OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 4/19th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 33

Chap. XXXIII.—An Act making appropriations for the public buildings, and other objects.
Sums respectively appropriated for the public buildings, &c.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums be, and the same are hereby, respectively, appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the following purposes: that is to say—
Capitol, Capitol square, &c.For completing the work remaining to be done on and about the Capitol, the Capitol square, and its enclosures, and for engine house, the sum of eighty-three thousand nine hundred and eighty-five dollars and five cents; for repairs on the Capitol, the sum of five hundred dollars; for repairs and improvements at the War and Navy Departments, the sum of one thousand four hundred and ninety-five dollars and thirty-five cents; for additional fire apparatus, the sum of one thousand two hundred and twenty-seven dollars:Proviso. Provided, That no platform nor steps be extended from the top of the area wall to the building, nor any change, whatever, be made in the present arrangement of the room under the library.
Repairs, cases for records, &c.For repairs, cases for records, and other furniture for the office of the clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States, four hundred and fifty dollars.
Completion of the penitentiary.For the completion of the penitentiary in the District of Columbia, fifteen thousand three hundred and ninety dollars.
Appropriation by an act, approved May 22, 1826, ch. 154, for finishing the large room in the President’s house, &c.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That of the sum of money appropriated by an act of Congress, approved twenty-second May, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, for finishing the large room in the President’s house, for the purchase of furniture, and the repairs of ​the house, six thousand dollars be expended, under the direction of the President of the United States.
Approved, March 2, 1827.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 4/19th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 34

Chap. XXXIV.—An Act supplementary to “An act to perfect certain locations and sales of the public lands in Missouri,” passed April the twenty-six, [sixth,] one thousand eight hundred and twenty-two.
Act of April 26, 1822, ch. 40. The location of lands for the relief of the inhabitants of the late county of New Madrid, to be perfected into grants. Act of Feb. 17, 1815, ch. 45. Act of July 9, 1832, ch. 180, and notes.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the locations of lands heretofore made according to law, by virtue of warrants issued under the act of Congress, passed the seventeenth day of February, one thousand eight hundred [and] fifteen, for the relief of the inhabitants of the late county of New Madrid, in the Missouri territory, who suffered by earthquakes, in lieu of lots and out lots, in and adjacent to the villages of New Madrid and Little Prairie, and not exceeding six hundred and forty acres in the whole to any one sufferer, shall be perfected into grants in the manner prescribed by the last mentioned act of Congress, any construction thereof to the contrary notwithstanding.
Approved, March 2, 1827.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 4/19th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 30

Chap. XXX.—An Act making appropriations for certain fortifications of the United States, for the year one thousand eight hundred and twenty-seven.
Sums appropriated.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums be, and the same are hereby, appropriated, to wit: For fortifications, to each specifically, as follows:
Forts.For fort Adams, at Brenton’s point, seventy thousand dollars. For fort Hamilton, at New Utrecht point, fifty-five thousand dollars. For fort Monroe, ninety thousand dollars. For fort Calhoun, fifty-five thousand dollars. For fort Macon at Bouge point, fifteen thousand dollars. For fort at Oak Island, twenty-five thousand dollars. For fort at Mobile point, seventy thousand dollars: For fort at Chef Menteur, thirty thousand dollars.Repairs and contingencies. For fort Jackson, eighty thousand dollars. For repairs and contingencies, fifteen thousand dollars.
Sums appropriated to be paid from the treasury. Proviso. Proviso.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the several sums hereby appropriated shall be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated: Provided, however, That no money appropriated by this act shall be paid to any person for his compensation, who is in arrears to the ​United States, until such person shall have accounted for, and paid into the treasury all sums for which he may be liable: Provided, also, That nothing in this section shall be construed to extend to balances arising solely from the depreciation of treasury notes, received by such person to be expended in the public service. But, in all cases where the salary or pay of any person is withheld, in pursuance of this act, it shall be the duty of the accounting officer, if demanded by the party, his agent or attorney, to report forthwith to the agent of the Treasury Department the balance due; and it shall be the duty of the said agent, within sixty days thereafter, to order suit to be commenced against such delinquent and his sureties.
Approved, March 2, 1827.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 4/19th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 31

