plays in the infection of innocent children, and innocent wives and mothers. Often a pure and chaste woman is thus deprived in the most cruel and brutal manner of the fruit of all her hopes and dreams of happiness. Similarly, a young man may find himself hopelessly condemned to a short life of pain and misery. He may also suffer from the knowledge that he has ruined the lives of those dearest to him. Venereal disease, syphilis in particular, emphasizes the practical value of continence—quite aside from its moral one—in a manner which cannot be ignored!
# Schine Chain Theatres v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, news, Wikidata item.

## Concurring Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 110
Schine Chain Theatres v. United States
Argued: Dec. 15, 1947. --- Decided: May 3, 1948
Petition for Clarification Denied June 1, 1948.
See 334 U.S. 831, 68 S.Ct. 1343.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of New York.
[Syllabus from pages 110-112 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Bruce Bromley, of New York City, for appellants.
Mr. Robert L. Wright, of Washington, D.C., for appellee.
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
# Schine Chain Theatres v. United States/Concurrence Frankfurter

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 110
Schine Chain Theatres v. United States
Argued: Dec. 15, 1947. --- Decided: May 3, 1948
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER concurs in the result.
Mr. Justice MURPHY and Mr. Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of 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
# Schindler's List - Congressional Record: February 27, 1997 (House)

"Schindler's List". Congressional Record: February 27, 1997 (House) Page H677. DOCID:cr27fe97-67.
"SCHINDLER'S LIST"
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about some of the inappropriate actions of some Members of this House. I cannot begin to fathom why someone watching the Academy Award winning "Schindler's List" on television the other night would choose to focus their attention on the harsh language or the images depicted in the film rather than the horrifying message of that film.
Yes; an apology was given, a little late I might add, for the Holocaust is one of mankind's worst moments in history and the importance of telling this story to the widest audience possible is what happened the other night. Those of us with compassion and feeling understood that history cannot be repeated. Only by retelling the story can we prevent millions of innocent victims from losing their lives again. The story of man's inhumanity to man should have been the focus, not someone's prurient interest in this great film.
Mr. Speaker, some apologies come too late and are disingenuous in light of what was said. I think we need to understand where these insensitive comments come from, just as we understand where the comments came from yesterday about the Branch Davidians and David Koresh were innocent victims. They were not. They raped young women.
Mr. Speaker, I hope this pattern does not continue. I think this House needs to get on with the right kind of business, the people's business.
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
# Schiro v. Indiana

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
493 U.S. 910
Schiro v. Indiana
No. 89-5327
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Indiana.

## 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
# Schipani v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
385 U.S. 372
Schipani v. United States
Jacob P. Lefkowitz, for petitioner.
Solicitor General Marshall, for the United States.
On Petition for Rehearing.
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
# Schipani v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
385 U.S. 372
Schipani v. United States
Upon the suggestion of the Solicitor General and upon an independent examination of the case, the petition for a rehearing is granted, the order of this Court denying certiorari, 385 U.S. 965, 87 S.Ct. 501, is vacated, certiorari is granted, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York for a new trial should the Government seek to prosecute petitioner anew.

## 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
# Schlagenhauf v. Holder

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

## Dissenting Opinions

    Black
    Douglas
    Harlan
United States Supreme Court
379 U.S. 104
Schlagenhauf v. Holder
Argued: Oct. 13, 1964. --- Decided: Nov 23, 1964
[Syllabus from pages 104-106 intentionally omitted]
Robert S. Smith, Indianapolis, Ind., for petitioner.
Erle A. Kightlinger, Indianapolis, Ind., for respondent.
Mr. Justice GOLDBERG, 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
# Review of a Pamphlet from the Churchman's Magazine, Entitled Marriage With a Deceased Wife's Sister

