OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# With God/With God

With God
Maxims and Counsels of Saints and Spiritual Writers
1
IF you wish to raise a lofty edifice of perfection, take humility for your foundation. — St. Thomas Aquinas: Sermon X.
2
Cast thy heart firmly on the Lord, and fear not the judgment of man, when thy conscience gives testimony of thy piety and innocence.
Though St. Paul endeavored to please all in the Lord and made himself all unto all; though he labored for the edification and salvation of others as much as he could — nevertheless, he could not prevent his being sometimes judged or despised by others; yet he made little account of his being judged by the judgment of men (i Cor. iv. 3). He committed all to God, Who knows all, and defended himself by patience and humility against the tongues of those who spoke evil, or that thought and gave out at pleasure vain and faulty things of him; however, he answered them sometimes, lest his silence might give occasion of scandal to the weak.
"Who art thou, that thou shouldst be afraid of a mortal man?" (Is. li. 12). To-day he is and tomorrow he appears no more (i Mach. ii. 63). Fear God, and thou shalt have no need of being afraid of man. Look up to Me (to the Lord thy God) in heaven, Who am able to deliver thee from all confusion and wrongs, and to repay every one according to his works (Matt. xvi. 27). — Thomas d Kempis: Book III, Ch. XXXVI.
3
A BEAUTIFUL flower is humility; beautiful is patience, obedience, meekness, modesty, and every other virtue; but the most beautiful is charity. — Blessed Jourdain de Saxe: Letter XXXIII.
4
HE is most powerful who loves most. — St. Gregory the Great: "Life of St. Benedict," Ch. XXXIIL
The best of all prayers is that in which we ask that God's holy will may be accomplished, both in ourselves and in others. — Venerable Louis de BloiSy O.S.B,
5
GOD regards the motive and not the action. It is not the importance of the action that He considers, but the excellence of the intention, the love which prompted it. — St. Gregory the Great, O.S.B.
6
So great is the goodness of God in your regard, that, when you ask through ignorance for that which is not beneficial, He does not grant your prayer in this matter, but gives you something better instead. — St, Bernard, O. Cist.
7
To love God truly one must have three hearts in one: a heart all on fire for God; a heart full of charity for his neighbor; and a heart of flint for himself. — Bl. Benedict Joseph Lahre.
​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/886 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/887 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/888 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/889 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/890 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/891 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/892 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/893 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/894 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/895 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/896 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/897 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/898 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/899 ​Page:Withgodbookofpra00las.djvu/900
# With Husky-Haughty Lips, O Sea!

Walt Whitman's "With Husky-Haughty Lips, O Sea!", later a part of Leaves of Grass, originally published in Harper's Monthly in March of 1884.
With husky-haughty lips, O sea!
Where day and night I wend thy surf-beat shore,
Imaging to my sense thy varied strange suggestions,
(I see and plainly list thy talk and conference here,)
Thy troops of white-maned racers racing to the goal,
Thy ample, smiling face, dash'd with the sparkling dimples of the sun,
Thy brooding scowl and murk - thy unloos'd hurricanes,
Thy unsubduedness, caprices, wilfulness;
Great as thou art above the rest, thy many tears-a lack from all
eternity in thy content,
(Naught but the greatest struggles, wrongs, defeats, could make thee greatest - no less could make thee,)
Thy lonely state - something thou ever seekist and seekist, yet never gain
Surely some right withheld-some voice, in huge monotonous rage, of freedom-lover pent,
Some vast heart, like a planet's, chain'd and chafing in those
breakers,
By lengthen'd swell, and spasm, and panting breath,
And rhythmic rasping of thy sands and waves,
And serpent hiss, and savage peals of laughter,
And undertones of distant lion roar,
(Sounding, appealing to the sky's deaf ear-but now, rapport for
once,
A phantom in the night thy confidant for once,)
The first and last confession of the globe,
Outsurging, muttering from thy soul's abysms,
The tale of cosmic elemental passion,
Thou tellest to a kindred soul.
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
# Wilwording v. Swenson/Concurrence Blackmun

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Blackmun
* Dissenting Opinion Burger
United States Supreme Court
404 U.S. 249
Wilwording v. Swenson
Mr. Justice BLACKMUN concurs in the judgment of the Court and in Part II of the Court's per curiam opinion.
Mr. Chief Justice BURGER, 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
# Wiltshire, Extracted from Domesday Book/Errata

ERRATA.
Page 36, l. 3, for acraæ et leucas, read acræ et leucæ.
—— 41, l. 16, for alesellers, read potters.
—— 109, l. II, for butler, read sfteward.
—— 223, l. 14, 19, for freemen, read aliens.
—— 231, l. 16, for thinks ought read has proved.
—— 255, l. 20, for sor this land, read that this land belongs.
# Wilwording v. Swenson/Dissent Burger

