OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Gregory the Great/Register of Epistles/Book VII/Chapter 10

Epistle XVII.
To Sabinianus, Bishop.
Gregory to Sabinianus, Bishop of Jadera.
If thou hadst been at pains to weigh with careful consideration the rule of ecclesiastical administration and the order of ancient custom, neither would any fault of unlawful presumption have crept in upon thee, nor would others have incurred danger by occasion of thy sin. Now there is no doubt that thou wast aware how that, certain things having come to our ears about Maximus which were no slight bar to his advancement to the priesthood, we had not given our assent to it, and that it was our will that he should not attain to what he strove after till there had been adequate satisfaction concerning the things that were said. But, when thou oughtest by all means to have observed this, it came rather to pass that he, snatching at the episcopate with the greediness of a blind mind, inclined thee unwarily to favour him in spite of our prohibition.  But, lest even then the things that had been reported to us should remain unexamined, he was summoned to come hither by letters from us. And, when he was so perversely inclined as to defer doing so, we took care to admonish him in repeated letters, under pain of interdiction from communion, to make haste to come to us for his purification, putting aside all excuses: but he chose rather to submit to excommunication than to evince obedience. Whence the result is (awful to be said), that the pravity of his perverse disposition involves others in his own perdition. Now however, inasmuch as we have learnt that thou dissentest from his wickedness, we exhort thee by the present writing (that so it may profit thy soul to have severed thyself, even though late, from him) that thou henceforth neither communicate with him nor make mention of his name in the sacred solemnities of mass; and also that thou defer not coming to us without delay, yea and bring others with thee too, such as thou canst, whether bishops or other religious persons, so that (the cause being thoroughly examined), both your absolution, should the case require it, may fittingly and decently ensue, and that those who have fallen into the sin of the like temerity may be recalled to the way of salvation, with the help of the blessed Peter, Prince of the apostles, by an arrangement well-pleasing to Christ. Moreover, let any bishop or religious person that may come to us know that he will sustain no prejudice or injustice, but that all will be arranged so as to please our Redeemer after full ascertainment of the truth; to the end that even from our way of ordering the matter, with the Lord’s approval, it may appear to all that we are not moved by private grudge against any man, but by zeal for God and for the adjustment of ecclesiastical order.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See VI. 27, note 6.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Gregory the Great/Register of Epistles/Book VII/Chapter 11

Epistle XIX.
To Marinianus, Archbishop.
Gregory to Marinianus, Archbishop of Ravenna.
Your Fraternity has been long aware after what manner the Church of Ariminum has been hitherto deprived of pastoral government by reason of the known bodily affliction of the priest who was ordained by us. Now we, moved by the prayers of the inhabitants of that place, having frequently exhorted him to return with the help of the Lord to his Church, if he should feel himself relieved from this affliction of the head whereby he was kept away, he has been expected now for four years since the leave of absence given him.  And, when at the instance of clergy and citizens who have come from thence and urged us with
entreaties, we urgently exhorted him to return with them, the Lord helping him, if able to do so, he begged of us by a supplication in writing, that, inasmuch as by reason of this affliction wherewith he is held he can in no wise rise to the government of the same Church, or to the office undertaken by him, we should ordain a bishop to this same Church. Hence, seeing that the charge laid upon us of caring for all the Churches constrains us to see that pastoral guardianship be no longer wanting to the flock of the faithful, and being compelled by their entreaties, and by his renunciation on the ground of his own inability, we have resolved that a bishop should be ordained to this same Church of Ariminum: and, having issued our precept according to custom, we have not failed to admonish the clergy and people of the same Church, to the end that they may concur with concordant provision to choose for themselves a prelate. We therefore exhort your Fraternity that him whom all with one consent shall choose (as they themselves also have requested leave to do) you cause to be summoned before you; and test him by cautious enquiry on all sides. And if, by favour of the Lord, none of the things that are punished with death in the text of the Heptateuch are found in him, and if, on the report of trustworthy persons, his life should approve itself to you, send him to us with the certification of his election, adding your own letter of testification, to the end that a prelate of this same Church may, under the ordering of the Lord, be by us consecrated.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Concerning the election of Marinianus, see V. 48.
* ↑ Viz. Castorius. See II. 41.
* ↑ Cf. XI. 47 as to the supersession of a bishop incapacitated by illness, except at his own written request, being uncanonical.
* ↑ See Ep. XX., which follows.
# On a Grey Thread/Grain and Grapes

