OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Smith v. Turner

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Smith v. Turner; Norris v. Boston, 48 U.S. 283 (1849), were two similar cases, argued together before the United States Supreme Court, in which it was adjudged (5:4) that States did not have the right to impose a tax determined by the number of passengers of a designated category on board a ship and/or disembarking into the State. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
48 U.S. 283
Smith v. Turner

## 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
# Smith v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Smith v. United States."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.
* Smith v. United States (30 U.S. 292), ( 8 L.Ed. 130 ), ( 5 Pet. 292 )
* Smith v. United States (35 U.S. 326), ( 9 L.Ed. 442 ), ( 10 Pet. 326 )
* Smith v. United States (69 U.S. 219), ( 17 L.Ed. 788 ), ( 2 Wall. 219 )
* Smith v. United States (94 U.S. 97), ( 24 L.Ed. 32 )
* Smith v. United States (137 U.S. 224)
* Smith v. United States (151 U.S. 50)
* Smith v. United States (161 U.S. 85)
* Smith v. United States (170 U.S. 372)
* Smith v. United States (292 U.S. 337)
* Smith v. United States (337 U.S. 137)
* Smith v. United States (348 U.S. 147)
* Smith v. United States (358 U.S. 281)
* Smith v. United States (360 U.S. 1)
* Smith v. United States (502 U.S. 1017), ( 116 L.Ed.2d 758 ), ( 112 S.Ct. 667 )
# Smith v. United States (137 U.S. 224)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
137 U.S. 224
Smith v. United States
No. 1,142, (Smith v. U.S.,) and No. 1,144, (Key v. Same,) argued and decided at the same time, are substantially similar, and in those cases also the judgments are 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
# Smith v. United States (151 U.S. 50)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
151 U.S. 50
Smith v. United States
Statement by Mr. Justice BROWN:
This was a writ of error to review the conviction of the plaintiff in error for the murder of one James Gentry, alleged to have been 'a white man, and not an Indian,' on August 1, 1883, in the Cherokee Nation, Indian Territory. The case was tried before the circuit court of the United States for the western district of Arkansas, at the May term of 1893, and the prisoner convicted, and sentenced to death. Thirty-four assignments of error were contained in the record, none of which were considered except the first and last, which raised the question of the jurisdiction of the court, arising from the fact that both the accused and the deceased were Indians.
A. H. Garland, for plaintiff in error.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Whitney, for the United States.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 51-53 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 03