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Blackmun
* Dissenting Opinion Burger
United States Supreme Court
404 U.S. 249
Wilwording v. Swenson
Mr. Chief Justice BURGER, dissenting.
This case is singularly inappropriate for summary reversal without an adequate record, and without briefs or argument. The Court assumes without citation of authority that further resort to state remedies would be futile; the District Judge, far more familiar than we with the local situation, thought otherwise. The Court does not rest its reversal on this ground, however, for it blandly treats petitioners' habeas corpus petitions as complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, an approach that petitioners' experienced counsel has studiously and appropriately avoided. Petitioners had previously filed complaints expressly under § 1983, which were denied after full hearing. It is conceded in the petition for certiorari that almost all of the claims involved in those actions underlie the instant habeas corpus proceeding; but petitioners' counsel argues that the doctrine of res judicata has no application in habeas corpus. The Court does not explain why this argument is not lost if the habeas corpus petitions are treated as complaints under § 1983.
I had previously thought that summary reversal was limited to cases where the error was manifest. Here, however, the Court has challenged the conclusion of the Court of Appeals largely on the basis of surmise and has gone on to reverse on a theory that the Court of Appeals was not asked to consider and presumably could not have considered.

## 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
# Wilwording v. Swenson

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Blackmun

## Dissenting Opinion

    Burger
United States Supreme Court
404 U.S. 249
Wilwording et al. v. Swenson, Warden
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
No. 70-5308
Petitioners' complaints relating to the condition of their confinement were held by the Missouri courts not to be cognizable by means of a petition for habeas corpus. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's subsequent dismissal of the habeas petitions on the ground that 28 U.S.C. § 2254 had not been satisfied because other types of state remedies might be available.
Held:
    1. Section 2254 does not require petitioners to pursue alternative courses suggested by the Court of Appeals since their availability was conjectural and, regardless of the remedy invoked, the state courts have not granted a hearing to state prisoners on the conditions of their confinement.
    2. Petitioners were entitled to have their actions treated as claims for relief under the Civil Rights Acts, to which exhaustion requirements do not apply.
Certiorari granted; 439 F. 2d 1331, reversed and remanded.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

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

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Campbell
United States Supreme Court
56 U.S. 330
Winans v. Denmead

## 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
# Woodward v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 112
Woodward v. United States
Argued: and Submitted April 11, 1951. --- Decided: April 23, 1951
Petitioner brought this action against the United States to secure the proceeds of a National Service Life Insurance Policy taken out by Evelyn Haizlip, a member of the Women's Army Corps. Before insured's death in 1945, petitioner, described by insured as her 'brother,' had been designated as beneficiary. The husband of the insured was interpleaded as a conflicting claimant. If petitioner, who was insured's brother by virtue of an adoption decree, is not within the permissible class of beneficiaries under § 602(g) of the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940, the husband is entitled to the proceeds in this case.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court which had held, 88 F.Supp. 152, that an adopted brother was not a permissible beneficiary under § 602(g). 8 Cir., 1950, 185 F.2d 134. See also the prior opinion of that court in this proceeding, 8 Cir., 1948, 167 F.2d 774. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit had reached a directly contrary conclusion under similar circumstances. Carpenter v. United States, 3 Cir., 1948, 168 F.2d 369, 3 A.L.R.2d 841. Our grant of certiorari was limited to the question whether a brother by adoption is within the permissible class of beneficiaries under § 602(g) of the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940. 1951, 340 U.S. 929, 71 S.Ct. 496.
We have examined the Act, its legislative history and related statutory provisions and have considered the various inferences drawn from the legislative materials by counsel. The short of the matter is that Congress has not expressed itself in regard to the question before us. In resolving the conflict of decisions, we must determine whether the word 'brother,' as used in this federal statute, restricts the policyholder's choice of beneficiaries to brothers of the blood. We are persuaded by the policy against drawing such a distinction in the family relationship. Contemporaneous legal treatment of adopted children as though born into the family is a manifestation of that policy. See Carpenter v. United States, supra; McDonald v. United States, D.C.D.Mass.1950, 91 F.Supp. 163. Consequently, we hold that a brother by adoption is a permissible beneficiary under § 602(g) of the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940.
Reversed.

