OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Woman of the Century/Jenny Terrill Ruprecht

​RUPRECHT, Mrs. Jenny Terrill, author, born in Liverpool, Ohio, 23rd May, 1840. She is of New England parentage. Her early years were spent on a farm, whose picturesque beauty fostered her love of nature. She received less encouragement to cultivate her early talent for writing, perhaps, than she would have done, had not her parents feared that writing, with the ordinary routine of study, would prove too great a strain on the child's sensitive mental organization. JENNY TERRILL RUPRECHT. After a brief experience as a school-teacher. Miss Terrill became the wife of Charles Ruprecht, a native of Baden, Germany. For many years her home has been in Cleveland, Ohio. While she has contributed largely to the local press, many of her poems and sketches have appeared in eastern and other magazines and papers. Some of them have been published over a fictitious name. She has written numerous juvenile stories and poems, which she will soon publish in book-form, illustrated by her daughter, also a volume entitled "Home Rhymes." She has long been engaged in christian work. The neglected quarters of Cleveland, crowded with the increasing foreign element, have been the scenes of her busiest years of mission work. Her warmest sympathies are enlisted by little children. Many have become members of the Sunday-school, organized and put under her supervision more than nine years ago, superintendent of which she still is. She is a member of the Ohio Woman's Press Association, of the Cleveland Sorosis and other literary and social organizations.
# Woman of the Century/Jennie T. Gray

​GRAY, Mrs. Jennie T., temperance worker, born in Pilot Grove, Iowa, 16th September. 1857. Her father, Stephen Townsend. was of English descent Her mother was of Welsh and English descent. She was reared in the faith of the Quaker Church. From her father she inherited literary ​taste and ability, and from her mother a fearless firmness for the right. She always showed an intense love for books and at an early age made herself acquainted with a large number of the best JENNIE T. GRAY. authors. From Iowa her father removed with his family in the spring of 1865 to Fountain City, Ind., near the place of his nativity, where the remainder of her childhood was spent. She and her older sisters identified themselves early in life with the temperance cause, and they are still active, enthusiastic workers in the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. She became the wife of Dr. C. F. Gray, of Winchester, Ind., i8th December, 1878. Her husband not only encourages her in every good word and work, but supplies with lavish hand all the financial assistance which she may feel called upon to bestow in any good cause. She consecrated herself wholly to Christian work in the spring of 1889, and since then she has been led into more active service in the line of temperance. At present she is president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Randolph county, Ind. In all her travels from ocean to ocean and gulf to lakes she has tried to carry the strongest possible influence for temperance, often finding suitable occasions for advocating her theme in a modest but convincing way.
# Vicksburg Company v. Smith

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
135 U.S. 195
Vicksburg Company v. Smith
Edward Colston, Geo. Hoadly, and E. M. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.
A. H. Leonard, A. J. Falls, and S. F. Phillips, for defendants in error.
BLATCHFORD, 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
# Vickers v. Arizona

