OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morehead, John Alfred

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MOREHEAD, JOHN ALFRED, American clergyman and educator; born in Pulaski co., Va., Feb. 4, 1867. Educated at Roanoke College and graduated from Lutheran Theological Seminary, Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, 1892. Studied at Berlin and Leipsic, 1901–1902. (D. D., Roanoke College, 1902.) Ordained to the Lutheran ministry 1892; Burke's Garden pastorate, Va., 1892; First English Lutheran Church, Richmond, Va., 1894–1898; president, and professor of systematic theology Southern Lutheran Theological Seminary, 1898–1908; president of Roanoke College, 1903; president of the United Synod of the South, 1910-1914.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morelia

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MORELIA (mō-rā′lē-ä), a town of Mexico, capital of the State of Michoacan, 125 miles W. N. W. of Mexico City, in a valley surrounded by high mountains; altitude 6,400 feet. It has a fine cathedral, and a magnificent aqueduct, dating from 1788, for the supply of water. It is in one of the chief sugargrowing districts in Mexico and was the birthplace of General Morelos, after whom the town was named. Pop. about 40,000.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morelos

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MORELOS (mō-rā′los), one of the States of Mexico (since 1869), immediately S. of the highest volcanic region of the Anahuac plateau; area, 2,773 square miles; pop. about 185,000. The country is very broken and covered with forests, and is drained by the Mexcala river.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Moreton Bay

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MORETON BAY, an inlet of the set on the E. coast of Queensland, Australia; formed inside the islands of Moreton and Stradbroke, the former 26 miles and the latter 33 miles in length, and both about 5 miles in greatest breadth. The bay is 40 miles long by 17 broad; its S. half is dotted with islands and sandbanks. It receives the six considerable streams, Nerang, Pimpama, Logan, Brisbane, Pine, and Caboolture.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morel

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MOREL, or MORELLE (of the form morel), Morchella esculenta, and edible fungus. It has a pale-brown pileus, deeply pitted all over, with raised anastomosing lines between the depressions. It grows in orchards, woods, and forests. It has an agreeable smell and taste. Also (of the two forms): Solanum nigrum. Called also petty morel, the great morel being Atropa belladonna.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morgan, Daniel

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MORGAN, DANIEL, an American military officer; born in New Jersey, in 1736. He took a prominent part in the expedition under Arnold against Quebec, 1775-1776; was in command of the riflemen at the battle of Saratoga, in 1777; and defeated the British under Tarleton at the Cowpens, S. C., in 1781. He died in Winchester, Va., July 6, 1802.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Morello

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​MORELLO, a fine variety of cherry with fruit that becomes almost black if allowed to hang.
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
220 U.S. 559
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. United States
Argued: March 9, 1911. --- Decided: May 15, 1911
Messrs. Charles J. Greene and Ralph W. Breckenridge for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 559-563 intentionally omitted]
Assistant Attorney General Fowler and Mr. Barton Corneau for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 563-567 intentionally omitted]
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
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Willard

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
220 U.S. 413
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Willard
Argued: March 17, 1911. --- Decided: April 10, 1911
Messrs. Albert J. Hopkins and Chester M. Dawes for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from page 414 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Arthur J. Eddy, Emil C. Wetten, Patrick C. Haley, and Coll McNaughton for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from page 415 intentionally omitted]
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
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Williams

