OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Jacobs v. Adams

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania:
April Term, 1781.
The Claim of Jacobs versus Adams Executor
This case had been argued on the 3d of July by Lewis for the Claimant, and Bradford for the estate of Adams. The former cited 2 P. Will. 157. 154. Pract. Reg. Barn. 151. 3 Wils. 206. 2 Burr 1083.—The latter cited 10 Mod. 277. 6 Mod. 167.
And now, the 8th of July, the Chief Justice stated the question, and delivered the opinion of the Court, to the following effect:
M’Kean C. J. The Teslator, Flowers, and Jacobs, entere$^d$ into an agreement for the sale of certain lands; soon after which Flower’s died, and Jacobs paid the purchase money to his executors. The will, however, which appointed these executors, was afterwards set aside, having been obtained by undue influence; and Jacobs filed the present claim to recover the money that he had thus improperly paid.
The only question submitted to the consideration of the Court, is, whether under these circumstances, interest should be allowed?
If there appeared, on the part of the executors, any thing like a suppressio veri, or suggestio falsi, our decision would, perhaps, he different from that which we have formed. But on the present complexion of the transaction, we think no interest ought to be allowed.
In Ventris, it is said, that no interest is lawful, and, in many other cases, that it cannot be recovered, unless given by a positive statute. When the St. of H.7. c. was passed, a question arose, whether interest might be allowed pending a writ of error; and it was refused. In the case of promissory notes, however, where a day certain is fixed for payment, interest is allowed from the day of payment; and, where no day is fixed, it is payable from the time of demand. But in the instance before us, the money was received, as well as paid, in a mistake, and neither fraud or surprize can be imputed to either party. Therefore,
Let the claim be allowed for the principal sum which Jacobs had paid, without interest.
See Henry Exor. versus Risk, et. al. post.
# Jacobellis v. Ohio/Dissent Harlan

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Black Stewart Goldberg
* Dissenting Opinions Warren Harlan
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.
While agreeing with my Brother BRENNAN's opinion that the responsibilities of the Court in this area are no different from those which attend the adjudication of kindred constitutional questions, I have heretofore expressed the view that the States are constitutionally permitted greater latitude in determining what is bannable on the score of obscenity than is so with the Federal Government. See my opinion in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496; cf. my opinion in Manual Enterprises, Inc., v. Day, 370 U.S. 478. While, as correctly said in MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN's opinion, the Court has not accepted that view, I nonetheless feel free to adhere to it in this still developing aspect of constitutional law.
The more I see of these obscenity cases, the more convinced I become that, in permitting the States wide, but not federally unrestricted, scope in this field, while holding the Federal Government with a tight rein, lies the best promise for achieving a sensible accommodation between [p204] the public interest sought to be served by obscenity laws (cf. my dissenting opinion in Bantam Books, Inc., v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 76, 77) and protection of genuine rights of free expression.
I experience no greater ease than do other members of the Court in attempting to verbalize generally the respective constitutional tests, for in truth the matter, in the last analysis, depends on how particular challenged material happens to strike the minds of jurors or judges, and ultimately those of a majority of the members of this Court. The application of any general constitutional tests must thus necessarily be pricked out on a case-by-case basis, but, as a point of departure, I would apply to the Federal Government the Roth standards as amplified in my opinion in Manual Enterprises, supra. As to the States, I would make the federal test one of rationality. I would not prohibit them from banning any material which, taken as a whole, has been reasonably found in state judicial proceedings to treat with sex in a fundamentally offensive manner, under rationally established criteria for judging such material.
On this basis, having viewed the motion picture in question, I think the State acted within permissible limits in condemning the film, and would affirm the judgment of the Ohio Supreme Court.
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 5/To My Flowers

The Offering, 1829 page 155
TO MY FLOWERS.
[The following beautiful lines were written by Mrs. Hernans, when confined by sickness. They were an impromptu, returned to the friend who had sent her the flowers to which they refer, by the messenger who brought them.A. N.]
Ye tell me not of birds and bees,
Not of the summer's murmuring trees,
Not of the streams and woodland bowers;—
A sweeter tale is yours, fair flowers.
Glad tidings to my couch ye bring,
Of one still bright, still flowing spring,
A fount of kindness, ever new,
In a friend's heart, the good and true.
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6

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
This work is available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of their rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law. You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
Miscellaneous Poetry 6 1831
By
Felicia Hemans
Compiled by Peter J. Bolton
Contents
* Church Music
* Song—What woke the buried sound that lay
* The Bed of Heath
* Fairy Song
* Look on me thus no more
* How can that love so deep, so lone
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/Song

