OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# The American Cyclopædia (1879)/Pocahontas

Edition of 1879. See also Pocahontas on Wikipedia; and the disclaimer.
POCAHONTAS, an Indian woman of Virginia, daughter of the chief Powhatan, born about 1595, died in Gravesend, England, in March, 1617. She was remarkable for her friendship for the English colonists, a striking evidence of which is said to have been given when she was about 12 years old. Capt. John Smith was taken prisoner, and it was decided to put him to death. His head was laid upon a stone, and the savages were brandishing their clubs preparatory to dashing out his brains, when Pocahontas threw herself upon the captive's body, and her intercession with her father saved his life. Recent researches discredit this story. When Smith returned to Jamestown, he sent presents to Pocahontas and her father; and after this, according to Smith's narrative, Pocahontas “with her wild train visited Jamestown as freely as her father's habitation.” In 1609 she passed through the wood in the night to inform Smith of a plot formed by her father to destroy him. In 1612 she was living in the territory of the Indian chief Japazaws. Capt. Samuel Argall bribed Japazaws to betray her into his hands, and began to treat with Powhatan for her restitution, but they were unable to agree. While she was on shipboard an attachment sprang up between her and an Englishman named John Rolfe, and the consent of Sir Thomas Dale and of her father having been gained, they were married at Jamestown in April, 1613. A peace of many years' duration between the English and the Indians was the consequence of this union. Before her marriage she was baptized, receiving the name of Rebecca. In 1616 she accompanied Dale to England, where she was an object of great interest to all classes of people, and was presented at court. When Smith visited her in London, after saluting him she turned away her face and hid it in her hands, and remained in this position for two or three hours. She had been taught to believe that he was dead, and there is no doubt that her husband was a party to the deception, he probably thinking she would never marry him while Smith was living. Pocahontas prepared to leave England with regret, but she suddenly died as she was on the point of embarking.
She left one son, Thomas Rolfe, who was educated by his uncle, a London merchant, and in after life went to Virginia, where he became a person of note and influence. The Bolling, Randolph, Fleming, and other families in that state are his descendants.
# Tales from Shakespeare, illus. Rackham (1908)

* related portals: Children's literature.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, quotes, Wikidata item.
Tales from Shakespeare is a children's book by Charles and Mary Lamb, first published in 1807. It retells, in language accessible to children, the stories of twenty of Shakespeare's plays.
EVERYMAN’S LIBRARY EDITED BY ERNEST RHYS
FOR YOUNG PEOPLE
TALES FROM SHAKESPEARE WITH ILLUSTRATIONS BY ARTHUR RACKHAM
[Advertisements]
THE PUBLISHERS OF EVERYMAN'S LIBRARY WILL BE PLEASED TO SEND FREELY TO ALL APPLICANTS A LIST OF THE PUBLISHED AND PROJECTED VOLUMES TO BE COMPRISED UNDER THE FOLLOWING TWELVE HEADINGS:
London : J. M. DENT & CO. New York : E. P. DUTTON & CO.
THISIS
FAIRY
GOLD,
BOY;AND
'TWILL
PROVESO
SHAKESPEARE
TALES · FROM
SHAKESPEARE
BY · CHARLES
AND · MARY
LAMB
LONDON : PUBLISHED
by J·M·DENT·&·CO
AND IN NEW YORK
BY E·P·DUTTON & CO
CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, Bread Street Hill, E.C., and Bungay, Suffolk.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1946, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 77 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.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Terry v. Little

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
101 U.S. 216
Terry v. Little
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of North Carolina.
By sect. 4 of the charter of the Merchants' Bank of South Carolina, at Cheraw, it was provided that, in case of the failure of the bank, 'each stockholder, copartnership, or body politic having a share or shares in the said bank at the time of such failure, or who shall have been interested therein at any time within twelve months previous to such failure, shall be liable and held bound individually for any sum not exceeding twice the amount of his, her, or their share or shares.' It is alleged in the declaration that the bank failed March 1, 1865. The general assets have since been collected and applied to the payment of debts, under the provisions of an act of the legislature of South Carolina, passed March 13, 1869, placing the bank in liquidation. Debts to the amount of several hundred thousand dollars are still unpaid. The capital stock was $400,000, divided into shares of $100 each. Of these shares the defendant Benjamin F. Little owned at the time of the failure one hundred and ten, and John P. Little one hundred and fifty-eight. On the 21st of August, 1875, Terry, the plaintiff, commenced an action at law in the court below, against the defendants jointly, to recover from them, on account of their individual liability as stockholders, $5,440, the amount due him from the bank on its bills which he held. The defendants demurred to the declaration, and among others assigned for cause, in substance,-1, that the individual liability of the stockholders as created and defined by this charter could not be enforced in an action at law by one creditor for his sole use to the exclusion of others; and, 2, that even if it could, the defendants cannot be joined in one such action because their liability is not joint but several. The Circuit Court sustained the demurrer and gave judgment for the defendants. This writ of error has been brought to reverse that judgment.
Mr. Harvey Terry for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Joseph J. Davis, contra.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE, after stating the case, 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
# Terry v. McLure

