OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Vinton, Samuel Finley

Edition of 1900.
VINTON, Samuel Finley, congressman, b. in South Hadley, Mass., 25 Sept., 1792; d. in Washington, D.C., 11 May, 1862. He was graduated at Williams in 1814, studied law, was admitted to the bar in 1816, and began to practise in Gallipolis, Ohio. He was chosen to congress as a Whig, serving from 1 Dec., 1823, till 3 March, 1837, was a presidential elector on the Harrison ticket, and served again in congress in 1843-'51. His last public service was in 1862, when he was appointed by President Lincoln to appraise the slaves that had been emancipated in the District of Columbia by act of congress. He published numerous congressional and other speeches, including “Argument for Defendants in the Case of Virginia vs. Garner and Others for an Alleged Abduction of Slaves” (1865). His daughter, Madeline, married Admiral John A. Dahlgren.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Vogué, Jean Pierre de

This is a fictitious person. There are spelling errors in the title of the alleged literary works, while Espirito Santo became a province of Brazil in 1815, and was known as the Captaincy of Espirito Santo.
​VOGUÉ, Jean Pierre de, Flemish adventurer, b. in Malines in 1570; d. in Brazil in 1630. He was a captain in the Spanish army when, hearing the fabulous description of the country of the Esmeraldas, he went to Espiritu Santo, in Brazil, and succeeded to the command of the colony that had been founded there. The establishment soon dissolved, as the adventurers were only anxious for riches; and Vogué, having announced that he knew the location of the Mountain of Wealth, was soon at the head of a host, and led an expedition to the interior of the Mamalucos country, wandering for several years through central and south Brazil, and suffering many misfortunes. His confidence in ultimate success was never shaken, but he was abandoned by his followers, and fell at last into the hands of the Charcas Indians. It is supposed that he died during his captivity, although the “Colleccão de alguns manuscriptos curiosos” credits to him the work “Jornada por el descobrimento de las Serras Esmeraldas” (Seville, 1690).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Vollmering, Joseph

Edition of 1900.
​VOLLMERING, Joseph, artist, b. in Anholt, Westphalia, 27 Aug., 1810; d. in New York city, 24 Sept., 1887. He was a pupil of the academy in Amsterdam in 1826-'30, after which he travelled for several years in Germany. During 1835-'44 he studied with Barend Cornelis Koekkoek, and in 1847 he removed to the United States. He opened a studio in New York and was elected an associate member of the National academy in 1853. Among his works are “Indian Falls, near Cold Spring, N. Y.” (1848); “View on the Hudson”; “Holy Shrine at Sunset” (1852); “Study of Trees” (1865); “Sunset Landscape and Adirondack Mountains” (1869); “The Hudson from Garrison's”; and “New York from Weehawken Heights” (1872).
# Aristophanes (Collins)

* related portals: Ancient Greek drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, quotes, Wikidata item.
Volume XIV of the "Ancient Classics for English Readers" series, the books of which series are useful as a preliminary acquaintance to readers that wish to read the ancient texts for the first time and also a nice interpretation of them for readers that are already acquainted with them. In this volume, the plays of Aristophanes are translated into an edited and abbreviated form, with explanatory notes and interpretive background placed among the text.
ARISTOPHANES
BY
REV. W. LUCAS COLLINS, M.A.
AUTHOR OF 'ETONIANA,' 'THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS,' ETC.
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS
EDINBURGH AND LONDON
MDCCCLXXII
CONTENTS.
| | | | PAGE |
| CHAP. | I. | INTRODUCTION, | 1 |
| „ | II. | THE KNIGHTS, | 14 |
| „ | III. | COMEDIES OF THE WAR: THE ACHARNIANS.—THE PEACE.—LYSISTRATA, | 38 |
| „ | IV. | THE CLOUDS, | 75 |
| „ | V. | THE WASPS, | 101 |
| „ | VI. | THE BIRDS, | 112 |
| „ | VII. | THE FROGS, | 125 |
| „ | VIII. | THE WOMEN'S FESTIVAL.—THE ECCLESIAZUSÆ, | 139 |
| „ | IX. | PLUTUS, | 154 |
NOTE.
In 'The Knights,' 'The Acharnians,' 'The Birds,' and 'The Frogs,' most of the translated extracts are taken, by permission, from the admirable version of those comedies by the late Mr Hookham Frere, and are marked (F.) For all translations not so marked the present writer is responsible.
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
# Bartenwerfer v. Buckley/Opinion of Justice Sotomayor