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 492
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Williams
Argued: and submitted April 16, 1909. --- Decided: April 26, 1909
[Syllabus from page 492 intentionally omitted]
[Statement of the Case from pages 493-494 intentionally omitted.]
'And the circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit further certifies that other questions of law which relate to the admission of evidence are presented by the assignment of errors in this case, and are pending for the decision of this court, but that the following questions of law are also presented by the assignment of errors, and their decision is indispensable to a determination of this case in this court; and that, to the end that this court may properly decide the issues of law presented, it desires the instruction of the Supreme Court of the United States upon the following questions of law:
'1. In a contract between an owner of cattle and a railway company for the transportation of the cattle at the regular rate, which contains the further agreement that the owner shall be transported on the cattle train free in consideration that he contracts that the railway company shall not be liable to him for any injury or damage which he sustains while he is being so carried, and that he will load, unload, feed, and care for the cattle during the transportation, is his agreement that the railway company shall not be liable to him for any injury or damage which he sustains while being so carried a valid contract? '2. Where the owner of the cattle is not constrained, required, or requested to make the contract described in the foregoing question in order to have his cattle transported at the regular rate, but freely chooses to make such an agreement in preference to contracting for the transportation of his cattle at the regular rate at the risk of the railway company, and riding himself on a passenger train to the destination of the cattle at the regular rate, is his agreement that the railway company shall not be liable to him for any injury or damage which he sustains while being so carried a valid contract?
'3. Do the facts which were established at the trial, and which are set forth in the statement which precedes these questions, show a valid contract by the owner of the cattle, the plaintiff below, that the railway company should not be liable to him for any injury or damage which he sustained while he was riding in the caboose of the cattle train under the contract specified in the statement?' Dismissed.
Messrs. O. H. Dean, W. D. McLeod, H. C. Timmonds, O. M. Spencer, and Hale Holden for the railway company.
Messrs. John H. Denison, William E. Fowler, John Hipp, Ralph Talbot, D. C. Allen, James M. Sandusky, and S. G. Sandusky for Williams.
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
# Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897), incorporated the takings clause of the 5th amendment into the due process clause of the 14th amendment by requiring states to provide just compensation for seizing private property. This was the first supreme court case that incorporated an amendment of the Bill of Rights. Prior to this case, the Bill of Rights was considered to only apply to the Federal government. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Brewer
United States Supreme Court
166 U.S. 226
Chicago Company v. Chicago
[Syllabus from pages 226-228 intentionally omitted]
John J. Herrick, for plaintiff in error.
John S. Miller, for defendant in error.
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
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company v. Kyle

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
228 U.S. 85
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company v. Kyle
Argued: March 18, 1913. ---
Messrs. Halleck F. Rose, John F. Stout, and James E. Kelby for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. E. J. Clements and S. H. Cowan for defendant in error.
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
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company v. Kyle/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
228 U.S. 85
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company v. Kyle
Argued: March 18, 1913. ---
This case also involves the validity of the statute of Nebraska which was considered in Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Cram, No. 193 [[[228 U.S. 70]], 57 L. ed. --, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 437], and was submitted at the same time with that case.
The cause of action was based on the ground of prolongation in the transportation beyond the statutory schedule of five cars of cattle from Palmer, Nebraska, to South Omaha, in the same state, which were delivered to the railroad September 6, 1905. It was alleged that the time of transportation was for a period of nine hours 'over the time allowed by law in that behalf,' and that by failure to transport the cattle 'within a reasonable time and within the time allowed by law for that purpose,' the plaintiff was damaged in the sum of $450, which was the statutory rate of $10 per hour.
The answer filed by the railroad company to the petition alleged that the shipment was made pursuant to a contract in writing, and that the cattle were transported and delivered as contracted for without any fault or negligence on its part. The answer also denied the allegations of the petition. A replication was filed to the answer.
The case was tried to a jury, which rendered a verdict for Kyle, upon which judgment was entered. It was affirmed by the supreme court of the state for the reasons stated by the court in Cram's Case.
The case was submitted to the jury upon the evidence of the plaintiff, the railroad company offering no testimony. There was no proof that there was actual injury or damage done to the shipper by the alleged delay in transportation. The statute was the sole basis of the claim in the suit. The court instructed the jury that if the time exceeded that provided for by the statute under the conditions expressed by the statute, they should find for the complainant; otherwise, for the defendant. The railroad company requested explicit instructions against the recovery by the plaintiff of any sum.
The contentions are the same as in Cram's Case, and upon the authority of its decision the judgment in this case is affirmed.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Williams/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 492
Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Williams
Argued: and submitted April 16, 1909. --- Decided: April 26, 1909
In the opinion of a majority of the court, this certificate is essentially the same as that disposed of in Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railway Company v. Williams, 205 U.S. 444, 51 L. ed. 875, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 559, and it is therefore dismissed on the authority of that decision.
When this case was here before I felt doubts, but deferred to the judgment of the majority, as I think one should when it does not seem that an important principle is involved or that there is some public advantage to be gained from a statement of the other side. But it seems to me that the present order is a mistake upon an important matter, and I am unwilling that it should seem to be made by unanimous consent. I think that such questions are to be encouraged as a mode of disposing of cases in the least cumbersome and most expeditious way. The former certificate was thought to invite a consideration of mixed questions of law and fact. However that may have been, the present one puts definite questions of pure law, and I think that those questions should be answered. Even if the third should be objected to, the other two are complete in themselves. It is no objection to a question of law that the case turns upon it. That is the best of reasons for propounding it. The only objection is not to deciding the case here, but to putting questions that turn upon conclusions from evidence, or that present a general statement and ask a judgment with regard to unspecified questions of law.
Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Moody concur in this dissent.