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
497 U.S. 1033
Vickers v. Arizona
No. 88-7629
Case below, 138 Ariz. 450, 675 P.2d 710; 159 Ariz. 532, 768 P.2d 1177.
June 28, 1990. The petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is denied.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, 1990.
See 497 U.S. 1050, 111 S.Ct. 14.
Justice MARSHALL, with whom Justice BRENNAN 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
# Vicksburg Railway Company v. Andersontully Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
256 U.S. 408
Vicksburg Railway Company v. Andersontully Company
Argued: March 24, 1921. --- Decided: May 16, 1921
Messrs. S. W. Moore, of New York City, and J. Blanc Monroe, of New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. Harry B. Anderson, of Memphis, Tenn., for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 409 intentionally omitted]
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
# Whitely v. Swayne/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
74 U.S. 685
Whitely v. Swayne
The plaintiff's title, and the one upon which he must succeed against the defendant, if he succeeds at all, rests upon a patent for improvements in a machine for harvesting clover and grass-seed; which improvements, after a full and fair trial, resulted in unsuccessful experiments, and which were finally abandoned. They never went into any useful or practical operation, and nothing more was heard of them from Steadman or any other person, for a period of six years. At the end of this period the plaintiff takes an assignment of the patentee, and is, doubtless, vested with all his rights. But what were those rights? Clearly, if any other person had chosen to take up the subject of the improvements, where it was left off by Steadman, he had a right thus to enter upon it, and if successful, would be entitled to the merit of them as an original inventor, for he is the first inventor, and entitled to the patent, who, being an original discoverer, has first perfected and adapted the invention to actual use.
Hence, if Dinsmore's patent was later than that of Steadman, and was for similar improvements, it would constitute a perfect defence against the suit in the present case, as the plaintiff is obliged to reply wholly on this assignment of Steadman, and stands in his footsteps, and has no better title. But the fact is otherwise. Dinsmore's invention goes back to the year 1850. His first machine was successfully tried in the harvest of that year. Some twenty-one were made in the year 1851, and from fifty to sixty in 1852. Steadman's caveat was even not filed in the Patent Office till after Dinsmore's patent was issued. The present defendant derives his title from Dinsmore. The case is too plain to require any extended examination.
DECREE 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
# Whiteley v. Kirby

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
78 U.S. 678
Whiteley v. Kirby
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
Kirby and Osborn filed a bill in the court below against Whiteley and others, to enjoin them from infringing their patent, originally issued to Byron Dinsmore, February 10, 1852, assigned to them the complainants, Kirby and Osborn, July 2, 1859, and surrendered and reissued 28th January, 1862. The court granted the injunction, and the defendants appealed.
Mr. S. Fisher, for the appellants; Mr. David Wright, contra.
Mr. Justice NELSON 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
# Whitehouse v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
349 U.S. 366
Whitehouse v. Illinois Central Railroad Company
Argued: Feb. 10, 11, 1955. --- Decided: June 6, 1955
Mr. Milton Kamer, for petitioner.
Mr. Walter J. Cummings, Jr., Chicago, Ill., for respondents.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER 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
# Whiteside v. Haselton

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
110 U.S. 296
Whiteside v. Haselton
Wm. H. De Witt, for appellant.
George Norris, for appellees.
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
# Whitely v. Swayne

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
74 U.S. 685
Whitely v. Swayne
WHITELY filed a bill against Swayne, in the Circuit Court for Southern Ohio, to enjoin the use of a certain machine known as the Kirbey Harvester.
As the case was presented in the argument, he relied upon a patent granted to one Steadman, May 23, 1854, for an improvement in clover and grass-seed harvesters, which had been assigned to him (Whitely), and surrendered, and three reissues granted to him on the 19th June, 1860.
The machine complained of, and sought to be enjoined, had been originally patented to one Byron Dinsmore. Dinsmore's specification was sworn to, December 31st, 1850, and was received at the Patent Office, January 10th, 1851. His patent was issued February 10th, 1852. He made and tried one of his machines in 1850, and cut some ten or twenty acres with it. In 1851 he made twenty-one of them, and between fifty of sixty of them in the following year. On the 18th of April, 1852, three months after the date of Dinsmore's patent, Steadman filed a caveat in the Patent Office, in which he stated that he was engaged in making experiments for perfecting certain improvements in a machine for harvesting clover and grass-seed, preparatory to letters patent therefor. As already stated, this patent was granted May 23, 1854. Besides the caveat and the patent, there was an account, given in the testimony, of the working of the machine, by Mr. Hatch, a neighbor of Steadman's, who resided in Holley, Orleans County, New York, in 1854. The machine was tried in the neighborhood on several occasions in clover fields, but never went into successful practical operation. No machines were ever made under the patent after the first, which was about the time the patent was granted. The experiment appeared to have been wholly given up and abandoned by Steadman as a failure; and it thus remained for some six years, when the complainant (Whitely), took from him an assignment of the patent, and procured the three reissues already referred to.
The bill was dismissed by the court below, and the complainant brought the case here.
Mr. Fisher, for the appellant.
Mr. Wright, contra.
Mr. Justice NELSON 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
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ENG WEN-PING, Admiral