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 21–908
KATE MARIE BARTENWERFER, PETITIONER v. KIERAN BUCKLEY ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT [February 22, 2023]
Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Jackson joins, concurring.
The Court correctly holds that 11 U. S. C. §523(a)(2)(A) bars debtors from discharging a debt obtained by fraud of the debtor’s agent or partner. Congress incorporated into the statute the common-law principles of fraud, Husky Int’l Electronics, Inc. v. Ritz, 578 U. S. 356, 360 (2016) (citing Field v. Mans, 516 U. S. 59, 69 (1995)), which include agency and partnership principles, ante, at 5–6. This Court long ago confirmed that reading when it held that fraudulent debts obtained by partners are not dischargeable, Strang v. Bradner, 114 U. S. 555, 559–561 (1885), and Congress “embraced” that reading when it amended the statute in 1898, ante, at 10.
The Bankruptcy Court found that petitioner and her husband had an agency relationship and obtained the debt at issue after they formed a partnership. Because petitioner does not dispute that she and her husband acted as partners, the debt is not dischargeable under the statute.
The Court here does not confront a situation involving fraud by a person bearing no agency or partnership relationship to the debtor. Instead, “[t]he relevant legal context” concerns fraud only by “agents” and “partners within the scope of the partnership.” Ante, at 5–6. With that understanding, I join the Court’s opinion.
# Bartemeyer v. Iowa (81 U.S. 26)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Swayne
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 26
Bartemeyer v. Iowa
This case is submitted to us on printed argument. In this class of cases the court has been in the habit of examining the record to see if it has jurisdiction whether the question is raised by counsel or not; and the case before us we find ourselves compelled to dismiss, because there is no proper allowance of the writ of error.
Writs of error to the Circuit Court, under the 22d section of the Judiciary Act, issue as a matter of course, and can be obtained from the clerk of the Circuit Court, and, when filed in his office by the party, are duly served. But writs of error to the State courts can only issue when one of the questions mentioned in the 25th section of that act was decided by the court to which the writ is directed, and in order that there may be some security that such a question was decided in the case, the statute requires that the citation must be signed by the chief justice, or judge, or chancellor of the court rendering or passing the judgment or decree complained of, or by a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. It has been the settled doctrine of this court that a writ of error to a State court must be allowed by one of the judges above mentioned, or it will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and the case before us raises the question whether the writ has been allowed by a judge authorized to do so.
The Supreme Court of Iowa, which rendered the judgment complained of, is composed of a chief justice and three associate justices, and this writ is allowed by one of the associate justices.
We are of opinion that the act of Congress requires that, when there is a court so composed, the writ can only be allowed by the chief justice of that court, or by a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. In case of a writ to a court composed of a single judge or chancellor, the writ may be allowed by that judge or chancellor, or by a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
The result of this construction of the statute is that the associate justice of the Supreme Court of Iowa who allowed the present writ had no authority to do so, and it is accordingly
DISMISSED.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE, with whom concurred the CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice BRADLEY, 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
# Bartemeyer v. Iowa (81 U.S. 26)/Dissent Swayne

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Swayne
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 26
Bartemeyer v. Iowa
Mr. Justice SWAYNE, with whom concurred the CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice BRADLEY, dissenting.
I dissent from the opinion just read. The objection was not taken by the counsel for the defendant in error. The writ of error was allowed by an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the State-the court by which the alleged error was committed. This, I think, was sufficient. In my judgment the construction given to the provision in question, of the statute, is unwarrantably narrow.