January to June, 1877
SOUTHERN
Historical Society Papers.
VOLUME III.
JANUARY TO JUNE, 1877.
RICHMOND, VA.:
Rev. J. WILLIAM JONES, D. D.,
Secretary Southern Historical Society.
page
GEORGE W. GARY,
PRINTER AND STATIONER,
RICHMOND, VA.
page
CONTENTS.
JANUARY.
| Defence of Mobile in 1865, by General D. H. Maury | 1 |
| Detailed Minutiæ of Soldier Life, by Carlton McCarthy | 13 |
| Defence of Fort Gregg, by General James H. Lane | 19 |
| Address on the Character of Gen. R. E. Lee, by Capt. John Hampden Chamberlayne | 28 |
| Defence of Fort Morgan—Reports of General R. L. Page | 37 |
| Diary of Captain R. E. Park | 43 |
| Editorial Paragraphs | 47 |
FEBRUARY.
| General R. H. Anderson's Report of the Battle of Gettysburg | 49 |
| Diary of Captain R. E. Park | 55 |
| Battle of Atchafalaya River—Letter from General Thomas Green | 62 |
| Lieutenant-General S. D. Lee's Report of the Tennessee Campaign | 64 |
| General J. E. B. Stuart's Report of his Expedition into Pennsylvania | 72 |
| Letters on the Treatment and Exchange of Prisoners | 77 |
| The Defence of Fort Gregg | 82 |
| Dahlgren's Ride into Fredericksburg | 87 |
| Editorial Paragraphs | 91 |
MARCH.
| Resources of the Confederacy in 1865—Report of Gen. I. M. St. John, Commissary General | 97 |
| General Early's Valley Campaign, by General A. L. Long | 112 |
| Diary of Captain R. E. Park | 123 |
| Letter from General A. S. Johnston | 128 |
| Maryland Troops in the Confederate Service, by Lamar Hollyday | 130 |
| Comments on the First Volume of Count of Paris' Civil War in America, by General J. A. Early | 140 |
| The Last Confederate Surrender, by Lieutenant-General Richard Taylor | 155 |
| Editorial Paragraphs | 159 |
APRIL.
| Report of Major-General Carter L. Stevenson of the Tennessee Campaign | 161 |
| The Peace Commission of 1865, by Hon. R. M. T. Hunter | 168 |
| Cavalry Operations in May, 1863—Report of General J. E. B. Stuart | 177 |
| Diary of Captain R. E. Park | 183 |
| Field Letters from Stuart's Headquarters, | 190 |
| Zagonyi's Charge with Fremont's Body-Guard, by Col. Wm. Preston Johnston | 195 |
| The Nation on our Discussion of the Prison Question | 197 |
| Garnett's Brigade at Gettysburg | 215 |
| Part taken by the Ninth Virginia Cavalry in Repelling the Dahlgren Raid | 219 |
| Editorial Paragraphs | 222 |
MAY AND JUNE.
| Dalton-Atlanta Campaign—Report of Major-General C. L. Stevenson | 225 |
| Battle of Chancellorsville Report of General R. E. Lee | 230 |
| Diary of Captain R. E. Park | 244 |
| Torpedoes, by General G. J. Rains, Chief of the Confederate Torpedo Service | 255 |
| Report of Major-General Samuel Jones of Operations at Charleston, S. C. | 261 |
| Sketch of the Late General S. Cooper, by General Fitz. Lee | 269 |
| Battle of Seven Pines—Report of General James Longstreet | 277 |
| Cavalry Operations on First Maryland Campaign—Report of General J. E. B. Stuart | 281 |
| Field Telegrams | 295 |
| Editorial Paragraphs | 301 |
| Colonel Charles C. Jones' Confederate Roster | 306 |
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 02/September

Volume 2, Issue 3
* Resources of the Confederacy in February, 1865
* Detailed Minutiae of Soldier Life in the Army of Northern Virginia
* General R. E. Rodes' Report of the Battle of Gettysburg
* Editorial Paragraphs
# Snuff

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Snuff."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.

### Encyclopaedia articles

* "Snuff," in Domestic Encyclopædia, by A. F. M. Willich, London: Murray and Highley (1802)
* "Snuff," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
# Snyder v. Bettman

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglass White
United States Supreme Court
190 U.S. 249
Snyder v. Bettman
Argued: April 7, 8, 1903. --- Decided: June 1, 1903
This was an action brought by the executor of David L. Snyder against the collector of internal revenue to recover $22,000, succession tax upon a legacy of $220,000 bequeathed to the city of Springfield, Ohio, in trust to expend the income in the maintenance, improvement, and beautifying of a public park of the city, known as Snyder park, including any extension thereof which said city might acquire. Such tax having been paid under protest, this action was brought to secure a refunding of the same.
A demurrer to the petition having been sustained by the circuit court, and final judgment entered, the case was brought here by writ of error.
Mr. J. E. Bowman, for plaintiff in error.
Assistant Attorney General Beck for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Brown 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
# Snowden v. Hughes
## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
321 U.S. 1
Snowden v. Hughes
Argued: and Submitted Dec. 13, 1943. --- Decided: Jan 17, 1944
See 321 U.S. 804, 64 S.Ct. 778.
Mr. W. R. Ming, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Mr. William C. Wines, of Chicago, Ill., for respondents Edward J. Hughes et al.
Mr. Isaac E. Ferguson, of Chicago, Ill., for respondents Robert E. Straus et al., as coexecutors, etc.
Mr. Chief Justice STONE 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
# Snowden v. Hemming

