OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Folk-lore of the Telugus/Durbuddhi and Subuddhi

XI.
DURBUDDHI AND SUBUDDHI.
At Avanti lived two merchants, Durbuddhi and Subuddhi by name. These, two men went to a foreign country, amassed much wealth there, and returned, and buried unknown to anybody the whole of their riches under a huge tamarind tree very near the town and went to their respective houses.
Not long after, Durbuddhi went clandestinely to the spot, purloined the whole treasure and carried it away to his house. A few days after the incident, both of them conjointly went to the tree and found to their sad disappointment that the treasure was gone. Upon this Durbuddhi accused the other of having secreted the treasure, dragged him before a court of justice, and carried a complaint against him, saying that Subuddhi alone had carried off, unknown to him, the treasure which they jointly buried under the tree, and requested that justice be done in the case. ​ The judge looked at him, and called upon him to prove the truth of his accusation against Subuddhi. Durbuddhi said that he would prove it by the tree itself under which the treasure was buried. The judge replied that he would investigate the affair the next day.
Meanwhile, Durbuddhi took his father along with him, placed him in the hollow of the tree, and instructed him to answer favourably (to himself) the judge's queries on the morrow. The next day, the judge, according to promise, came with his attendants near the tree and asked who had taken away the money. To the intense astonishment of the by-standers (the man inside) the tree accused Subuddhi of having secreted the money. But the judge was not a man to give in so easily. After a little reflection he caused some straw to be brought, stuffed the hollow with it, and set fire to it. The man inside was suffocated and fell out of the tree dead. The judge, perceiving the deceit that Durbuddhi had played, came to the conclusion that it was he who had walked away with the money. He ​caused, therefore, all the money to be brought and given over to Subuddhi.
Durbuddhi having paid very dearly for the deceit he had played— in the loss of his riches and his father to boot—went home with a very sad heart.
# Folk-lore of the Telugus/An Un-seasonable Advice

FOLK-LORE OF THE TELUGUS.
I.
AN UNSEASONABLE ADVICE.
In the country of Kandahar,* a certain king, Mahavira by name, at a great expense, caused a tank to be dug, two palm-trees deep and a yojana wide, and constructed a bank around it. But all the water in it dried up, notwithstanding a heavy rainfall. The king, seeing that no water remained in the tank he had constructed at so great an expense, was sitting on the bank with a grieved heart, when one Erunda Muni passed that way. The king immediately rose, went and prostrated himself before the sage, seated him, and began to converse with him; when the sage, looking at the sorrowful countenance of the king, asked him the reason for it. To which the king replied:—
"Sir, I had this tank dug at an enormous expense, but not a drop of water remains in it, and this is why I am feeling grieved." ​ The sage replied:— "Why weep for this? If you mix boiled rice with the blood of a courageous and liberal king, or with the blood from the throat of a revered yogi endowed with all virtuous qualities, and offer it to Durga, whose temple is very near the tank, I dare to say that the water will never dry, and that the tank will be as full as the ocean."
The king heard these words and thought of the difficulty of getting a king answering the description. Then he thought that the sage himself answered the purpose excellently well, being endowed with all the necessary qualities. So he drew his sword, cut the sage's throat, mingled his blood with boiled rice and made the necessary offering to Durga. From that day forward, the rain stopped in the tank and it was full to the brim.
Those, therefore, who tender advice to kings must do so in season, for otherwise they will assuredly come to grief.
# Folk-lore of the Telugus/Child is Father of the Man

XXIV.
CHILD IS FATHER OF THE MAN.
A Brahman well versed in every branch of science, was journeying with his disciples on a pilgrimage to Benares, and about sun-set one evening, met a young Brahman boy, who was feeding a herd of cattle near a wood, of whom he asked the distance to the adjacent village where he proposed to halt for the night. The boy responded:—"Just look at me, at the cattle I am feeding, the forest, and the sun, and your question will be answered; for if the village was not very near, would such a young boy as I am be feeding so many cattle near a forest at this time of the day?" From this sensible response, the Brahman formed a high opinion of the boy's abilities, and following him home, told his father that the lad was too clever to be employed in feeding cows, and requested that he might be allowed to take him with his other disciples to Benares, where he would educate him. The father gladly agreed to the proposal, and the lad afterwards turned out a very brilliant character.
# Folk-lore of the Telugus/Duped by the Majority

