OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Laborde v. Ubarri/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 173
Laborde v. Ubarri
Argued: April 30, 1909. --- Decided: May 17, 1909
This is the same suit that has been decided already. Ubarri y Yramategui v. Laborde, 214 U.S. 168, 53 L. ed.-, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 549. There is presented here a subordinate question as to the right of the plaintiffs in error, who were also the plaintiffs below, to retain an attachment against property alleged to belong to two nonresident heirs of Pablo Ubarri. The district court ordered the complaint to be dismissed as to these heirs, and the attachment against any of their property to be dissolved, on the principle that has been laid down more than once by this court, that, in the courts of the United States, 'attachment is but an incident to a suit, and, unless the suit can be maintained, the attachment must fall.' Ex parte Des Moines & M. R. Co. 103 U.S. 794, 796, 26 L. ed. 461, 462. 'Unless the suit can be maintained' means, of course, unless the court has jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. See further Toland v. Sprague, 12 Pet. 300, 330, 336, 9 L. ed. 1093, 1105, 1107; Chaffee v. Hayward, 20 How. 208, 15 L. ed. 804; Clark v. Wells, 203 U.S. 164, 51 L. ed. 138, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 43.
It was admitted at the argument before us that, if the suit against the other defendant should fail, as it has, there was no need to decide this case. But it must be disposed of in some way, and we are of opinion that the judgment below should be affirmed. The suit purports to be against the succession. Yet the property sought to be attached is alleged in the petition to belong to the defendants, and is not alleged even to have belonged to the succession in the past. It seems from what was admitted at the argument that a part, at least, never did. But, if it had belonged to the succession, we gather from incidental testimony in the main case, from the allegations of separate titles in the petition for attachment, and from admissions at the bar, that it had been divided, and thereafter the liability of the heirs, if any, was personal, as explained in the other case. Even if a suit still could be maintained against the succession when there was no property left in the inheritance, the private property of the heirs could not be held to answer the judgment. On the other hand, if this could be regarded as a suit to enforce personal liability of such heirs as could be caught, it would fail for reasons stated in Ubarri y Yramategui v. Laborde. In view of the disposition of that case we deem it needless to say more.
Judgment affirmed.

## 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
# Laborde v. Ubarri

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
214 U.S. 173
Laborde v. Ubarri
Argued: April 30, 1909. --- Decided: May 17, 1909
Messrs. Willis Sweet and George H. Lamar for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. John Maynard Harlan for defendants in error.
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
# Labour and Childhood

* related portals: Labor.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, quotes, Wikidata item.
LABOUR AND CHILDHOOD
"THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS WITHIN YOU."
BY
MARGARET McMILLAN
AUTHOR OF "EARLY CHILDHOOD" AND "EDUCATION THROUGH THE IMAGINATION," ETC.
LONDON SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., Ltd. 25 HIGH STREET, BLOOMSBURY 1907
TO THE MEMORY OF MY GRANDFATHER
WHO WAS AS A FATHER TO ME
AND WHOSE GENTLE AND CHIVALROUS CHARACTER
FIRST TAUGHT ME TO HAVE FAITH
IN HUMANITY
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1931, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 92 years or less. 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
# It Came upon a Midnight Clear (unsourced)

* related portals: Song lyrics, Christmas.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
"It Came Upon a Midnight Clear" was written by Edmund Sears (1810-1876), pastor of the Unitarian Church in Wayland, Massachusetts. It appeared on December 29, 1849 in the (Boston, Massachusetts) Christian Register. Sears is said to have written these words at the request of his friend, W. P. Lunt, a minister in Quincy, Massachusetts. In 1850 Richard Storrs Willis, a composer who trained under Felix Mendelssohn as well as editor and critic for the New York Tribune, wrote the melody called "Carol". The tune used in England, called "Noel" was adapted from an English melody by the composer Arthur Sullivan.
This carol is also known by the title "It Came upon the Midnight Clear".
It came upon a midnight clear, That glorious song of old, From angels bending near the earth To touch their harps of gold: "Peace on the earth, good will to men, From heav'n's all gracious King!" The world in solemn stillness lay To hear the angels sing.
Still thru the cloven skies they come With peaceful wings unfurled, And still their heav'nly music floats O'er all the weary world: Above its sad and lowly plains They bend on hov'ring wing, And ever o'er its Babel sounds The blessed angels sing.
And ye, beneath life's crushing load, Whose forms are bending low, Who toil along the climbing way With painful steps and slow, Look now! for glad and golden hours Come swiftly on the wing: O rest beside the weary road And hear the angels sing.
For lo, the days are hast'ning on, By prophet bards foretold, When with the ever circling years Comes round the age of gold; When peace shall over all the earth Its ancient spendors fling, And the whole world give back the song Which now the angels sing.
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
# It Fortifies my Soul to Know

