OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Wade v. Mayo

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Reed
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 672
Wade v. Mayo
Argued: March 9, 1948. --- Decided: June 14, 1948
[Syllabus from pages 672-674 intentionally omitted]
Mr. E. M. Baynes, of West Palm Beach, Fla., for petitioner.
Mr. J. Tom Watson and Sumter Leitner, both of Tallahassee, Fla., for respondent.
Mr. Justice MURPHY 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
# Wade v. Metcalf

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 202
Wade v. Metcalf
[Statement of Case from pages 202-204 intentionally omitted]
George F. Betts, for appellant.
Edward M. Hutchins and Henry Wheeler, for appellees.
Mr. Justice GRAY, after stating the case as above, 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
# Wade v. Walnut/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 1
Wade v. Walnut
The only question we have to decide in this case is, whether the section of the Illinois Constitution adopted in 1870, relating to 'municipal subscriptions to railroads or private corporations,' was in force on the 6th of August, 1870. This question came before the Supreme Court of the State at the January Term, 1872, only eighteen months after the Constitution was adopted, in Schall v. Bowman (62 Ill. 321), and it was then decided that this section took effect on the 2d of July, the day the people voted for its adoption. The opinion in the case was written by Mr. Justice Breese, two justices dissenting. At the September Term in the same year the same questions came again before the court in Richards v. Donagho (66 id. 73), and the opinion was then delivered by Mr. Justice Thornton, in the following words: 'The only question presented by this record was, after mature deliberation, settled by the opinion in Schall v. Bowman. . . . Notwithstanding the able and plausible argument made in this case, the majority of the court adhere to the opinion in the case referred to above.' Afterwards, at the January Term, 1878, in Wright v. Bishop (88 id. 302), the court said: 'Appellants make a very able and interesting argument against the rulings in those cases; but we are not convinced they should be overruled.'
This court has never until now been called on to decide the question, but in numerous cases it has assumed that the section took effect on the day fixed by the Supreme Court of the State. Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank, 92 U.S. 625; County of Moultrie v. Rockingham Ten-cent Savings Bank, id. 631; County of Randolph v. Post, 93 id. 502; Fairfield v. County of Gallatin, 100 id. 47; Walnut v. Wade, 103 id. 683; Louisville v. Savings Bank, 104 id. 469. Under these circumstances we are not inclined to consider the question an open one here while the Supreme Court of the State adheres to its present rulings.
Judgment affirmed.

## 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
# Wade v. Walnut

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 1
Wade v. Walnut
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.
This was an action brought by Wade against the town of Walnut, upon coupons cut from bonds purporting to be issued by the defendant, under the style of Township of Walnut, in the County of Bureau and State of Illinois. The declaration avers that each of the bonds contains, among other recitals, the following: 'This bond is issued under and by virtue of the charter of said Illinois Grand Trunk Railway Company, and amendments thereto, and other laws of the State of Illinois, and in accordance with the vote of the electors of said township, at the special election held August 6th, 1870, in accordance with said charter and amendments and laws.'
The defendant demurred to the declaration, and judgment was rendered in its favor. It is unnecessary to state the remaining facts, as the only question upon which this court passed was as to whether at the foregoing date there was in force an article of the Constitution of Illinois which is as follows:--
'No county, city, town, township, or other municipality shall ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or private corporation, or make donation to, or loan its credit in aid of such corporation: Provided, however, that the adoption of this article shall not be construed as affecting the right of any such municipality to make such subscriptions where the same have been authorized, under existing laws, by a vote of the people of such municipalities prior to such adoption.'
Wade sued out this writ of error.
Mr. Thomas S. McClelland and Mr. George A. Sanders for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. William C. Goudy and Mr. Allan C. Story for the defendant in error.
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
# Weird Tales/Volume 36/Issue 1/Witch-Dance

