OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Laird v. Tatum

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article.
Laird v. Tatum, 408 U.S. 1 (1972), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court dismissed for lack of ripeness a claim in which the plaintiff accused the U.S. Army of alleged unlawful "surveillance of lawful citizen's political activity." The appellant's specific nature of the harm caused by the surveillance was that it chilled the First Amendment rights of all citizens and undermined that right to express political dissent.

## Dissenting Opinions

    Douglas
    Brennan
Supreme Court of the United States
408 U.S. 1
Laird, Secretary of Defense, et al. v. Tatum et al.
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
No. 71-288. Argued: March 27, 1972 --- Decided: June 26, 1972
Prior to its being called upon in 1967 to assist local authorities in quelling civil disorders in Detroit, Michigan, the Department of the Army had developed only a general contingency plan in connection with its limited domestic mission under 10 U.S.C. § 331. In response to the Army's experience in the various civil disorders it was called upon to help control during 1967 and 1968, Army Intelligence established a data-gathering system, which respondents describe as involving the "surveillance of lawful civilian political activity."
Held: Respondents' claim that their First Amendment rights are chilled, due to the mere existence of this data-gathering system, does not constitute a justiciable controversy on the basis of the record in this case, disclosing as it does no showing of objective harm or threat of specific future harm. Pp. 3-16.
144 U.S. App. D.C. 72, 444 F. 2d 947, reversed.
BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which WHITE, BLACKMUN, POWELL, and REHNQUIST, JJ., joined. DOUGLAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which MARSHALL, J., joined, post, p. 16. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which STEWART and MARSHALL, JJ., joined, post, p. 38.
Solicitor General Griswold argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Assistant Attorney General Mardian and Robert L. Keuch.
Frank Askin argued the cause, for respondents. With him on the brief was Melvin L. Wulf.
Sam J. Ervin, Jr., argued the cause for the Unitarian Universalist Assn. et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance. With him on the brief was Lawrence M. Baskir.
Burke Marshall and Arthur R. Miller filed a brief for a Group of Former Army Intelligence Agents as amici curiae urging affirmance.
# Jos Schlitz Brewing Company v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
385 U.S. 37
Jos Schlitz Brewing Company v. United States
The motion of Philip A. Ray et al., for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, is granted.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and would set the case for argument.

## 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
# Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495 (1952), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court which largely marked the decline of motion picture censorship in the United States. It determined that certain provisions of the New York Education Law allowing a censor to forbid the commercial showing of any non-licensed motion picture film, or revoke or deny the license of a film deemed to be "sacrilegious," was a "restraint on freedom of speech" and thereby a violation of the First Amendment. By way of this, the decision defined film as an artistic medium protected by the Constitution's guarantee of free speech. In so doing, the Court overturned its previous decision in Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (1915), which found that movies were not an art form worthy of First Amendment protection, but merely a business. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Concurring Opinion

    Reed
United States Supreme Court
343 U.S. 495
Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson
Argued: April 24, 1952. --- Decided: May 26, 1952
[Syllabus from 496 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Ephraim S. London, Clendon H. Lee, Milton H. Spiero, and Leonard P. Simpson, New York City, for appellant.
Mr. Charles A. Brind, Jr., Wendell P. Brown, Albany, N.J., for appellees.
Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jos Schlitz Brewing Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
385 U.S. 37
Jos Schlitz Brewing Company v. United States
See 395 U.S. 1021, 87 S.Ct. 702.
Leslie Hodson, Hammond E. Chaffetz, Joseph DuCoeur and Richard J. Archer, for appellant.
Solicitor General Marshall and Assistant Attorney General Turner, for the United States.
Burnham Enersen and Stephen Grant, for appellee General Brewing Corp.
Godfrey L. Munter, Jr., for Ray and others, amici curiae.
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
# Jorinda and Jorindel (Grimm/Taylor and Jardine)

* "Jorinda and Jorindel" in German Popular Stories (1823) (transcription project)
* "Jorinda and Jorindel" in Grimm's Goblins (1876) (transcription project)

## See also

* "Jorinda and Jorindel" (1912), Taylor and Jardine translation, revised by Marian Edwardes
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Jose Rivera Soler Company v. United Firemen's Insurance Company of Philadelphia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
299 U.S. 45
Jose Rivera Soler Company v. United Firemen's Insurance Company of Philadelphia
Argued: Oct. 20, 1936. --- Decided: Nov 9, 1936
Mr. Francis H. Dexter, of San Juan, P.R., for petitioner.
Messrs. Henri Brown, of San Juan, P.R., and Carroll G. Walter, of New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS 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
# Jean-François Millet (Coates)

"Not far from Paris, in fair Fontainebleau"
Appeared as "The Angelus" in The Home Book of Verse (1912) and in The Traveler's Book of Verse (1928).
* "Jean-François Millet" (1904), in The Atlantic Monthly (November 1904).
* "Jean-François Millet" (1904), in Mine and Thine (1904).
* "Jean-François Millet" (1916), in Poems II.

