OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Harlem Shadows/To Winter

Layout 2
Stay, season of calm love and soulful snows! There is a subtle sweetness in the sun, The ripples on the stream's breast gaily run, The wind more boisterously by me blows, And each succeeding day now longer grows. The birds a gladder music have begun, The squirrel, full of mischief and of fun, From maples' topmost branch the brown twig throws. I read these pregnant signs, know what they mean: I know that thou art making ready to go. Oh stay! I fled a land where fields are green Always, and palms wave gently to and fro, And winds are balmy, blue brooks ever sheen, To ease my heart of its impassioned woe.
# Harlem Shadows/To O.E.A.

Layout 2
Your voice is the color of a robin's breast, And there's a sweet sob in it like rain—still rain in the night. Among the leaves of the trumpet-tree, close to his nest, The pea-dove sings, and each note thrills me with strange delight Like the words, wet with music, that well from your trembling throat. I'm afraid of your eyes, they're so bold, Searching me through, reading my thoughts, shining like gold. But sometimes they are gentle and soft like the dew on the lips of the eucharis Before the sun comes warm with his lover's kiss. You are sea-foam, pure with the star's loveliness, Not mortal, a flower, a fairy, too fair for the beauty-shorn earth. All wonderful things, all beautiful things, gave of their wealth to your birth. ​Oh I love you so much, not recking of passion, that I feel it is wrong! But men will love you, flower, fairy, non-mortal spirit burdened with flesh, Forever, life-long.
# Harlem Shadows/To a Poet

Layout 2
There is a lovely noise about your name, Above the shoutings of the city clear, More than a moment's merriment, whose claim Will greater grow with every mellowed year.
The people will not bear you down the street, Dancing to the strong rhythm of your words, The modern kings will throttle you to greet The piping voice of artificial birds.
But the rare lonely spirits, even mine, Who love the immortal music of all days, Will see the glory of your trailing line, The bedded beauty of your haunting lays.
# Harlem Shadows/The Tired Worker

First published in The Liberator, Issue No. 18, August, 1919, republished in the Cambridge Magazine 10 Summer (1920)
Layout 2
O whisper, O my soul! The afternoon Is waning into evening, whisper soft! Peace, O my rebel heart! for soon the moon From out its misty veil will swing aloft! Be patient, weary body; soon the night Will wrap thee gently in her sable sheet, And with a leaden sigh thou wilt invite To rest thy tired hands and aching feet. The wretched day was theirs, the night is mine; Come tender sleep, and fold me to thy breast. But what steals out the gray clouds red like wine? O dawn! O dreaded dawn! O let me rest Weary my veins, my brain, my life! Have pity! No! Once again the harsh, the ugly city.
# Harlem Shadows/The White City

Layout 2
I will not toy with it nor bend an inch. Deep in the secret chambers of my heart I muse my life-long hate, and without flinch I bear it nobly as I live my part. My being would be a skeleton, a shell, If this dark Passion that fills my every mood, And makes my heaven in the white world's hell, Did not forever feed me vital blood. I see the mighty city through a mist— The strident trains that speed the goaded mass, The poles and spires and towers vapor-kissed, The fortressed port through which the great ships pass, The tides, the wharves, the dens I contemplate, Are sweet like wanton loves because I hate.
# Harwood v. Dickerhoff/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
117 U.S. 200
Harwood v. Dickerhoff
Argued: March 8, 1886. ---
This motion is denied on the authority of Jerome v. McCarcer, 21 Wall. 17. 'The circumstances of the case, or of the parties,' have not been so changed by the death of N. B. Harwood, one of the appellants, as to make 'the security, which at the time it was taken was 'good and sufficient," now insufficient. No personal decree is asked. The sole purpose of the suit is to subject the lands in question to the payment of debts of Harwood, the deceased appellant. The affidavits do not satisfy us that the property is depreciating in value by reason of any neglect of the surviving appellants in its care or management.

## 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
# Haskell v. Kansas Natural Gas Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
224 U.S. 217
Haskell v. Kansas Natural Gas Company
Argued: February 23, 1912. --- Decided: April 1, 1912
Mr. Charles West, Attorney General of Oklahoma, for appellants.
Messrs. John G. Johnson, D. T. Watson, E. L. Scarritt, and John J. Jones for appellees.
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
# Has Your Soul Sipped?