Grain and Grapes
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Futility

Futility
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Experience

Experience
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Episode

Episode
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/I, Lover

I, Lover
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Hope

Hope
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/From the Top of the World

From the Top of the World
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Grain and Grapes (Title)

Grain and Grapes
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Grey Skies

Grey Skies
Layout 2
# On a Grey Thread/Face in the Rain

The Face in the Rain
Layout 2
# Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 11/"The lesser light" - Part 2

​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/698 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/699 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/700 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/701
# Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 11/"The lesser light" - Part 1

​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/669 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/670 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/671 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/672 ​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/673
# Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 11/"What is my love like?"

​Page:Once a Week Jun to Dec 1864.pdf/547
# § 28-9-4. Commission staff

The Office of Legislative Counsel shall serve as staff for the commission.

# Annotations
## History

Code 1981, § 28-9-4, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 197, § 1. Annotations

## Research References & Practice Aids
### LAW REVIEWS.

For discussion of history, staffing, procedures, and duties of the Office of Legislative Counsel, see 23 Ga. St. B.J. 114 (1987).

### Hierarchy Notes

Title Note

### Hierarchy Notes

Chapter Note
# Official Code of Georgia Annotated/Title 28/Chapter 9/Section 1

This is revision 73, as released by Public.Domain.Org.
As used in this chapter, the term:
    (1) “Code” means the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, any unannotated version thereof, or any codification of the laws of the State of Georgia which is a successor to or replacement of such Code, and such term shall include all statutory provisions, annotations, research references, notes, indexes, tables, constitutions, cross-references, pocket parts, and other material related to or included in such Code.
    (2) “Commission” means the Code Revision Commission originally created pursuant to H. R. No. 217–838 adopted by the General Assembly at the 1977 regular session, as amended, and as re-created by Code Section 28—9—2.
(Code 1981, § 28—9—1, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 197, § 1.)
# Official Code of Georgia Annotated/Title 28/Chapter 9

This is revision 73, as released by Public.Domain.Org.
* Section 1: Definitions
* Section 2: Creation of the Code Revision Commission; membership, term of office, and vacancies; expenses and allowances; ratification of previous actions and contracts
* Section 3: Powers and duties of commission generally
* Section 4: Commission staff
* Section 5: Publication of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated; authority to make corrections and editorial changes; effect of changes; treatment of multiple amendments; preparation and introduction of legislation reenacting and correcting Code; effect
Cross references.—Provisions regarding enactment of Official Code of Georgia Annotated, T. 1., C. 1.
Code Commission notes.—Code sections comprising a new Chapter 9 of this title were added by Ga. L. 1985, p. 197, § 1 (§§ 28—9—1 through 28—9—4), Ga. L. 1985, p. 202, § 1 (§ 28—9—5), and Ga. L. 1985, p. 1283, § 2 (§§ 28—9—1 through 28—9—7). Because Ga. L. 1985, p. 1283, § 2 is the latest of the three Acts, in 1985 the chapter enacted by that Act was redesignated as Chapter 10 pursuant to Code Section 28—9—5, and the Code sections enacted by that Act were redesignated as Code Sections 28—10—1 through 28—10—7.
Editor’s notes.—Code Section 28—9—5 was enacted by an Act other than the Act which enacted Code Sections 28—9—1 through 28—9—4. See the Editor’s notes to Code Section 28—9—5.
# Official Code of Georgia Annotated/Title 28/Note
## JUDICIAL DECISIONS

LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY. -- Members of General Assembly are entitled to immunity against harassment of any type of legal action against them in connection with acts done by them in a strictly official capacity. Village of N. Atlanta v. Cook, 219 Ga. 316, 133 S.E.2d 585 (1963); Saleem v. Snow, 217 Ga. App. 883, 460 S.E.2d 104 (1995). COURT NOT TO CONCERN ITSELF WITH LEGISLATIVE ACTION. -- Judiciary cannot modify, amend, or repeal legislative action, nor concern itself with the wisdom of it. That is a field in which only the legislature may work. Sirota v. Kay Homes, Inc., 208 Ga. 113, 65 S.E.2d 597 (1951).
POLITICAL QUESTION IS NOT WITHIN JURISDICTION OF THE JUDICIARY. -- That the judiciary under the Constitution is wholly without jurisdiction to adjudicate a purely political question is not an open question. Also, it is the settled law of this state that actions of the General Assembly taken in virtue of a power conferred by the Constitution and in conforming with the provisions of the Constitution, are not subject to review by the courts. Thompson v. Talmadge, 201 Ga. 867, 41 S.E.2d 883 (1947).