From Weird Tales (vol. 36, no. 1, September 1941)
Witch-Dance
By CLARK ASHTON SMITH
As in the Sabatt's ancient round
With strange and subtle steps you went:
And toward the heaven and toward the ground Your steeple shapen hat was bent As in the sabbat's ancient round.
Between the windy, swirling fire
And all the stillness of Ihe moon.
Sweet witch, you danced at my desire, Turning some weird and lovely tune To paces like the swirling fire.
Your supple youth and loveliness
A glamor left upon the air:
Whether to curse, whether to bless,
You wove a stronger magic there
With your lithe youth and loveliness.
Upon the earth your paces wrought
A circle such as magicians made . . . And still some hidden thing you sought
With hands desirous, half afraid, Beyond the ring your paces wrought.
Your fingers, on the smoke and flame,
Moved in mysterious conjuring,
You seemed to call a silent Name,
And lifted like an outstretched wing
Your somber gown against the flame.
What darkling and demonian Lord, In fear or triumph, did you call? Ah! was it then that you implored, With secret signs equivocal, The coming of the covens' Lord?
Sweet witch, you conjured forth my heart
To answer always at your will!
Like Merlin, in some place apart, It lies enthralled and captive still:
Sweet witch, you conjured thus my heart!
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.
* For Class A renewal records (books only) published between 1923 and 1963, check the Stanford University Copyright Renewal Database.
* For other renewal records of publications between 1922–1950, see the University of Pennsylvania copyright records.
* For all records since 1978, search the U.S. Copyright Office records.
Works published in 1941 could have had their copyright renewed in 1968 or 1969, i.e. between January 1st of the 27th year after publication or registration and December 31st of the 28th year. As this work's copyright was not renewed, it entered the public domain on January 1st, 1970.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1961, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 62 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.
It is imperative that contributors ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Weird Tales/Volume 36/Issue 11/Avalon

Avalon
By Janice Hall Quilligan
Stars do not shine at Avalon Nor raindrops fall on velvet lawns, Through lonely days and endless years I’ve witnessed half a million dawns.
The house is old and thick with dust, The sagging steps are green with moss, The cobbled paths stretch to the sea Where bits of driftwood idly toss.
There is no life at Avalon The birds have fled and all is still, But I, the ghost called Might Have Been, Yet wander on a nearby hill.
# United States v. United States District Court for Southern District of New York/Concurrence Frankfurter

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 258
United States v. United States District Court for Southern District of New York
Argued: April 19, 20, 1948. --- Decided: May 24, 1948
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, concurring.
When this case originally came here by appeal, an extraordinarily rare, if not unique, situation in the history of the Court precluded its consideration for want of a qualified quorum. The impasse was met by the special jurisdictional Act of June 9, 1944, 58 Stat. 272, 15 U.S.C. § 29, 15 U.S.C.A. § 29. For reasons that seem to me too obvious to need spelling out, that Act should be interpreted as transferring to the Circuit Court of Appeals the case and not merely a stage in its disposition if the Congressional language reasonably permits the Act to be so read. Since it can be so read I do so read it and conclude that the whole appellate process in this case was vested in the Circuit Court of Appeals, regardless of the piecemeal exercise of that process. I find such a construction of the Act of June 9, 1944, freer from difficulties than some of the technical questions pertaining to mandamus that arise on the view taken by the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# United States v. United States District Court for Southern District of New York

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 258
United States v. United States District Court for Southern District of New York
Argued: April 19, 20, 1948. --- Decided: May 24, 1948
Mr. Leonard J. Emmerglick, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. William Watson Smith, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondents.
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
# United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
309 U.S. 506
UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO. et al.
Argued: Feb. 27, 1940. ---
Messrs. Robert H. Jackson, Atty. Gen., and Francis B. Biddle, Sol. Gen., for petitioner.
Messrs. Bower Broaddus and Julian B. Fite, both of Muskogee, Okl., for respondents.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 507-508 intentionally omitted]
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
# Upshur County v. Rich

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
135 U.S. 467
Upshur County v. Rich
Alfred Caldwell, for appellant.
BRADLEY, 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
# Upton v. Tribilcock/Dissent Miller