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Snowden Assignee versus Hemming.
In an action of debt upon a bond, judgment being obtained, and execution issued, Wilcocks moved to stay proceedings upon this ground; that, though the bond was dated in June, the consideration, for which it was given, arose before the 1st of March 1781; and therefore, he contended, that his client was within the protection of the Act of Assembly passed the 27th of December 1784, which entitles a defendant to a stay of execution, for a certain time, upon tendering the interest and costs to the sheriff.
Bradford, for the plaintiff, was prepared with an affidavit to controvert the facts advanced in support of the motion; but he forbore reading it, and insisted that the Court could not travel into a consideration of the transactions for which the bond was given.
By the Court:—It would occasion infinite trouble and consusion were the defendant’s doctrine to be admitted, and it is impossible to say where the mischief would end. It is true, that before a jury, proof may be made of the consideration, and of the time of delivering a bond; but this Act of Assembly which, in particular cases, grants a delay of execution to the defendant, upon the tender of the interest and costs, must, surely, at the same time, recognize the written instrument as conclusive evidence of the contract; and we can enquire no father.
Wilcocks took nothing by his motion.
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 01/March

Volume 1, Issue 3
Treatment of Prisoners:
* Mr. Blaine's Arraignment
* The question stated
* Letter from President Davis
* Testimony of General R. E. Lee
* Vice-President Stephens' Statement
* Judge Ould's Vindication of the Confederate Government
* Report of Joint Committee of the Confederate Congress
* Extract from Central Presbyterian
* Confederate Laws
* Treatment of Privateers
* The Cartel
* Confederate Soldiers and their Prisoners
* Andersonville
* Statement of one of the Guard
* Paper of Dr. Jos. Jones on causes of mortality
* Editorial Comments
* Extracts from statement of Dr. R. R. Stephenson
* Testimony of Federal Prisoners
* Statement of General J. D. Imboden
* Report of Colonel D. T. Chandler
* Letter from Honorable R. G. H. Kean
* Letter from Secretary Seddon
* Letters in defence of General Winder
* Judge Ould's reply to charges against him
* Official Statistics on relative mortality of Prisoners
* Failure to make a case
* Editorial Paragraphs
# Southern Historical Society Papers/Volume 01/March/Confederate Laws

Southern Historical Society Papers, March 1876
​Having produced the testimony of reliable witnesses who were in position to know the truth in reference to this whole question, we proceed to give a somewhat more detailed statement of the facts in reference to it.
THE CONFEDERATE LAW.
We have before us the "Statutes at large" of the Confederate Congress, the general orders which eminated from the War Department, and the orders of the Confederate Surgeon-General in reference to the management of hospitals. We have carefully examined these volumes and papers, and are unable to discover a syllable looking to or in the least degree countenancing the maltreatment of prisoners of war.
As early as the 21st of May, 1861, the Confederate Congress passed a law which provided that "all prisoners of war taken, whether on land or sea, during the pending hostilities with the United States, shall be transferred by the captors from time to time, and as often as convenient, to the Department of War; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War, with the approval of the ​President, to issue such instructions to the Quartermaster-General and his subordinates as shall provide for the safe custody and sustenance of prisoners of war; and the rations furnished prisoners of war shall be the same in quantity and quality as those furnished to enlisted men in the army of the Confederacy."
This law of the Confederate Congress was embodied in the orders issued from the War Department, and from the headquarters in the field, and we defy the production of a single order from any Confederate Department which militates against this humane provision.
# Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
316 U.S. 317
Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States
Argued: April 10, 1942. --- Decided: May 11, 1942
Mr. Ralph H. Case, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Charles Fahy, Sol. Gen., for respondent.
Mr. Justice Byrnes 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
# Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Sipuel v. Board of Regents of Univ. of Okla., 332 U.S. 631 (1948) (per curiam) is a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 631
Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma
Argued: Jan. 7, 8, 1948. --- Decided: Jan 12, 1948
Messrs. Thurgood Marshall, of New York City, and Amos Hall, of Tulsa, Okl., for petitioner.
Messrs. Fred Hansen, of Oklahoma City, Okl., and Maurice H. Merrill, of Norman, Okl., for respondents.
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
# Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 631
Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma
Argued: Jan. 7, 8, 1948. --- Decided: Jan 12, 1948
On January 14, 1946, the petitioner, a Negro, concededly qualified to receive the professional legal education offered by the State, applied for admission to the School of Law of the University of Oklahoma, the only institution for legal education supported and maintained by the taxpayers of the State of Oklahoma. Petitioner's application for admission was denied, solely because of her color.
Petitioner then made application for a writ of mandamus in the District Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma. The writ of mandamus was refused, and the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma affirmed the judgment of the District Court. Okl. Sup., 180 P.2d 135. We brought the case here for review.
The petitioner is entitled to secure legal education afforded by a state institution. To this time, it has been denied her although during the same period many white applicants have been afforded legal education by the State. The State must provide it for her in conformity with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and provide it as soon as it does for applicants of any other group. State of Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 1938, 305 U.S. 337, 59 S.Ct. 232, 83 L.Ed. 208.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Reversed.