## References

* ↑ View this version at Google books.
* ↑ See snippet view of this version at Google books.
* ↑ View this version at Google Books.
# Jean-François Millet

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Jean-François Millet."
* sister projects: Commons category, 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.
* "Jean-François Millet", a poem by Florence Earle Coates
* "Millet, Jean François (c. 1642-1679)," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Millet, Jean François (1814-1875)," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Jean-François Millet," in Catholic Encyclopedia, (ed.) by Charles G. Herbermann and others, New York: The Encyclopaedia Press (1913)

## See also

* Author:Jean-François Millet
# Jean Jaurès, socialist and humanitarian

* related authors: Jean Jaurès.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
JEAN JAURÈS
THE WILLIAM MORRIS PRESS LTD. FORTY-TWO ALBERT STREET MANCHESTER ENGLAND
JEAN JAURÈS
SOCIALIST
AND
HUMANITARIAN
By
MARGARET PEASE
With Introduction by J. RAMSAY MACDONALD, M.P.
NEW YORK B. W. HUEBSCH MCMXVII
PREFACE
In course of time the friends and comrades of Jean Jaurès will publish his biography and a new edition of his works; some of these were written with a certain amount of haste, and need careful revision. As, however, the complete biography has not yet been accomplished, I have had to seek other sources of information.
I am much indebted to M. Charles Rappoport's detailed and sympathetic analysis of Jaurès' ideas, contained in his book: Jean Jaurès; L’Homme, Le Penseur, Le Socialiste. M. Rappoport claims that his book is "Jaures explained by himself." A great part of it is, in fact, in Jaurès' own words, and the rest is a penetrating exposition of his mind.
From M. Levy-Bruhl's charming brochure, Quelques pages sur Jean Jaurès, I have gathered most of the details of Jaurès' youth contained in Chapter I. My other sources have been his own ​works: Etudes Socialistes (of which I have used for quotation the English translation by Mrs. Minturn), Les Preuves, L’Armée Nouvelle and numerous pamphlets containing his speeches.
Of some of the subjects on which Jaurès thought and spoke and wrote, such as Education and the French Revolution, no mention has been made in this book. His was a most varied, eager and all-embracing mind, and this short study naturally makes no pretension to be exhaustive. Its object is merely to give English readers some acquaintance with that force, at once harmonising and progressive, that was in Jaurès, and so to help to preserve his influence from being lost.
Margaret Pease.
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
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Arkansas City

​Arkansas City, the largest city of Cowley county and one of the most important commercial centers of southeastern Kansas, is beautifully located on the elevation between the Arkansas and Walnut rivers, about 4 miles north of the state line and 12 miles south of Winfield, the county seat. The city was laid out in 1870, about the time Cowley county was organized, and the postoffice was established in April of that year with G. H. Norton as postmaster. Mr. Norton built the first house—a pioneer log structure—and was one of the first merchants. The place was first called Adelphi, later Walnut City, still later Cresswell and finally the name of Arkansas City was adopted. On June 10, 1872, Judge W. P. Campbell of the 13th district issued the order for the incorporation of the town, and at the first election for municipal officers on July 2, A. D. Keith was chosen mayor. For a few years the growth was comparatively slow, but in Dec., 1879, the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe railroad company completed a line to Arkansas City, after which the growth was more rapid and of a more substantial character. Following this road came the Kansas Southwestern, the Missouri Pacific, the Midland Valley and the St. Louis and San Francisco lines, providing transportation facilities as good as are to be found in any city of its size anywhere.
With the advent of the railroads, manufacturing became an important industry. Water power is provided by a canal 5 miles long connecting the Walnut and Arkansas rivers. Among the manufactured products are cement, flour and feed, brooms, paint and alfalfa meal. The city also has a meat packing establishment, planing mills, ice factory, creameries, ​five banks, an opera house which cost about $100,000, an electric lighting plant, a fine waterworks system which was first installed in 1881 and has been enlarged to keep pace with the growth of the city, a fire department, a street railway, a good sewer system, and two beautiful public parks. The first school was taught in 1871 by T. A. Wilson in a house that cost about $400. The present public school system comprises four modern ward school buildings and a high school building which cost about $40,000. A number of fine church edifices add to the beauty of the city, the jobbing trade covers a large territory, and the press is well represented by two daily and three weekly newspapers. The Arkansas City Commercial club is composed of energetic citizens, always alert to the interests of the city, and that its efforts in this direction have been successful may be seen in the fact that the population increased from 6,140 in 1900 to 7,508 in 1910.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Argonia

