OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# How to Know the Ferns (7th ed)/Preface

"If it were required to know the position of the fruit-dots or the character of the indusium, nothing could be easier than to ascertain it; but if it is required that you be affected by ferns, that they amount to anything, signify anything to you, that they be another sacred scripture and revelation to you, helping to redeem your life, this end is not so easily accomplished."
—Thoreau
PREFACE
Since the publication, six years ago, of "How to Know the Wild Flowers," I have received such convincing testimony of the eagerness of nature-lovers of all ages and conditions to familiarize themselves with the inhabitants of our woods and fields, and so many assurances of the joy which such a familiarity affords, that I have prepared this companion volume on "How to Know the Ferns." It has been my experience that the world of delight which opens before us when we are admitted into some sort of intimacy with our companions other than human is enlarged with each new society into which we win our way.
It seems strange that the abundance of ferns everywhere has not aroused more curiosity as to their names, haunts, and habits. Add to this abundance the incentive to their study afforded by the fact that owing to the comparatively small number of species we can familiarize ourselves with a large ​proportion of our native ferns during a single summer, and it is still more surprising that so few efforts have been made to bring them within easy reach of the public.
I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to the many books on our native ferns which I have consulted, but more especially to Gray's "Manual," to Eaton's "Ferns of North America," to the "Illustrated Flora" of Messrs. Britton and Brown, to Mr. Underwood's "Our Native Ferns," to Mr. Williamson's "Ferns of Kentucky," to Mr. Dodge's "Ferns and Fern Allies of New England," and to that excellent little quarterly, which I recommend heartily to all fern-lovers, the "Fern Bulletin," edited by Mr. Willard Clute, of Binghamton, N. Y.
To the State Botanist, Dr. Charles H. Peck, who has kindly read the proof-sheets of this book, I am indebted for many suggestions; also to Mr. Arthur G. Clement, of the University of the State of New York.
To Miss Marion Satterlee thanks are due not only for many suggestions, but also for the descriptions of the Woodwardias.
The pen-and-ink illustrations are all from original drawings by Miss Satterlee and Miss Alice ​Josephine Smith. The photographs have been furnished by Miss Murray Ledyard, Miss Madeline Smith, and Mr. Augustus Pruyn.
In almost all cases I have followed the nomenclature of Gray's "Manual" as being the one which would be familiar to the majority of my readers, giving in parentheses that used in the "Illustrated Flora" of Messrs. Britton and Brown.
Frances Theodora Parsons
Albany, March 6, 1899
"The more thou learnest to know and to enjoy, the more full and complete will be for thee the delight of living."
# How to Play Chess (Rogers)

* related portals: Chess.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
CROWELL’S HANDY INFORMATION SERIES
HOW TO PLAY
CHESS
COMPILED BY CHARLOTTE BOARDMAN ROGERS
NEW YORK THOMAS Y. CROWELL & CO. PUBLISHERS
Copyright, 1907,
By Thomas Y. Crowell & Co.
PREFACE
In preparing the present work the compiler wishes to give full credit to those books which she has had occasion to use as authorities for the general principles and laws of the game and for such of its history as the limited space of the Introduction permitted. The list is as follows: “The Chess-Player’s Handbook,” by Howard Staunton; “Chess,” by E. F. Green; “The Principles of Chess in Theory and Practice,” and “The Art of Chess,” by James Mason; “The American Cyclopædia,” and “The Life of Philidor,” by George Allen.
C. B. R.
    May 1, 1907.
CONTENTS.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# How to Play Chess (Rogers)/Bibliography

BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Chess Openings. I. Gunsberg. (London: George Bell & Son.)
Chess Player's Companion. Howard Staunton. (New York: Macmillan Co.)
Chess Pocket Manual. G. H. D. Gossip. (New York: Chas. Scribner's Sons.)
Chess Sparks. J. H. Ellis. (New York: Longmans, Green & Co.)
Chess Strategetics. Franklin K. Young. (Boston: Little, Brown & Co.)
Game of Chess. P. C. Morphy. New York: Macmillan Co.)
Grand Tactics of Chess. Franklin K. Young. (Boston: Little, Brown & Co.)
Minor Tactics of Chess. Franklin K. Young. (Boston: Little, Brown & Co.)
Model Chess Instructor. William Steinmitz. (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.)
​Principles of Chess in Theory and Practice. James Mason. (London: Horace Cox.)
Theory of Chess Openings. G. H. D. Gossip. (New York: Frederick Warne & Co.)
Two Move Chess Problems. B. G. Laws. (London: George Bell & Sons.)
# Jackson v. Ashton (33 U.S. 148)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
33 U.S. 148
Jackson v. Ashton
APPEAL from the circuit court of the United States for the Pennsylvania district.
After the argument was commenced by Mr Key for the appellant, the court stated that an objection to the jurisdiction of this case, arose from the omission to state the citizenship of the defendant, William E. Ashton, in the bill, as filed in the circuit court, and appearing on the printed copy of the record. The caption of the bill was in the following terms.
'Thomas Jackson, a citizen of the state of Virginia, William Goodwin Jackson and Maria Congreve Jackson, citizens of Virginia, infants, by their father and next friend, the said Thomas Jackson v. The Reverend William E. Ashton, a citizen of the state of Pennsylvania. In equity.'
The bill proceeds to state that the complainants and the appellants are citizens of the state of Virginia. The only description of the defendant is, 'William E. Ashton, of the city of Philadelphia,' which is in the body of the bill.
Mr Peters, for the appellee, stated, that although aware of the objection to the jurisdiction, in consequence of there being an omission to state the citizenship of the appellee, yet he was not disposed to urge the exception. If the court could take jurisdiction of the case, the appellee was entirely willing; indeed, he was anxious that the court should hear and determine the cause. He wished it to be understood that the appellee made no objection to the court's proceeding in the case.
Mr Key contended, that the caption of the bill was part of it, and that taken with the bill, the citizenship of the defendant was sufficiently shown. The disposition of this court has been manifested in many cases, to get rid of technical difficulties of this kind.
Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL 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
# Jackson v. Allen

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
132 U.S. 27
Jackson v. Allen
[Statement of Case from pages 27-33 intentionally omitted]
E. H. Farrar and E. B. Kruttschnitt, for Jackson.
T. L. Bayne and Geo. Denegre, for Brown Bros. & Co.
A. Goldth waite and John M. Allen, for Allen and others.
FULLER, C. 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
# Jackson v. Allen/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
132 U.S. 27
Jackson v. Allen
The original action and that of intervention and third opposition therein were brought in the civil district court for the parish of Orleans, La., and petitions filed for their removal into the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana upon the ground of the diverse citizenship of the parties. The cause was thereupon docketed and tried in the circuit court, by the judge thereof, on stipulation according to the statute, and, upon his findings, judgment was rendered, and writs of error were prosecuted to this court. It appears from the record that the citizenship of the parties at the commencement of the actions, as well as at the time the petitions for removal were filed, was not sufficiently shown, and that therefore the jurisdiction of the state court was never divested. Stevens v. Nichols, 130 U.S. 230, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 518. This being so, the defect cannot be cured by amendment. Crehore v. Railroad Co., 131 U.S. 240, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 692. We are compelled to reverse the judgment, at the costs, however, of the respective plaintiffs in error, and remit the cause to the circuit court, with directions to remand to the state 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
# Jacks v. City of Helena

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
115 U.S. 288
Jacks v. City of Helena
Argued: November 9, 1885. ---
M. T. Sanders, for the motion.
J. C. Tappan and I. J. Hornor, against the motion.
WAITE, C. 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
# Jackson ex rel. Bradstreet v. Huntington

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
30 U.S. 402
Jackson ex rel. Bradstreet v. Huntington

## 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
# Jackson v. Ashton

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Jackson v. Ashton."
* 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.
* Jackson v. Ashton (33 U.S. 148)
* Jackson v. Ashton (35 U.S. 480)
* Jackson v. Ashton (36 U.S. 229)
# Jacks v. City of Helena/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
115 U.S. 288
Jacks v. City of Helena
Argued: November 9, 1885. ---
These motions are granted on the authority of Detroit City Ry. Co. v. Guthard, 114 U.S. 133; S.C.. 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 811, and the cases there cited. It appears distinctly on the face of the opinion of the court below, which by the laws of Arkansas forms part of the record, (Rev. St. Ark. 1884, § 1318,) that the decision of the case was put, and properly put, on a ground which did not involve a consideration of the federal question that may possibly have been presented by one of the several defenses set up in the answer of the city, to-wit, that the constitution of 1874 prohibited the issue of the bonds in dispute. In fact, it is intimated in the opinion that if the case had rested on this defense alone, the judgment would have been the other way. 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
# Ichneutae

* related portals: Ancient Greek drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
Ἰχνευταί (Ichneutai, Latin: Ichneutae) is a fragmentary satyr play by Sophocles. In the play, a newborn Hermes has stolen the cattle of Apollo who sends a chorus of satyrs to retrieve the animals.
English-language translations of Ἰχνευταί include:
* ΙΧΝΕΥΤΑΙ ΣΑΤΥΡΟΙ, pp. 224–270 in The Fragments of Sophocles, vol. I, translated by A. C. Pearson (1917) IA
* The Ichneutae of Sophocles, translated by Richard Johnson Walker (1919) (transcription project)
This work is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago. Translations of this work may be copyrighted.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Icelandic Poetry/Wisdom of Alviss