## 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
# Sipperley v. Smith/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
155 U.S. 86
Sipperley v. Smith
The motion to dismiss is sustained, upon the authority of Masterson v. Herndon, 10 Wall. 416; Hardee v. Wilson, 146 U.S. 179, 13 Sup. Ct. 39; Inglehart v. Stansbury, 151 U.S. 68, 14 Sup. Ct. 237; and Davis v. Trust Co., 152 U.S. 590, 14 Sup. Ct. 693.
Appeal dismissed.

## 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
# St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 1/Advertisements/Front/Miscellaneous-2

MISCELLANEOUS
THE DAINTIEST SOAP MADE is HAND SAPOLIO for toilet and bath. Other soaps chemically dissolve the dirt—HAND SAPOLIO removes it. It contains no animal fats, but is made from the most healthful of the vegetable oils. It opens the pores, liberates their activities, but works no chemical change in those delicate juices that go to make up the charm and bloom of a perfect complexion. Test it yourself
THE FAME OF SAPOLIO has reached far and wide, Everywhere in millions of homes there is a regard for it which can not be shaken, Sapolio has done much for your home, but now for yourself—have you ever tried HAND SAPOLIO for toilet and bath? It is related to Sapolio only because it is made by the same company, but it is delicate, smooth, dainty, soothing, and healing to the most tender skin. It pleases everyone.
ITS USE IS A FINE HABIT—ITS COST BUT A TRIFLE.
* Pencil Troubles
* disappear when pencil users are guided by Dixon’s Pencil Guide. 1000 pencils for 1000 purposes. Which?
* Dixon’s Pencil Guide, a 32 page book, indexed by vocations, correctly indicates the right pencil for your use. Sent free.
* Department R
* Joseph Dixon Crucible Co.,
* Jersey City, N. J.
# St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 1/Advertisements/Front/Miscellaneous