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
103 U.S. 442
Terry v. McLure
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of South Carolina.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Harvey Terry for the appellant.
Mr. James Lowndes and Mr. William E. Earl, contra.
MR. JUSTICE MILLER 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
# Terry v. Ohio/Concurrence Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Black Harlan White
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 1
Terry v. Ohio
Argued: Dec. 12, 1967. --- Decided: June 10, 1968
Mr. Justice BLACK concurs in the judgment and the opinion except where the opinion quotes from and relies upon this Court's opinion in Katz v. United States and the concurring opinion in Warden v. Hayden.

## 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
# Terry v. Ohio/Concurrence White

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Black Harlan White
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 1
Terry v. Ohio
Argued: Dec. 12, 1967. --- Decided: June 10, 1968
Mr. Justice WHITE, concurring.
I join the opinion of the Court, reserving judgment, however, on some of the Court's general remarks about the scope and purpose of the exclusionary rule which the Court has fashioned in the process of enforcing the Fourth Amendment.
Also, although the Court puts the matter aside in the context of this case, I think an additional word is in order concerning the matter of interrogation during an investigative stop. There is nothing in the Constitution which prevents a policeman from addressing questions to anyone on the streets. Absent special circumstances, the person approached may not be detained or frisked but may refuse to cooperate and go on his way. However, given the proper circumstances, such as those in this case, it seems to me the person may be briefly detained against his will while pertinent questions are directed to him. Of course, the person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest, although it may alert the officer to the need for continued observation. In my view, it is temporary detention, warranted by the circumstances, which chiefly justifies the protective frisk for weapons. Perhaps the frisk itself, where proper, will have beneficial results whether questions are asked or not. If weapons are found, an arrest will follow. If none are found, the frisk may nevertheless serve preventive ends because of its unmistakable message that suspicion has been aroused. But if the investigative stop is sustainable at all, constitutional rights are not necessarily violated if pertinent questions are asked and the person is restrained briefly in the process.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, 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
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Arachnides

​ARACHNIDES. A class of animals of the type Annulosa. See Index to Annulosa.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Analysis, Chemical

​ANALYSIS, Chemical. See Chemical Analysis.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Analysis, Metaphysical

​ANALYSIS, Metaphysical. See Metaphysical Analysis.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Analysis, Algebraical

​ANALYSIS, Algebraical. See Mathematical Analysis.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Anderson (Alexander)

​ANDERSON (Alexander), a very eminent Mathematician, who flourished in the early part of the seventeenth century. He was born at Aberdeen, but passed over to the Continent, and settled as a private teacher or Professor of Mathematics at Paris, where he published or edited, between the years 1612 and 1619, various Geometrical and Algebraical tracts, which are conspicuous for their ingenuity and elegance. It is doubtful whether he was ever acquainted with the famous Vieta, Master of Requests at Paris, who died in 1603; but his pure taste and skill in mathematical investigation, had pointed him out to the executors of that illustrious man, who had found leisure, in the intervals of a laborious profession, to cultivate and extend the ancient geometry, and by adopting a system of general symbols, to lay the foundation, and begin the superstructure of Algebraical science, as the person most proper for revising and publishing his valuable manuscripts. Anderson did not come forward, however, as a mere editor; he enriched the texts with learned comments, and gave neat demonstrations of those propositions which had been left imperfect. He afterwards produced a specimen of the application of Geometrical Analysis, which is distinguished by its clearness and classic elegance.
Of this able geometer, we are ignorant both of the time of his birth and of his death. His brother, David Anderson, a small proprietor in Aberdeenshire, but engaged in business, had likewise a strong turn for mathematics and mechanics, which, joined to great versatility of talent, made him be regarded by his neighbours at that period as a sort of oracle. The daughter of this clever and active burgess, was married to John Gregory, minister of Drumoak, in that county, father to the celebrated James Gregory, inventor of the reflecting telescope, and is supposed to have communicated to her children that taste for mathematical learning which afterwards shone forth so remarkably in the family of the Gregorys.
The works of Anderson amount to six thin quarto volumes, which are now very scarce. These are:
* Francisci Victæ Fontenacensis de Aequationum Recognitione et Emendatione Tractatus Duo. Paris, 1615, in 4to; to which Anderson has supplied the dedication, preface, and appendix.
* Ad Angularium Sectionum Analyticen Theoremata Καθολικοτερα. A Francisco Vieta Fontenacensi excogitata, at absque ulla demonstratione ad nos transmissa, jam pridem demonstrationibus confirmata. Paris, 1615, in 4to.
* Vindiciæ Archimedis. Sive, Elenchus Cyclometriæ novæ à Philippo Lansbergio nuper editæ. Paris, 1616, in 4to.
* Alexandri Andersoni Scoti Exercitationum Mathematicarum Dicas Prima. Continens, Quæstionum aliquot, quæ nobilissimorum tum hujus tum veteris ævi, Mathematicorum ingenia exercuere Enodationem. Paris, 1619, in 4to. (D.)
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Amphibia