ARGUMENT.
This ode appears to be written to shew the excellence of the Icelandic language, in being able to furnish such a variety of names for every indivdual thing. These, the translator has been obliged to express, in most instances, by a periphrasis. The subject of it is a certain Dwarf, who calls himself Alviss, or All-Wise, that prides himself in having seen the nine worlds, and makes a pedantic display of his knowledge before Thor. He comes from Asgard, to demand the daughter of Thor in marriage. Thor acknowledges that his daughter had been promised to him, but refuses to give her up, on account of his absence when the agreement was entered into. He, however, leaves the dwarf some hope of obtaining her, by the display of his superior knowledge. This he did for the purpose of detaining the dwarf till next morning; for he was of that species of Genii who shun the light. At the conclusion of the discourse, the dwarf was forced to depart without his bride, and not without some danger of his life. By this artifice Thor seemed not to have violated the rights of hospitality, or to have broken his engagement; and the danger to which the dwarf was exposed, could be attributed to nothing but his own temerity.
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
# Ichneutae (Walker 1919)

* related portals: Ancient Greek drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
The Ichneutae of Sophocles is a fragmentary satyr play, and the longest such surviving play written by Sophocles.
Layout 2
THE ICHNEUTAE OF SOPHOCLES
THE
ICHNEUTAE OF SOPHOCLES
With Notes and a Translation into English, preceded by Introductory Chapters dealing with the Play, with Satyric Drama, and with various cognate matters
BY
RICHARD JOHNSON WALKER
Τέλος δὲ τραγῳδίας μὲν λύειν τὸν βίον, κωμῳδίας δὲ συνιστᾶν αὐτὸν, σατυρικῆς δὲ τοιούτοις θυμελικοῖς χαριεντισμοῖς καθηδύνειν αὐτόν.
Περὶ Κωμῳδίας, apud Crameri Anecdota.
LONDON: BURNS AND OATES LTD. 28 ORCHARD STREET, W. 1919
CONTENTS
| | PAGE |
| Dedication | v |
| Preface | xi |
| Chapter I (The Plot) | 1 |
| Chapter II (The Staff and the Lyre) | 5 |
| Chapter III (The Suppression of Pan) | 14 |
| Chapter IV (The Style of the Play) | 25 |
| Chapter V (The Vocabulary of the Play) | 30 |
| Chapter VI (Stichometry) | 155 |
| Chapter VII (The Choric Metres of the Play) | 175 |
| Chapter VIII (Non-Choric Metre in Satyric Drama, with a Discussion of the Practice of Pratinas) | 189 |
| Chapter IX (Thespis) | 270 |
| Chapter X (De Choro: an alleged Dialogue by Sophocles, in which the Disputants are Thespis, Choerilus, and himself) | 305 |
| Chapter XI (Origines) | 313 |
| Chapter XII (Notes on the Nature of Satyric Drama) | 348 |
| Chapter XIII (Eridion Agyrticum ?) | 353 |
| Chapter XIV (Cos) | 378 |
| Text of the Ichneutae with Translation into English and Apparatus Criticus | 433 |
| Notes on the Text | 508 |
| Appendix to Introductory Chapters | 567 |
| Addenda, etc. | 627 |
| Indices | 645 |
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Ickes v. Fox Same

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
300 U.S. 82
Ickes v. Fox Same
Argued: Jan. 6, 1937. --- Decided: Feb 1, 1937
As Amended on Denial of Rehearing March 1, 1937.
Messrs. Homer S.C.ummings, Atty. Gen., and Harry W. Blair, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 83-85 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Stephen E. Chaffee, of Sunnyside, Wash., for respondents.
[Argument of Counsel from Page 86 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND 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
# Icelandic Poetry/Song of the Ravens

SONG
OF THE
RAVENS.
* ↑ “Odin's strength,”—Perhaps the meaning of this verse is, that the powers and virtues which are attributed to Odin and the rest, availed nothing in the calamity which then threatened the Asi state.
* ↑ Dryas, a fabulous gigantic woman, by whom the Heavens are supposed to be prefigured.
* ↑ Thursi, the Geloni.
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
# Insurance Group Committee v. Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
329 U.S. 607
Insurance Group Committee v. Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company
Argued: Jan. 6, 1947. --- Decided: Feb 3, 1947
See 330 U.S. 854, 67 S.Ct. 860.
[Syllabus from pages 607-609 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. George D. Gibson, of Richmond, Va., and Kenneth F. Burgess, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioners.
F. C. Nicodemus, Jr., of New York City, and William V. Hodges, of Denver, Colo., for respondents.

