OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Gesta Romanorum (1905)/Of Justice

TALE IV.
OF JUSTICE.
During the reign of Cæsar a law was enacted, that if a man maltreated a woman, and overcame her by violence, it should remain with the aggrieved party, whether the person so offending should be put to death, or married to her, without a portion. Now, it fell out that a certain fellow violated two women upon the same night; the one of whom sought to put him to death, and the other to be married to him. The violator was apprehended and brought before the judge, to answer respecting the two women, according to law. The first woman insisting upon ​her right, desired his death; while the second claimed him for her husband. The first woman said, "It cannot be denied that the law ordains that I should obtain my wish." The other replied, "In like manner the law raises its voice for me. But because my demand is of less importance, and more charitable, I doubt not but that sentence will be given in my favour." Both women complained, and both required the enforcement of the law. When either side had been heard, the judge ordered that the second woman should obtain the man for her husband. And so it was done.
APPLICATION.
My beloved, the emperor, who framed the law, is our Lord Jesus Christ. The violator, any sinner, who violates two females, that is, Justice and Mercy, which are both the daughters of God. The violator is brought before the Judge, when the soul separates from the body. The first woman, that is, Justice, alleges against the sinner that by law he is subject to eternal death: but the other, that is, Divine Mercy, alleges that by contrition and confession he may be saved. Therefore, let us study to please God.
# Gesta Romanorum (1905)/Of Mercy

TALE II.
OF MERCY.
The Emperor Titus made a law, that whosoever provided not for his parents should be condemned to death. It happened that there were two brethren, descended from the same father. One of them had a son, who discovered his uncle in the greatest indigence; and immediately, in compliance with the law, but in opposition to the will of his father, administered to his wants. Thereupon the father expelled him from his house. Notwithstanding, he still maintained his poor uncle, and supplied him with every requisite. By and by, the uncle became rich and the father indigent. Now, when the son beheld the altered circumstances of his parent, he liberally supported him also, to the great indignation of his uncle, who drove him from his house and said, "Formerly, when I was poor, thou gavest me support, in opposition to thy father; for which I constituted thee my heir, in the place of a ​son. But an ungrateful son ought not to obtain an inheritance; and rather than such, we should adopt a stranger. Therefore, since thou hast been ungrateful to thy father in maintaining me contrary to his command, thou shalt never possess my inheritance." The son thus answered his uncle: "No one can be punished for executing what the law commands and compels. Now, the law of nature obliges children to assist their parents in necessity, and especially to honour them: therefore, I cannot justly be deprived of the inheritance."
APPLICATION.
My beloved, tho two brothers are the Son of God and the world, which both proceed from one heavenly Father. The first, begotten; the second, created. Between them, from the beginning, discord arose, and continues to this day; so that he who is the friend of the one is an enemy to the other. According to St. James iv.: "Whosoever would become the friend of this world shall be accounted an enemy to God." The only son is every Christian, who is the progeny of Christ because he is descended from Him by faith. Therefore, we should not feed fat the world with pride, avarice, and other vices, if we would be the children of God. And if our desires are contrary, too surely we shall be excluded from the family of Christ, and lose our heavenly inheritance. If we maintain and cherish Christ by works of love and of piety, the world indeed will abhor us—but better is it to be at enmity with the world than forego an inheritance in heaven.
# Gesta Romanorum (1905)/Of Just Judgment