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Miller
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 45
Upton v. Tribilcock
MR. JUSTICE MILLER (with whom concurred MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE and MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY) dissenting.
I am of opinion, that, where an agent of an existing corporation procures a subscription of additional stock in it by fraudulent representations, the fraud can be relied on as a defence to a suit for the unpaid instalments, when suit is brought by the corporation; and that if the stockholder has in reasonable time repudiated the contract, and offered to rescind before the insolvency or bankruptcy of the corporation, the defence is valid against the assignee of the corporation.
I also think there was evidence of such fraud in this case, and that the question of reasonable diligence in the offer to rescind was fairly put to the jury by the Circuit Court.
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
# Upton v. Tribilcock

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Miller
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 45
Upton v. Tribilcock
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Iowa.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. C. C. Nourse for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. George G. Wright for the defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE HUNT 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
# Upton v. McLaughlin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 640
Upton v. McLaughlin
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the Territory of Wyoming.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Homer Cook for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. William R. Steele for the defendant in error.
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
# Washington, D.C. Admission Act (H.R. 51; 117th Congress)/Title II/Subtitle A

117th congress (2021-2022)

### SEC. 201. TREATMENT OF MILITARY LANDS.

    (a) Reservation Of Federal Authority.—
       (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2) and subsection (b) and notwithstanding the admission of the State into the Union, authority is reserved in the United States for the exercise by Congress of the power of exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such tracts or parcels of land located in the State that, on the day before the date of the admission of the State into the Union, are controlled or owned by the United States and held for defense or Coast Guard purposes.
       (2) LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY.—The power of exclusive legislation described in paragraph (1) shall vest and remain in the United States only so long as the particular tract or parcel of land involved is controlled or owned by the United States and held for defense or Coast Guard purposes.
    (b) Authority Of State.—
       (1) IN GENERAL.—The reservation of authority in the United States under subsection (a) shall not operate to prevent such tracts or parcels of land from being a part of the State, or to prevent the State from exercising over or upon such lands, concurrently with the United States, any jurisdiction which it would have in the absence of such reservation of authority and which is consistent with the laws hereafter enacted by Congress pursuant to such reservation of authority.
       (2) SERVICE OF PROCESS.—The State shall have the right to serve civil or criminal process in such tracts or parcels of land in which the authority of the United States is reserved under subsection (a) in suits or prosecutions for or on account of rights acquired, obligations incurred, or crimes committed in the State but outside of such lands.

### SEC. 202. WAIVER OF CLAIMS TO FEDERAL PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.—As a compact with the United States, the State and its people disclaim all right and title to any real or personal property not granted or confirmed to the State by or under the authority of this Act, the right or title to which is held by the United States or subject to disposition by the United States.
    (b) Effect On Claims Against United States.—
       (1) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this Act shall recognize, deny, enlarge, impair, or otherwise affect any claim against the United States, and any such claim shall be governed by applicable laws of the United States.
       (2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act is intended or shall be construed as a finding, interpretation, or construction by Congress that any applicable law authorizes, establishes, recognizes, or confirms the validity or invalidity of any claim referred to in paragraph (1), and the determination of the applicability to or the effect of any law on any such claim shall be unaffected by anything in this Act.
# Washington, D.C. Admission Act (H.R. 51; 117th Congress)/Title III

117th congress (2021-2022)
    Subtitle A — Employee Benefits
    Subtitle B — Agencies
    Subtitle C — Other Programs And Authorities
# Washington-Virginia Railway Company v. Real Estate Trust Company of Philadelphia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
238 U.S. 185
Washington-Virginia Railway Company v. Real Estate Trust Company of Philadelphia
Argued: April 29 and 30, 1915. --- Decided: June 14, 1915
Messrs. William A. Glasgow, Jr., Norman Grey, and John S. Barbour for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. John G. Johnson and Joseph de F. Junkin for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Day 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
# Untitled

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Untitled."
* 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.
* Untitled (Rolle), a poem by Richard Rolle
* Untitled (Girl with a boyish garb for boyish task), an acrostic by Lewis Carroll
* Untitled poem (Orwell), a poem by George Orwell
* Untitled, a limerick by Aubrey Beardsley
* Untitled, poem by Jupiter Hammon
# Untitled (Rolle)

