OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Ha'e ye seen

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Ha'e ye seen."
* 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.
* "Ha'e ye seen", song by J. M.
* "Ha'e ye seen", song by Robert Burns Jr.
# HKSAR v Tong Ying Kit

First criminal case under the Hong Kong National Security Law
* Reasons for Verdict
* Reasons for Sentence
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# HR 3590 Preamble

Preamble
December 24, 2009 Ordered to be printed as passed HR 3590 EAS/PP In the Senate of the United States, December 24, 2009. Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 3590) entitled `An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes.', do pass with the following AMENDMENTS: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
* (a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act'.
* (b) Table of Contents- The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
** Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
# History of two brothers misfortunes/Anna of the Tyne

ANNA OF THE TYNE.
A BONNY swain, blithe Sandy nam’d, Who’d murkle land and kine; A lassie lov’d for beauty fam’d, Fair Anna of the Tyne: And thus would Sandy joyous sing, Fair maid, O be but mine; More bless’d I’ll be than laird or king, With Anna of the Tyne, With Anna of the Tyne. With Anna, &c.
Kind youth, she cried, na kine, nor land, Nor money I’ve in store; Then cease to ask my humble hand, Nor wed a maid so poor: Yet Sandy still would joyous sing, Fair maid, O be but mine, More bless’d I’d be than laird or king, With Anna of the Tyne. With Anna, &c.
For, Anna, thou art rich in charms, The wealth of worlds to me; Then wed and bless thy lover’s arms: She smil’d, and blest was he: How rapt’rous then did Sandy sing, Now, now my fair one’s mine, I am more bless’d than laird or king, With Anna of the Tyne. With Anna, &c.
FINIS.
# History of two brothers misfortunes/Moggy of the Cot

MOGGY OF THE COT.
⟨Young⟩ Harry would a courting go, And fain would marry Mog; ⟨But⟩ Kate, and Jane, and Betsey too, Would no way let him jog. ⟨With⟩ smiles each try’d to gain his heart, ⟨But⟩ Hal car’d not a jot; ⟨For⟩ he in truth swore ne’er to part With Moggy of the Cot.
⟨Young⟩ Moggy was his heart’s delight, And she lov’d him full well; ⟨When⟩ on the green they danc’d each night, Their am’rous tales would tell: ⟨He’d⟩ smile, he’d laugh, with such a glee, Was proud to own his lot, ⟨They⟩ marry’d were; Hal paid his fee, To Moggy of the Cot.
⟨Poor⟩ Dad and Mam were very glad To hear the happy news; ⟨With⟩ haste they ran, drest in the plaid, The ribbons for to chuse: ⟨Each⟩ lad and lass met on the green, To praise young Harry’s lot; ⟨Kate⟩, Jane, and Bet, at church were seen, With Moggy of the Cot.
# History of two brothers misfortunes

The HISTORY of
TWO BROTHERS
MISFORTUNES;
At, and after their Marriage,
SIMPLE SIMON,
and
MARGERY HIS CRUEL WIFE.
and
SIMPLE JOHN,
The weaver, and
GRIZY HIS WIFE, A THUMPER.
To which are added,
Four excellent Songs.
haddington: Printed by G Miller:—at whose Shop may be had a variety of Pamphlets, Ballads, Children’s Books, Pictures, Catechisms, &c. wholesale and retail.
# History of two brothers misfortunes/Choice of a Wife

SONGS.
CHOICE OF A WIFE.
When a man is determin’d on taking a wife, ’Tis a time to be nice—his quiet’s the price, The odds are against—he’s wretched for life, I can point out the charm to remove ev’ry harm, So attend all ye batchelors taking a wife. ’Tis not the face, ’tis nor the air, ’Tis not the grace, tho’ debonair, ’Tis not the glance, or brilliant eye, ’Tis not the dance, or tender sigh: Nor hand, nor shape, nor leg, nor air, Nor mouth, nor teeth, nor skin tho’ fair,
Without a mind, tho’ all in one, I’d value not a feather; Good humour is the chain alone, That links them all together.
Then fix not alone on a beautiful face, For what could you do with a fair little shrew, Whose tongue with your patience would never keep pace? You ne’er could new mould her, for worse when she’s older, You’d in vain seek the mind in a beautiful face. ’Tis not the face, &c.
# History of two brothers misfortunes/The Way to get Married

