OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Victory (Conrad)/Note

The last word of this novel was written on 29 May 1914. And that last word was the single word of the title.
Those were the times of peace. Now that the moment of publication approaches I have been considering the discretion of altering the title-page. The word "Victory" the shining and tragic goal of noble effort, appeared too great, too august, to stand at the head of a mere novel. There was also the possibility of falling under the suspicion of commercial astuteness deceiving the public into the belief that the book had something to do with war.
Of that, however, I was not afraid very much. What influenced my decision most were the obscure promptings of that pagan residuum of awe and wonder which lurks still at the bottom of our old humanity. "Victory" was the last word I had written in peace-time. It was the last literary thought which had occurred to me before the doors of the Temple of Janus flying open with a crash shook the minds, the hearts, the consciences of men all over the world. Such coincidence could not be treated lightly. And I made up my mind to let the word stand, in the same hopeful spirit in which some simple citizen of Old Rome would have "accepted the Omen."
The second point on which I wish to offer a remark is the existence (in the novel) of a person named Schomberg.
That I believe him to be true goes without saying. I am not likely to offer pinchbeck wares to my public consciously. Schomberg is an old member of my company. A very subordinate personage in Lord Jim as far back as the year 1899, he became notably active in a certain short story of mine published in 1902. Here he appears in a still larger part, true to life (I hope), but also true to himself. Only, in this instance, his deeper passions come into play, and thus his grotesque psychology is completed at last.
I don't pretend to say that this is the entire Teutonic psychology; but it is indubitably the psychology of a Teuton. My object in mentioning him here is to bring out the fact that, far from being the incarnation of recent animosities, he is the creature of my old deep-seated, and, as it were, impartial conviction.
J. C.
# Western v. Henderson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
279 U.S. 639
Western v. Henderson
Argued: April 17, 1929. --- Decided: May 27, 1929
Messrs. Fitzgerald Hall, of Nashville, Tenn., and John L. Tye, of Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.
Mr. Reuben R. Arnold, of Atlanta, Ga., for appellees.
Mr. Justice BUTLER 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
# Western v. Railroad Commission of Georgia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
261 U.S. 264
Western v. Railroad Commission of Georgia
Argued: Jan. 9, 1923. --- Decided: Feb 19, 1923
Messrs. Fitzgerald Hall, of Nashville, Tenn., and Henry C. Peeples, of Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.
Mr. Justice BUTLER 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
# Westfall v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
274 U.S. 256
Westfall v. United States
Argued: March 8 and 9, 1927. --- Decided: May 16, 1927
Messrs. D. S. Face and Harry D. Jewell, both of Grand Rapids, Mich., for Westfall.
Mr. William D. Mitchell, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
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
# Westinghouse Broadcasting Company v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
364 U.S. 518
Westinghouse Broadcasting Company v. United States
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice DOUGLAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER is of the opinion that the motion to affirm should be granted.

## 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
# Westinghouse Broadcasting Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
364 U.S. 518
Westinghouse Broadcasting Company v. United States
George B. Turner and Philip H. Strubing, for appellant.
Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Bicks, Richard A. Solomon and Bernard M. Hollander, for appellee the United States.
Bernard G. Segal, Samuel D. Slade, Robert L. Werner and Thomas E. Ervin, for appellees Radio Corporation of America and National Broadcasting Co., Inc.
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
# Wilson v. McNamee