The Athenæum, 1831, page 313
SONG.
BY MRS. HEMANS.
What woke the buried sound that lay
 In Memnon's harp of yore?
What spirit on its viewless way
 Along the Nile's green shore?
—Oh! not the night, and not the storm,
 And not the lightning's fire—
But sunlight's touch—the kind—the warm—
 This woke the mystic lyre!  This, this, awoke the lyre!
What wins the heart's deep chords to pour
 Their music forth on life,
Like a sweet voice, prevailing o'er
 The sounds of torrent strife?
—Oh! not the conflict midst the throng,
 Not e'en the triumph's hour;—
Love is the gifted and the strong
 To wake that music's power!
 His breath awakes that power!
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/Look on me thus no more

Poems of Felicia Hemans, 1872 edition, page 563
LOOK ON ME THUS NO MORE.
It is thy pity makes me weep,  My soul was strong before; Silent, yet strong its griefs to keep  From vainly gushing o'er. Turn from me, turn those gentle eyes! In this fond gaze my spirit dies:  Look on me thus no more!
Too late that softness comes to bless,  My heart's glad life is o'er; It will but break with tenderness,  Which cannot now restore! The lyre-strings have been jarr'd too long, Winter hath touch'd the source of song!  Look on me thus no more!
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/The Bed of Heath

Poems of Felicia Hemans, 1872 edition, page 562
THE BED OF HEATH.
"Soldier, awake! the night is past; Hear'st thou not the bugle's blast? Feel'st thou not the dayspring's breath? Rouse thee from thy bed of heath!  Arm, thou bold and strong! Soldier! what deep spell hath bound thee Fiery steeds are neighing round thee— Banners to the fresh wind play: Rise, and arm—'tis day, 'tis day!  And thou hast slumber'd long."
"Brother! on the heathery lea Longer yet my sleep must be; Though the morn of battle rise, Darkly night rolls o'er my eyes—  Brother, this is death! Call me not when bugles sound, Call me not when wine flows round; Name me but amidst the brave, Give me but a soldier's grave—  But my bed of heath!"
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 5/The Prayer for Life

Sharpe's London Magazine.
Museum of Foreign Literature and Science, 1829 Vol 15 page 325-326
From Sharpe's London Magazine.
THE PRAYER FOR LIFE.
BY MRS. HEMANS.
E vos, amigas!
Cercay-me em roda todas, e podendo,
Defendey-me da morte que me busca!
Ferreira.
O Sunshine and fair Earth!
 Sweet is your kindly mirth.
Angel of Death! yet, yet awhile delay!
 Too sad it is to part,
 Thus in my spring of heart,
With all the light and laughter of the day.
 For me the falling leaf
 Touches no chord of grief,
No dark word in the rose's bosom lies:
 Not one triumphal tone,
 One hue of hope, is gone
From song or bloom beneath the summer skies.
 Call me not hence away,
 Death, Death! ere yet decay
Over the golden hours one shade hath thrown;
 The poesy that dwells
 Deep in green woods and dells,
Still to my spirit speaks of joy alone.
Yet not for this, O Death!
 Not for the vernal breath
Of winds, that shake forth music from the trees;
 Not for the splendour given
 To Night's dark regal heaven,
Spoiler! I ask thee not reprieve for these.
 But for the happy love
Whose light, where'er I rove,
Kindles all nature to a sudden smile,
 Shedding on branch and flower
 A rainbow-tinted shower
Of richer life—spare, spare me yet awhile!
 Too soon, too fast thou'rt come!
 Too beautiful is home,
A home of gentle voices and kind eyes!
 And I the loved of all,
 On whom fond blessings fall
From every lip—oh wilt thou rend such ties?
 Sweet Sisters! weave a chain
 My spirit to detain;
Hold me to earth with strong affection back!
 Bind me with mighty love
 Unto the stream, the grove,
Our daily paths—our life's familiar track!
 Stay with me—gird me round!
 Your voices bear a sound
Of hope—a light comes with you and departs;  Hush my soul's boding knell
 That murmurs of farewell!
How can I leave this ring of kindest hearts?
 Death! Grave! and are there those
 That woo your dark repose
Midst the rich beauty of the glowing earth?  Surely about them lies
 No world of loving eyes—
Leave me, oh! leave me unto home and hearth!
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 5/The Welcome to Death

