OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Omniana/Volume 2/Biography

227. Biography.
Mr. Daniel Lambert and the Irish Giant both died in fear of the surgeons. Great men of every description are in ​equal danger from their biographers,.. a race of Resurrection-men against whom neither laws nor parent coffins afford any protection. No sooner is the lion dead than these hungry flesh-flies swarm about him, verifying a part only of Sampson's riddle,.. they find meat, but they produce no sweetness. First come the news-writers, then the magazines, with what Sir Richard Phillips calls "a good death for the month." The sharking booksellers, ever on the watch to tempt and delude the curiosity of the lower public, then set their Ghouls at Work;..and lastly comes the over zealous admirer, like the Roman Catholics, who rob the body of their saint of his teeth and his nails,.. to collect, enshrine, and hold out to public view all that ought to have been laid with him in the grave.
# Omniana/Volume 2/Blood Showers

237. Blood Showers.
Paracelsus is less fortunate in explaining blood-showers than sky-stones. He is; however, equally bold.
​"Fit enim quandoque ut pluvia sanguinalis, seu sanguini similis decidat, aspectu mira. Hujus rei causa est, quod stellarum excrementa pluviis interdum permisceantur, et cum ipsis una decidant. Guttæ illæ, stellares ubi vel super lapides aut terram cadunt, colore rubro ea tingunt, et tamen per se claræ, ut aqua, sunt. In permixtione tamen super terra facta colorem adsciscunt.
"Sæpe etiam ex Iridibus proveniant ita ut resolvantur in aquam. Quæ cum in sese colores omnes habeant, illi cum pluviâ simul in terram cadunt. Postea super eodem fundo similiter quoque coloratæ pluviæ visuntur, ubi scilicet Irides in pluviis stant, quæ magnæ et validæ sunt. Dum incipiunt resolvi, una cum pluvia discedunt. Si quis in illis locis sub Iride, tempore resolutionis ejus, linteis candidis tectus stet, colores illi expressè in linteis notantur et deprehenduntur, modo pluvia simul non ubertim coincidat et colores abluat. Quanquam non Irides om​nes in aquam resolvantur. Sunt enim quædam aereæ. Magnæ tamen, pluviosæ et salis plenæ, naturâ aqueâ constant. Unde etiam resolvuntur."
De Meteoris, T. 2, P. 319.
Peiresc thought be had detected the cause of blood-showers in the matter ejected by certain insects when they pass from the chrysalis to the winged state. Any person who has kept silk-worms will recollect the appearance; it is rather of an orange than a blood colour, but if many insects should take wing about the same time, in one place, (as was the case when Peiresc observed the fact,) the large drops falling upon any substance which would retain them, would easily be mistaken for blood by the ignorant. But we have lately heard of red snow, and this seems to show that the true solution yet remains to be discovered.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 9

9. When he wrote his treatises against Jovinian, and some one had raised objections to them, he was informed of these objections by Domnio, that old man whose memory we all revere; and in his answer to him he said that it was impossible that a man like him should be in the wrong, since his knowledge extended to everything that could be known: and he proceeded to enumerate the various kinds of syllogisms, and the whole art of learning and of writing (of course supposing that the man who found fault with him knew nothing about such things). He then goes on thus:
“It was foolish, it appears, in me to think that I could not know all these things without the philosophers, and to look upon the end of the stylus which strikes out and corrects as better than the end with which we write. It was useless for me it seems, to have translated the Commentaries of Alexander, and for my learned master to have brought me into the knowledge of Logic through the ‘Introduction’ of Porphyry; and, putting aside humanistic teachers, there was no reason why I should have had Gregory Nazianzen and Didymus as my teachers in the Scriptures.”
This, you observe, is the man who said to Christ, I have denied thee if ever I am found to possess or to read the works of the heathen. He might, one would think, at all events have left out Porphyry, who was Christ’s special enemy, who endeavoured as far as in him lay to completely subvert the Christian religion, but whom he now glories in having had as his instructor in his Introduction to Logic. He cannot put in the plea that he had learned these things at a former time: for, before his conversion, he and I equally were wholly ignorant of the Greek language and literature. All these things came after his oath, after that solemn engagement had been made. It is of no use for us to argue in such a case. It will at once be said to us: Man, you are wrong, God is not mocked, and no syllogisms spun out of the books of Alexander will avail with him. I think, my brother, it was an ill-omened event that you submitted to the Introduction of Porphyry. Into what has that faithless man introduced you? If it is into the place where he is now, that is the place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth; for there dwell the apostate and the enemies of God; and perhaps the perjurers will go there too.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ep. 1.
* ↑ Ep. l. 1.
* ↑ Verti. Possibly used like Versare for ‘turning over the leaves,’ ‘making constant use of.’
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Epitome of Argument