TALE III.
OF JUST JUDGMENT.
A certain emperor decreed, that if any woman were taken in adultery, she should be cast headlong from a very high precipice. It chanced that a woman, convicted of the crime, was immediately conveyed to the place of ​punishment, and thrown down. But she received no injury in the fall. They therefore brought her back to the judgment-seat; and when the judge perceived that she was unharmed, he commanded that she should again be led to the precipice, and the sentence effectually executed. The woman, however, addressing the judge, said, "My Lord, if you command this, you will act contrary to the law, which punishes not twice for the same fault. I have already been cast down as a convicted adultress, but God miraculously preserved me. Therefore, I ought not to be subjected to it again." The judge answered, "Thou hast well said; go in peace:" and thus was the woman saved.
APPLICATION.
My beloved, the emperor is God, who made a law that if any one polluted the soul (which is the spouse of Christ) by the commission of any mortal sin, he should be precipitated from a high mountain—that is, from heaven; as befel our first parent, Adam. But God, by the sufferings of His Son, hath preserved us. When man sins, God does not instantly condemn him, because His mercy is infinite; but "by grace we are saved," and not cast headlong into hell.
# Glen v. Fant/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
134 U.S. 398
Glen v. Fant
No bill of exceptions was taken in this case, nor was there any finding of facts by the supreme court of the District of Columbia, nor any case stated by the parties analogous to a special verdict, and stating the ultimate facts of the case, presenting questions of law only. What is styled here an 'agreed statement of facts' is an agreement as to certain matters, and that the parties might refer to and rely upon any and all grounds of action or defense to be found in two voluminous exhibits, marked 'X' and 'Y,' being the records of two equity causes in other courts, including all the pleadings and evidence, as well as the orders and decrees therein. The effect of some of that evidence, and of the conclusions of fact to be drawn from it, is controverted. It is impossible for us to regard this stipulation as taking the place of a special verdict of a jury, or a special finding of facts by the court, upon which our jurisdiction could properly be invoked to determine the questions of law thereon arising. And while the case is governed by the rule laid down in Campbell v. Boyreau, 21 How. 223, yet, even if the statutory provisions in relation to the trial of causes without the intervention of a jury by the circuit courts of the United States were applicable, the result upon this record would be the same. Raimond v. Terrebonne Parish, 132 U.S. 192, ante, 57; Andes v. Slauson, 130 U.S. 435, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 573; Bond v. Dustin, 112 U.S. 604, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 296; Lyons v. Bank, 19 Blatchf. 279, 8 Fed. Rep. 369. The judgment must be 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
# Glencoe

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Glencoe."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, travel guide, 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.
* "Glencoe" by G. K. Chesterton
* "Glencoe" by Letitia Elizabeth Landon
# Glen Aldyn Plays

THE CHRISTMAS PUDDING.
HOMMY BEG AND THE GUILLYN VEGGEY.
HOLLANTIDE or JEM’S MOTHER.
By CUSHAG.
Reprinted from the Isle of Man Examiner for The Manx Society 1916
In aid of Lezayre Red Cross Funds.
DOUGLAS: S. K. Broadbent & Co. Ltd. Printers.
GLEN ALDYN PLAYS.
THE CHRISTMAS PUDDING.
HOMMY BEG AND THE GUILLYN VEGGEY.
HOLLANTIDE or JEM’S MOTHER.
In aid of Lezayre Red Cross Funds.
DOUGLAS: S. K. Broadbent & Co. Ltd. Printers.
* The Christmas Pudding
* Hommy Beg and the Guillyn Veggey
* Hollantide, or Jem’s Mother
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 1937, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 86 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
# Glen Aldyn Plays/Advertisement

BOOKS PUBLISHED BY THE MANX SOCIETY DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN.
MANNIN, The Journal of the Society. Twice Yearly. By Post, 2s. 3d. per annum.
First Lessons in Manx.” By Edmund Goodwin. 1s.; postage, 2d.
The Direct Method of Teaching Manx. By J. J. Kneen, 1s.; postage, 2d.
Psalmyn Ghavid, a metrical version of the Psalms of David. Paper covers, 6d.; cloth, 1s.; postage, 3d.
Manx Wild Flowers. By Miss S. Morrison and P. G. Ralfe. 2d.; postage, 1d.
Cregeen’s Manx-English Dictionary. 7s. 6d.; postage, 8d.
T. E. Brown Calendar. A quotation for every day. 1s.; postage, 2d.
Manx Proverbs and Sayings. Edited by Miss S. Morrison. 3d.
Manx Fairy Tales. By Miss S. Morrison. 3s.; postage, 5d.
Various Manx Solos and Choruses in connection with Chaglym Kiaullee (the Manx Guild). 6d. each; postage, 1d.
William Cashen’s Folklore. Edited by Miss S. Morrison. 1s.; postage, 1d.
The Charm. A Manx Comedy, by Christopher Shimmin (illustrated). 1s.; postage, 2d.
Illiam Kodhere’s Will. By Christopher Shimmin (illustrated). 1s.; postage 2d.
Luss ny Graih. A Manx Comedy by Christopher Shimmin. 6d.; postage, 11/2d.
A Book of Manx Poetry. Edited by W. Cubbon (illustrated). 1s. 6d.; postage, 3d.
The Carol of Rushen Abbey. Arranged by J. E. Quayle, Mus. Bac. 6d.; postage, 11/2d.
Longing. A tradition air, with Manx and English words. 6d.; postage, 1d.
Manx Reading Lessons. By H. P. Kelly (illustrated). 3d.; postage, 1d.
Large size engraved portrait of T. E. Brown. 1s.; postage, 3d.
Also may be had from
S. K. BROADBENT & CO., Ltd., Victoria Street,
Douglas, Isle of Man.
And other booksellers throughout the Island.
# Glee—The great storm is over—