The WAY to get MARRIED.
Come hither, ye belles, aye and likewise ye beaus, Come hither, and mind what I have to express, ’Tis the way to get married I mean to disclose, A way of some moment you all must confess. Physicians, its known, for advice claim a fee, But I, oh! I’m not by self interest carried, And so you are welcome to my recipe,
Which is if you like it—the way to get married.
Now lovers attend, and I hope there’s ⟨some⟩ here! Don’t trifle too long about this thing ⟨or⟩ that, But when you are bent on an object so ⟨dear⟩, Let prudence direct you, and mind ⟨what⟩ you’re at: To love, and be lov’d, is the highest of ⟨joy⟩, Then be not, I beg, by indifference ⟨carried⟩, Let honour and truth all your actions ⟨employ⟩, Which is, if you like it—the way to ⟨get⟩ married.
Tho’ money may sometimes be deem’d ⟨very⟩ well, Yet riches can never true pleasures ⟨impart⟩; ’Tis love, and love only, each care can ⟨repel⟩; ’Tis love, and love only, that ⟨conquers⟩ the heart! Then make it your study to follow my ⟨plan⟩, All you who live single, and too long ⟨have⟩ tarried, Court with zeal, like true lovers, as soon ⟨as⟩ you can, Which is, if you like it—the way to ⟨get⟩ married.
# History of the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club

History of the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club is a collection of historical works about and published by the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club starting in 1834. The contents of the volumes include lists of members of the Club, various blueprints and illustrations, and proceedings of the Club, among other things. The club itself still exists to this day (official website).

## Volumes

* Volume 1, on 1831-1833 (1834) (start transcription)
* Volume 2, on 1842-1849 (1849) (start transcription)
* Volume 3, on 1850-1856 (1857) (start transcription)
* Volume 4
* Volume 5
* Volume 6, on 1869-1872 (1872) (start transcription)
* Volume 7, on 1873-1876 (1876) (start transcription)
* Volume 8, on 1876-1878 (1879) (start transcription)
* Volume 9, on 1879-1881 (1882) (start transcription)
* Volume 10, on 1882-1884 (1885) (start transcription)
* Volume 11, on 1885-1886 (1887) (transcription project)
* Volume 12, on 1887-1889 (1890) (start transcription)
* Volume 13
* Volume 14, on 1890-1891 (1892) (start transcription)
* Volume 15, on 1894-1895 (1897) (start transcription)
* Volume 16, on 1896-1898 (1899) (start transcription)
* Volume 17, on 1899-1900 (1901) (start transcription)
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
# History of the Church

* related portals: Mormonism.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article.
Published in: Dean Jessee, Personal Writings of Joseph Smith. For info on manuscript dates, see Jessee, Dean C. (1971), "The Writing of Joseph Smith's History", BYU Studies 11 (4): 439–73. Joseph Smith is the nominal author, but the history was compiled by various editors and scribes, based on a number of sources, including Smith's diaries. Smith dictated some portions.
# History of the City of New York: Its Origin, Rise, and Progress

* Volume 1
* Volume 2
* Volume 3
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
# Hagan v. Foison/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
35 U.S. 160
Hagan v. Foison
The court are not satisfied that this case is within their appellate jurisdiction. To support that jurisdiction, it is necessary that it should appear upon the face of the record, or upon affidavits to be filed by the parties, that the sum or value in controversy exceeds $2,000, exclusive of costs. The onis probandi is upon the party seeking to obtain a revision of the case, to establish the jurisdiction. Here the whole matter in controversy is the ownership of one negro woman and two children, who are slaves; and it is not supposed that their value can be equal to $2,000. The bond in the case, in the nature of a forthcoming bond, in a larger penalty, does not vary the result. But the plaintiff in error is at liberty to establish, if necessary, that the value exceeds that sum. But there are other cases on the docket, between the plaintiff in error and other persons, which involved the same points, which have been argued in this case. If any of these cases involved a sum or value which entitles the court to take jurisdiction, we will hereafter give an opinion upon those points.