The limbs that move, the eyes that see, these are not entirely me; Dead men and women helped to shape, the mold that I do not escape; The words I speak, the written line, these are not uniquely mine. For in my heart and in my will, old ancestors are warring still, Celt, Roman, Saxon and all the dead, from whose rich blood my veins are fed, In aspect, gesture, voices, tone, flesh of my flesh, bone of my bone; In fields they tilled, I plow the sod, I walk the mountain paths they trod; Around my daily steps arise - the good, the bad - those I comprise.
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
# Unto Me

* related portals: Christian poetry.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
An untitled poem, it appeared in the 1888 publication of the Toronto Humane Society
What thou hast done to one of Mine, Though to the least of all it be, I will reward it line for line; For thou hast done it unto me.
# Untitled (There was a young man with a salary)

There was a young man with a salary, Who had to do drawings for Malory, When they asked him for more, He replied: "Why? Sure, You've got enough as it is for a gallery."
# Until Death

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Until Death."
* 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.
* Until death, a poem by Anne Lynch Botta
* "Until Death" by Elizabeth Chase Allen in Littell's Living Age, 128 (1652)
# Untimely Love

* "Untimely Love" in The Ascent of Man (1889)
* "Untimely Love" in Poetical works of Mathilde Blind (1900)
# Untitled poem

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Untitled poem."
* 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.
* Untitled (Rolle), a poem by Richard Rolle
* Untitled (Girl with a boyish garb for boyish task), an acrostic by Lewis Carroll
* Untitled poem (Orwell), a poem by George Orwell
* Untitled, a limerick by Aubrey Beardsley
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Narayan Singh

S. B. Caption. Narayan Singh (78)
​Narayan Singh, Sardar Bahadur, Captain, Double Company Commander, Bharatpur Imperial Service Infantry, was born in 1867 and educated at Ludhiana and Lahore. He belongs to a family who have held high military posts, especiallv in the time of Maharaja Ranjit. Singh. His grandfather, Chaudhuri Gulab Singh, was Kiladar of Ludhiana Fort during that Chief's rule Sardar Narayan Singh saw active service in the Tirah Expedition in 1897-8, and was with the China Expeditionary Force as Havildar in 1900-01 : he possesses medals for these Expeditions. His great services in Dholpur and Bharatpur States in connection with the Imperial Service Troops were rewarded on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar with the grant of the title of Sardar Bahadur. Address: Bharatpur; also Bakhnwal, Ludhiana, Punjab.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Mukand Ram Sastri

​Mukand Ram Sastri, Mahamahopadhyaya, Archaeological Department, Jammu and Kashmir State, received his title on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar, in recognition of his services to the State and archaeological research. Address: Srinagar, Kashmir.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Mukharji, the Hon'ble Sir Asutosh, Kt, C.S.I., M.A., D.L., D.S.C., F.R.A.S., F.R.S.E.

​Mukharji, the Hon'ble Sir Asutosh, Kt, C.S.I., M.A., D.L., D.S.C., F.R.A.S., F.R.S.E., Judge of the High Court of Calcutta, whose biography appears in Part VIII, page 48, of this work, was granted the honour of Knighthood by His Majesty the King-Emperor on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/NABHA — His Highness Maharaja Ripudaman Singh

​NABHA — His Highness Maharaja Ripudaman Singh, Maharaja of—a Ruling Chief, was born in 1883, and succeeded his father, Maharaja Sir Hira Singh, G.C.S.I, G.C.I.E., in January, 1912. He was formally installed and invested with full powers in a public Durbar held at Nabha on 27th March, 1912, by the Political Agent of the Phulkian Stair. The history of the State, with the biography of the late Ruler,
​appear in Part III, pages 21-23, of this work. The fete Chief was granted the hereditary distinction of Maharaja on the occasion on the recent Coronation Durbar.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Nanak Chand, C.S.I., C.I.E.

​Nanak Chand, C.S.I., C.I.E., Rao Bahadur, Minister, Indore State, was made a Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire 0119th November, 1901, and on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar was invested with the insignia of Companion of the Order of the Star of India by His Majesty the King-Emperor. He is a member of the Managing Committee of the Daly College. Indore. Address: Indore, Central India.