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 572
Wilson v. McNamee
Error to the Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
McNamee tendered his services as a licensed Sandy Hook pilot to conduct the schooner 'E. E. Racket' by way of Sandy Hook to the port of New York. He was the first that offered his services. The tender was made at sea, about fifty miles from that port. The vessel was from a foreign port, sailing under register, and drew nine feet of water. The master refused to accept the services, and came into port without a pilot. McNamee demanded the compensation allowed by the local State law, and, payment having been refused, brought this suit and recovered judgment in the District Court of the city of New York for the First Judicial Circuit against Wilson, the consignee of the schooner. The case was thereupon removed by appeal to the proper Court of Common Pleas, and subsequently to the Court of Appeals of the State. Those courts successively affirmed the judgment. Wilson sued out this writ.
The laws of New York on the subject of pilotage contain, among other provisions, the following:--
'All masters of foreign vessels, and vessels from a foreign port, and all vessels sailing under register, bound to or from the port of New York, by the way of Sandy Hook, shall take a licensed pilot; or, in case of refusal to take such pilot, shall himself, owners or consignees, pay the said pilotage, as if one had been employed; and such pilotage shall be paid to the pilot first speaking or offering his services as pilot to such vessel.'
The fourth section of the act of Congress approved Aug. 7, 1789 (1 Stat. 54), declares that,-- 'All pilots in the bays, inlets, rivers, harbors, and ports of the United States shall continue to be regulated in conformity with the existing laws of the States respectively wherein such pilots may be, or with such laws as the States may respectively hereafter enact for the purpose, until further legislative provision shall be made by Congress.'
This enactment will also be found in sect. 4235 of the Revised Statutes.
The proviso to the second section of an act of Congress of Feb. 2, 1867 (14 Stat. 412), is in these words:--
'Nothing in this act contained, or in the act of which it is amendatory, shall be construed to annul or affect any regulations established by the existing laws of any State requiring vessels entering or leaving a port in such State to take a pilot duly authorized by the laws of such State, or of a State situate upon the waters of the same port.'
Mr. James S. Stearns, for the plaintiff in error.
The court declined hearing counsel for the defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE, after stating the case, 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
# Wilson v. Merchants' Loan Trust Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
183 U.S. 121
Wilson v. Merchants' Loan Trust Company
Argued: October 29, 30, 1901. --- Decided: December 2, 1901
Messrs. Delevan A. Holmes and W. E. Mason for plaintiff in error.
Mr. John N. Jewett for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Peckham 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
# Wilson v. New

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
243 U.S. 332
Wilson v. New
Argued: January 8, 9, and 10, 1917. --- Decided: March 19, 1917
[Syllabus from pages 332-334 intentionally omitted]
Solicitor General Davis, Messrs. Frank Hagerman, E. Marvin Underwood, and Attorney General Gregory for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 334-336 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Walker D. Hines, John G. Johnson, and Arthur Miller for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 336-340 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Chief Justice White 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
# Wilson v. North Carolina

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
169 U.S. 600
Wilson v. North Carolina
R. O. Burton and Thomas N. Hill, for plaintiff in error.
J. C. MacRae, W. H. Day, and A. C. Avery, for defendant in error.
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
# Wilson v. North Carolina/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
169 U.S. 600
Wilson v. North Carolina
In No. 558 (Wilson v. North Carolina, 18 Sup. Ct. 435) the same questions are involved and the same orders are made.

## 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
# Wilson v. Loew's/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 597
Wilson v. Loew's
The writ is dismissed as improvidently granted because the judgment rests on an adequate state ground.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, 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
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/WANKANER— Raj Saheb Sir Amarsinhji Banesinhji, K.C.I.E.

​WANKANER— Raj Saheb Sir Amarsinhji Banesinhji, K.C.I.E., Raj Saheb of — a Ruling Chief, whose biography appears in Part VII, page 24. of this work, was invested with the insignia of Knight Commander of the Order of Indian Empire by his Majesty the King-Emperor, on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/The State Departure from Delhi

THE STATE DEPARTURE FROM DELHI
On Saturday, 16th December, Their Imperial Majesties made their State Departure from Delhi. In the morning the Ruling Chiefs present in Delhi were, at tie special desire of ​His Majesty, assembled in the Audience Chamber of the Royal Camp to take leave of Their Majesties. This function concluded, the Royal procession set out for Selimgarh station. The streets were, as at the State Entry, lined with troops, behind whom were standing hundreds of thousands of the loving subjects of Their Majesties, who had assembled to bid them farewell. Their Majesties drove in an open state carriage, and were escorted by a British Cavalry Regiment, a Battery of Royal Horse Artillery, the Imperial Cadet Corps and an Indian Cavalry Regiment, and were attended by His Excellency the Commander-in-Chief and Staff, and preceded by the Herald and Assistant Herald. As the royal procession entered the Fort, a salute of 101 guns was fired. The assembled populace cheered most heartily, and the enthusiasm was remarkably spontaneous. At Selimgarh station Their Majesties were received by His Excellency the Governor-General, the heads of Local Governments, the Metropolitan of India, the Chief Justice of Bengal, the Naval Commander-in-Chief, the Members of the Supreme Council and the Durbar Committee, headed by their President, Sir John Hewett, G. C. S. I. After taking leave of these officials, His Majesty entered his train, and proceeded to Nepal.
Her Majesty the Queen then entered her train, and set out for Agra.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Their Majesties' Departure

THEIR MAJESTIES' DEPARTURE
Vociferous cheers were raised as Their Majesties left in a launch for the "Medina." The battleships in the harbour fired a Royal salute.
On board the Royal Yacht Their Majesties gave a luncheon party before leaving, and H. H. the Maharao Raja of Bundi was afterwards invested with the insignia of a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Vala Laksman Meram, C. I. E.