## Research References & Practice Aids
### Cross References.

Election and term of members, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. II, Para. V. Legislative privileges and immunity, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. IV, Para. IX. Advertisement of notice to introduce local legislation, Ga. Const., 1983, Art. III, Sec. V, Para. IX. Exercise of powers, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI. Special sessions of the General Assembly, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. V, Sec. II, Para. VII. Rules of statutory construction, § 1-1-1 et seq. and § 1-3-1 et seq. Grounds for continuance of case applicable to members and staff of General Assembly, § 9-10-150. Legislator attending General Assembly excused as a witness, § 9-10-159. Exemption from jury duty for members of General Assembly, § 15-12-2. Date of election for offices, § 21-2-9. Vacancies and special elections for members of General Assembly, § 21-2-544. Reporting of contributions made to members of General Assembly during legislative session, § 21-5-35. Legislators' exemption from attending or testifying at hearing or trial during legislative session, § 24-13-29. Ongoing review of effectiveness of and continued need for regulatory agencies, § 43-2-1 et seq.

### Am. Jur. 2D.

72 Am. Jur. 2d, States, Territories, and Dependencies, §§ 52 et seq., 64 et seq.
# Oliver Goldsmith: A Biography

* Preface
* Chapter I
* Chapter II
* Chapter III
* Chapter IV
* Chapter V
* Chapter VI
* Chapter VII
* Chapter VIII
* Chapter IX
* Chapter X
* Chapter XI
* Chapter XII
* Chapter XIII
* Chapter XIV
* Chapter XV
* Chapter XVI
* Chapter XVII
* Chapter XVIII
* Chapter XIX
* Chapter XX
* Chapter XXI
* Chapter XXII
* Chapter XXIII
* Chapter XXIV
* Chapter XXV
* Chapter XXVI
* Chapter XXVII
* Chapter XXVIII
* Chapter XXIX
* Chapter XXX
* Chapter XXXI
* Chapter XXXII
* Chapter XXXIII
* Chapter XXXIV
* Chapter XXXV
* Chapter XXXVI
* Chapter XXXVII
* Chapter XXXVIII
* Chapter XXXIX
* Chapter XL
* Chapter XLI
* Chapter XLII
* Chapter XLIII
* Chapter XLIV
* Chapter XLV
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
# Oliver American Trading Company v. United States of Mexico

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
264 U.S. 440
Oliver American Trading Company v. United States of Mexico
Argued: March 13, 1924. --- Decided: April 7, 1924
Messrs. Alfred Hayes and Robert F. Greacen, both of New York City, for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Jerome S. Hess, of New York City, and George F. Snyder, of Washington, D. C., for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS 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
# Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 9/Number 4

​THE QUARTERLY of the Oregon Hi^orical Society. VOLUMfc IX.] DECEMBER, 1908 [NUMBER 4 CONTENTS. T. W. Dai^enport—fiTuAVEUY Question in Oregon, II ... - 309-378 John Minto— From Youth to Age as an American, III - - - 374-3S7 Documents- Speech OF Senator J, Semple— On Abrogation of Treaty ok Joint Occupation _ - 388-411 PRICE : FIFTY CENTS PER NUMBER, TWO DOLLARS PER YEAR Entered at the post office at Portland, Oregon, as secondrclass matter. ​The Oregon Histobical Society Organized December 17, 1898 FREDERICK V. HOLMAN. -President JOSEPH R. WI1.SON Vice-President F. G. YOUiNG. -Secretary CHARLES E. LADD. .Treasurer George H. Himes, Assistant Secretary. I>I RECTORS ' THE GOVERNOR OF OREGON, ex officio. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, ex oSicio. Term expii-es at Annual Meeting in December, 1908, MRS. HARRIET K. McARTHUR, GEORGE H. HIMES. J Term expires at Annual Meeting in December, 1909, FREDERICK V. HOLMAN, WM. D. FENTON. Term expires at Annual Meeting in December, 1910, ARTHUR C. BOGGESS. MILTON W. SMITH. Term expires at Annual Meeting in December, 1911, MRS. MARIA L. MYRICK, CHARLES J. SCHNABEL. The Q^tarWrly is sent free to all members of the Society. The annual dues are two dollars. The fee for life membership is twenty-five dollars. Contributions to the Quarterly and. correspondence relative to historical matei ials, or pertaining to the affairs of this Society, should be addressed to Subscriptions for The Q^mi'ierly, or for the other publications of the Society, should be sent to Eugene, Oregon. Secretary. City Hall, Portland, Oregon. GEORGE H. HIMES, Assistant Secretary.
* Slavery Question in Oregon, part 2. by T. W. Davenport
* From Youth to Age As an American, part 3. by John Minto
* "Documents" [Sen. J. Semple of Illinois]
# Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 9/Number 1