Layout 2
​ CH'ENG WEN-PING, Admiral (SHANGHAI), native of Anhui. Appointed Commander-in-Cliief at Hupeh; Commander-in-Chief at Fukien, ​Dec., 1894; Admiral of the Yangtse, June, 1901.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'EN HSU, General

Layout 2
​ CH'EN HSU, General (TSUNG-MING), Native of Kwangtung. Brigadier General, Tsung-Ming, province of Kiangsu.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'EN MING-K'AN

Layout 2
​ CH'EN MING-K'AN (PEKING), Chinese Official Service; native of Kiangsu; provincial graduate. Appointed Secretary, Board of Foreign Affairs, Dec., 1901; Vice-President, Imperial Clan Court, March, 1906.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ANG-KENG, General

Layout 2
​ CH'ANG-KENG, General (In), native of Manchuria. Appointed Commandant of Forces in Hi; Senior Resident, Tibet, with rank of Deputy Lieut.-General, March, 1888; Military Governor of Hi, June 1890; Lieut.-General Bordered Blue Banner corps; ordered to Peking for employment, Sept. 1901; Tartar General, Szechwan, Dec., 1901; President Board of War, Now, 1904; Tartar General, Hi (Chinese Turkestan), July, 1905.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ENG-HSUN, General

Layout 2
​ CH'ENG-HSUN, General (NANKING), native of Manchuria. Appointed Grain Intendant, Shantung, May. 1886; Ta-Shun-Kuang Tao, Chihli, Sept., 1886; Feng-Chin-Shan-hai Tao, July, 1887; Taotai, Kiukiang. May, 1892; Ning-Shao-Tai Tao, Chekiang, 1899; Judicial Commissioner, Kiangsu, Feb., 1901: Financial Commissioner, Chekiang. Sept., 1901; Governor, Anhui, Jan., 190S; Tartar-General, Kiangningv Nanking, March, 1906.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ANG-HENG

Layout 2
​ CH'ANG-HENG (KIANGSU), Chinese Official Service; native of Manchuria. Appointed Ch'ang-Chen Tao, Kiangsu, (Taotai at Chinkiang), June, 1897.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'EN PANG-JUI

Layout 2
​ CH'EN PANG-JUI (PEKING), Vice-President Board of Revenue; native of Chekiang; metropolitan graduate, 1868. Appointed Commissioner, Office of Transmission. Nov., 1900; junior Vice-President, Board of Works, June, 1901; employed in Council of Government Reform, July, 1901; junior Vice-President, Board of Revenue,, Nov., 1901; senior Vice-President Board of Revenue, Feb., 1902.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ANG-SHAN, Lieut.-General

Layout 2
​ CH'ANG-SHAN, Lieut.-General (PEKING), Lieut.-General of Bordered Blue Mongol Banner corps.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'ENG CHANG

Layout 2
​ CH'ENG CHANG (PEKING), Vice-President of Censorate. Appointed Chief Secretary, Tsung-li Yamen; Hui -Ning -Ch'ih -T'ai -Kuang Tao,. Toatai at Wuhu, March, 1889; suspended from office, Aug., 1891; vacated post and summoned to Peking for audience, Jan., 1892; assistant Superintendent, Board of Admiralty; Sub-Director, Banqueting Court, Jan., 1897; Sub-Director,, Court of Sacrificial Worship Sept., 1898; Deputy Commissioner of the Office of Transmission, Nov., 1898; Vice-Director, Imperial Clan Court Jan., 1899; Vice-President, Censorate, Jan., 1901.
# Who's Who in the Far East/CH'EN KUEI-LUNG