## 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
# Bartholmew Fayre

This work is printed as originally published. For respelled version (which is otherwise intact), see Bartholomew Fair.
| “ | Si foret in terris, rideret Democritus: nam spectaret populum ludis attentius ipsis, ut sibi præbentem, mimo spectacula plura. Scriptores autem narrare putaret assello fabellam surdo. | ” |
| —Hor. lib. 2. Epist. I. |||
* The Prologue to the Kings Maiesty.
* The Persons of the Play.
* The Induction.
* Act. I.
** Scene. I.
** Scene. II.
** Scene. III.
** Scene. IIII.
** Scene. V.
** Scene. VI.
* Act. II.
** Scene. I.
** Scene. II.
** Scene. III.
** Scene. IIII.
** Scene. V.
** Scene. VI.
* Act. III.
** Scene. I.
** Scene. II.
** Scene. III.
** Scene. IIII.
** Scene. V.
** Scene. VI.
* Act. IIII.
** Scene. I.
** Scene. II.
** Scene. III.
** Scene. IIII.
** Scene. V.
** Scene. VI.
* Act. V.
** Scene. I.
** Scene. II.
** Scene. III.
** Scene. IIII.
** Scene. V.
** Scene. VI.
* The Epilogue.
# Barth v. Clise

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
79 U.S. 400
Barth v. Clise
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Wisconsin.
Mr. G. W. Lakin, for the plaintiff in error; Mr. M. H. Carpenter and M. M. Cothren, contra.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE stated the case and 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
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Methodius/Fragments/From the Works of Methodius Against Porphyry

From the Works of Methodius Against Porphyry.
I.
This, in truth, must be called most excellent and praiseworthy, which God Himself considers excellent, even if it be despised and scoffed at by all. For things are not what men think them to be.
II.
Then repentance effaces every sin, when there is no delay after the fall of the soul, and the disease is not suffered to go on through a long interval. For then evil will not have power to leave its mark in us, when it is drawn up at the moment of its being set down like a plant newly planted.
III.
In truth, our evil comes out of our want of resemblance to God, and our ignorance of Him; and, on the other hand, our great good consists in our resemblance to Him. And, therefore, our conversion and faith in the Being who is incorruptible and divine, seems to be truly our proper good, and ignorance and disregard of Him our evil; if, at least, those things which are produced in us and of us, being the evil effects of sin, are to be considered ours.

## Footnotes

* ↑ From the Parallels of St. John Damascene, Opera, tom. ii. p. 778, ed. Lequien.
* ↑ Ibid., p. 784, B.
* ↑ Ibid., p. 785, E.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Methodius/Fragments

Fragments.

## Contents

* On the History of Jonah
* From the Work on Things Created
* From the Works of Methodius Against Porphyry
* From His Discourse Concerning Martyrs
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Methodius/Fragments/From His Discourse Concerning Martyrs

From His Discourse Concerning Martyrs.
For martyrdom is so admirable and desirable, that the Lord, the Son of God Himself, honouring it, testified, “He thought it not robbery to be equal with God,” that He might honour man to whom He descended with this gift.

## Footnotes

* ↑ From Theodoretus, Dial., 1, ᾽Ατρεπτ. Opp., ed. Sirmond, tom. iv. p. 37.
* ↑ Phil. ii. 5.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Methodius/Banquet of the Ten Virgins/Tusiane/Part 2

Chapter II.—Figure, Image, Truth: Law, Grace, Glory; Man Created Immortal: Death Brought in by Destructive Sin.
And let these things be said for the sake of example, showing that the Jews have wonderfully fallen from the hope of future good, because they consider things present to be only signs of things already accomplished; whilst they do not perceive that the figures represent images, and images are the representatives of truth. For the law is indeed the figure and the shadow of an image, that is, of the Gospel; but the image, namely, the Gospel, is the representative of truth itself. For the men of olden time and the law foretold to us the characteristics of the Church, and the Church represents those of the new dispensation which is to come. Whence we, having received Christ, saying, “I am the truth,” know that shadows and figures have ceased; and we hasten on to the truth, proclaiming its glorious images. For now we know “in part,” and as it were “through a glass,” since that which is perfect has not yet come to us; namely, the kingdom of heaven and the resurrection, when “that which is in part shall be done away.” For then will all our tabernacles be firmly set up, when again the body shall rise, with bones again joined and compacted with flesh. Then shall we celebrate truly to the Lord a glad festal-day, when we shall receive eternal tabernacles, no more to perish or be dissolved into the dust of the tomb. Now, our tabernacle was at first fixed in an immoveable state, but was moved by transgression and bent to the earth, God putting an end to sin by means of death, lest man immortal, living a sinner, and sin living in him, should be liable to eternal curse. Wherefore he died, although he had not been created liable to death or corruption, and the soul was separated from the flesh, that sin might perish by death, not being able to live longer in one dead. Whence sin being dead and destroyed, again I shall rise immortal; and I praise God who by means of death frees His sons from death, and I celebrate lawfully to His honour a festal-day, adorning my tabernacle, that is my flesh, with good works, as there did the five virgins with the five-lighted lamps.