* "Glee! the great storm is over" in Poems (1890)
* "Glee! the great storm is over!" in The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson (1924)
# Glenara

'This poem of "Glenara," written in the year 1797, at the age of nineteen, was suggested by the following tradition:-"Maclean, of Duart, having determined to get rid of his wife, 'Ellen of Lorn,' had her treacherously conveyed to a rock in the sea, where she was left to perish by the rising tide. He then announced to her kinsmen 'his sudden bereavement,' and exhorted them to join in his grief. In the mean time the lady was accidentally rescued from the certain death that awaited her, and restored to her father. Her husband, little suspecting what had happened, was suffered to go through the solemn mockery of a funeral. At last, when the bier rested at the 'gray stone of her cairn,' on examination of the coffin by her kinsmen, it was found to contain stones, rubbish, &c., whereupon Maclean was instantly sacrificed by the Clan Dougal and thrown into the ready-made grave."'—W. A. Hill, The Poetical Works of Thomas Campbell (1856)
* "Glenara" in The Poetical Works of Thomas Campbell (1837) by Thomas Campbell
* "Glenara" in The Elocutionist (1815-1830)
* "Glenara" in Modern reciter (1829)
* "Glenara" in The Elocutionist (1840-1850)
* "Glenara" in The Reciter (1840s)
# Glen v. Fant

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
134 U.S. 398
Glen v. Fant
[Statement of Case from pages 398-400 intentionally omitted]
Charles Marshall, John Howard, H. W. Garnett, and Conway Robinson, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
M. F. Morris, W. D. Davidge, and Reginald Fendall, for defendant in error.
Mr. Chief Justice FULLER, after stating the facts as above, 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
# Gilbert v. California

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Gilbert v. California."
* 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.
* Gilbert v. California (384 U.S. 985)
* Gilbert v. California (388 U.S. 263)
# Gilbert v. California (388 U.S. 263)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967), was an important decision of the Supreme Court of the United States involving Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights, the taking of handwriting exemplars, in-court identifications and warrantless searches. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Concurrence/Dissents

    Black
    Douglas
    Fortas
United States Supreme Court
388 U.S. 263
Gilbert v. California
Argued: Feb. 15 and 16, 1967. --- Decided: June 12, 1967
Luke McKissack, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Norman H. Sokolow and William E. James, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN 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
# Gilbert Secor v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
75 U.S. 358
Gilbert Secor v. United States
The present claim for $72,742.82 is the difference in value between felt and tar sheathing, and copper sheathing, the latter of which, by their contract, Gilbert & Secor, the claimants, were required to put on the dock, and did put on it.
The claimants do not make any question that by the terms of the agreement signed by them, and by the Secretary of the Navy, they were bound to copper sheath the dock, and that this was included in the work which they agreed to do for the aggregate sum already mentioned. Nor do they contend that there was any mistake in reference to that particular, for they protested against that provision of the contract while they signed it.
But the proposition on which their claim is based seems, when fairly stated, to be this: That the act of Congress under which the secretary acted when he made the contract with them, was itself an acceptance of certain proposals made by plaintiffs, and, therefore, taken in connection with those proposals, constituted a contract binding on the government, and that under that contract the dock was built. That those proposals were framed on the basis of allowing the sum now claimed for copper sheathing if copper was used.
But it seems to us that the statement of the case sufficiently negatives the idea that the act of Congress completed a contract.
When did the claimants become bound to build such a work as that specified in their final contract? That work was much larger than the one for which they made proposals. When did they consent to the enlargement? Their proposals of the year previous had been rejected by the secretary. When did they renew them? The proposition which Congress authorized the secretary to accept was ten per cent. larger than any proposal they had made. Did Congress mean to say, we accept your proposal, and give you ten per cent. more than you have asked? Or did it mean to authorize the secretary to make the best terms he could, not exceeding that limit? Clearly it must have intended the latter.
It also appears from the agreement signed, and therefore accepted by the claimants, that the secretary was induced to exercise the option which the act gave him in regard to the two kinds of work, in favor of that of claimants, in consideration that they would copper-fasten the dock without additional charge. Having thus induced the secretary to decide in their favor, they are not at liberty to repudiate this part of their contract.
If these transactions are to be construed by the rules which govern agreements between private individuals, there does not appear to be any reason to infer a contract prior to the written agreement between the parties; not any reason why that agreement should not govern the rights of the parties.
JUDGMENT 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
# Gilbert Abbott à Beckett