## Notes

* ↑ 'The insurance shall be payable only to a widow, widower, child * * *, parent, brother or sister of the insured. The insured shall have the right to designate the beneficiary or beneficiaries of the insurance, but only within the classes herein provided, * * *.' 54 Stat. 1008, 1010, as amended, 38 U.S.C. § 802(g), 38 U.S.C.A. § 802(g).
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
# Woodward v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 112
Woodward v. United States
Argued: and Submitted April 11, 1951. --- Decided: April 23, 1951
Mr. Claude T. Wood, Richland, Mo. (Louren G. Davidson, Springfield, Mo., of counsel), for petitioner.
Mr. Flavius B. Freeman, Springfield, Mo., for respondent, LeRoy Haizlip.
Messrs. Philip B. Perlman, Sol. Gen., Washington, D.C., Holmes Baldridge, Asst. Atty. Gen., John R. Benney, Paul A. Sweeney, Herman Marcus, Washington, D.C., for respondent, the United States.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

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

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
238 U.S. 284
Woodward v. De Graffenried
Argued: February 25, 1915. --- Decided: June 14, 1915
Messrs. William R. Lawrence, F. W. Clements, and George S. Ramsey for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Thomas H. Owen, Joseph C. Stone, and Charles A. Cook for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Pitney 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
# Woodward v. Jewell

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
140 U.S. 247
Woodward v. Jewell
Walter B. Hill, for appellants.
Clifford Anderson, for appellees.
BREWER, 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
# Woodwell v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 82
Woodwell v. United States
Argued: April 8, 12, 1909. --- Decided: May 17, 1909
Mr. William H. Robeson for appellant.
Assistant Attorney General John Q. Thompson and Mr. Clark McKercher for appellee.
Mr. Justice White 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
# Woodworth v. Benjamin/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
45 U.S. 712
Woodworth v. Benjamin
The objection taken, that the administrator could not apply for an extension of the patent granted to Woodworth, his intestate, under the eighteenth section of the patent law, has been disposed of in the previous case of Wilson v. Rousseau et al., and need not be further noticed.
Another objection taken to the right of the complainants to maintain the suit is, that Woodworth was not the first and original inventer of the planing-machine, against the using of which the defendant was enjoined.
Without going into the proofs in the case, which are very voluminous, it will be sufficient to state, that after fully considering all the evidence produced bearing upon the question, the court is satisfied that the weight of it is decidedly against the objection, and in favor of the allegation in the bill, that Woodworth was the original inventer of the machine.
It is objected, also, that the specifications accompanying the patent were not sufficiently full and explicit, so as to enable a mechanic of ordinary skill to build a machine. The court is not satisfied, according to the proof in the case, that the objection is well founded, and it cannot be relied on as affording sufficient ground for the dismissal of the bill.
A further objection was taken, that W. W. Woodworth, one of the complainants, was improperly joined with E. V. Bunn, the assignee of the exclusive right in Louisville and ten miles around it. The court is of opinion, that the interest of Woodworth in the assignment, as appears from the record, is sufficient to justify his being made a party jointly with the assignee.
Some other objections were taken to the maintenance of the suit on the argument, which it is not material to notice particularly; they have all been considered, and in the judgment of the court afford no sufficient ground for the dismissal of the bill and the dissolving of the injunction.
We think the court erred, and that the decree dismissing the bill, as to the defendant James Wilson, and dissolving the injunction, should be reversed, and that a perpetual injunction should issue.

## 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
# Works of the late Doctor Benjamin Franklin/To Mr. Dubourg, concerning the Diſſentions between England and America

TO MR. DUBOURG,
CONCERNING THE DISSENSIONS BETWEEN ENGLAND AND AMERICA.
London, October 2, 1770.
I SEE with pleafure that we think pretty much alike on the ſubjects of Engliſh America. We of the colonies have never inſiſted that we ought to be exempt from contributing to the common expences neceſſary to ſupport the proſperity of the empire. We only aſſert, that having parliaments of our own, and not having repreſentatives in that of Great Britain, our parliaments are the only judges of what we can and what we ought to contribute in this caſe; and that the Engliſh parliament has no right to take our money without our conſent. In fact the Britiſh empire is not a ſingle ſtate; it comprehends many; and though the parliament of Great-Britain has arrogated to itſelf the power of taxing the colonies, it has no more right to do ſo, than it has to tax Hanover. We have the ſame king, but not the ſame legiſlatures.
The diſpute between the two countries has already loſt England many millions ſterling, which it has loſt in its commerce, and America has in this reſpect been a proportionable gainer. This commerce conſiſted principally of ſuperfluities; objects of luxury and faſhion, which we can well do without; and the reſolution we have formed of importing no more till our grievances are redreſſed, has enabled many of our infant manufactures to take root; and it will not be eaſy to ​make our people abandon them in future, even ſhould a connection more cordial then ever ſucceed the preſent troubles.—I have, indeed, no doubt that the parliament of England will finally abandon its preſent pretenſions, and leave us to the peaceable enjoyment of our rights and privileges.
B. FRANKLIN.
# World's Fair Mining Company v. Powers