MISCELLANEOUS
Five Little Peppers and Their Friends
By MARGARET SIDNEY
Eight illustrations by EUGENIE M. WIREMAN. 2mo, Cloth. Price $1.50, postpaid.
There were so many interesting friends of the Five Little Peppers, whose lives were only the faintest of outlines in the series ending when Phronsie was grown up, that a volume devoted to this outer circle has been written to meet the persistent demand.
Herein the author records many happenings that long ago Ben and Polly, Joel and David, told her, And even Phronsie whispered some of it confidentially into the listening ear.
| Five Little Peppers and How They Grew. Cloth, 12mo. New edition. Illustrated by Hermann Heyer. $1.50, postpaid. This was an instantaneous success, and has been in continual demand ever since, until to-day it has become a genuine child classic. Five Little Peppers Midway. Cloth, 12mo, illustrated, $1.50, postpaid. Takes the Pepper children into youth and changing circumstances. “A perfect Cheeryble of a book.”—Boston Herald. Five Little Peppers Grown Up. Cloth, 12mo, illustrated. $1.50, postpaid. This shows the Five Little Peppers as “grown-up,” with all the struggles and successes of young manhood and womanhood. Phronsie Pepper. Cloth, 12mo, illustrated, $1.50, postpaid. It is the story of Phronsie, the youngest and dearest of all the Peppers. But Polly and Joel and Ben and Jasper and Mamsie, too, are all in the story. | The Stories Polly Pepper Told. Cloth, 12mo. Illustrated by Jesie McDermott and Etheldred B. Barry. $1.50, postpaid. Wherever there exists a child or a “grown-up,” there will be a loving and vociferous welcome for these charming and delightful “Stories Polly Pepper Told.” The Adventures of Joel Pepper. Cloth, 12mo. Illustrated by Sears Gallagher. $1.50, postpaid. Harum-scaram “Joey” is lovable. Polly and Phronsie, Ben and Davie, and the dear Mamsie herself are in the story. Five Little Peppers Abroad. Cloth, 12mo, Illustrated by Fanny Y. Cory. $1.50, postpaid. The “Peppers Abroad” adds another most delightful book to this famous series. Five Little Peppers at School. Cloth, 12mo. Illustrated by Hermann Heyer. Price, $1.10 net; postpaid, $1.25. Of all the fascinating experiences and adventures of the “Peppers,” none will surpass those telling of their school-days. |
LOTHROP PUBLISHING COMPANY, BOSTON
* “The funniest, most ludicrous, and jolliest of all the Brownie books,”
* Advertiser, Newark
| The Century Co. | Union Square, New York. |
| MINIATURE NOVELTY CO., | 132 East 20th Street NEW YORK CITY |
# St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 1/Advertisements/Front/Swifts

Premium Calendar
Swift’s Premium Calendar for 1905, size 12 ⨯ 35 inches, consists of four lovely heads by McEntee, the famous water colorist. Superbly lithographed in ten colors and gold, and charmingly represents the four seasons of the year. Unsurpassed for attractiveness of deign, beautiful coloring and superior workmanship, To see it is to have it.
Swift’s Premium Calendar will be sent, postpaid, to any address, for 10 cts. in money or stamps, 10 Wool Soap wrappers, or 1 metal cap from jar of Swift's Beef Extract.
Send order to Swift & Company Dept. G, Stock Yards Station Chicago, Ill.
Swifts Premium Hams and Bacon (U. S. Inspected) Swift’s Silver Leaf Lard 3, 5, and 10-lb. air-tight pails. Swift & Company, U.S.A.
# St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 1/Blue Ribbon Girl

* related authors: Charles Mark Relyea.
* sister projects: Commons category, Wikidata item.
The “Blue Ribbon Girl.”
# St. Nicholas/Volume 32/Number 1/Advertisements/Front/Mary Mapes Dodge

BOOKS
A New Book by
MARY MAPES DODGE
Editor of St. Nicholas
POEMS AND VERSES
Probably no living writer can claim more friends than Mary Mapes Dodge, editor of St. Nicholas since its first issue. Young and old find pleasure and help in her writings, and in the magazine which she has edited so many years. The sweet serenity and sunny cheer which characterize her life breathe from every page of this new book of poems, Many are old favorites, friends which could ill be spared from any new collection; but the little volume contains also Mrs. Dodge’s latest verse and poems, the collection being representative of her choicest and ripest work.
12mo, 250 pages. $1.20 net, postage 8 cents.
Other Books by Mrs. Dodge
DONALD AND DOROTHY
THE LAND OF PLUCK
WHEN LIFE IS YOUNG
Published by
THE CENTURY CO.