IT fortifies my soul to know
That though I perish, Truth is so;
That howsoe’er I stray and range,
Whate’er I do, Thou dost not change;
I steadier step when I recall
That if I slip, Thou dost not fall!
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
# It Is Time For A Change In The Policies Of This Nation

It Is Time For A Change In The Policies Of This Nation. Congressional Record: September 17, 2008 (House) Page H8281. DOCID:cr17se08-103.
IT IS TIME FOR A CHANGE IN THE POLICIES OF THIS NATION
(Mr. PERLMUTTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, this country was really founded upon sacrifice, investment and opportunity for all, but over the last few years, we've seen the focus being on the wealthiest 1 percent in America to the exclusion of the rest of us, and that House of cards has come tumbling down on Wall Street over the last couple of weeks with the failures of the biggest corporations in America.
The policies of this administration not to regulate and the policies to only borrow and spend are causing this country turmoil, and the hardworking people in the middle are going to have to pick up the pieces. It is time for renewal. It is time for a change. The policies of the Democrats and of Barack Obama are going to change the direction of this Nation and make it stronger and make it the Nation that it can be.
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
# Julia

Written in 1789, first published in A History of the Royal Foundation Christ's Hospital (1834), by William Trollope
Medio de fonte leporum Surgit amari aliquid.
Julia was blest with beauty, wit, and grace: Small poets lov’d to sing her blooming face. Before her altars, lo! a numerous train Preferr’d their vows; yet all preferr’d in vain,
Till charming Florio, born to conquer, came And touch’d the fair one with an equal flame. The flame she felt, and ill could she conceal What every look and action would reveal. With boldness then, which seldom fails to move, He pleads the cause of Marriage and of Love: The course of Hymeneal joys he rounds, The fair one’s eyes danc’d pleasure at the sounds. Nought now remain’d but ‘‘Noes’’ — how little meant! And the sweet coyness that endears consent. The youth upon his knees enraptur’d fell: The strange misfortune, oh! what words can tell? Tell! ye neglected sylphs! who lap-dogs guard, Why snatch’d ye not away your precious ward? Why suffer’d ye the lover’s weight to fall On the ill-fated neck of much-lov’d Ball? The favourite on his mistress casts his eyes, Gives a short melancholy howl, and — dies. Sacred his ashes lie, and long his rest! Anger and grief divide poor Julia’s breast. Her eyes she fixt on guilty Florio first: On him the storm of angry grief must burst. That storm he fled: he wooes a kinder fair, Whose fond affections no dear puppies share. ’Twere vain to tell, how Julia pin’d away: Unhappy Fair! that in one luckless day — From future Almanacks the day be crost! — At once her Lover and her Lap-dog lost.
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
# Julia Bride

* "Julia Bride" in Harper's Monthly Magazine 116 (694–695) (March-April 1908):
** "Julia Bride" in Harper's Monthly Magazine 116 (694) (March 1908): 489–502.
** "Julia Bride" in Harper's Monthly Magazine 116 (695) (April 1908): 705–713.
    — First publication in any form.
* "Julia Bride" in The Novels and Tales of Henry James 17 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909): 487–542.
    — The "New York Edition". First appearance in book form, slightly revised by James from the serial text.
* Julia Bride (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1909)
    — First separate book edition; further minor revisions by James
* "Julia Bride" in The Altar of the Dead, The Beast in the Jungle, The Birthplace, and Other Tales (London: Macmillan & Co., 1922): 433–478.
    — Volume 22 of The Novels and Stories of Henry James, the first posthumous collection of James' works; uses the "New York Edition" text.
# Julia Bride (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1909)

[See page 1
THE YOUNG MAN HAD LEFT HER, SMILING, LOOKING BACK
JULIA BRIDE
BY
HENRY JAMES
ILLUSTRATED BY W. T. SMEDLEY
NEW YORK AND LONDON
HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS
MCMIX
Copyright, 1909, by Harper & Brothers.
All rights reserved.
Published September, 1909.
ILLUSTRATIONS
| THE YOUNG MAN HAD LEFT HER, SMILING, LOOKING BACK | Frontispiece | Frontispiece |
| "HE SAYS I WAS GOOD TO HIM, MRS. DRACK" | Facing p. | 46 |
| "THERE NEVER WAS ANYTHING THE LEAST SERIOUS BETWEEN US" | " | 56 |
| SHE YIELDED TO THE BITTERNESS | " | 82 |
JULIA BRIDE
* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
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
# Lesher v. Gehr