Sharpe's London Magazine.
Museum of Foreign Literature and Science, 1829 Vol 15 page 408
From Sharpe's London Magazine.
THE WELCOME TO DEATH.
BY MRS. HEMANS.
"Shall I abide
In this dull world? I have
Immortal longings in me!"
Antony and Cleopatra.
Thou art welcome, O thou warning voice,
 My soul hath pined for thee;
Thou art welcome as sweet sounds from shore,
 To wanderer on the sea.
I hear thee in the rustling woods,
 In the sighing vernal airs;
Thou call'st me from the lonely earth,
 With a deeper tone than theirs.
The lonely earth! since kindred steps
 From its green paths are fled,
A dimness and a hush have fall'n
 O'er all its beauty spread.
The silence of the' unanswering soul
 Is on me and around;
My heart hath echoes but for thee,
 Thou still small warning sound!
Voice after voice hath died away,
 Once in my dwelling heard,
Sweet household name by name hath changed
 To grief's forbidden word!
From dreams of night on each I call,
 Each of the far removed;
And waken to my own wild cry,
 Where are ye, my beloved?
Ye left me! and earth's flowers grew fill'd
 With records of the past,
And stars pour'd down another light
 Than o'er my youth they cast:
The skylark sings not as he sang
 When ye were by my side,
And mournful tones are in the wind,
 Unheard before ye died!
Thou art welcome, O thou summoner!  Why should the last remain? What eye can reach my heart of hearts,
 Bearing in light again?
Even could this be—too much of fear
 O'er love would now be thrown—
Away, away! from time, from change,
 To dwell amidst mine own!
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/Church Music

Fraser’s Magazine, 1831, page 603
CHURCH MUSIC.—BY MRS. HEMANS.
————"All the train
Sang Hallelujah, as the sound of seas."—Milton.
Again! oh, send those anthem-notes again
Thro' the arch'd roof in triumph to the sky!
Bid the old tombs give echoes to the strain,
The banners tremble, as with victory!
Sing them once more!—they waft my soul away,
High where no shadow of the past is thrown;
No earthly passion, thro' th' exulting lay,
Breathes mournfully one haunting under-tone.
All is of Heaven!—yet wherefore to mine eye,
Gush the quick tears unbidden from their source,
E'en while the waves of that strong harmony,
Sweep with my spirit on their sounding course?
Wherefore must rapture its full tide reveal,
Thus by the signs betokening sorrow's power?
—Oh! is it not, that humbly we may feel
Our nature's limits in its proudest hour!
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/How can that love so deep, so lone

Poems of Felicia Hemans, 1872 edition, page 565
HOW CAN THAT LOVE SO DEEP, SO LONE.
How can that love so deep, so lone,  So faithful unto death, Thus fitfully in laughing tone,  In airy word, find breath?
Nay! ask how on the dark wave's breast,  The lily's cup may gleam, Though many a mournful secret rest  Low in the unfathom'd stream.
That stream is like my hidden love,  In its deep current's power; And like the play of words above,  That lily's trembling flower.
# Hemans Miscellaneous Poetry 6/Fairy Song

Poems of Felicia Hemans, 1872 edition, pages 562-563
FAIRY SONG.
Have ye left the greenwood lone, Are your steps for ever gone? Fairy King and Elfin Queen, Come ye to the sylvan scene, From your dim and distant shore, Never more?
Shall the pilgrim never hear With a thrill of joy and fear, In the hush of moonlight hours, Voices from the folded flowers, Faint, sweet flute-notes as of yore, Never more?
"Mortal! ne'er shall bowers of earth Hear again our midnight mirth: By our brooks and dingles green
Since unhallow'd steps have been,
Ours shall thread the forests hoar
Never more.
"Ne'er on earthborn lily's stem
Will we hang the dewdrop's gem; Ne'er shall reed or cowslip's head Quiver to our dancing tread,
By sweet fount or murmuring shore—
Never more!"
# Home Education

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Home Education."
* 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.
* Home Education by Charlotte Marie Mason
* Home Education by Isaac Taylor
# Home (Brooke)

* "Home" from 1914 and other poems (1915)
* "Home" from The Collected Poems of Rupert Brooke (1915)
# Home Benefit Association v. Sargent

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
142 U.S. 691
Home Benefit Association v. Sargent
A. G. Fox and Francis Lawton, for plaintiff in error.
Miron Winslow, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice BLATCHFORD 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
# Home Bond Company v. McChesney