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
Has your soul sipped Of the sweetness of all sweets? Has it well supped But yet hungers and sweats?
I have been witness Of a strange sweetness, All fancy surpassing Past all supposing.
Passing the rays Of the rubies of morning, Or the soft rise Of the moon; or the meaning Known to the rose Of her mystery and mourning.
Sweeter than nocturnes Of the wild nightingale Or than love's nectar After life's gall.
Sweeter than odours Of living leaves, Sweeter than ardours Of dying loves.
Sweeter than death And dreams hereafter To one in dearth Or life and its laughter.
Or the proud wound The victor wears Or the last end Of all wars.
Or the sweet murder After long guard Unto the martyr Smiling at God;
To me was that smile, Faint as a wan, worn myth, Faint and exceeding small, On a boy's murdered mouth.
Though from his throat The life-tide leaps There was no threat On his lips.
But with the bitter blood And the death-smell All his life's sweetness bled Into a smile.
# Haseltine v. Central National Bank

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
183 U.S. 130
Haseltine v. Central National Bank
Argued: October 29, 1901. --- Decided: December 2, 1901
Messrs. James Baker and Seward A. Haseltine submitted the cause for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. John Ridout submitted the cause for defendant in error.
Statement by Mr. Justice Brown:
This was an action brought originally in the circuit court for Greene county, Missouri, by the Haseltines against the Central National Bank, to recover double the amount of certain alleged usurious interest paid by the plaintiffs to defendant, and which they sought to recover under the 2d clause of Rev. Stat. § 5198, providing that 'in case the greater rate of interest has been paid, the person by whom it has been paid, or his legal representatives, may recover back, in an action in the nature of an action of debt, twice the amount of the interest thus paid from the association taking or receiving the same.'
The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs for $831.70. From this judgment defendant appealed to the supreme court of the state, which reversed the judgment of the trial court upon the ground that the plaintiffs had neither paid nor tendered the principal sum due, and remanded the cause 'for further proceedings to be had therein, in conformity with the opinion of this court herein delivered.'
Defendant moved to dismiss the writ of error upon the ground that this was not a final judgment.
Mr. Justice Brown 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
# Hardy v. Harbin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
154 U.S. 598
Hardy v. Harbin
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
# Hardy v. Hoyt/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
38 U.S. 292
Hardy v. Hoyt
This case involves the second point, only, which has been just decided in the case of Bend vs. Hoyt; and, therefore, it is only necessary to say that it will be certified to the Circuit Court for the southern district of New York, that the silk stockings and half-stockings mentioned in the case, were exempted from duty on their importation, under the act of the 2d of March, 1833, ch. 384.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States, for the southern district of New York, on the points and questions on which the judges of the said Circuit Court were opposed in opinion, and which were certified to this Court for its opinion, agreeably to the act of Congress in such case made and provided, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, this Court is of opinion, that the silk hose, as manufactures of silk, not being sewing silk, were exempted from the payment of duty, by the fourth section of the act of the 2d of March, 1833, entitled, 'An act to modify the act of the 14th of July, 1832, and all other acts imposing duties on imports,' which declares, that all manufactures of silk, or of which silk is the component material of chief value, coming from this of the Cape of Good Hope, except sewing silk, shall be free of duty. Whereupon, it is ordered and adjudged by this Court, that it be so certified to the said Circuit Court, and that this case be remanded to the said Court, that further proceedings may be had therein according to law.