* Edward Dickinson Baker. by William D. Fenton
* The Wax of Nehalem Beach [reprinted from Oregonian]. by O. F. Stafford
* Political Beginnings in Oregon: The Period of the Provisional Government, 1839-1849 [Univ. of Wisconsin M.A. thesis]. by Marie Merriman Bradley
* From Youth to Age As an American. by John Minto
* Columbia River Improvement and the Pacific Northwest [reprinted]. by Frederic G. Young
* "Notes and News"
# Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 9/Number 2

* "Doctor" Robert Newell: Pioneer. by T. C. Elliott
* From Youth to Age As an American, part 2. by John Minto
* Contests over the Capital of Oregon. by Walter C. Winslow
* Mrs. Jesse Applegate. by Mrs. S. A. Long
* "Notes and News"
* Review: The Nez Perces Indians Since Lewis and Clark
# Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 9/Number 3

* Slavery Question in Oregon. by T. W. Davenport
* The "Free-State Letter" of Judge George H. Williams
* Oregon's First Monopoly—The O.S.N. Co. [Univ. of Oregon B.A. thesis]. by Irene Lincoln Poppleton
* "Documents" [railroad history]
* "Notes"
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Leo the Great/Letters/Letter 27

Letter XXVII.
To Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople.
Leo to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople.
An acknowledgment of Flavian’s first letter and a promise of a fuller reply.
On the first opportunity we could find, which was the coming of our honourable son Rodanus, we acknowledge, beloved, the arrival of your packet, which was to give us information about the case which has been stirred up to our grief among you by misguided error. Since this man, who has long seemed to be religiously disposed, has expressed himself in the Faith otherwise than is right, though he never ought to have departed from the catholic tradition, but to have persevered in the same belief as is held by all. But on this matter we are replying more fully by him who brought your letter to us, beloved: that we may give you all necessary instructions, beloved, on the whole matter. For we do not allow either him to persist in his perverse conviction; or you, beloved, who with such faithful zeal are resisting his wrong and foolish error to be long disturbed by the adversary’s opposition. Our aforesaid son, by whom we are sending this letter, we desire you to receive with the affection he deserves, and to reply when he returns to us. Dated 21st May in the consulship of Asturius and Protogenes (449).

## Footnotes

* ↑ Epistolas. This refers to Lett. XXII., and includes the gesta (or minutes of the synod’s proceedings) which accompanied it.
* ↑ This is the Tome (Letter XXVIII.): it will be noticed that Flavian (in Lett. XXII.) had not asked for any instructions, but only that Leo should inform the bishops under his jurisdiction of Eutyches’ deposition (chap. iv.). Flavian’s second letter (XXVI.), however, does mention vestras sacras litteras, which he hopes will avoid the necessity of a council (chap. iii.). Leo himself seems to be conscious of this: for in Letter XXXIII., chap. 2, he twice pointedly puts in the word “seems,” as if Flavian had not expressed himself quite clearly: “the points which he seems to have referred to us,” and “this error which seems to have arisen.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Leo the Great/Letters/Letter 29