Chap. XXXI.—An Act making appropriations for the erection and completion of certain barracks, store-houses, and hospitals, and for other purposes.
Sums appropriated.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums be, and the same are hereby, appropriated, to wit:
For completion of military barracks, &c.For the completion of barracks, store-houses, and hospital, at the Military Cantonment, near St. Louis, twenty thousand dollars.
For completion of military quarters, &c.For the completion of quarters, barracks, and hospital, at fort St. Philip, twelve thousand dollars.
Barracks, &c., at Michilimackinac.For the erection of new barracks and hospital at Michilimackinac, six thousand dollars.
Wharf at fort Wolcott.For the erection of a wharf at fort Wolcott, Rhode Island, five hundred dollars.
House, &c. at Eastport, Maine.For the purchase of a house and lot of land at Eastport, Maine, required for the use of the garrison at that post, eighteen hundred dollars.
Barracks at St. Augustine.For the purchase of lots adjoining the barracks at St. Augustine, Florida, six hundred dollars.
Barracks at Savannah.For the completion of the barracks at Savannah, fourteen thousand four hundred and fifty-two dollars and fifty-one cents.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the several sums hereby appropriated shall be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Approved, March 2, 1827.
# United States v. Spector

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

## Dissenting Opinions

    Black
    Jackson
United States Supreme Court
343 U.S. 169
United States v. Spector
Argued: March 6, 1952. --- Decided: April 7, 1952
See 343 U.S. 951, 72 S.Ct. 1040.
Provision of Immigration Act that alien, against whom order of deportation is outstanding, shall be guilty of felony if he shall willfully fail or refuse to make timely application in good faith for travel or other documents necessary to his departure in view of emphasis on timely application in good faith and lack of requirement that alien know visa requirements of one or more countries, contains warning sufficiently definite to free statute of any constitutional infirmity of vagueness. Immigration Act of 1917, § 20(a-c), as amended, 8 U.S.C.A. § 156(a-c); 18 U.S.C.A. § 3731.
Mr. Robert L. Stern, Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Messrs. John W. Porter, A. L. Wirin, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# United States v. Spector/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinions Black Jackson
United States Supreme Court
343 U.S. 169
United States v. Spector
Argued: March 6, 1952. --- Decided: April 7, 1952
Mr. Justice BLACK, dissenting.
The only thing certain about § 20(c) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended, is that violation of its terms is a felony punishable by ten years' imprisonment. An alien ordered deported by the Bureau of Immigration is subject to this ten-year penalty if he 'willfully fail(s) or refuse(s) to make timely application in good faith for travel or other documents necessary to his departure'. To avoid punishment an alien must guess with unerring accuracy what answers a judge or jury might someday give to the following questions: (1) When is an application 'timely'? (2) What constitutes a 'good faith' application? (3) What kind of 'documents' are 'necessary to his departure'? (4) To whom must he apply for these documents?
Aliens living in this country are not necessarily sophisticated world travelers familiar with the present-day red tape that must be unwound to get from one country to another. Congress should at least indicate when, to whom, and for what the alien should apply. If, for example, the statute merely required an alien to report at a certain time and place to sign 'documents' collected by the American Department of State, the affirmative conduct demanded would at least be clear and specific. But the present statute, in my judgment, entangles aliens in a snare of vagueness from which few can escape. I think the Constitution requires more than a 'bad' guess to make a criminal.

## Notes

* ↑ 'In earlier times, some Rulers placed their criminal laws where the common man could not see them, in order that he might be entrapped into their violation. Others imposed standards of conduct impossible of achievement to the end that those obnoxious to the ruling powers might be convicted under the forms of law. No one of them ever provided a more certain entrapment, than a statute which prescribes a penitentiary punishment for nothing more than a layman's failure to prophesy what a judge or jury will do. * * *' Williams v. North Carolina, 325 U.S. 226, 278, 65 S.Ct. 1092, 1118, 89 L.Ed. 1577 (dissenting opinion). Cf. United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Co., 255 U.S. 81, 89, 41 S.Ct. 298, 300, 65 L.Ed. 516.
* ↑ My belief that the statute is void for vagueness makes it unnecessary for me to reach the constitutional question discussed by Mr. Justice JACKSON, although I have not yet seen a satisfactory reason for rejecting his view. See my opinion in Maggio v. Zeitz, 333 U.S. 56, 78-81, 68 S.Ct. 401, 412-413, 92 L.Ed. 476.
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
# United States v. Spearin Spearin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
248 U.S. 132
United States v. Spearin Spearin
Argued: Nov. 14 and 15, 1918. --- Decided: Dec 9, 1918
Messrs. Frank W. Hackett, of Washington, D. C., and Charles E. Hughes, of New York City, for Spearin.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Thompson, for the United States.
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
# United States v. Speers

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
382 U.S. 266
United States v. Speers
Argued: Oct. 20, 1965. --- Decided: Dec 13, 1965
Richard M.Roberts, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Robert B. Gosline, Toledo, Ohio, for respondent.
Mr. Justice FORTAS 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
# Waples v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
110 U.S. 630
Waples v. United States
C. W. Horner and L. Madison Day, for appellant.
Sol. Gen. Phillips, for appellee.
FIELD, 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
# War's Dark Frame