## 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
# Hardy v. Hoyt

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
38 U.S. 292
Hardy v. Hoyt
ON a certificate of division of opinion from the Circuit Court of the United States, for the southern district of New York.
This cause came before the Court on a certiorari to the Superior Court of the city of New York, the action being in assumpsit to recover from the defendant the sum of $148 29, received by him as collector of the port of New York, for duties on an importation of silk hose. The duty was levied at the rate of 25 per centum ad valorem, as 'hosiery,' under the 2d article of the 2d section of the act of Congress, approved July 14th, 1832, entitled 'An act to alter and amend the several acts imposing duties on imports.' The plea of non-assumpsit was pleaded by the defendant in bar of the action.
It being proved that the articles imported were stockings and half-stockings, made entirely of silk, and were imported from Liverpool, in England, in the ship St. Andrew, in the month of October, in the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight, which port of Liverpool is a port this side of the Cape of Good Hope; the following point was presented, during the progress of the trial, for the opinion of the judges, on which the judges were opposed in opinion, viz.:
Whether the said silk hose was subject to the payment of the duty imposed on hosiery by the 2d clause of the 2d section of the act of July 14th, 1832, entitled, 'An act to alter and amend the several acts imposing duties on imports.'
Or whether, as manufactures of silk, not being sewing silk, they were exempted from the payment of duty by the 4th section of the act of March 2d, 1833, entitled, 'An act to modify the act of the fourteenth of July, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two, and all other acts imposing duties on imports,' which declares that all manufactures of silk, or of which silk is the component material of chief value, coming from this side of the Cape of Good Hope, except sewing silk, shall be free.
Which point, upon which the disagreement has happened, under the direction of the judges of the said Court, at the request of the counsel for the parties in the cause, was ordered to be certified unto the Supreme Court of the United States, at the next session.
The case was submitted to the Court, on the argument in the case of Bend vs. Hoyt, by Mr. Raymond for the plaintiff, and Mr. Grundy, Attorney General, for the United States.
Mr. Justice STORY 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
# Hardy v. Johnson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
68 U.S. 371
Hardy v. Johnson
WRIT of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California; the action having been ejectment, by Johnson against Hardy and wife, to recover a parcel of land in the city of Oakland, California. Johnson, in his complaint, as a declaration is there called, alleged a seizin in fee and a right to the possession of the entire demanded premises. The jury, however, by special verdict, found that the plaintiff was seized of a fractional part only; to wit, of an undivided twentieth interest. The defendants showed no title in any part; and the court gave judgment in Johnson's favor for the entire premises, 'in subordination to the rights of his co-tenants.'
On the trial the defendants offered in evidence a deed, conveying the interest of some of the co-tenants, executed after issue joined; an issue amounting in fact to the general issue. The deed was admitted (the question of its admissibility under the pleadings being reserved), and the jury based one of its findings upon it. The court, however, finally held the evidence not competent, and, in entering judgment on the verdict, excluded the finding made upon its basis.
The questions in this court were:
1. Whether judgment could properly be given, as it was in favor of the plaintiff for the entire premises, in subordination to the rights of his co-tenants?
2. Whether the deed was rightly excluded?
Mr. Train, for the plaintiffs in error, relied, as respected the first point, on the familiar principles that the plaintiff must recover, if at all, on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of the defendant's; and that a recovery must be had secundum allegata, or not at all: arguing, from the last position, that even though the special verdict found the plaintiff entitled to an undivided twentieth, he could not have judgment therefor, except by amending the declaration or complaint. On the second point, he contended that the title of the defendants acquired after issue was admissible; citing Stockdale v. Young, a decision in South Carolina, in which it was held that, 'in trespass to try title, the acquisition of title by defendant, since the last continuance, could not operate to prevent the recovery of damages to which the plaintiff might be entitled, and therefore that it was unnecessary to plead it puis darrein continuance; but that it might be given in evidence under the general issue.'
Messrs. Hepburn and Hill, contra, relied, for the first point, on Stark v. Barrett; and, for the second, on Yount v. Howell, California decisions, both.
Mr. Justice FIELD delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

* ↑ 3 Strobhart, 501.
* ↑ 15 California, 371.
* ↑ 14 Id., 468.
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
# Hardy v. United States

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Clark

## Dissenting Opinion

    Harlan
United States Supreme Court
375 U.S. 277
Hardy v. United States
Argued: Nov. 21, 1963. --- Decided: Jan 6, 1964
Mozart G. Ratner, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Louis F. Claiborne, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
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
# Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company."
* 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.
* Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company (173 U.S. 582)
* Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company (183 U.S. 402)
# Guarantee Title Trust Company v. Title Guaranty & Surety Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
224 U.S. 152
Guarantee Title Trust Company v. Title Guaranty & Surety Company
Argued: March 5, 1912. --- Decided: April 1, 1912
Mr. R. T. M. McCready for appellant.
Messrs. George J. Shaffer, Walter Lyon, and John P. Hunter for appellee.
Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company (173 U.S. 582)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
173 U.S. 582
Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company
W. L. Granbery, for petitioner.
E. H. East, for respondent.
Mr. Justice HARLAN 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
# Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company (183 U.S. 402)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
183 U.S. 402
Guarantee Company of North America v. Mechanics' Savings Bank Trust Company
Argued: April 23, 24, 1901. --- Decided: January 6, 1902

## 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
# Guaranitee Trust Safety Deposit Company v. Delta Pine Land Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
190 U.S. 636
Guaranitee Trust Safety Deposit Company v. Delta Pine Land Company
Denied.