Letter XXIX.
To Theodosius Augustus.
To Cæsar Theodosius, the most religious and devout Augustus Leo pope of the CatholicChurch of the city of Rome.
He notifies the appointment of his representatives at the Council of Ephesus.
How much God’s providence vouchsafes to consult for the interests of men is shown by your merciful care which, incited by God’s Spirit, is unwilling that there should be any disturbance or difference: since the Faith, which is absolutely one, cannot be different from itself in any thing. Hence although Eutyches, as the minutes of the bishops’ proceeds reveals, has been detected in an ignorant and unwise error, and ought to have withdrawn from his conviction which is rightly condemned, yet since your piety which loves the Catholic Truth with great jealousy for God’s honour, has determined on a synodal judgment at Ephesus, that that Truth on
which he is blind may be brought home to the ignorant old man; I have sent my brothers Julius the Bishop, Renatus the presbyter, and my son Hilary the deacon to act as my representatives as the matter requires, and they shall bring with them such a spirit of justice and kindness that while the whole misguided error is condemned (for there can be no doubt as to what is the integrity of the Christian Faith), yet if he who has gone astray repents and entreats for pardon, he may receive the succour of priestly indulgence: seeing that in his appeal which he sent us, he reserved to himself the right of earning our forgiveness by promising to correct whatever our opinion disapproved of in his opinion. But what the catholic Church universally believes and teaches on the mystery of the Lord’s Incarnation is contained more fully in the letter which I have sent to my brother and fellow-bishop Flavian. Dated 13th June in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).

## Footnotes

* ↑ This is the title retained by Quesnel and the Ballerinii, though many mss. exhibit the simpler gloriosissimo et clementissimo Theodosio Augusto Leo episcopus, which is favoured by the Gk. version τῷ ἐνδοξοτάτῳ καὶ φιλανθρωποτάτῳ κ.τ.λ. Quesnel takes occasion to warn us to distinguish between this use of the title papa and that adopted later when it was equivalent to œcumenicus et universalis episcopus.
* ↑ Viz., Lett. XXI., chaps. i. and iii.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Leo the Great/Letters/Letter 24

Letter XXIV.
To Theodosius Augustus II.
Leo the bishop, to Theodosius Augustus.
I. He praises the Emperor’s piety and mentions Eutyches’ appeal.
How much protection the Lord has vouchsafed His Church through your clemency and faith, is shown again by this letter which you have sent me: so that we rejoice at there being not only a kingly, but also a priestly mind within you. Seeing that, besides your imperial and public cares, you have a most devout anxiety for the Christian religion, lest schisms or heresies or other offences should grow up among God’s people. For your realm is then in its best state when men serve the eternal and unchangeable Trinity by the confession of one Godhead. What the disturbance was which occurred in the Church of Constantinople, and which could have so moved my brother and fellow-bishop Flavian, that he deprived Eutyches, the presbyter, of communion, I have not yet been able to understand clearly. For although the aforesaid presbyter sent in writing a complaint concerning his trouble to the Apostolic See, yet he only briefly touched on some points, asserting that he kept the constitutions of the Nicene synod and had been vainly blamed for difference of faith.
II. He finds fault with Flavian’s silence.
But the statement of bishop Eusebius, his accuser, copies of which the said presbyter has sent us, contained nothing clear about his objections, and though he charged a presbyter with heresy, he did not say expressly what opinion he disapproved of in him:  although the bishop himself also professed that he adhered to the decrees of the Nicene synod: for which reason we had no means of learning anything more fully. And because the method of our Faith and the laudable anxiety shown by your piety requires the merits of the case to be known, there must now be no place allowed for deception, but we must be informed of the points on which he considers him unsound, that the right judgment may be passed after full information. I have sent a letter to the aforesaid bishop, from which he may gather that I am displeased at his still keeping silence upon what has been done in so grave a matter, when he ought to have been forward in disclosing all to us at the outset: and we believe that even after the reminder he will acquaint us with the whole, in order that, when what now seems obscure, has been brought into the light, judgment may be passed agreeably to the teaching of the Gospels and the Apostles. Dated the 18th of February, in the consulship of the illustrious Asturius and Protogenes (449).

## Footnotes

* ↑ Is it fanciful to trace an analogy between these words and the language of the Collect for Trinity Sunday (out of the Sacramentary of Gregory), “grace by the confession of a true faith to acknowledge the glory of the Eternal Trinity, and in the power of the Divine Majesty to worship the Unity?”
* ↑ Quesnel reads the 1st of March as the date.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XII/Leo the Great/Letters/Letter 25

Letter XXV.
From Peter Chrysologus, Bishop of Ravenna, to Eutyches, the Presbyter.
[In answer to a letter from Eutyches, he urges him to accept the decisions of the Church on the Faith in fear and without too close inquiry, and to abide by the ruling of the bishop of Rome.]