WARS DARK FRAME
© Underwood & Underwood, N. Y.
A British Battery in Flanders
WAR'S DARK FRAME
BY WADSWORTH CAMP Author of "Sinister Island," etc.
WITH ILLUSTRATIONS
NEW YORK DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY 1917
Copyright, 1917
By dodd, mead and company, Inc.
TO
MY WIFE
AND
MY MOTHER
CONTENTS :
| CHAPTER | | PAGE |
| I | The Submarine Zone | 1 |
| II | The Strange England | 14 |
| III | Battle, Zeppelins, and Democracy | 30 |
| IV | Paris and Its War Spirit | 44 |
| V | Lorraine and the Devastation | 56 |
| VI | The Sinister Invasion | 68 |
| VII | The Persistent Bombardment | 81 |
| VIII | The Amazing Garden | 90 |
| IX | Between the Lines. | 100 |
| X | With the British in Flanders | 108 |
| XI | Hospitals and Headquarters | 121 |
| XII | Under Fire in a Flat Land | 133 |
| XIII | The Day's Work of Life and Death at the Front | 147 |
| XIV | The Appalling Mines | 164 |
| XV | Gas School and the Artillery | 176 |
| XVI | The Base | 190 |
| XVII | The Mad Activity of a Dead City | 199 |
| XVIII | Where Men Are Like Ants | 212 |
| XIX | The Grim Game of Intelligence. | 220 |
| XX | Tragic Secrets | 244 |
| XXI | The Advance | 260 |
ILLUSTRATIONS :
| A British battery in Flanders | Frontispiece FACING PAGE |
| The Germans made a more thorough job here than in Louvain | 32 |
| Old men and children wandered around with a furtive air, as if in anticipation of another catastrophe | 70 |
| Gerbéviller ... this monument to the Teutonic campaign of terribleness. | 78 |
| The effect of heavy shells in Rheims | 86 |
| The new and the old | 86 |
| Poilus billeted in Rheims | 86 |
| A listening post | 104 |
| "'One more village back to France'" | 108 |
| In the towns under bombardment | 140 |
| A shattered farm behind the firing line | 178 |
| A few twigs, scattered bits of green, make an impenetrable veil against the prying airmen | 188 |
| Barbed wire entanglements in winter | 216 |
| The Church at M—— had been blasted by great shells sent from guns many miles away | 256 |
WAR'S DARK FRAME
# War's Cataract

"In this red havoc of the patient earth"
* "War's Cataract, 1915" in The volunteer, and other poems (1916)
* "War's Cataract", in The Muse in Arms (1917)
# War's Cataract, 1915

"In this red havoc of the patient earth"
* "War's Cataract, 1915" in The volunteer, and other poems (1916).
* "War's Cataract" in The Muse in Arms (1917).
# Two expeditions into the interior of Southern Australia/Volume one/Appendix two