## Footnotes

* ↑ St. John xiv. 16.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xiii. 12.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xiii. 10.
# Bates v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
323 U.S. 15
Bates v. United States
Distributed on Petition for Certiorari Sept. 11, 1944.
Decided Nov. 6, 1944.
Opinion Conformed to May 3, 1945.
See 148 F.2d 907.
Mr. Charles Bushnell Fullerton, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Mr. Charles Fahy, Sol.Gen., of Washington, D.C., Mr. Tom C. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Messrs. Robert S. Erdahl and W. Marvin Smith and Miss Beatrice Rosenberg, all of Washington, D.C., for 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
# Bates v. Dresser Dresser

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
251 U.S. 524
Bates v. Dresser Dresser
Argued: Jan. 19 and 20, 1920. --- Decided: March 1, 1920
Messrs. Frank N. Nay and William A. Kneeland, both of Boston, Mass., for receiver.
Messrs. Robert G. Dodge and Robert M. Morse, both of Boston, Mass., for Dresser.
[Argument of Counsel from page 525 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Clarence Alfred Bunker and Albert E. Pillsbury, both of Boston, Mass., for Bunker and Hardy.
Mr. Albert E. Pillsbury, of Boston, Mass., for Dean and others.
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
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Lactantius/The Divine Institutes/The Epitome of the Divine Institutes/Chap. III

Chap. III.—The Testimonies of the Poets Concerning the One God.
There is, then, one God, perfect, eternal, incorruptible, incapable of suffering, subject to no circumstance or power, Himself possessing all things, ruling all things, whom the human mind can neither estimate in thought nor mortal tongue describe in speech. For He is too elevated and great to be conceived by the thought, or expressed by the language of man. In short, not to speak of the prophets, the preachers of the one God, poets also, and philosophers, and inspired women, utter their testimony to the unity of God. Orpheus speaks of the surpassing God who made the heaven and the sun, with the other heavenly bodies; who made the earth and the seas. Also our own Maro calls the Supreme God at one time a spirit, at another time a mind, and says that it, as though infused into limbs, puts in motion the body of the whole world; also, that God permeates the heights of heaven, the tracts of the sea and lands, and that all living creatures derive their life from Him. Even Ovid was not ignorant that the world was prepared by God, whom he sometimes calls the framer of all things, sometimes the fabricator of the world.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Vates, i.e., the Sibyls.
* ↑ [I shall not multiply references to the seven books, which are so readily compared by turning back to the pages here epitomized.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Lactantius/The Divine Institutes/The Epitome of the Divine Institutes/Chap. IV

Chap. IV.—The Testimonies of the Philosophers to the Unity of God.
But let us come to the philosophers, whose authority is regarded as more certain than that of the poets. Plato asserts His monarchy, saying that there is but one God, by whom the world was prepared and completed with wonderful order. Aristotle, his disciple, admits that there is one mind which presides over the world. Antisthenes says that there is one who is God by nature, the governor of the whole system. It would be a long task to recount the statements which have been made respecting the Supreme God, either by Thales, or by Pythagoras and Anaximenes before him, or afterwards by the Stoics Cleanthes and Chrysippus and Zeno, or of our countrymen, by Seneca following the Stoics, and by Tullius himself, since all these attempted to define the being of God, and affirmed that the world is ruled by Him alone, and that He is not subject to any nature, since all nature derives its origin from Him.
Hermes, who, on account of his virtue and his knowledge of many arts, deserved the name of Trismegistus, who preceded the philosophers in the antiquity of his doctrine, and who is reverenced by the Egyptians as a god, in asserting the majesty of the one God with infinite praises, calls Him Lord and Father, and says that He is without a name because He does not stand in need of a proper name, inasmuch as He is alone, and that He has no parents, since He exists of Himself and by Himself. In writing to his son he thus begins: To understand God is difficult, to describe Him in speech is impossible, even for one to whom it is possible to understand Him; for the perfect cannot be comprehended by the imperfect, nor the invisible by the visible.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Naturalem.
* ↑ Quid sit Deus.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Lactantius/The Divine Institutes/The Epitome of the Divine Institutes/Chap. LI