REVIEW OF A PAMPHLET
FROM
THE CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE,
ENTITLED
MARRIAGE
WITH
A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER;
A BIBLE ARGUMENT LONG OBSCURED.
BY
A CLERGYMAN.
The Writer's Misquotations and Misrepresentations Corrected.
REPRINTED FROM "THE CHURCH HERALD."
1. "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: So that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may he proved therefrom, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought necessary for salvation,"—Extract from the VI. Article of the Church of England.
2. "The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in controversies of Faith: And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written; neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another."—Extract from the XX. Article of the Church of England.
TORONTO:
1871.
PREFATORY NOTE.
The following pages (reprinted from the Church Herald) contain a brief reply to a pretentious but superficial paper which appeared in the Churchman's Magazine for August, and which was afterwards reprinted in a pamphlet.
With the local personalities introduced by the Churchman's Magazine and its contributor, we have not felt called upon to interfere; our concern is to vindicate scriptural principles as set forth in the authorized translation of the Holy Scriptures, which may be regarded as expressing not only the true principles of the Church of England, but of Protestantism generally. When attempts are made to set aside, or to set ecclesiastical authority above any great principle of Bible truth, or of human right, they are always begun by attacks upon the authorized translation of the Holy Scriptures, whether made by the sneering sceptic or the Roman ecclesiastic, or the amphibious character that floats between Protestantism and Romanism. We trust the following pages will tend to check such attempts, as well as give information on an important questions of religious and social life.
    Toronto1st September, 1871.
* Paper One
* Paper Two
* Third Paper
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
# Schmieder v. Barney

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
113 U.S. 645
Schmieder v. Barney
A. W. Griswold and Sidney Webster, for plaintiffs in error.
Sol. Gen. Phillips, for defendant in error.
WAITE, C. 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
# Schmidt v. Cobbo'malley/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
119 U.S. 386
SCHMIDT and another v. COBB.O'MALLEY

## 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
# Schnarr v. State

Schnarr v. State, 2018 Ark. 333, is an appeal from a jury trial at which appellant Schnarr was convicted of manslaughter for recklessly causing the victim's death. But the trial court refused Schnarr's request to instruct the jury on the defense of justification. The Arkansas Supreme Court (Baker, J.) held this was error, and reversed and remanded Schnarr's case for a new trial. Dissenting opinions were filed by Wood and Wynne, JJ.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
2018 Ark. 333
CHRISTOPHER AARON SCHNARR v. STATE OF ARKANSAS
No. CR-18-161.---Delivered: Nov. 29, 2018
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinions Wood Wynne
Appeal from Pulaski County Circuit Court, the Honorable J. Leon Johnson, Judge; reversed and remanded.
Jeff Rosenzweig, for appellant.
Leslie Rutledge, Att’y Gen., by: Adam Jackson, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.
Opinion of the court by Justice KAREN R. BAKER. Dissenting opinions by Justices RHONDA K. WOOD and ROBIN F. WYNNE, each joined by Chief Justice JOHN DAN KEMP.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Schneble v. Florida
## Dissenting Opinion

    Marshall
Supreme Court of the United States
405 U.S. 427
Schneble v. Florida
Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida
No. 68-5009. Argued: January 17-18, 1972 --- Decided: March 21, 1972
Petitioner was found guilty of murder following a jury trial in which police officers testified as to the detailed confession that he had given to them and in which one officer related a statement made to him by petitioner's codefendant, who did not testify, which tended to undermine petitioner's initial (but later abandoned) version and to corroborate certain details of petitioner's confession. The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed. Petitioner claims that the admission into evidence of his codefendant's statement deprived him of his right to confrontation in violation of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123.
Held: Any violation of Bruton that might have occurred was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in view of the overwhelming evidence of petitioner's guilt as manifested by his confession, which completely comported with the objective evidence, and the comparatively insignificant effect of the codefendant's admission. Pp. 429-432.
215 So. 2d 611, affirmed.
REHNQUIST, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and STEWART, WHITE, BLACKMUN, and POWELL, JJ., joined. MARSHALL, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which DOUGLAS and BRENNAN, JJ., joined, post, p. 432.
Clyde B. Wells argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.
George R. Georgieff, Assistant Attorney General of Florida, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Robert L. Shevin, Attorney General.