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
224 U.S. 173
World's Fair Mining Company v. Powers
Argued: March 11 and 12, 1912. --- Decided: April 1, 1912
Messrs. Frank H. Hereford and F. E. Curley for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 173-175 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Eugene S. Ives for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice Holmes 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
# Works of the late Doctor Benjamin Franklin/The Way to make Money plenty in every Man's Pocket

THE WAY TO MAKE MONEY PLENTY IN EVERY MAN'S POCKET.
AT this time, when the general complaint is that—"money is ſcarce," it will be an act of kindneſs to inform the moneyleſs how they may reinforce their pockets. I will acquaint them with the true ſecret of money-catching the certain way to fill empty purſes and how to keep them always full. Two ſimple rules, well obſerved, will do the buſineſs.
Firſt, let honeſty and induſtry be thy conſtant companions; and,
Secondly, ſpend one penny leſs than thy clear gains.
Then ſhall thy hide-bound pocket ſoon begin to thrive, and will never again cry with the empty belly-ach: neither will creditors inſult thee, nor want oppreſs, nor hunger bite, nor nakedneſs freeze thee. The whole hemiſphere will ſhine brighter, and pleaſure ſpring up in every corner of thy heart. Now, therefore, embrace theſe rules and be happy. Baniſh the bleak winds of ſorrow from thy mind, and live independent. Then ſhalt thou be a man, and not hide thy face at the approach of the rich, nor ſuffer the pain of feeling little when the ſons of fortune walk at thy right hand: for independency, whether with little or much, is good fortune, and placeth thee on even ground with the proudeſt of the golden fleece. Oh, then, be wiſe, and let induſtry walk with thee in the morning, and attend thee until thou reached the evening hour for reſt. Let honeſty be as the breath of thy ſoul, and ​never forget to have a penny, when all thy expences are enumerated and paid: then ſhalt thou reach the point of happineſs, and independence ſhall be thy ſhield and buckler, thy helmet and crown; then ſhall thy ſoul walk upright, nor ſtoop to the ſilken wretch becauſe he hath riches, nor pocket an abuſe becauſe the hand which offers it wears a ring ſet with diamonds.
# Works of the late Doctor Benjamin Franklin/The Whiſtle, a true Story; written to his Nephew

THE WHISTLE:
A TRUE STORY.
WRITTEN TO HIS NEPHEW.
WHEN I was a child, at ſeven years old, my friends, on a holiday, filled my pocket with coppers. I went directly to a ſhop where they ſold toys for children; and being charmed with the ſound of a whiſtle, that I met by the way in the hands of another boy, I voluntarily offered him all my money for one. I then came home, and went whiſtling all over the houſe, much pleaſed with my whiſtle 9 but diſturbing all the family. My brothers, and ſiſters, and couſins, underſtanding the bargain I had made, told me I had given four times as much for it as it was worth. This put me in mind what good things I might have bought with the reſt of the money; and they laughed at me ſo much for my folly, that I cried with vexation; and the reflection gave me more chagrin than the whiſtle gave me pleaſure.
This however was afterwards of uſe to me, the impreſſion continuing on my mind; ſo that often, when I was tempted to buy ſome unneceſſary thing, I ſaid to myſelf Don't give too much for the whiſtle; and ſo I ſaved my money.
As I grew up, came into the world, and obſerved the actions of men, I thought I met with many, very many, who gave too much for the whiſtle.
When I ſaw any one too ambitious of court favours, ſacrificing his time in attendance on ​levees, his repoſe, his liberty, his virtue, and perhaps his friends, to attain it, I have ſaid to myſelf, This man gives too much for his whiſtle.
When I ſaw another fond of popularity, conſtantly employing himſelf in political buſtles, neglecting his own affairs, and ruining them by that neglect: He pays, indeed ſays I, too much for his whiſtle.
If I knew a miſer, who gave up every kind of comfortable living, all the pleaſure of doing good to others, all the eſteem of his fellow-citizens, and the joys of benevolent friendſhip, for the ſake of accumulating wealth; Poor man, ſays I, you do indeed pay too much for your whiſtle.
When I meet a man of pleaſure, ſacrificing every laudable improvement of the mind, or of his fortune, to mere corporeal ſenſations; Miſtaken man, ſays I, you are providing pain for yourſelf, inſtead of pleaſure: you give too much for your whiſtle.
If I ſee one fond of fine clothes, fine furniture, fine equipages, all above his fortune, for which he contracts debts, and ends his career in priſon; Alas, ſays I, he has paid dear, very dear, for his whiſtle.
When I ſee a beautiful, ſweet-tempered girl married to an ill-natured brute of a huſband: What a pity it is, ſays I, that ſhe has paid ſo much for a whistle!
In ſhort, I conceived that great part of the miſeries of mankind were brought upon them by the falſe eſtimates they had made of the value of things, and by their giving too much for their whiſtles.