​Vala Laksman Meram, C. I. E., Chief of Thana-Devli, Jetpur Taluka, was granted the insignia of Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire by His Majesty the King-Emperor, on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar. Address : Jetpur Devli, Bombay Presidency.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Ugyen Dorji Kazi, Raja

​Ugyen Dorji Kazi, Raja, Rai Bahadur, a notice of whom appears in Part VIII, page 76, of this work, is the Bhutan Agent at Kalimpong, and was granted the personal title of Raja on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Umar Hyat Khan Tiwana, Captain the Hon'ble Malik, M.V.O., C.I.E.

​Umar Hyat Khan Tiwana, Captain the Hon'ble Malik, M.V.O., C.I.E., Assistant Herald to His Imperial Majesty the King-Emperor, whose biography appears in Part III, page 66, was invested as a Member, Fourth Class, of the Royal Victorian Order, by His Majesty at the recent Coronation Durbar.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/UDAIPUR — His Highness Maharajadhiraja Maharana Sir Fateh Singh Bahadur, G. C. S. I., G. C. I. E.

​UDAIPUR — His Highness Maharajadhiraja Maharana Sir Fateh Singh Bahadur, G. C. S. I., G. C. I. E., Maharana of — a Ruling Chief, whose biography appears in Part I, pages 62-64. of this work, was invested with the insignia of Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Indian Empire by His Majesty the King-Emperor, on the occasion of the recent Coronation Durbar. His Highness was further distinguished on that occasion by being appointed Ruling Chief in Waiting on His Majesty.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/The Royal Visit to India

WHO'S WHO IN INDIA
SUPPLEMENT
THE ROYAL VISIT TO INDIA
On December 2nd, 1911. their Majesties the King-Emperor and the Queen-Empress arrived in Bombay by the Royal Yacht "Medina" and received a most enthusiastic reception.
Their Majesties were presented with an address of welcome by the Bombay Corporation, to which His Majesty made the following reply, which will live long in the memories of the Indian people :
"You have rightly said that I am no stranger among you, and I can heartily respond that I feel myself no stranger in your beautiful city. Six years ago I arrived, indeed, as a new-comer, but the recollection of your cordial and sympathetic greeting is still fresh in my memory. The wondrous aspect disclosed by the approach to your shores, the first glimpse of the palms rising as it were from the bosom of the sea, have not been forgotten, and have lost none of their fascination for me. From Bombay I set forth in 1905, encouraged by your affectionate welcome, to traverse at any rate a part of this vast country, and to strive to gain some knowledge of its people. Such knowledge as I acquired could not but deepen my sympathy with all races and creeds, and when through the lamented death of my beloved father I was called to the Throne of my ancestors, one of my first and most earnest desires was to revisit my good subjects in India.
"It is with feelings of no common emotion that I find myself here again to-day with the Queen-Empress at my side ​and that desire fulfilled. And I come with a heart full of gratitude that the anxiety due to a threatened scarcity in certain areas of the Presidency has, thanks to favourable and opportune rains, been happily dispelled, and that there is every prospect of your land being blessed with a good spring harvest.
"Your eloquent Address has recalled to me that Bombay was once the dowry of a British Queen. As such Humphrey Cook took it over 250 years ago, a mere fishing village. You, gentlemen, and your forerunners, have made it a jewel of the British Crown. I see again with joy the rich setting of its beautiful and stately buildings. I note also the less conspicuous, but also more profitable, improvements lately effected; but above all, I recognise with pride your efforts to heighten what must always be the supreme lustre of such a jewel as this, the peace, happiness, and prosperity of all classes of the citizens.
"From my heart I thank you for the generous reception accorded to the Queen-Empress and myself to-day. We earnestly pray that God's blessing may rest upon our Indian Empire and that peace and prosperity may be ever vouchsafed to its people."
His Majesty having read his speech, Lady Mehta presented a beautiful bouquet to Her Majesty. The members of the Bombay Corporation were then presented to the King-Emperor.
# Who's Who in India Supplement 1 (1912)/Their Majesties at Nagpur