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
1788.
LESHER verʃus GEHR.
T
Sergeant obtained a rule to fhew caufe, why the execution fhould not be quafhed, alledging that it ought to have been preceeded by a Fi.ƒa in the county where the Venus was laid, in order to ground a Teʃtatum into Bucks.
​ Levy, in fhewing caufe, contended, that the act of Affembly had departed from the practicein England; and that in directing a Teʃtatum it referred only to the Courts of Common Pleas, which are limited in jurifdiction to a fingle county : That the fame acts eftablifhed the jurifdiction of the Supreme Court, and that, therefore, as the Legiflature was filent with refpect to iffuing a Teʃtatum from this latter court, it was fairly to be inferred, they did not mean to require it. He further infifted that the practice fupport his conftruction, and that a ​deviation from it would be attended with great delay and injuftice; for when the act was paffed, although a Teʃtatum might iffue in three months from a Court of Common Pleas, it muft have been fufpended for fix months in the Supreme Court ; and thus a debtor would have it in his power to give an unfair preference to creditors in the County where he lives.
Sergeant, in reply, ftated, that the Supreme Court has powers fimilar to the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas in England, and that the courfe of practice, with refpect to a Teʃtatum, had ​always been the fame. But, he contended, that unlefs the act of Affembly had exprefsly extended the power to the county courts, they could not have proceeded by Teʃtatum, to execute out of their immediate jurifdiction ; which is the true reafon why the Legiflature takes notice of the writ in one cafe, and not in the order.
Upon a queftion from the Court, Mr. Burd, the Prothonotary, faid that previoufly to the Revolution, the proceeding, in fuch cafes, had always been by Teʃtatum; though fince that period a different practice had been introduced by fome of the attornies, contrary to his opinion. ​
1788.
by the court:–The Legiflature before the Revolution prefcribed no rules for the Supreme Court ; but it is certainly vefted with the powers of the King's Bench and Common Pleas in England ; and the practice has been, in general, governed by the fame law. Hence, we find, that it was formerly thought neceffary to proceed by Teʃtatum in Pennʃylvana ; and although a contrary practice has lately obtained, it is without the opinion or fanction of the court.
We think, therefore, that this execution muft be quafhed ; and in every future cafe of the fame kind, let a Fi.ƒa. be filed in the Supreme Court, with a return of nulla bona; and then a term muft intervene before the Teʃtatum iffues, in order to fupport the fiction.
The Execution quafhed.
RESPUBLICA
# Leslie's Weekly

Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, later renamed Frank Leslie's Weekly, Frank Leslie's Illustrated Weekly, Leslie's Weekly and Leslie's Illustrated Weekly, was an American illustrated literary and news magazine founded in 1855 and published until 1922. It was one of several magazines started by publisher and illustrator Frank Leslie.
* Volume 79 (1894)
* Volume 80 (1895)
* Volume 81 (1895)
* Volume 82 (1896)
* Volume 83
* Volume 84
* Volume 85
* Volume 86
* Volume 87
* Volume 88
* Volume 89
* Volume 90
* Volume 91
* Volume 92
* Volume 93
* Volume 94
* Volume 95
* Volume 96
* Volume 97
* Volume 98
* Volume 99
* Volume 100
* Volume 101
* Volume 102
* Volume 103
* Volume 104
* Volume 105
* Volume 106
* Volume 107
* Volume 108
* Volume 109
* Volume 110
* Volume 111
* Volume 112
* Volume 113
* Volume 114
* Volume 115
* Volume 116
* Volume 117
* Volume 118
* Volume 119
* Volume 120
* Volume 121
* Volume 122
* Volume 123
* Volume 124
* Volume 125
* Volume 126
* Volume 127
* Volume 128
* Volume 129
* Volume 130
* Volume 131
* Volume 132
* Volume 133 (1921)
* Volume 134 (1922)
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
# Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
352 U.S. 187
Leslie Miller, Inc. v. Arkansas
Appeal from the Supreme Court of Arkansas
No. 51 Argued: December 5–6, 1956. --- Decided: December 17, 1956

## Linked case(s)

225 Ark. 285
Leffel Gentry argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.
By special leave of Court, John F. Davis argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, urging reversal. On the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub and Melvin Richter.\
William J. Smith argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief were Tom Gentry, Attorney General of Arkansas, and Thorp Thomas, Assistant Attorney General.
PER CURIAM.
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
# Leser v. Garnett