XXIX.
DUPED BY THE MAJORITY.
There was a Brahman, Vasanthayaji by name, at Sriramapura, on the banks of the Tamraparni. He conceived the idea of performing a yajna (sacrifice), and wanted four or five of the best goats for the purpose. He went, therefore, to a neighbouring village, purchased the goats, tied a rope round their necks, and was wending his way home, when four Sudras wanted to appropriate the goats to them selves. One of them, therefore, came and stood before the Brahman and said, "Why are you carrying a number of mad dogs?" The Brahman merely thought him a fool who confounded goats with mad dogs. He went on a little further, when another of the Sudras put him the same question, and wanted him to take care, lest the mad dogs should bite him. The Brahman, on hearing these words, entertained a slight doubt in his mind. While pursuing his track a little further, a third of the Sudras came close by the goats, grew exceed​ingly angry, and began to rebuke the Brahman for letting loose a number of mad dogs on the way-farers. The Brahman, on hearing this, became certain that they must be mad dogs and tried to unloose them, when the last of the Sudras came up and wanted him to tie them up to a tree adjacent, as, by letting them loose, they would fall upon people and bite them. The Brahman thereupon tied them to a tree and ran away. The Sudras then untied them and took them home.
Moral:—An intelligent person can be duped by a number of men maintaining the same foolish opinion.
# Football for Player and Spectator/Chapter 16

A few "Hurry Ups"
# Familiar Letters of Henry David Thoreau

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
FAMILIAR LETTERS OF HENRY DAVID THOREAU
EDITED, WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES
by
F. B. SANBORN
BOSTON AND NEW YORK HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY The Riverside Press, Cambridge 1894
CONTENTS.
Copyright, 1894, By HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN & CO.
All rights reserved.
The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass., U. S. A. Electrotyped and Printed by H. O. Houghton and Company
W. Ricketson, Sc.
# Familiar Letters between the Principal Characters in David Simple
### CONTENTS

* Preface
* Letter 1
* Letter 2
* Letter 3
* Letter 4
* Letter 5
* Letter 6
* Letter 7
* Letter 8
* Letter 9
* Letter 10
* Letter 11
* Letter 12
* Letter 13
* Letter 14
* Letter 15
* Letter 16
* Letter 17
* Letter 18
* Letter 19
* Letter 20
* Letter 21
* Letter 22
* Letter 23
* Letter 24
* Letter 25
* Letter 26
* Letter 27
* Letter 28
* Letter 29
* Letter 30
* Letter 31
* Letter 32
* Letter 33
* Letter 34
* Letter 35
* Letter 36
* Letter 37
* Letter 38
* Letter 39
* Letter 40
* Letter 41
* Letter 42
* Letter 43
* Letter 44
* A Vision
# Foster v. Master and Wardens of the Port of New Orleans

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
94 U.S. 246
Foster v. Master and Wardens of the Port of New Orleans
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Submitted on printed arguments by Mr. H. J. Leovy for the plaintiff in error. No counsel appeared for the defendants in error.
MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE 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
# Foster v. Illinois

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinions

    Black
    Rutledge
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 134
Foster v. Illinois
Argued: May 8, 1947. --- Decided: June 23, 1947
Mr. Charles Kaufman, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioners.
Mr. William C. Wines, of Chicago, Ill., for respondent.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinionof the Cou rt.