Book II.
1. Jerome says that the defenders of Origen are united in a federation of perjury.
2. Jerome’s commentaries on Ephesians follow Origen’s interpretation of the texts about a secret federation to whom higher truths are to be told.
3. But I follow Christ in condemning all falsehood.
4. Jerome has not only allowed perjury but has practised it.
5. His treatise on Virginity (Ep. xxii to Eustochium) defames all orders of Christians.
6. In his anti-Ciceronian dream he promised never to read or possess heathen books.
7. Yet his works are filled with quotations from them.
8. In his “Best mode of Translation” he relies on the opinions of Cicero and Horace.
9. He confesses his obligations to Porphyry.
8 (2). Jerome at Bethlehem had heathen books copied and taught them to boys.
9 (2). He condemns as heathenish unobjectionable views which he himself holds.
10 (2). He spoke of Paula impiously as the mother-in-law of God.
11. Such impiety is unpardonable.
12. Jerome’s boast of his teachers, Didymus and the Jew Baranina.
13. His extravagant praises of Origen.
14. Preface to Origen on Canticles.
15. Preface to Commentary on Micah.
16. Book of Hebrew Names.
17. A story of Origen.
18. Pamphilus the Martyr and his Library.
19. Jerome praises Origen but condemns others for doing the same.
20. Jerome praises the dogmatic as well as the expository works of Origen.
21. Contrast of Jerome’s earlier and later attitude towards Origen.
22. The Book of Hebrew Questions.
23. Jerome’s attack upon Ambrose.
24. Preface to Didymus on the Holy Spirit.
25. Jerome attacks one Christian writer after another.
26. His treatment of Melania.
27. I never followed Jerome’s errors, for which he should do penance.
27 a. But I followed his method of translation.
28. Jerome in condemning me condemns himself.
29. He says I shew Origen to be heretical, yet condemns me.
30. His pretence that the Apology for Origen is not by Pamphilus needs no answer.
31. Others did not translate the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν because they did not know Greek.
32. Jerome’s translation of the Scriptures impugned.
33. Authority of the LXX.
34. Has the Church had spurious Scriptures?
35. Danger of altering the Versions of Scripture.
36. Origen’s Hexapla—Its object.
37. St. Paul’s method of dealing with erring brethren.
38. How Jerome should have replied to Pammachius.
39. The Books against Jovinian.
40. My translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν was meant to aid in a good cause.
41, 42, 43. Recapitulation of the Apology.
44. An appeal to Pammachius.
45, 46. Why my translations of Origen had created offence, but Jerome’s not.
47. A Synod, if called on to condemn Origen, must condemn Jerome also.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Commentary on the Apostles' Creed
## Contents

* Preface
* Section 1
* Section 2
* Section 3
* Section 4
* Section 5
* Section 6
* Section 7
* Section 8
* Section 9
* Section 10
* Section 11
* Section 12
* Section 13
* Section 14
* Section 15
* Section 16
* Section 17
* Section 18
* Section 19
* Section 20
* Section 21
* Section 22
* Section 23
* Section 24
* Section 25
* Section 26
* Sectino 27
* Section 28
* Section 29
* Section 30
* Section 31
* Section 32
* Section 33
* Section 34
* Section 35
* Section 36
* Section 37
* Section 38
* Section 39
* Section 40
* Section 41
* Section 42
* Section 43
* Section 44
* Section 45
* Section 46
* Section 47
* Section 48
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 5

5. When he was living at Rome he wrote a treatise on the preservation of virginity, which all the pagans and enemies of God, all apostates and persecutors, and whoever else hate the Christian name, vied with one another in copying out, because of the infamous charges and foul reproaches which it contained against all orders and degrees among us, against all who profess and call themselves Christians, in a word, against the universal church; and also because this man declared that the crimes imputed to us by the Gentiles, which were before supposed to be false were really true, and indeed that much worse things were done by our people than those laid to their charge. First, he defames the virgins themselves of whose virtue he professed to be writing, speaking of them in these words:
“Some of them change their dress and wear the costume of men, and are ashamed of the sex in which they were born; they cut their hair short, and raise their heads with the shameless stare of eunuchs. There are some who put on Cilician jackets, and with hoods made up into shape, make themselves like horned owls and night birds, as if they were becoming babies again.”
There are a thousand such calumnies, and worse than these, in the book. He does not even spare widows, for he says of them, “They care for nothing but the belly and what is next it;” and he adds many other obscene remarks of this kind. As to the whole race of Solitaries, it would take too long to give the passages written by him in which he attacks them with the foulest abuse. It would be a shame even to recount the indecent attacks which he makes upon the Presbyters and the deacons. I will, however, give the beginning of this violent invective, by which you may easily imagine what a point he reaches in its later stages.
“There are some,” he says, “of my own order, who only seek the office of Presbyter or deacon so that they may have more license to visit women. They care for nothing but to be well dressed, to be well scented, to prevent their feet from being loose and bulging. Their curly hair bears the mark of the crisping iron; their fingers sparkle with rings; and they walk on tiptoe, for fear a fleck of mud from the road should touch their feet. When you see them, you would take them for bridegrooms rather than clerics.”
He then goes on to hurl his reproaches against our priests and ministers, specifying their faults, or rather their crimes; and to represent the access allowed them to married ladies not only in a disgraceful light, but so as to seem positively execrable: and after having cut to pieces with his satirical defamation the whole race of Christians, he does not even spare himself, as you shall presently hear.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See letter xxii. to Eustochium. In it Jerome pointed out the worldliness of professing Christians, and the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of many of the clergy and monks.
* ↑ Letter xxii. c. 27 (end).
* ↑ Of goats’ hair, used by soldiers and sailors.
* ↑ Letter xxii. c. 29 (middle).
* ↑ Id. c. 28.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 6