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130 (1922), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution had been constitutionally established. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
258 U.S. 130
Leser v. Garnett
Argued: Jan. 24, 25, 1922. --- Decided: Feb 27, 1922
Messrs. Thomas F. Cadwalader and Wm. L. Marbury, both of Baltimore, Md., for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 131-135 intentionally omitted]
Mr. G. M. Brady, of Baltimore, Md., for defendants in error Caroline Roberts and others.
Mr. Alexander Armstrong, of Baltimore, Md., for other 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
# Leschen & Sons Rope Company v. Broderick & Bascom Rope Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
201 U.S. 166
Leschen & Sons Rope Company v. Broderick & Bascom Rope Company
Argued: March 1, 1906. --- Decided: March 19, 1906
This was a bill in equity brought in the circuit court for the eastern district of Missouri by the appellant, a Missouri corporation, against the appellee, another Missouri corporation, for the infringement of a trademark for wire rope, registered under the act of Congress of March 3, 1881 (21 Stat. at L. 502, chap. 138, U.S.C.omp. Stat. 1901, p. 3401).
The bill alleged that the plaintiff, the A. Leschen & Sons Rope Company, in 1888 had 'adopted for its use as a trademark for its highest and best grade of wire rope, a strand of a different color from the other strands of the rope, the said trademark then and now being effected by your orator by painting one of the strands of the rope so as to make it distinctly unlike the other strands of the rope;' that it had continuously used the trademark to the present day; that it had been extensively advertised; that its sale had been very great, and that the company had obtained, December 4, 1900, a registration of such trademark in the office of the Commissioner of Patents.
The bill further averred that early in the year 1900 the defendant company 'commenced to paint one of the strands of its wire rope so as to make it of a distinctly different color from the other strands of the rope;' that on October 31, 1900, it applied to the Commissioner of Patents for a registration; that the Commissioner declared an interference with the plaintiff, upon which proofs were taken, the case fully argued, and plaintiff was declared to be the first to adopt the trademark; that notwithstanding this, defendant continued its unlawful use of this trademark with the intent to defraud plaintiff, to deceive the public, and to take unfair advantage of the demand for plaintiff's wire ropes, and that said mark is being used by said defendant to make sales of rope upon the strength of plaintiff's reputation. The bill further alleged the use of the trademark by both parties in commerce between the United States and foreign countries.
Defendant demurred on the ground that the trademark set up in the bill was not a lawful and valid trademark. The demurrer was sustained, the bill dismissed (123 Fed. 149), and the decree of the circuit court affirmed by the circuit court of appeals. 67 C. C. A. 418, 134 Fed. 571.
Messrs. Melville Church, Hervey S. Knight, J. C. Jones, and George H. Knight for appellant.
No counsel for appellee.
Statement by Mr. Justice Brown:
Mr. Justice Brown 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
# Leslie's Monthly Magazine

Monthly magazine
* Volume 57 (November 1903–April 1904) (external scans (multiple parts): 1, 2, 3)
* Volume 58 (May–October 1904) (external scans (multiple parts): 1, 2, 3)
* Volume 59 (November 1904–April 1905) (external scans (multiple parts): 1, 2, 3)
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
# Le Morte d'Arthur/Volume I/Book X

Book X contains 88 chapters. It continues in Volume II.
* Chapter I: How Sir Tristram jousted, and smote down King Arthur, because he told him not the cause why he bare that shield
* Chapter II: How Sir Tristram saved Sir Palomides' life, and how they promised to fight together within a fortnight
* Chapter III: How Sir Tristram sought a strong knight that had smitten him down, and many other knights of the Round Table
* Chapter IV: How Sir Tristram smote down Sir Sagramore le Desirous and Sir Dodinas le Savage
* Chapter V: How Sir Tristram met at the peron with Sir Launcelot, and how they fought together unknown
* Chapter VI: How Sir Launcelot brought Sir Tristram to the court, and of the great joy that the king and other made for the coming of Sir Tristram
* Chapter VII: How for the despite of Sir Tristram King Mark came with two knights into England, and how he slew one of the knights
* Chapter VIII: How King Mark came to a fountain where he found Sir Lamorak complaining for the love of King Lot's wife
* Chapter IX: How King Mark, Sir Lamorak, and Sir Dinadan came to a castle, and how King Mark was known there
* Chapter X: How Sir Berluse met with King Mark, and how Sir Dinadan took his part
* Chapter XI: How King Mark mocked Sir Dinadan, and how they met with six knights of the Round Table
* Chapter XII: How the six knights sent Sir Dagonet to joust with King Mark, and how King Mark refused him
* Chapter XIII: How Sir Palomides by adventure met King Mark flying, and how he overthrew Dagonet and other knights
* Chapter XIV: How King Mark and Sir Dinadan heard Sir Palomides making great sorrow and mourning for La Beale Isoud
* Chapter XV: How King Mark had slain Sir Amant wrongfully to-fore King Arthur, and Sir Launcelot fetched King Mark to King Arthur
* Chapter XVI: How Sir Dinadan told Sir Palomides of the battle between Sir Launcelot and Sir Tristram
* Chapter XVII: How Sir Lamorak jousted with divers knights of the castle wherein was Morgan le Fay
* Chapter XVIII: How Sir Palomides would have jousted for Sir Lamorak with the knights of the castle
* Chapter XIX: How Sir Lamorak jousted with Sir Palomides, and hurt him grievously