## 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
# Foster v. Illinois/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinions Black Rutledge
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 134
Foster v. Illinois
Argued: May 8, 1947. --- Decided: June 23, 1947
Mr. Justice BLACK, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, Mr. Justice MURPHY and Mr. Justice RUTLEDGE join, dissenting.
In Adamson v. California, this day decided, 332 U.S. 46, 67 S.Ct. 1672, the Court waters down the Fourteenth Amendment's application to the States of the Bill of Rights guarantee against self-incrimination so as to make it compatible with the Court's standards of decency and a fair trial. In this case the Court similarly waters down the Bill of Rights guarantee of counsel in criminal cases. In both cases, the Court refuses to strike down convictions obtained in disregard of Bill of Rights guarantees, assuming all the while that identical convictions obtained in federal courts would violate the Bill of Rights. For the Court, in the instant case, concedes that, by virtue of the Sixth Amendment, 'counsel must be furnished to an indigent defendant prosecuted in a federal court in every case, whatever the circumstances.' This, of course, relates to convictions following both pleas of not guilty and pleas of guilty. Williams v. Kaiser, 323 U.S. 471, 65 S.Ct. 363, 89 L.Ed. 398; Tomkins v. Missouri, 323 U.S. 485, 65 S.Ct. 370, 89 L.Ed. 407.
In the Adamson case, I have voiced my objections to dilution of constitutional protections against self-incrimination in state courts. This decision is another example of the consequences which can be produced by substitution of this Court's day-to-day opinion of what kind of trial is fair and decent for the kind of trial which the Bill of Rights guarantees. This time it is the right of counsel. We cannot know what Bill of Rights provision will next be attenuated by the Court. We can at least be sure that there will be more, so long as the Court adheres to the doctrine of this and the Adamson case.
The Court's decision relies heavily on Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455, 62 S.Ct. 1252, 86 L.Ed. 1595. In that case, a man on relief, too poor to hire a lawyer, and whose request for the appointment of a lawyer was denied, was compelled to act as his own lawyer on a charge of robbery. Conviction followed. That case is precedent for this one. But it is the kind of precedent that I had hoped this Court would not perpetuate.
One thing more. The Court seems to fear that protecting these defendants' right to counsel to the full extent defined in the Bill of Rights would furnish 'opportunities hitherto uncontemplated for opening wide the prison doors of the land,' because presumably, there are many people like Betts, Foster and Payne behind those doors after trials without having had the benefit of counsel. I do not believe that such a reason is even relevant to a determination that we should decline to enforce the Bill of Rights.

## 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
# Foster v. Mora

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 425
Foster v. Mora
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of California.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Edmond L. Goold for the plaintiffs in error.
Mr. John T. Doyle, contra.
MR. JUSTICE MILLER 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
# Fowle v. The Common Council of Alexandria

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
24 U.S. 320
Fowle v. The Common Council of Alexandria

## 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
# Fouvergne v. Municipality No 2 of the City of New Orleans

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
59 U.S. 470
Fouvergne v. Municipality No 2 of the City of New Orleans
THIS was an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, sitting as a court of equity.
The principal circumstances of the case, which furnished the basis of the judgment of this court, are set forth in the opinion.
The entire case was one which covered a vast deal of ground. For the appellants there was a brief filed by Mr. S. Paul, of nearly 150 pages, which was adopted by Mr. Taylor, and one by Mr. Taylor himself, of the same size. On the part of the appellees, the brief of Mr. Janin was only 30 pages. These papers contained a vast deal of research into the civil law upon many points of the case which were not noticed in the opinion of the court, whose judgment rested upon a single point as disposing of the case. It is not necessary, therefore, to report them.
The case was argued by Mr. Taylor and Mr. Lewis, for the appellants, and by Mr. Janin, for the appellees.
Mr. Justice CAMPBELL 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
# Gibson v. Stevens

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
49 U.S. 384
Gibson v. Stevens

## 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
# Gibson v. Thompson, Trustee/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 18
Gibson v. Thompson, Trustee
Argued: Dec. 9, 1957. ---
The petition for certiorari is granted, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Texas is reversed and the case is remanded. We hold that the proofs justified with reason the jury's conclusion that employer negligence played a part in producing the petitioner's injury. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 77 S.Ct. 443, 1 L.Ed.2d 493; Webb v. Illinois Central R. Co., 352 U.S. 512, 77 S.Ct. 451, 1 L.Ed.2d 503; Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 U.S. 521, 77 S.Ct. 457, 1 L.Ed.2d 511; Shaw v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 680, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Futrelle v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 353 U.S. 920, 77 S.Ct. 682, 1 L.Ed.2d 718; Deen v. Gulf, C. & S.F. Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 925, 77 S.Ct. 715, 1 L.Ed.2d 721; Thomson v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 926, 77 S.Ct. 698, 1 L.Ed.2d 722; Arnold v. Panhandle & S.F. Ry. Co., 353 U.S. 360, 77 S.Ct. 840, 1 L.Ed. 889; Ringhiser v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., 354 U.S. 901, 77 S.Ct. 1093, 1 L.Ed.2d 1268; McBride v. Toledo Terminal R. Co., 354 U.S. 517, 77 S.Ct. 1398, 1 L.Ed.2d 1534. For the reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 524, 77 S.Ct. 443, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 493, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER is of the view that the writ of certiorari is improvidently granted.
Memorandum of Mr. Justice HARLAN, with whom Mr. Justice BURTON and Mr. Justice WHITTAKER join. For reasons elaborated by Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER at the last Term, 352 U.S. 521, 524, 77 S.Ct. 457, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 511, I think that certiorari should have been denied. However, I continue in the view, expressed at the last Term, 352 U.S. 559, 77 S.Ct. 478, that once certiorari has been granted in such cases, we disbelievers, consistent with the Court's certiorari procedure, should consider them on the merits. Further, much as I disagree, 352 U.S. 559, 562-564, 77 S.Ct. 478 481, with the reasoning and philosophy of the Rogers case, which strips the historical role of the judge in a jury trial of all meaningful significance, I feel presently bound to bow to it. Applying Rogers to the present cases, I am forced to concur in judgments of reversal in Nos. 142 and 350.