6. For I will now return, after a sort of digression, to the point I had proposed, and for the sake of which it was necessary to mention this treatise. I will shew that perjury is looked upon by him as lawful, to such a point that he does not care for its being detected in his writings. In this same treatise he admonishes the reader that it is wrong to study secular literature, and says, “What has Horace to do with the Psaltery, or Virgil with the Gospels, or Cicero with St. Paul? Will not your brother be offended if he sees you sitting at meat in that idol’s temple?” And then, after more of the same kind, in which he declares that a Christian must have nothing to do with the study of secular literature, he gives an account of a revelation divinely made to him and filled with fearful threatenings upon the subject. He reports that, after he had renounced the world, and had turned to God, he nevertheless was held in a tight grip by his love of secular books, and found it hard to put away his longing for them.
Suddenly I was caught up in the spirit and dragged before the judgment seat of the Judge; and here the light was so bright, and those who stood around were so radiant, that I cast myself upon the ground and did not dare to look up. Asked who and what I was I replied ‘I am a Christian.’ But He who presided said: ‘Thou liest; thou art a follower of Cicero and not of Christ. For where thy treasure is there will thy heart be also.’ Instantly I became dumb, and amid the strokes of the lash—for He had ordered me to be scourged—I was tortured more severely still by the fire of conscience, considering with myself that verse ‘In the grave, who shall give thee thanks?’ Yet for all that I began to cry and to bewail myself saying: ‘Have mercy upon me, O Lord; have mercy upon me.’ Amid the sound of the scourges this cry still made itself heard. At last the bystanders, falling down before the knees of Him who presided, prayed that He would have pity on my youth, and that He would give me space to repent of my error. He might still, they urged, inflict torture upon me, should I ever again read the works of the Gentiles. Under the stress of that awful moment I should have been ready to make even still larger promises than these. Accordingly I made oath and called upon His name, saying ‘Lord, if ever again I possess worldly books, or if ever again I read such, I have denied thee.’ On taking this oath, I was dismissed, and returned to the upper world.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Id. 29 (end).
* ↑ Id. 30.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 7

7. You observe how new and terrible a form of oath this is which he describes. The Lord Jesus Christ sits on the tribunal as judge, the angels are assessors, and plead for him; and there, in the intervals of scourgings and tortures, he swears that he will never again have by him the works of heathen authors nor read them. Now look back over the work we are dealing with, and tell me whether there is a single page of it in which he does not again declare himself a Ciceronian, or in which he does not speak of ‘our Tully,’ ‘our Flaccus,’ ‘our Maro.’ As to Chrysippus and Aristides, Empedocles and all the rest of the Greek writers, he scatters their names around him like a vapour or halo, so as to impress his readers with a sense of his learning and literary attainments. Amongst the rest, he boasts of having read the books of Pythagoras. Many learned men, indeed, declare these books to be non-extant: but he, in order that he may illustrate every part of his vow about heathen authors, declares that he has read even those which do not exist in writing. In almost all his works he sets out many more and longer quotations from these whom he calls ‘his own’ than from the Prophets and Apostles who are ours. Even in the works which he addresses to girls and weak women, who desire, as is right, only to be edified by teaching out of our Scriptures, he weaves in illustrations from ‘his own’ Flaccus and Tullius and Maro.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Cicero, Horace and Virgil.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 50