## 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
# Insurance of North America v. Guardiola/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 642
Insurance of North America v. Guardiola
This was an action on a policy of insurance upon a cargo of sugar shipped at Sagua, in Cuba, for New York. After verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs, the defendant sued out this writ of error. The principal controversy at the trial was whether the cargo shipped consisted of 531 hogsheads, or of 368 hogsheads only. Upon this question there was much conflicting evidence, and the plaintiffs introduced a number of depositions, taken under commission at Sagua, including those of the plaintiffs themselves, as to what took place at their warehouse, and those of their shipping agents, as to what took place at the port, some 20 miles below. Annexed to the deposition of one of the plaintiffs were letters written to them by their shipping agents, at the time of the successive shipments, stating the number of hogsheads shipped. Upon these letters being offered in evidence by the plaintiffs, the defendant objected that they were irrelevant and incompetent, and duly excepted to the ruling of the court admitting them. It is too clear for discussion that these letters, written to the plaintiffs by their own agents, were no part of the transaction of shipping the sugar, but were mere reports by the agents to their principals, and were incompetent, either in themselves, or in corroboration of the testimony of the agents, to prove the facts recited in the letters against third persons. Freeborn v. Smith, 2 Wall. 160, 176; Dwyer v. Dunbar, 5 Wall. 318; U.S. v. Corwin, ante, 318. Upon the exceptions to other rulings we give no opinion, because they may be presented in a different aspect upon another trial. To avoid misapprehension, it may be added that, according to the rule heretofore laid down by this court, objections to copies of documents or memoranda embodied in or annexed to the depositions, might perhaps more properly have been made by motion to suppress them before the trial, so as to afford opportunity to produce the originals, when those would be competent evidence. York Co. v. Railroad Co., 3 Wall. 107; Blackburn v. Crawfords, Id. 175, 191. But the letters to the plaintiffs from their own agents were absolutely incompetent, and their admission in evidence clearly tended to prejudice the defendant with the jury. Upon this ground the judgment of the circuit court must be reversed, and the case remanded, with directions to set aside the verdict, and to order a new trial.

## 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
# Insurance of North America v. Guardiola

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
129 U.S. 642
Insurance of North America v. Guardiola
J. L. Cadwalader, for plaintiff in error.
W. W. Goodrich and George F. Edmunds, for defendants in error.
GRAY, 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
# Insurance Company v. Weide (78 U.S. 438)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
78 U.S. 438
Insurance Company v. Weide
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota; the case was thus:
In October, 1866, the Home Insurance Company insured, for the term of one year, against fire, a stock of groceries and other merchandise owned by C. & J. Weide, and which were contained in a storehouse occupied by them in the city of St. Paul. In February, 1867, the storehouse and its contents were burnt, and this suit was brought to recover for the loss of the stock of goods. At the trial the main question in issue was the extent of the loss. As most of the books were destroyed, and the defendants had introduced evidence tending to show that those which were not burned were not to be depended on, and afforded no data from which the value of the goods on hand at the date of the fire could be ascertained, or the extent of loss determined, the case rested chiefly on the testimony of the plaintiffs. They swore that their sales during the year preceding the fire were about $120,000, and that the goods on hand at the time of the fire were worth, at their cost value, $65,000.
The defendants insisted, on the basis of the sales, that the loss was greatly overstated, and, as one means of proving it, offered to show by witnesses in St. Paul, engaged in the same business with the plaintiffs, and whose annual sales were as large as theirs, that grocery merchants in that city for the previous six years had not carried, or had on hand at any one time, more than one-fifth of their annual aggregate sales, and that this was the case on the day when the fire occurred. In other words, they wished to show by the general course of trade in that branch of business in St. Paul, that the plaintiffs' loss could not have exceeded $24,000, if their sales during the year amounted to only $120,000.
The court refused to allow the evidence to go to the jury, and the correctness of this ruling was the only point in the case which it was necessary here to consider. In the course of the trial, however, the defendant asked a witness this question:
'Supposing that the plaintiffs' sales were $120,000 for the year preceding the fire, as grocery merchants, what average amount did they carry or have on hand during such year, according to the general course of business?'
And on objection made to it, some discussion took place below on the correctness of that question.
Mr. E. A. Storrs, for the plaintiff in error; Mr. W. H. Peckham, with a brief of Mr. L. Allis, contra.
Mr. Justice DAVIS 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