​AMPHIBIA. See Reptilia in Index to the article Vertebrosa.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Anatomy

ANATOMY.
The provinces of Anatomy and Physiology may now, we believe, be looked upon as distinctly and permanently defined. Anatomy is understood to treat solely of the Structure of Living Bodies, and Physiology solely of their Functions.
We shall observe this arrangement strictly in the following article. It is one which, in our opinion, has already been productive of material advantages to the science of Vital Economy. The descriptive detail of the structure of Living Bodies is no longer distracted and obscured by superficial and unconnected views of their functions; nor their functions carelessly discussed, in the form of occasional and uninstructive commentaries on the descriptions of their structure. Each is made the subject of separate and particular investigation; and not only has Anatomy been thus rendered more accurate and precise, but a more regular and philosophical form has been given to Physiology, and its progressive improvement rendered more sure.
Living Bodies being arranged into two grand classes, Animals and Vegetables, the science of Anatomy, of course, comprehends two great divisions corresponding to these; viz. Animal Anatomy and Vegetable Anatomy.
In the two following articles, we propose not only to trace the progress of improvement in each of those departments within these few years, but to correct several errors, and to supply many deficiencies, in the dissertations which relate to them in the body of the work.
* Animal Anatomy
* Vegetable Anatomy
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Amman (John Conrad)

​AMMAN (John Conrad), a Physician, and one of the earliest writers on the instruction of the deaf and dumb, was born at Schaffhausen, but in what year is uncertain. In 1687, he graduated at Basle; and, his religious principles not permitting him to settle in his native country, he retired to Holland, where he appears to have devoted his time and attention chiefly to the cure of the defects and imperfections of speech. He first called the attention of the public to his method, in a paper which was inserted in the Philosophical Transactions; and which appeared in a separate form in the year 1692, under the title, Surdus Loquens, sive Methodus qua qui surdus natus est loqui possit; and afterwards, with much additional matter, in 1702 and 1728, under the title, Dissertatio de Loquela, qua non solum vox humana, et loquendi artificium ex originibus suis eruuntur, sed et traduntur media, quibus ii qui ab incunabulis surdi et muti fuerunt, loquelam adipisci, quique difficulter loquuntur, vitia sua emendari possunt. In this work, which Haller terms “vere aureum,” he developes, with great ability, the mechanism of language, and describes the process which he employed in teaching its use to the unfortunate class of persons committed to his care. This consisted principally in exciting the attention of his pupils to the motions of his lips and larynx while he spoke; and then inducing them, by gentle means, to imitate these movements, till he brought them to repeat distinctly letters, syllables, and words. As his method was excellent, we may readily give him credit for the success to which he lays claim. In a long course of practice, he says that he never failed in his endeavours but in two instances; one of which was that of a girl who was an idiot, and the other that of a Jew, from whose father he foresaw that he would not get any thanks for his trouble. The edition of Cælius Aurelianus, which was undertaken by the Wetstens in 1709, and which still ranks as one of the best editions of that author, was superintended by Amman. (E.)
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Analysis, Geometrical

​ANALYSIS, Geometrical. See Mathematical Analysis.
# Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Amman (Paul)