## 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
# Hagar and Ishmael

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Hagar and Ishmael."
* 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.
* Hagar and Ishmael, a poem by J. M. L.
* Hagar and Ishmael, a poem by Letitia Elizabeth Landon within The Easter Gift
# Hagan v. Foison

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
35 U.S. 160
Hagan v. Foison
IN error to the district court of the United States, for the southern district of Alabama.
This case was argued by Coxe for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Key for the defendant. After the argument, the court, on inspecting the record, became satisfied that the amount in controversy between the parties, was not sufficient to give the plaintiff a right to bring the case up by writ of error.
Mr. Justice STORY 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
# Hagan v. Lucas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
35 U.S. 400
Hagan v. Lucas
IN error to the district court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama.
Mr Justice M'LEAN 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
# Haines v. Carpenter/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 254
Haines v. Carpenter
A mere statement of the bill is sufficient to show that it cannot be sustained. Whilst it undoubtedly presents some matters of equitable consideration, they are so mixed up with others of a different character, or which cannot be entertained by the Circuit Court of the United States, and which constitute the main object and purpose of the suit, as to make the bill essentially bad on demurrer. In the first place, the great object of the suit is to enjoin and stop litigation in the State courts, and to bring all the litigated questions before the Circuit Court. This is one of the things which the Federal courts are expressly prohibited from doing. By the act of March 2, 1793, it was declared that a writ of injunction shall not be granted to stay proceedings in a State court. This prohibition is repeated in sect. 720 of the Revised Statutes, and extends to all cases except where otherwise provided by the Bankrupt Law. This objection alone is sufficient ground for sustaining the demurrer to the bill. In the next place, the claim that the court ought to interfere on account of multiplicity of suits is manifestly unfounded. Only three suits are specified for this purpose in the bill, and each of these has a distinct object, founded on a distinct ground, and is instituted by a distinct class of claimants, who had a perfect right to institute the suit they did. The State courts have full and ample jurisdiction of the cases, and no sufficient reason appears for interfering with their proceedings.
The decree of the Circuit Court 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
# Hailes v. Van Wormer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
87 U.S. 353
Hailes v. Van Wormer

## 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
# Haines v. Kerner

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
404 U.S. 519
Haines v. Kerner, et al.
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
No. 70-5025 Argued: December 6, 1971 --- Decided: January 13, 1972
Prisoner's pro se complaint seeking to recover damages for claimed physical injuries and deprivation of rights in imposing disciplinary confinement should not have been dismissed without affording him the opportunity to present evidence on his claims.
Stanley A. Bass, by appointment of the Court, 401 U.S. 1008, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, William B. Turner, Alice Daniel, and Max Stern.
Warren K. Smoot, Assistant Attorney General of Illinois, argued the cause for respondents pro hac vice. With him on the brief were William J. Scott, Attorney General, Joel M. Flaum, First Assistant Attorney General, and James B. Zagel, Morton E. Friedman, and Jayne A. Carr, Assistant Attorneys General.
Briefs of amici curiae were filed by Charles H. Baron for Boston College Center for Corrections and the Law, and by Julian Tepper and Marshall J. Hartman for the National Law Office of the National Legal Aid and Defender Assn.
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
# Hailes v. Albany Stove

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
123 U.S. 582
Hailes v. Albany Stove
A. J. Todd, for appellants.
Esek Cowen, for appellee.
BRADLEY, J.

## 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
# Heike v. United States (227 U.S. 131)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
227 U.S. 131
Heike v. United States
Argued: January 9, 1913. --- Decided: January 27, 1913
Messrs. John B. Stanchfield, George S. Graham, and Frederick Allis for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 131-137 intentionally omitted]
Assistant Attorney General Denison and Messrs. Henry L. Stimson and Felix Frankfurter for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 137-139 intentionally omitted]
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
# Heikkila v. Barber