​Argonia, one of the incorporated towns of Sumner county, is in Dixon township, on the Chikaskia river and at the junction of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe and Missouri Pacific railways, 20 miles west of Wellington, the county seat. It has an international money order postoffice, from which emanate four rural routes, express and telegraph offices, telephone connection, grain elevators, a good school system, and is the principal shipping and supply point for the western part of the county. Several religious demoninations, including the Baptists, Methodists, Friends and Presbyterians, are represented by neat houses of worship. The population in 1910 was 466.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Arma

​Arma, an incorporated town of Crawford county, is a station on the Missouri Pacific R. R.. 9 miles east of Girard, the county seat, and about 3 miles west of the state line. It is a typical Kansas town, has express and telegraph offices, a flour mill, a lumber yard, several general stores, and in 1910 reported a population of 327.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Arlington

​Arlington, an incorporated town of Reno county, is situated in the township of the same name. 17 miles southwest of Hutchinson, at the point where the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R. R. crosses the Ninnescah river. It has a bank, grain elevators, a weekly newspaper, a good public school system, a cornet band, a money order postoffice with two rural free delivery routes, express and telegraph offices, and is the shipping and supply point for a large area of the rich agricultural country surrounding the town. The population increased from 312 in 1900 to 450 in 1910.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Arispie

​Arispie, a hamlet of Pottawatomie county, is located 9 miles east of Westmoreland, the county seat, and 7 miles southwest of Onaga, from which place it receives daily mail.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Arkalon

​Arkalon, an international money order postoffice of Seward county, is situated in Fargo township at the point where the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R. R. crosses the Cimarron river, 13 miles northeast of Liberal, the county seat. Although the population is small, Arkalon is an important shipping point, especially for grain and live stock.
# Kansas: A Cyclopedia of State History/Armour

​Armour, a sub-station of the Kansas City postoffice (see Kansas City), is located on the Union Pacific and Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific railroads, about 4 miles west of Kansas City, Mo.
# Language of the Gods/c

London: Macmillan and Co. (1918)
assembling directory
7 March 2016
# Lanier v. Nash

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
121 U.S. 404
Lanier v. Nash
[Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., for appellants.
John Coffey and D. S. Hounshell, for appellees.
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
# Language of the Gods/b

London: Macmillan and Co. (1918)
assembling directory
7 March 2016
# Language of the Gods/d

London: Macmillan and Co. (1918)
assembling directory
7 March 2016
# Lanham v. McKeel

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
244 U.S. 582
Lanham v. McKeel
Argued: April 30, 1917. --- Decided: June 11, 1917
Messrs. Orion L. Rider, George E. Rider, and E. S. Hurt for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. J. F. McKeel, in propria persona, and Messrs. C. H. Ennis and James E. Webb for defendant in error.
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
# Knauth, Nachod, & Kuhne v. Latham & Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
242 U.S. 426
Knauth, Nachod, & Kuhne v. Latham & Company
Argued: November 13, 1916. --- Decided: January 8, 1917
Messrs. Thomas M. Stevens, George T. Hogg, Julien T. Davies, and W. H. Watson for petitioners and appellants.
Messrs. Walker B. Spencer, Charles Payne Fenner, Augustus Benners, William A. Blount, Henry P. Dart, F. B. Carter, E. C. Maxwell, and Henry P. Dart, Jr., for respondents and appellees.
Mr. Justice McReynolds 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
# Langnes v. Green