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
239 U.S. 568
Home Bond Company v. McChesney
Argued: December 3, 1915. --- Decided: January 10, 1916
Messrs. Robert Kinkead, S. M. Sapinsky, James R. Duffin, Owen D. Duffin, and S. M. Stockslager for appellant.
Messrs. Lewis A. Nuckols, John Bryce Baskin, and Eli H. Brown, Jr., for appellee.
Mr. Justice Pitney 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
# Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that Minnesota's suspension of creditor's remedies was not in violation of the United States Constitution. Blaisdell was decided during the height of the Great Depression and has been criticized by modern conservative and libertarian commentators. Nevertheless, Blaisdell has never been explicitly overruled. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
290 U.S. 398
Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell
Argued: Nov. 8, 9, 1933. --- Decided: Jan 8, 1934
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.
[Syllabus from pages 398-400 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Karl H. Covell and Alfred W. Bowen, both of Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 402-408 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Harry H. Peterson and Wm. S. Ervin, both of St. Paul, Minn., for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 409-415 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES 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
# Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To assist in the provision of housing for low- and moderate-income families, and to extend and amend laws relating to housing and urban development.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
    That this Act may be cited as the ``Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968´´.
Approved August 1, 1968.

## Legislative History

* S. 3497, (H.R. 17989)
   * HOUSE REPORTS:
   ** No. 90-1585 accompanying H.R. 17989 (Comm. on Banking and Currency)
   ** No. 90-1785 (Comm. of Conference)
   * SENATE REPORTS:
   ** No. 90-1123 (Comm. on Banking and Currency)
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 114 (1968):
   ** May 23, 24, 27, 28, considered and passed Senate.
   ** July 10, considered and passed House, amended, in lieu of H.R. 17989
   ** July 25, Senate agreed to conference report.
   ** July 26, House agreed to conference report.

## Notes

* Generally codified, in part and as amended, under https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/1701 et al. of Title 12, Chapter 13. See Edition for original text.
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
# Houston, East & West Texas Railway Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Houston E. & W. T. Ry. Co. v. United States, 234 U.S. 342 (1914), also known as Shreveport Rate Case, was a decision of the United States Supreme Court expanding the power of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States. Justice Hughes's majority opinion stated that the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce also allowed it to regulate purely intrastate commerce in cases where control of the former was not possible without control of the latter. Because the Supreme Court consolidated several related appeals, they are sometimes collectively known as the "Shreveport Rate Cases" although the Supreme Court issued only one ruling. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
234 U.S. 342
Houston, East & West Texas Railway Company v. United States
TEXAS & RACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY et al., Appts.,
v.
UNITED STATES, the Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
No. 568.
Nos. 567 and 568.
Argued October 28 and 29, 1913.
Decided June 8, 1914.
[Syllabus from pages 342-344 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Hiram M. Garwood, James G. Wilson, and Maxwell Evarts for appellants in No. 567.
Messrs. Thomas J. Freeman, George Thompson, and W. L. Hall for appellants in No. 568.
Assistant Attorney General Denison and Mr. Thurlow M. Gordon for the United States.
Mr. P. J. Farrell for the Interstate Commerce Commission.
Messrs. R. G. Pleasant, Luther M. Walter, John S. Burchmore, M. W. Borders, and W. M. Barrow for intervener, the Railroad Commission of Louisiana, in No. 567.
Mr. Justice Hughes 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
# Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To assist in the provision of housing for low- and moderate-income families, to promote orderly urban development, to improve living environment In urban areas, and to extend and amend laws relating to housing, urban renewal, and community facilities.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
    That this Act may be cited as the ``Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965´´.
Approved August 10, 1965.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 7984, (S. 2213)
   * HOUSE REPORTS:
   ** No. 89-365 (Comm. on Banking and Currency)
   ** No. 89-679 (Comm. of Conference)
   * SENATE REPORTS:
   ** No. 89-378 accompanying S. 2213 (Comm. on Banking and Currency)
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 111 (1965):
   ** June 28, 29, considered in House.
   ** June 30, considered and passed House.
   ** July 14, S. 2213 considered in Senate.
   ** July 15, considered and passed Senate, amended, in lieu of S. 2213
   ** July 26, Senate agreed to conference report.
   ** July 27, House agreed to conference report.

## Notes

* Generally codified, in part and as amended, under https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/1701 of Title 12, Chapter 13. See Edition for original text.
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