## 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
# Henry VI Part 1 (1918) Yale

* related portals: The Yale Shakespeare.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, quotes, Wikidata item.
Part of The Yale Shakespeare series.
Layout 2
∵ The Yale Shakespeare ∵
THE FIRST PART OF KING HENRY THE SIXTH
EDITED BY TUCKER BROOKE
NEW HAVEN • YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON • HUMPHREY MILFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS • MCMXVIII
Copyright, 1918 By Yale University Press
First published, December, 1918
TABLE OF CONTENTS :
| | | PAGE |
| The Text | The Text | 1 |
| Act I | Act I | 1 |
| Act II | Act II | 25 |
| Act III | Act III | 44 |
| Act IV | Act IV | 63 |
| Act V | Act V | 84 |
| Notes | Notes | 106 |
| Appendix A. Sources of the Play | Appendix A. Sources of the Play | 128 |
| Appendix B. The History of the Play | Appendix B. The History of the Play | 133 |
| Appendix C. The Authorship of the Play | Appendix C. The Authorship of the Play | |
| I. | Shakespeare's Concern in It | 138 |
| II. | The Author of the Original Play | |
| | 1. Marlowe? | 147 |
| | 2. Greene? | 150 |
| | 3. Peele? | 151 |
| Appendix D. The Text of the Present Edition | Appendix D. The Text of the Present Edition | 154 |
| Appendix E. Suggestions for Collateral Reading | Appendix E. Suggestions for Collateral Reading | 155 |
| Index of Words Glossed | Index of Words Glossed | 157 |
The map on the next page is a modified reproduction of one included in the famous Atlas of Ortelius (edition of 1850), those places only being indicated which are of interest in connection with the 'First Part of Henry VI' and 'Henry V.' Parallels of latitude are reckoned eastwardly around the globe from a line in the Atlantic Ocean about 20 degrees west of Greenwich; parallels of longitude are as in modern maps. The two lines of dashes mark the approximate limits of English dominion in France prior to the relief of Orleans in 1429. Only the central district, south of the Loire and east of Bordeaux, and the besieged city of Orleans then recognized the Dauphin's authority.
THE YALE SHAKESPEARE
Edited by
Wilbur L. CrossTucker Brooke
Willard Higley Durham
Published under the Direction
of the
Department of English, Yale University,
on the Fund
Given to the Yale University Press in 1917
by the Members of the
Kingsley Trust Association
To Commemorate the Seventy-Fifth Anniversary
of the Founding of the Society
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
# Henry VI Part 1 (1918) Yale/Appendix D

Layout 2
APPENDIX D
The Text of the Present Edition
The text of the present volume is, by permission of the Oxford University Press, that of the Oxford Shakespeare, edited by the late W. J. Craig, except for the following deviations:
1. The stage directions are those of the original Folio edition, necessary additional words being inserted in square brackets.
2. The punctuation has been altered in many places, and the spelling normalized in the following instances: French place names in general (e.g., Champagne, Gisors, Poitiers, Bordeaux instead of Champaigne, Guysors, Poictiers, Bourdeaux); antic (antick), everywhere (every where), forfend (forefend), forgo (forego), immortaliz'd (immortalis'd), warlike (war-like).
3. The following alterations of the text have been made after collation with the Folio, readings of the present edition preceding and those of Craig following the colon. Except in the one case otherwise marked the changes all represent a return to the Folio text:
I. ii. 41 gimmors: gimmals
I. iv. 28 Call'd: Called
95 thee: thee, Nero
I. v. 16 hungry-starved: hunger-starved
​I. vi. 22 of: or (F)
II. ii. 54 'tis: it is
II. iv. 6 th' error: the error
II. v. 71 Richard: King Richard
III. i. 25, 114 sovereign: sov'reign
198 lose: should lose
III. ii.28 Talbonites: Talbotites
III. iii. 76 wandering: wand'ring
IV. i. 138 wavering: wav'ring
IV. ii. 6 sovereign: sov'reign
IV. iii. 28 makes: make
IV. vii. 25 whether: whe'r
65 Verdon: Verdun
V. iii. 68 here: here thy prisoner
153 country: county
V. v. 39 lord: good lord
46 liberal: a liberal