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
282 U.S. 531
Langnes v. Green
Argued: Jan. 7, 8, 1931. --- Decided: Feb 24, 1931
Messrs. Robert E. Bronson and H. B. Jones, both of Seattle, Wash., for petitioner.
Messrs. Winter S. Martin and Samuel B. Bassett, both of Seattle, Wash., for respondent.
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
# Journal of Discourses/Volume 12

(Online document scan of Journal of Discourses, Volume 12)
Journal of Discourses Volume 12
BY PRESIDENT BRIGHAM YOUNG,
HIS TWO COUNSELLORS, AND THE TWELVE APOSTLES,
REPORTED BY G. D. WATT, E. L. SLOAN, AND D. W. EVANS,
AND HUMBLY DEDICATED TO THE LATTER-DAY SAINTS IN ALL THE WORLD.
VOL. XII
LIVERPOOL:
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY ALBERT CARRINGTON, 42, ISLINGTON.
LONDON:
LATTER-DAY SAINTS' BOOK DEPOT, 20, BISHOP'S GROVE, ISLINGTON.
1869.
Preface
EACH discourse in this the XIIth volume of the "Journal" commends itself to thoughtful perusal, being plain, practical, and of much worth to all who desire to keep pace with the progress of truth.
While Zion is so rapidly and prosperously lengthening her cords and strengthening her stakes, it behooves all to be acquainted with the teachings pertaining to her advancement and the perfecting of the Saints; and inasmuch as the affords such excellent facilities for an acquaintance with those teachings, it is both desired and expected that the lovers of truth and of their own best interests will at all times sustain its publication and profit by its perusal so far as may be in their power.
THE PUBLISHER
# Ker v. California

Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23 (1963), was a case before the United States Supreme Court, which incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. The case was decided on June 10, 1963, by a vote of 5-4. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Concurring Opinion

    Harlan

## Concurrence/Dissent

    Brennan
United States Supreme Court
374 U.S. 23
Ker v. California
Argued: Dec. 11, 1962. --- Decided: June 10, 1963
Robert W. Stanley, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioners.
Gordon Ringer, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court with reference to the standard by which state searches and seizures must be evaluated (Part I), together with an opinion applying that standard, in which Mr. Justice BLACK, Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice WHITE join (Parts II-V), and announced the judgment 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
# Ker v. People of the State of Illinois

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (1886), is a U.S. Supreme Court case. It held that a fugitive kidnapped from abroad could not claim any violation of the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
119 U.S. 436
Ker v. People of the State of Illinois
C. Stuart Beattie, for plaintiff in error.
Geo. Hunt, Atty. Gen. of Illinois, for defendant in error.
MILLER, 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
# Ker Company v. Couden

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
223 U.S. 268
Ker Company v. Couden
Argued: April 27, 1911. --- Decided: February 19, 1912
Messrs. Oscar Sutro, E. S. Pillsbury, Aldis B. Browne, Alexander Britton, and Evans Browne for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 268-273 intentionally omitted]
Solicitor General Lehmann for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 273-275 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Keppele v. Williams

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Keppele versus Williams.
A Venire had issued, and the Jury was summoned: the Plaintiff forbade the Sheriff to bring the Jury to the Court.—On the day of trial, the Plaintiff’s Attorney demanded the Venire.—Defendant’s Attorney opposed it, and advised the Sheriff to deliver it into Court.
The Jury also attended upon the application of Defendant’s Attorney. The Court was then moved for their direction.
They took the Venire and called for the pannell.—The Chief Justice quoting the following authorities, to shew, that it would be a contempt to pocket the Venire.—Comb. 303. 4 Mod. 367. Vin. Abr. Tit. Trial 329.
The Plaintiff then moved to continue the cause which was allowed, Defendant having no proviso rule.
Defendant then moved for a proviso rule, to which Plaintiff objected, and made affidavit of the absence of a material witness, and service of a subpœna, on which the motion dropt.
# Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate/Volume 1/Number 5/Obituary

Obituary.
DIED in this place on the evening of the 19th inst. elder SETH JOHNSON, aged 30 years. Elder J. was a young man of promising talents, and of strict religious principles; ever manifesting, by his acts, the warm affection of a heart devoted to the cause of God, and to that most dear to him of all things, the religion of the Lord Jesus; but his Master has accepted his work and taken him home, where he can receive that reward promised to the pure in heart.
Though dust returns to dust, and his spirit has fled to Christ, we drop this as a tribute to his worth—HE WAS A SAINT.—[ Editor.]