​AMMAN (Paul), a Physician and Botanist, was born at Breslau in 1634. In 1662, he received the degree of Doctor of Medicine from the University of Leipsic, and, in 1664, was admitted a member of the Society Naturæ Curiosorum, under the name of Dryander. Shortly afterwards, he was chosen Extraordinary Professor of Medicine in the above-mentioned University; and, in 1674, he was promoted to the Botanical Chair, which he again, in 1682, exchanged for the Physiological. He died in 1691. Paul Amman seems to have been a man of an acute mind, and extensive learning; but a restless and irritable disposition led him to engage too much in controversy, and to indulge in a degree of raillery in his writings, which the nature of the subjects hardly warranted. By his first work, which was published in 1670, under the title, Medicina Critica, seu Centuria Casuum in Facultate Lipsiensi resolutorum variis discursibus aucta, he drew down upon himself the displeasure of the Faculty, who had certainly no cause to rejoice at this exposure of their decisions. In the Paracænesis ad discentes circa institutionum medicarum emendationem occupata, which appeared three years afterwards, and in the Irenicum Numæ Pompilii cum Hippocrate, which he published in 1689, he showed his independent turn of thinking, by boldly attacking the systems of Galen and Hippocrates, and the abuses to which the implicit adoption of them had given rise. But it is chiefly on his botanical writings that his fame ought to rest. The Suppellex Botanica, et Manuductio ad Materiam Medicam, which he committed to the press in 1675, contains a full, but somewhat prolix, catalogue of the plants of the botanic garden of Leipsic and its environs, with their synonyms; followed by a brief introduction to the study of the Materia Medica, which proves an accurate knowledge of the science he was then employed in teaching. His next publication was entitled, Character Plantarum Naturalis, ab ultimo fine, viz. fructificatione desumptus, et in gratiam philatrorum per canones et exempla digestus; to the second edition of which, in 1685, he prefixed a dissertation on the true classification of plants. In this work he adopted the arrangement of Morison, endeavouring to show, as the title imports, that the genera of plants were only to ​be distinguished by their parts of fructification, and illustrating his method by the description of 1476 different genera and species, in alphabetical order. An enlarged edition of this book was published by Daniel Nebel, in 1700, with the addition of the characters of Tournefort and Hermann. For the complete list of Paul Amman’s writings, see Haller, Bibl. Med. and Eloy, Dict. Hist. (E.)
# The Alicia/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
74 U.S. 571
The Alicia
As the appellant has not docketed the cause and filed the record within the time allowed by the rules in cases of appeals, the motion would be allowed as of course, if the appeal could be regarded as taken to this court from the decree of the District Court. But the decree of condemnation in that court was rendered in January, 1863, and the appeal to the Circuit Court was allowed, and bond given, in the same month. By these proceedings, and the transmission of the record to the Circuit Court, the cause was duly removed to that court under the laws regulating appeals at that time. Subsequently, by the thirteenth section of the act of June 30, 1864, provision was made for appeals in prize cases directly from the District Court to this court; and it was directed that appeals from the Circuit Courts, in cases remaining therein, should be allowed to this court in the same manner as appeals from the District Court under the act. But it was also provided in the same section that prize causes, depending in the Circuit Courts, might be transferred, upon the application of all parties in interest, to this court; and it was under this provision that the application and order for transfer were made.
Can this court acquire jurisdiction of the cause through this order of transfer?
It cannot be doubted that the cause was removed to the Circuit Court by the appeal from the decree of the District Court in 1863. That decree was vacated by the appeal, and the Circuit Court acquired full jurisdiction of the cause. It might, in its discretion, make orders for further proof, and was fully authorized to proceed to final hearing and decree, in all respects, as if the cause had been originally instituted in that court. Nor can it be doubted that, under the Constitution, this court can exercise, in prize causes, appellate jurisdiction only. An appellate jurisdiction necessarily implies some judicial determination, some judgment, decree, or order of an inferior tribunal, from which an appeal has been taken. But in this case there had been no such order, judgment, or decree in the Circuit Court; and there was no subsisting decree in the District Court, from which an appeal could be taken. We are obliged to conclude that, in the provision for transfer, an attempt was inadvertently made to give to this court a jurisdiction withheld by the Constitution, and, consequently, that the order of transfer was without effect. The cause is still depending in the Circuit Court. We must decline, therefore, to make an order to docket and dismiss the appeal; but this opinion may be
CERTIFIED TO THAT COURT FOR INFORMATION.

## 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