46. I suppose it is not to be wondered at that I am always blamed for the points in which I have praised him. It is quite right, no doubt. But to come to the matter itself. I said that when grounds of offence appeared in the Greek he had cleared them away in his Latin translation; and not wrongly; but he had done this just in the same sense as I have done it. For instance, in the Homilies on Isaiah, he explains the two Seraphim as meaning the Son and the Holy Ghost, and he adds this of his own: “Let no one think that there is a difference of nature in the Trinity when the offices of the Persons are distinguished”; and by this he thinks that he has been able to remedy the grounds of offence. I in a similar way occasionally removed, altered or added a few words, in the attempt to draw the meaning of the writer into better accordance with the straight path of the faith. What did I do in this which was different or contrary to our friend’s system? what which was not identical with it? But the difference lies in this, that I was judging of his writings without ill-will or detraction, and therefore saw in them not what might lend itself to depreciation, but what the translator aimed at; whereas he is seeking for occasions for calumniating others, and therefore finds fault with those things in my writings which he himself has formerly written. And indeed he is right in blaming me, since I have pronounced what he has said to be right, whereas in his judgment it is reprehensible. This holds in reference to the doctrine he has expressed about the Trinity; namely, that the two Seraphim are the Son and the Holy Ghost, from which especially the charge of blasphemy is drawn, that is, if he is to be judged according to the system which he has adopted in dealing with me. But according to the system which I have adopted in judging of his writings, apart from the matter of calumny, he is not to be held guilty because of what he has added on his own account to explain the author’s meaning.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Apology of Rufinus/Book II/Chapter 51

47. As regards the resurrection of the flesh, I think that my translation contains the same doctrines which are preached in the churches. As to the other points which relate to the various orders of created beings, I have already said that they have nothing to do with our faith in the Deity. But if he appeals to these for the sake of calumniating others, though they have hitherto presented no ground of offence, I do not deny his right to do so, if he thinks well to revoke my judgment by which he might have been absolved, and to enforce his own, by which he ought to be condemned. It is not my judgment on him which is blameable, but his own, which takes others to task for doing what he approves in himself. But this is a new method of judgment according to which I am defending my own accuser, and he considers that he has at last gained the victory over me when he has brought himself in guilty. But suppose that a Synod of Bishops should accept the sentences you have pronounced, and should demand that all the books which contain the impugned doctrines, together with their authors, should be condemned; then these books must be condemned first as they stand in the Greek; and then what is condemned in Greek must undoubtedly be condemned in the Latin. Then will come the turn of your own books; they will be found to contain the same things, even according to your own judgment. And as it has been of no advantage to Origen that you have praised him, so it will be of no profit to you that I have pleaded in your behalf. I shall then be bound to follow the judgment of the Catholic Church whether it is given against the books of Origen or against yours.
# On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures/Chapter 5

(45.) This is one of the most common and most useful of the employments of machinery. The half minute which we daily devote to the winding-up of our watches is an exertion of labour almost insensible; yet, by the aid of a few wheels, its effect is spread over the whole twenty-four hours. In our clocks, this extension of the time of action of the original force impressed is carried still further; the better kind usually require winding up once in eight days, and some are occasionally made to continue in action during a month, or even a year. Another familiar illustration may be noticed in our domestic furniture: the common jack by which our meat is roasted, is a contrivance to enable the cook in a few minutes to exert a force which the machine retails out during the succeeding hour in turning the loaded spit; thus enabling her to bestow her undivided attention on the other important duties of her vocation. A great number of automatons and mechanical toys moved by springs, may be classed under this division.
(46.) A small moving power, in the shape of a jack or a spring with a train of wheels, is often of great convenience to the experimental philosopher, and has been used with advantage in magnetic and electric ​experiments where the rotation of a disk of metal or other body is necessary, thus allowing to the inquirer the unimpeded use of both his hands. A vane connected by a train of wheels, and set in motion by a heavy weight, has also, on some occasions, been employed in chemical processes, to keep a solution in a state of agitation. Another object to which a similar apparatus may be applied, is the polishing of small specimens of minerals for optical experiments.
Layout 2
# Old Dominion Steamship Company v. Gilmore

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
207 U.S. 398
Old Dominion Steamship Company v. Gilmore
Argued: December 13, 1907. --- Decided: December 23, 1907
Messrs. Harrington Putnam, Henry E. Mattison, and Wing, Putnam, & Burlingham for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 399-401 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. J. Parker Kirlin, George Whitefield Betts, Jr., John M. Woolsey, Howard M. Long, and Hunt, Hill, & Betts for respondents.
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
# Old Fashioned Roses

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
# Old Dominion Land Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
269 U.S. 55
Old Dominion Land Company v. United States
Argued: Oct. 16, 1925. --- Decided: Nov 16, 1925
Messrs. J. Winston Read, of Newport News, Va., Thomas H. Willcox, of Norfolk, Va., and R. G. Bickford, of Newport News, Va., for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 56-61 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Blackburn Esterline, of Chicago, Ill., and the Attorney General, for the United States.
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
# Old Father Longlegs

Nursery rhyme. Some sources list it as a variant or additional verse of "Goosey Goosey Gander". The Roud Folk Song Index lists it under number 13711 alongside "Willie Winkie".