THEIR MAJESTIES AT NAGPUR
On 9th January, Nagpur had the honour of a visit from Their Imperial Majesties. The special train carrying Their Majesties arrived there at 2-15 p. m. The Chief Commissioner, Sir Reginald Craddock, introduced the General Commanding the Jubbulpur Division, the Lord Bishop, the three Judicial Commissioners, the Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner, Sir Gangadhar Rao Chitnavis, President of tin- Municipal Committee, the members of the Viceroy's Legislative Council representing the Central Provinces and Berar, the Hon'ble Mr. M. B. Dadabhoy, and others. Their Majesties then motored to the Fort at a very slow pace, amidst cheers. Their Majesties, alter inspecting the Fort, motored back to the station where they thanked the Chief Commissioner, the General Commanding Jubbulpore Brigade, the President of the Municipal Committee and the Deputy Commissioner for the excellent arrangements that had been made for their reception. Tiny left amidst loud cheers for Bombay at 3-15 P.M.
# Woman of the Century/Elnora Monroe Babcock

​BABCOCK, Mrs. Elnora Monroe, woman suffragist, born in Columbus, Pa., 11th January, 1852. Her maiden name was Monroe. She was married at the early age of eighteen to Prof. John W. Babcock, of Jamestown, N. Y., who for the last EUNORA MONROE BABCOCK. twelve years has been city superintendent of public schools in Dunkirk. N. Y., where they now live. From early girlhood she felt the injustice of denying to woman a voice in government, which concerned her the same as a man, but as her time was taken up to a great extent in household affairs, and she lived in a community where but few sympathized with that feeling and none were ready to come out and take a stand for freedom, she took no very active part in the reforms of the day until 1889, when, owing mainly to her efforts, a political equality club was organized in Dunkirk, of which she was made president. This club flourished remarkably under her management, and before the close of her first year as president of the Dunkirk club, she was elected president of the Chautauqua County Political Equality Club, the most thoroughly organized county in the United States, having twenty-five flourishing local clubs within its borders and a membership of 1,400. At the close of her first year as ​president of that club she was unanimously re-elected. That office she still holds. On 25th July. 1891, she had the honor of presiding over the first woman in suffrage meeting ever held at the great Chautauqua Assembly, where, through the request of the county club.the subject was allow ed to be advocated. Aside from the presidency of these clubs, she has Served upon a number of important committees connected with suffrage work. Although deeply interested in all the reforms of the day tending to the uplifting of humanity, she has devoted most of her time to the enfranchisement of woman believing this to be the most important reform before the American people to-day, and one U|x>n which all other reforms rest.
# Woman of the Century/Emily Caroline Chandler Hodgin

​HODGIN, Mrs. Emily Caroline Chandler, temperance reformer, born in Williamsport, Ind., EMILY CAROLINE CHANDLER HODGIN. 12th April, 1838. Her father, Hon. Robert A. Chandler, who was of German descent, emigrated from New York to western Indiana while it was yet a wilderness. Mr. Chandler was a self-made man, a scholarly lawyer. He accumulated a competence and reared a large family. The mother was a member of the Dodd family, of Orange, N. J., and was a cultured Christian lady. Mrs. Hodgin had the advantage of the best schools of Williamsport and her father's large library. Accepting her father's doctrine that every one should learn to be self-supporting, she early taught school, and paid her own way through the Illinois Normal University, graduating in 1867, making a record as a strong student, especially in mathematics. After graduating she became the wife of her classmate, Cyrus W. Hodgin, and settled in Richmond, Ind. There two years later, a daughter, her only child, was born. In 1872 she removed to Terre Haute, where for many years her husband was a teacher in the State Normal School. It was there Mrs. Hodgin entered the field of work that has since chiefly occupied her time and best thought. She was one of the leaders in the temperance crusade in the city, and was a delegate to the convention in Cleveland, Ohio, where the crusading spirit was crystallized by the organization of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. After that she began the work of organizing the forces in neighboring parts of the State. In 1878 the strain upon her strength induced nervous exhaustion, from which she found relief by a six-months retirement in the sanitarium in Dansville, N. Y. In 1883 she returned to Richmond, and has since been devoting much of her time to furthering the work of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. She is president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in her own county, is secretary of the State Suffrage Association, and is one of the trustees of the Hadley Industrial Home for the education of poor girls. In addition to these lines of work, she received in 1886 the Chautauqua diploma for a four-years course of study, and recently completed a course of biblical and theological study in Earlham College. She is a member of the Society of Friends and avails herself of the freedom accorded to the women of that church to "speak in meeting."