LIST OF STORES SUPPLIED FOR THE EXPEDITION.
List of Articles delivered from His Majesty's Stores, in charge of D. A. C. Goodsir, to Captain Sturt, viz.--
1 Hack saddle. 9 Harness casks. 1 Bridle. 23 Canvas bags. 2 Tents. 4 Tin cases. 14 Pack saddles. 16 Padlocks. 14 Pair hobbles. 6 Tarpaulens. 24 Sets horse shoes. 10 Haversacks. 2000 Horse nails. 113 Fathom one-inch rope. 113 Fathoms 1 1/2 inch rope. 1 Boat compass. 1 Hammer, (Blacksmith's) 1 Telescope. 1 Paring knife. 1 Spare glass for ditto. 2 Chipping do. 1 Tin case (for charts.) 2 Rasps. 100 Fish-hooks, (large.) 1 Pair pincers. 12 Fishing-lines. 1 Cutter. 10 Knives. 2lb. Pack thread. 10 Forks. 24 Needles. 10 Spoons. 1/4lb. Bristles. 2 Frying-pans. 7lbs. Leather. 2 Tinder-boxes. 1/2lb. Thread. 1 Tea-kettle, (tin.) 1 Pair of steelyards. 10 Tin dishes. 10 Tin pots. 8 Jackets. 1 Flour seive. 8 Duck frocks. 2 Felling-axes. 8 Shirts. 4 Tomahawks. 16 Trousers. 2 Hammers. 24 Pair shoes. 1 Hand-saw. 16 Blankets. 3 Bill-hooks. 16 Pair stockings. 3 Awls. 2 Bullock collars. 3 Broad hoes. 2 Do. back-bands and pipes. 4 Razors. 2 Leading cruppers. 4 Brushes. 1 Boat with sail and oars. 4 Combs. 1 Do. carriage. 3 Iron pots, (camp kettles.) 1 Canvass boat-cover. 1 Pair scissors. 3 Water breaker.
COMMISSARIAT OFFICE, SYDNEY, NOV. 10TH, 1828.
P.S.--l Tarpaulin.  Large Fish-hook.  1 Tin tea-kettle.  1 Camp kettle.  Pitch and oil.  Hemp or twine.
# United States v. Continental Oil Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
377 U.S. 161
United States v. Continental Oil Company
The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico for a trial on the merits of the case. Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 368 U.S. 464, 82 S.Ct. 486, 7 L.Ed.2d 458.
Separate Memorandum of Mr. Justice HARLAN.
This is an appeal by the Government in an antitrust case wherein the District Court entered summary judgment in favor of the defendant-appellee without opinion, findings of fact, or conclusions of law of any kind. The case is here on a typewritten record of some 2,000 pages, consisting of pleadings, briefs, depositions, exhibits, and the transcript of a pretrial conference. The district judge is now deceased.
The Court vacates the judgment below and remands the case for trial. Short of its being the law that the summary judgment procedure is wholly unavailable in a government antitrust case-a holding not before nor, as I understand matters, now made-I am unable to say that summary judgment was improvidently granted in this instance without making an examination of the entire record; certainly this disposition should not be made simply on the basis of the Government's statements that triable issues of fact exist. To examine this large record without any illumination by the court below would place an intolerable burden on this Court.
In these circumstances I believe that the proper course is to vacate the judgment below and remand the case to the District ourt, with leave to the defendant to renew its motion for summary judgment before another distrct judge. The Court's action, which deprives the defendant of that opportunity, seems to me unwarranted. If summary judgment were again granted, the District Court would be expected to furnish a statement of its reasons, including such findings of fact and conclusions of law as might be appropriate. Cf. United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 376 U.S. 651, 84 S.Ct. 1044, 12 L.Ed.2d 12 (concurring-dissenting opinion of HARLAN, 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
# United States v. Cook

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "United States v. Cook."
* 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.
* United States v. Cook (84 U.S. 168)
* United States v. Cook (86 U.S. 591)
* United States v. Cook (128 U.S. 254)
* United States v. Cook (257 U.S. 523)
* United States v. Cook (384 U.S. 257)
See also Cook v. United States.
# United States v. Conway

United States v. Conway, Hempst. 313, 25 F. Cas. 598 (D. Ark. 1843) (No. 14,849)
United States District Court for the District of Arkansas
Hempst. 313
The United States v. James S. Conway
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
* The "Act to regulate the sale of property on execution," approved 23d December, 1840, commonly called the valuation law, is constitutional, according to the doctrine in Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311, and its provisions must be followed in executing the final process of the court.
* The obligation of a contract and the remedy to enforce it are distinct things, and whatever belongs to the remedy may be altered according to the will of the State, as to both past and future contracts, provided the alteration does not impair the obligation of the contract.
* The obligation of a contract may be destroyed by den,ing a remedy altogether, or impaired by burdening the proceedings with new restrictions and conditions so as to make the remedy hardly worth pursuing; but a law which reserves property from sale one year, if two thirds of the appraised value shall not be offered, is not of that character.
* A writ of venditioni exponas issued before the expiration of the year is irregular, and will be quashed on motion, and a supersedeas thereto ordered.
July, 1843.—Motion to quash a venditioni exponas, determined before Benjamin Johnson, district judge.
A. Fowler, district attorney, for the plaintiff.
Chester Ashley, for the defendant.
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
# United States v. Cook (128 U.S. 254)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
128 U.S. 254
United States v. Cook
Asst. Atty. Gen. Howard and F. P. Dewees, for appellant.
John Paul Jones and Robert B. Lines, for appellee.
BRADLEY, 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
# United States v. Cook (257 U.S. 523)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
257 U.S. 523
United States v. Cook (257 U.S. 523)
Argued: Jan. 13, 1922. --- Decided: Feb 27, 1922
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Lovett, for the United States.
Mr. Wm. R. Harr, of Washington, D. C., for appellees.
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT 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
# United States v. Continental Oil Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
377 U.S. 161
United States v. Continental Oil Company
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick and Robert B. Hummel, for the United States.
David T. Searls and A. T. Seymour, for appellee.
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
# United States v. Contract Steel Carriers

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 409
United States v. Contract Steel Carriers
Argued: Feb. 29, 1956. --- Decided: March 12, 1956
Mr. Charles F. Barber, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Mr. Robert N. Burchmore, Chicago, Ill., for appellees.
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