Chap. LI.—Of the Death of Christ on the Cross.
I will now speak of the mystery of the cross, lest any one should happen to say, If death must be endured by Him, it should have been not one that was manifestly infamous and dishonourable, but one which had some honour. I know, indeed, that many, while they dislike the name of the cross, shrink from the truth, though there is in it great reasonableness and power. For since He was sent for this purpose, that He might open to the lowest men the way to salvation, He made Himself humble that He might free them. Therefore He underwent that kind of death which is usually inflicted on the humble, that an opportunity of imitation might be given to all. Moreover, since He was about to rise again, it was not allowable that His body should be in any way mutilated, or a bone broken, which happens to those who are beheaded. Therefore the cross was preferred, which reserved the body with the bones uninjured for the resurrection.
To these grounds it was also added, that having undertaken to suffer and to die, it was befitting that He should be lifted up. Thus the cross exalted Him both in fact and in emblem, so that His majesty and power became known to all, together with His passion. For in that He extended His hands on the cross, He plainly stretched out His wings towards the east and the west, under which all nations from either side of the world might assemble and repose. But of what great weight this sign is, and what power it has, is evident, since all the host of demons is expelled and put to flight by this sign. And as He Himself before His passion put to confusion demons by His word and command, so now, by the name and sign of the same passion, unclean spirits, having insinuated themselves into the bodies of men, are driven out, when racked and tormented, and confessing themselves to be demons, they yield themselves to God, who harasses them. What therefore can the Greeks expect from their superstitions and with their wisdom, when they see that their gods, whom they do not deny to be demons also, are subdued by men through the cross?

## Footnotes

* ↑ Significatione.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Lactantius/The Divine Institutes/The Epitome of the Divine Institutes

The Epitome of the Divine Institutes.
Addressed to His Brother Pentadius.

## Contents

* The Preface
* Chap. I
* Chap. II
* Chap. III
* Chap. IV
* Chap. V
* Chap. VI
* Chap. VII
* Chap. VIII
* Chap. IX
* Chap. X
* Chap. XI
* Chap. XII
* Chap. XIII
* Chap. XIV
* Chap. XX
* Chap. XXI
* Chap. XXII
* Chap. XXIII
* Chap. XXIV
* Chap. XXV
* Chap. XXVI
* Chap. XXVII
* Chap. XXVIII
* Chap. XXIX
* Chap. XXX
* Chap. XXXI
* Chap. XXXII
* Chap. XXXIII
* Chap. XXXIV
* Chap. XXXV
* Chap. XXXVI
* Chap. XXXVII
* Chap. XXXVIII
* Chap. XXXIX
* Chap. XL
* Chap. XLI
* Chap. XLII
* Chap. XLIII
* Chap. XLIV
* Chap. XLV
* Chap. XLVI
* Chap. XLVII
* Chap. XLVIII
* Chap. XLIX
* Chap. L
* Chap. LI
* Chap. LII
* Chap. LIII
* Chap. LIV
* Chap. LV
* Chap. LVI
* Chap. LVII
* Chap. LVIII
* Chap. LIX
* Chap. LX
* Chap. LXI
* Chap. LXII
* Chap. LXIII
* Chap. LXIV
* Chap. LXV
* Chap. LXVI
* Chap. LXVII
* Chap. LXVIII
* Chap. LXIX
* Chap. LXX
* Chap. LXXI
* Chap. LXXII
* Chap. LXXIII
* Elucidations