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
345 U.S. 229
Heikkila v. Barber
Argued: Feb. 4, 5, 1953. --- Decided: March 16, 1953
See 345 U.S. 946, 73 S.Ct. 828.
Messrs. Joseph Forer, Washington, D.C., Lloyd E. McMurray, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Mr. Robert W. Ginnane, Washington, D.C., for appellee.
Mr. Justice CLARK 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
# Heike v. United States (217 U.S. 423)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 423
Heike v. United States
Argued: April 11, 1910. --- Decided: May 2, 1910
Messrs. John B. Stanchfield, George S. Graham, and John C. Spooner for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 423-426 intentionally omitted]
Solicitor General Bowers and Messrs. Henry L. Stimson and Felix Frankfurter for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Day 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
# Heikkinen v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 273
Heikkinen v. United States
Argued: Jan. 6, 1958. ---
Mr. David Rein, Washington, D.C., for the petitioner.
Mr. J. F. Bishop, Washington, D.C., for the respondent.
Mr. Justice WHITTAKER 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
# Huddleston v. Dwyer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
322 U.S. 232
Huddleston v. Dwyer
Argued: and Submitted April 25, 26, 1944. --- Decided: May 15, 1944
Mr. William E. Davis, of Kansas City, Mo., for petitioners.
Mr. William L. Curtis, of Fort Smith, Ark., 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
# Hudgins v. Kemp (61 U.S. 54)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
61 U.S. 54
Hudgins v. Kemp
THIS was a branch of the preceding case, was argued by the same counsel, and included within the same principles.
Mr. Justice NELSON 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
# Hudgins v. Kemp

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Hudgins v. Kemp."
* 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.
* Hudgins v. Kemp (59 U.S. 530)
* Hudgins v. Kemp (61 U.S. 45)
* Hudgins v. Kemp (61 U.S. 54)
# Hudibras

See also "Hudibras," by Marion Tucker in The Encyclopedia Americana, New York: The Encyclopedia Americana Corporation (1920)
HUDIBRAS,
BY
SAMUEL BUTLER;
WITH VARIORUM NOTES, SELECTED PRINCIPALLY
FROM GREY AND NASH.
EDITED BY
HENRY G. BOHN
VOL. I.
WITH SIXTY TWO ADDITIONAL PORTRAITS.
LONDON: HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN. 1859.
JOHN CHILDS AND SON, PRINTERS.
S. BUTLER.
* Preface
* List of the Wood Cuts
* Additional Illustrations
* Life of Samuel Butler
* Part 1
** Canto 1
** Canto 2
** Canto 3
* Part 2
** Canto 1
** Canto 2
** Canto 3
** An Heroical Epistle of Hudibras to Sidrophel
* Part 3
** Canto 1
** Canto 2
** Canto 3
** An Heroical Epistle of Hudibras to his Lady
** The Lady's Answer to the Knight
* Index
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
# Hudgins v. Kemp (61 U.S. 54)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
61 U.S. 54
Hudgins v. Kemp
This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the eastern district of Virginia.
The bill was filed by the assignee of the bankrupt, J. L. Hudgins, as in the preceding case, against E. W. Hudgins, a son, to set aside two deeds of conveyance of lands, as executed and delivered by the bankrupt to hinder and delay creditors—one dated 6th September, 1839, conveying three hundred acres lying in the county of York; the other dated 1st March, 1842, conveying, by estimation, seven hundred acres, in the same county—the latter for the consideration of $3,000. This deed was made a few days after the one set aside in the case of the assignee against Robert Hudgins. The case depends upon substantially the same evidence. Portions of it, tending to connect this defendant with the conduct of the grantor, in conveying away his property in fraud of his creditors, as respects the deed of the 1st March, 1842, are, if possible, somewhat stronger than that in the preceding case.
The court, on the 18th May, 1843, decreed that the deed was fraudulent and void, and that the assignee in bankruptcy take possession of the property as a receiver; and, further, that the deed of the 6th September, 1839, was not made in fraud of creditors, but was valid as against the complainant. The court also directed an account of the rents and profits, from the time of the petition in bankruptcy to the time of the receiver taking possession. The master subsequently reported rents and profits to the amount of $659.72; and on the 27th June, 1855, a final decree was entered.
The court decreed that the defendant, Elliott W. Hudgins, pay to the complainant $659.72, with interest from 2d June, 1848; and that, if the proceeds of the property directed to be sold in the case of the plaintiff against Robert Hudgins and others, should not be sufficient to satisfy the debts proved against the bankrupt, then the plaintiff is authorized to sell the lands in question, as particularly specified and directed in the said decree.
The only question arising on the master's report in this case, and the decree in pursuance thereof, is, that the rents and profits should not have been charged prior to the decree in bankruptcy. The answer to this objection is, that no such exception was taken to the report, and cannot, therefore, be noticed here. The case, in all its essential parts, falls within the views presented in the preceding one of this plaintiff against Robert Hudgins and others, and must abide the like result.
The decree of the court below 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