Layout 2
​ CH'EN KUEI-LUNG (KIANGSU), Governor; native of Kweichow; ​metropolitan graduate, 1886. Appointed Vice-Governor of Peking, June, 1900; Governor of Peking, Sept, 1900; Financial Commissioner, Honan, May, 1901; Director General of Grain Transport, Dec., 1901; Governor, Honan, April, 1903; Governor, Kiangsu, Feb., 1906.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TEBBITT, Robert Theodore

Layout 2
​ TEBBITT, Robert Theodore (CANTON), H. B. M. Vice-Consul. Appointed Student Interpreter in China, March 1, 1898; ag. Consul at Swatow, 1900; eg. Consul at Swatow, 1903; ag. Consul at Canton, 1906. Address: H. B. M. Consulate, Canton, China.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TERAO, Torn

Layout 2
​ TERAO, Toru (TOKYO), LL.D.; Prof, of Imp. Univ., Tokyo; b. Dec., 1858, at Fukuoka. Educ. Imp. Univ., Tokyo; at Brussels, 1892-1895. Is authority on international law;Address: Tokyo, Japan.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/THOMSON, Henry Wagstaffe

Layout 2
​ THOMSON, Henry Wagstaffe (KUANTAN), District Officer; b. ​Feb. 22, 1874. Passed in Malay; entered Federated Malay States Civil Service as Cadet, Selangor, 1896; acting assistant Collector of Land Revenue, Kuala Lumpur, Sept. 1899; acting assistant District officer, Serendah, April, 1900; District Officer, Kuantan, Pahang, June, 1900; seconded for service in Kelantan, Siam, 1903; District Officer, Kuantan, 1900. Address. Kuantan, Pabang, Federated Malay States.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TANG CHING CHUNG

Layout 2
​ TANG CHING CHUNG (KIANGSU), Literary Chancellor; native of Kwangsi; metrop graduate, 1871. Sub-Chancellor, Grand Secretariat, Nov., 1893; Vice-Presdt., Board et' Ceremonies, Oct, 1897; Literary Chancellor, Kiangsu, 1904.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TANG SHOU-MING

Layout 2
​ TANG SHOU-MING (KWANGSI), ex-Treasurer; native of Hunan. Lin-An-K'ai-Kuang Tao, Yunnan, Sept., 1887; Judge, Yunnan, July, 1895; Treasurer, Yunnan, Oct., 1 897; Treasurer, Anhwei, July, 1898: do., Kwangsi, 1901; cashiered, July, 1903.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TEYUN, Lieut.-General

Layout 2
​ TEYUN, Lieut.-General (PEKING), native of Mongolia. Lieut. -General of Gendarmerie. Peking, Oct., 1897; vacated post, Jan., 1899; Dep. Lieut.-General, Plain Blue Bordered Banner Corps, Aug., 1899.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TERAO, Hisasbi

Layout 2
​ TERAO, Hisasbi (TOKYO), D. Sc.; Prof, of the Imp. Univ., Tokyo. b. Sept., 1855, at Fukuoka Educ.: in France, 1879-1883. Has occupied present position, since 1884; is also Director of Gov. Observatory at Tokyo. Address: Tokyo, Japan.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/TETART, Lieut-Colonel Georges L. A.

Layout 2
​ TETART, Lieut-Colonel Georges L. A. (HANOI), Commandant, 11e Regiment d'Infanterie Coloniale. Decoration: Officier de la Legion d'Honneur. Address: Hanoi, Tonkin. Indo-China.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/THUREAU, Clement Desire Henri

Layout 2
​ THUREAU, Clement Desire Henri (THAI-BINH), Resident; Administrator, 1st class; b. May 9, 1845. Joined Indo-China Civil Service, March 17, 1886; Administrator, 4th class, March 17, 1886; Administrator, 3rd class, March 27, 1888; Administrate!', 2nd class, Oct. 6, 1 897; Administrator, 1st class, Aug. 2, 1900. Decoration: Officier d'Academie. Address: Thai-Binh, Province of Thai-Binh, Tonkin, Indo-China,.
# Who's Who in the Far East/Addenda/THORPE, William Peter