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Gilbert Abbott à Beckett."
* 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.
* "À Beckett, Gilbert Abbott," in A Short Biographical Dictionary of English Literature, by John William Cousin, London: J. M. Dent & Sons (1910)
* "À Beckett, Gilbert Abbott," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "À Beckett, Gilbert Abbott," in Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900, London: Smith, Elder, & Co. (1885–1900) in 63 vols.

## See also

* Author:Gilbert Abbott à Beckett
# Gilbert v. California (384 U.S. 985)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
384 U.S. 985
Gilbert v. California
Case transferred to the appellate docket.

## 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
# Gilbert v. California (384 U.S. 985)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
384 U.S. 985
Gilbert v. California
Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California granted limited to Questions 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the petition which read as follows:
'2. Whether a criminal defendant's constitutional right to due process of law and his guarantee against self-incrimination were violated where the conviction of petitioner Gilbert was based substantially upon the out-of-court declaration of his co-defendant King which recited Gilbert's participation in robbery, kidnapping and murder and King's in court confession which the California Court has ruled as a matter of state law was impelled by the wrongful admission of King's hearsay statements?
'3. Whether a criminal defendant's constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure was violated where a conviction was had upon a capital offense and sentence of death was rendered upon eyewitness identification that was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by such witnesses of four protographs that were seized by the F.B.I. from petitioner's locked private apartment without either an arrest or search warrant at a time when an arrest had not been made and could not be made, all contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'4. Whether a criminal defendant's constitutional right to counsel was violated where he was convicted of a capital offense and sentenced to death upon eyewitness testimony that was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by such witnesses of unlawfully sized photographs prior to their attendance at a police line-up where petitioner was compelled to appear, without notice, and his attorney was not given opportunity to be present, all contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'5. Whether a criminal defendant's constitutional right to the assistance of counsel was violated where following his arrest by the Federal Bureau of Investigation he demanded the protections afforded by presence of counsel and, that same evening, an F.B.I. agent took handwriting exemplars from him that were subsequently used against him at trial of a capital offense, all contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?'

## 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
# Frederickson v. State of Louisiana

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
64 U.S. 445
Frederickson v. State of Louisiana
THIS case was brought up from the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana, by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the judiciary act.
It involved the construction of an article of a treaty between the United States and the Kingdom of Wurtemberg, concluded on the 10th of April, 1844, (8 Stat. at L., page 588.) The article is quoted in the syllabus, and need not be repeated. It was admitted upon the record that Fink was a naturalized citizen of the United States at the time of his death, and residing in the city of New Orleans; also, that the legatees reside in the Kingdom of Wurtemberg, and are subjects of the King of Wurtemberg.
The Supreme Court of Louisiana decided in favor of the validity of the tax, and the legatees brought the case up to this court.
It was argued by Mr Taylor for the appellants, and by Mr. Benjamin for the appellee.
Mr. Justice CAMPBELL 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
# Guarini untitled verse

Quotation from Hygeiana, a non-medical analysis of the complaints incidental to females, in which are offered some important admonitions on the peculiar debilities attending their circumstances, sympathies and formation, illustrated by cases, intended for the use of females only, and addressed to the youth and maturity of that sex by Goss and Company London, Sherwood and Co. 1834²²
| Original Italian | English Translation |
| “La misera tacendo Per soverchio desio tutta si strugge; Così perde belta, se'l foco dura, E perdendo stagion, perde ventura” | In silent grief absorb'd, the wretched maid,  By passions too refined, too ardent, lost, Lets time unheeded pass, her beauties fade,  And with the present hour her future hopes are lost. |