## 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
# Christ

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Christ."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, taxonomy, 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.

## See also

* Jesus Christ
# Christ, Whose Glory Fills the Skies

Christ, whose glory fills the skies, Christ, the true, the only light, Sun of Righteousness, arise, Triumph o'er the shades of night; Dayspring from on high, be near; Daystar, in my heart appear.
Dark and cheerless is the morn Unaccompanied by thee; Joyless is the day's return, Till thy mercy's beams I see; Till they inward light impart, Glad my eyes and warm my heart.
Visit then this soul of mine; Pierce the gloom of sin and grief; Fill me, Radiancy divine, Scatter all my unbelief; More and more thyself display, Shining to the perfect day.
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
# Christ, from Whom All Blessings Flow

Christ, from whom all blessings flow, Perfecting the saints below, Hear us, who thy nature share, Who thy mystic body are.
Join us, in one spirit join, Let us still receive of thine; Still for more on thee we call, Thou who fillest all in all.
Move and actuate and guide, Diverse gifts to each divide; Placed according to thy will, Let us all our work fulfill;
Sweetly may we all agree, Touched with loving sympathy, Kindly for each other care; Every member feel its share.
Never from thy service move, Needful to each other prove; Use the grace on each bestowed, Tempered by the art of God.
Many are we now, and one, We who Jesus have put on; There is neither bond nor free, Male nor female, Lord, in thee.
Love, like death, hath all destroyed, Rendered all distinctions void; Names and sects and parties fall; Thou, O Christ, art all in all!
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
# Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes/Chronological Table/8Ann

* ↑ c. 9., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 10., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 11., Ruff
* ↑ c. 12., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 2., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 4., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 6., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 7, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 5., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 13., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 14., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 18., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 12., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 19., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 20., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 21., Ruff
* ↑ cc. 11, 15., private, Ruff.
# Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes/Chronological Table/6 Ann

* ↑ The Statutes of Great Britan Commence here
* ↑ c. 1, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 2, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 3, Ruff.
* ↑ cc. 4, 5., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 6., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 7., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 1., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 8., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 9., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 10., Ruff.
* ↑ cc.6-7., private, Ruff.
* ↑ cc. 11, 12, 22., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 24., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 25., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 26., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 27., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 28., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 29., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 30., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 31., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 32., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 33., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 34., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 35., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 36., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 37., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 13., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 14., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 15., Ruff.
* ↑ c.16., Ruff
* ↑ cc 8, 9., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 17., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 18., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 19., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 20., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 21., Ruff.
* ↑ cc. 14, 15., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 23., Ruff
* ↑ c. 13., private, Ruff
# Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes/Chronological Table/7Ann

* ↑ cc. 1, 4, 5,27., private, Ruff.
* ↑ cc. 12, 6, 41., private, Ruff.
* ↑ c. 7., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 8., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 9., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 10., Ruff.
* ↑ c. 13., private, Ruff.
# Coleman v. Miller

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939) is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which clarified that if the Congress of the United States—when proposing for ratification an amendment to the United States Constitution pursuant to Article V thereof—chooses not to specify a deadline within which the state legislatures (or conventions held in the states) must act upon the proposed amendment, then the amendment remains pending business before the state legislatures (or conventions). The case centered on the Child Labor Amendment, which was proposed for ratification by Congress in 1924. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Concurring Opinion

    Black

## Dissenting Opinion

    Butler

## Separate Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
307 U.S. 433
Coleman v. Miller
Argued: April 17–18, 1939 --- Decided: June 5, 1939
[Syllabus from pages 433–435 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Robert Stone, of Topeka, Kan., and Rolla W. Coleman, of Olathe, Kan., for petitioners.
Mr. Clarence V. Beck, of Topeka, Kan., for respondents.
Mr. Robert H. Jackson, Sol. Gen., for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court.
Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES 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
# Coleman v. Tennessee