Layout 2
​ THORPE, William Peter (KUALA LUMPUR), Revenue Auditor; b. Oct. 31, 1856. Clerk in Financial Office, Public Works Department, Perak, 1885-1889; assistant Treasurer, Larut, 1889; acting assistant Treasurer and Customs Officer, Lower Perak, 1890; assistant Auditor, Perak, 1892; District Treasurer, etc., Kinta, 1893; acting Auditor, Negri Sembilan, 1895; Magistrate, Sereniban, Oct., 1895; Officer in Charge of the State, 1899; States Auditor, 1901; Revenue Auditor, 1903; acted as Revenue Auditor in Perak and Selangor, 1903; Revenue Auditor, Federated Malay States, Kuala Lumpur, 1906. Address: Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Federated Malay States.
# Yeaton v. Lenox (32 U.S. 220)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
32 U.S. 220
Yeaton v. Lenox
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the district of Columbia, and county of Alexandria.
Coxe, for the appellees, moved to dismiss this appeal; an appeal in the same having been dismissed at January term 1832, and this appeal not having been taken and filed, according to the provisions of the judiciary act and the rules of this court.
Neale, contra, cited the following cases, Reily v. Lamar, 2 Cranch 344; Wood v. Lide, 4 Ibid. 180; The San Pedro, 2 Wheat. 132; Johnson v. Johnson's Administrators, 2 Munf. 304.
MARSHALL, Ch. J., delivered the opinion of the court.
In this case, a decree was pronounced by the court of the United States for the county of Alexandria, in December 1829, from which the defendants in that court appealed, but did not bring up the record. At January term 1832, the appellees, in pursuance of a rule of this court, brought in the record, filed it, and moved that the suit should be dismissed. The court ordered a dismissal. On the 9th day of March 1832, a citation was signed by the chief justice of the court for the district of Columbia, citing the plaintiffs in the original action to appear before the supreme court, then in session, and show cause why the decree of the circuit court should not be corrected. A copy of the record was returned with this citation 'executed,' and filed with the clerk. The appellees move to dismiss the suit, because the record has been irregularly brought up.
The act of March 1803, which gives the appeal from decrees in chancery, subjects it to the rules and regulations which govern writs of error. Under this act, it has been always held, that a decree may be prayed in court, when the decree is pronounced; but if the appeal be prayed, after the court has risen, the party must proceed in the same manner as had been previously directed in writs of error. The judiciary act directs, that a writ of error must be allowed by a judge, and that a citation shall be returned with the record; the adverse party having at least twenty days' notice. This notice, we understand, is twenty days before the return-day of the writ of error. In this case, the appeal is not allowed by the judge, and the citation is to appear before the court then sitting. The record is brought up irregularly, and the cause must be dismissed.
On consideration of the rule granted in this cause, and of the arguments of counsel, as well for the appellants as for the appellees, thereupon had, after mature deliberation, it is the opinion of this court, that the record is brought up irregularly, and that this appeal should be dismissed: whereupon, it is ordered and decreed by this court, that the appeal be and the same is hereby dismissed, with costs.

## Notes

* ↑ For a decision upon the merits, on a further appeal, see 8 Pet. 123.
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
# Yee Hem v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
268 U.S. 178
Yee Hem v. United States
Argued: March 19, 1925. --- Decided: April 27, 1925
Messrs. Gerard J. Pilliod and Joseph C. Breitenstein, both of Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 178-180 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Donovan, for the United States.
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND 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
# Yeaton v. Lenox (32 U.S. 220)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
32 U.S. 220
Yeaton v. Lenox

## 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
# Yeaton v. Lenox

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Yeaton v. Lenox."
* 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.
* Yeaton v. Lenox (32 U.S. 220)
* Yeaton v. Lenox (33 U.S. 123)