## 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
# Gibson v. Thompson, Trustee

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 18
Gibson v. Thompson, Trustee
Argued: Dec. 9, 1957. ---
Messrs. Doerner, Rhinehart & Stuart, Tulsa, Okl., Fred Parks, Houston, Tex., for petitioner.
Messrs. Woodul, Arterbury & Wren, Walter F. Woodul, Houston, Tex., for respondent.
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
# Gibson v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Gibson v. United States."
* 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.
* Gibson v. United States (166 U.S. 269)
* Gibson v. United States (194 U.S. 182)
* Gibson v. United States (329 U.S. 338)
See also United States v. Gibson.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 5

Plate 5. V. I. p. 112.
3. Front view of the left Femur.
4. Front view of the left Tibia and Fibula.
5. Bones of the foot, imperfectly restored.
12, 13. Armour, supposed to be that of Megatherium.
14—19. Armour of Dasypus and Chlamyphorus.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 6

Plate 6. V.I. p. 118.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 7

Plate 7. V. I. p. 133.
Ichthyosaurus platyodon from the Lias at Lyme Regis, discovered by T. Hawkins, Esq. and deposited in the British Museum, together with all the other splendid fossil remains that are engraved in his memoirs of Ichthyosauri and Plesiosauri. This animal, though by no means full grown, must have measured twenty-four feet in length. The extremity of the tail, and left fore paddle, and some lost ​fragments of the rest of the skeleton, are artificially restored. (Hawkins.)
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 8

Plate 8. V. I. p. 135.
# Fifty spiritual homilies of St. Macarius the Egyptian/Homily 42

HOMILY XLII
Not external things, but internal, advance or injure a man, namely the Spirit of grace or the spirit of wickedness.
1. SUPPOSE there is a great city, and it is deserted, the walls all broken down, and it be taken by enemies, its greatness is of no use. Care then must be taken in proportion to its greatness that it should have strong walls, that the enemy may not come in. In like manner, souls adorned with knowledge and intelligence and acuteness of mind are like great cities. But careful inquiry must be made whether they are fortified with the power of the Spirit, lest the enemy should get into them and lay them waste. The wise men of the world, Aristotle, or Plato, or Socrates, being prudent in knowledge, were like great cities, but they were made waste by enemies, because the Spirit of God was not in them.
2. But as many simple folk as are partakers of grace are like little cities fortified by the power of the cross. They only fall from grace for two causes, and perish either because they cannot bear the afflictions that are brought upon them, or because, having tasted the sweets of the pleasures of sin, they continued in them. Those who tread the way cannot go through without temptations. As in childbirth the beggar and the queen have the same pangs, and as the rich man’s land and the poor man’s alike, if they receive not the necessary culture, cannot bear worthy fruits, so in the culture of the soul not the wise man, not the rich man, reigns in grace, unless through endurance, and afflictions, and many a labour. The life of Christians ought to be of that kind. As honey, being sweet, does not admit of anything bitter or poisonous, so Christians are good to all who come near them, good or bad, as the Lord says, Be ye good, like your heavenly Father. The thing that injures and pollutes a man is from within. Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, as the Lord says; because the things which defile the man are from within.
3. From within, creeping and advancing in the soul, is the spirit of wickedness, calculating, inciting, which is the veil of darkness, the old man, which those who flee to God must put off, and put on the heavenly, new man, which is Christ. Nothing outside can hurt a man, only the spirit of darkness dwelling in the heart, alive and active; so that every one in his thoughts ought to possess the conflict, that Christ may shine upon his heart. To whom be glory for ever. Amen.