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Clifford
United States Supreme Court
97 U.S. 509
Coleman v. Tennessee
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Tennessee.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Henry S. Foote and Mr. Leonidas C. Houk for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. J. B. Heiskell, contra.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD 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
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wisby

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​WISBY, the chief town of the Swedish island of Gotland; is a thriving seaport on the W. coast, and has a fine cathedral (1200). It was once one of the richest of the Hanse towns, with 18 churches, but was taken and destroyed by the Danish King Valdemar III. in 1361, and has never regained its importance. There are great ruins of seven of its former churches; but of the others and of the castle of Wisborg, destroyed by the Danes in 1675, there is little trace left. Pop. about 10,000.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wisdom of Solomon, The

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​WISDOM OF SOLOMON, THE, the title of an apocryphal book, named in Greek Sophia Salomon, or Salomontos, generally placed sixth in order between “the rest of Esther” and Ecclesiasticus.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Winsor, Justin

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
WINSOR, JUSTIN, an American historian; born in Boston, Mass., Jan. 2, 1831. He was superintendent of the Boston Public Library in 1868-1877, and librarian of Harvard University in 1877-1897. He published: “Bibliography of Original Quartos and Folios of Shakespeare” (1875); “Reader's Handbook of the American Revolution” (1880); “Memorial History of Boston” (edited, 1880-1882); “Narrative and Critical History of America” (edited: 8 vols. 1884-1889); “Christopher Columbus” (1891); “From Cartier to Frontenac” (1894); “The Mississippi Basin”; and “The Struggle in America Between England and France” (1895). He was the highest authority on the early history of North America. He died in Cambridge, Mass., Oct. 22, 1897.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wisconsin River

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​WISCONSIN RIVER, the largest river in Wisconsin. It rises in Lake Vieux Desert, in the N. part of the State, and flows S. and W., emptying into the Mississippi 4 miles below Prairie du Chien. It is nearly 600 miles long and is navigable to Portage City. Remarkable rapids and falls, called “dalles,” occur at several places, the river passing through deep gorges between rocky bluffs, some of which are more than 400 feet high.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wisconsin, University of

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​WISCONSIN, UNIVERSITY OF, a coeducational non-sectarian institution in Madison, Wis.; founded in 1848; reported at the close of 1919: Professors and instructors, 682; students, 5,274; president, E. A. Birge.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wirt, William

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
​WIRT, WILLIAM, an American lawyer; born in Bladensburg, Md., Nov. 8, 1772; was admitted to the bar in 1792, and in 1806 settled in Richmond, Va., where he became a prominent lawyer. He distinguished himself at the trial of Aaron Burr in 1807, as one of the counsel for the prosecution. He held many State offices, being clerk of the House of Delegates, Chancellor of the Eastern Shore of Virginia, and member of the House of Delegates. He was appointed United States District Attorney in 1816, and Attorney-General in 1817, holding the latter office till 1829, through three administrations. He was nominated for President in 1832 by the Anti-Masonic party and received the electoral vote of Vermont. He wrote “Letters of the British Spy” (1803); “The Rainbow” and other essays; “Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry” (1817), and various addresses. He died in Washington, D. C., Feb. 18, 1834.
# Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Wilson, James Grant

Edition of 1921; disclaimer.
WILSON, JAMES GRANT, an American author; born in New York City, April 28, 1832; served in the Civil War. Besides numerous addresses, essays, and articles in periodicals, he published: “Biographical Sketches of Illinois Officers” (1862-1863); “Love in Letters, Illustrated in the Correspondence of Eminent Persons” (1867); “Life of General Grant” (1868-1885); “Life of Fitz-Greene Halleck” (1869); “Sketches of Illustrious Soldiers” (1874); “Poets and
Poetry of Scotland” (1876); “Centennial History of the Diocese of New York, 1775-1885” (1886); “Bryant and His Friends” (1886); “Commodore Isaac Hull and the Frigate Constitution” (1889); “Life of General Grant” (1897); “The President of the United States” (1901); etc. He was the editor (with John Fiske) of “Appleton's Cyclopædia of American Biography” (6 vols. 1886-1889), and alone of “Memorial History of the City of New York.” He died in 1914.