OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# In the Morning (MacGill)

"The firefly haunts were lighted yet"
* "In the Morning" in The Muse in Arms (1917)
* "In the Morning" in A treasury of war poetry, British and American poems of the world war, 1914-1919 (1917)
# In the Night

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "In the Night."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.
* In the Night, a poem by Stephen Crane
* In the Night, a poem by Arthur Clark Kennedy
* In the Night, a poem by John Cowper Powys
* In the Night, a poem by Ella Wheeler Wilcox
# In the Neolithic Age

* Kipling, Rudyard (1896), "In the Neolithic Age" in The Seven Seas.
* Kipling, Rudyard (1899, 1919), "In the Neolithic Age" in Departmental Ditties and Ballads and Barrack-Room Ballads.
# In the Offing

As rendered in The Minaret (May 1917):
IN THE OFFING
The Ship of the Spring in the offing at last! Oh, rude blew the hindering gales, But perfumes entrancing, the danger o'erpast, Are wafted afar, from her sails!
The bearer of treasure more fragrant than myrrh— More precious than jewels of Inde, The stars in their courses keep watch over her, The gods for her temper the wind.
She comes as a maid whom life's vision elates, Out-spreading her draperies white; She comes as a bride whom a lover awaits With proud and impatient delight.
A queen, as she glides to the goal of her dreams With movement majestic and slow, So still is her beauty, half-conscious she seems,— But the heart in her breast is aglow;
For she hears the far murmur of myriad things That shall at her coming have birth. O sails in the offing! ye are as the wings Of angels that bring her to Earth!
Florence Earle Coates.
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 1927, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 96 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
# Kaufman v. United States

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
394 U.S. 217
Kaufman v. United States
Argued: Nov. 19, 1968. --- Decided: March 24, 1969
Bruce R. Jacob, Tallahassee, Fla., for petitioner.
John S. Martin, Jr., Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN 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
# Kaufman v. Wooters

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
138 U.S. 285
Kaufman v. Wooters
This case is before us upon a motion to cismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction in this court to re-examine the judgment below; or, if this court has jurisdiction, to affirm the judgment upon the ground that the question on which our right of review depends is too frivolous to require argument upon it.
Certain provisions of the statutes of Texas relating to the service of process are, it is contended, in violation of the clause of the fourteenth amendment declaring that no state shall deprive any person of property without due process of law. These provisions are as follows:
'Art. 1240. The defendant may accept service of any process, or waive the issuance of service thereof, by a written memorandum signed by him or his duly-authorized agent or attorney, and filed among the papers of the cause, and such waiver or exceptions shall have the same force and effect as if the citation had been issued and served as provided by law. 1241. The defendant may in person, or by attorney, or by his duly-authorized agent, enter an appearance in open court, and such appearance shall be noted by the judge upon his docket and entered in the minutes, and shall have the same force and effect as if a citation had been duly issued and served as provided by law. 1242. The filing of an answer shall constitute an appearance of the defendant so as to dispense with the necessity for the issuance of service of citation upon him. 1243. Where the citation or service thereof is quashed on motion of the defendant, the case may be continued for the term, but the defendant shall be deemed to have entered his appearance to the succeeding term of the court. 1244. Where the judgment is reversed on appeal or writ of error taken by the defendant for the want of service, or because of defective service of process, no new citation shall be issued or served, but the defendant shall be presumed to have entered his appearance to the term of the court at which the mandate shall be filed. 1245. No judgment shall in any case be rendered against any defendant unless upon service, or acceptance, or waiver of process, or upon an appearance by the defendant, as prescribed in this chapter, except where otherwise expressly provided for by law.'
T. N. Waul, for plaintiff in error.
A. H. Garland and Heber J. May, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# Kavanagh v. Noble

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
332 U.S. 535
Kavanagh v. Noble
Argued: Nov. 18, 1947. --- Decided: Dec 22, 1947
See 333 U.S. 850, 68 S.Ct. 656.
Mr. Lee A. Jackson, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Messrs. W. H. Harris and E. M. Baynes, both of West Palm Beach, Fla., for respondent.
Mr. Justice MURPHY 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
# Kaufman v. Wooters/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
138 U.S. 285
Kaufman v. Wooters
The supreme court of Texas, construing these statutory provisions has held, and it so held in this case, that a defendant, who appears only to obtain the judgment of the court upon the sufficiency of the service of the process upon him, is thereafter subject to the jurisdiction of the court, although the process against him is adjudged to have been insufficient to bring him into court for any purpose. The question here is whether such legislation is consistent with 'due process of law.' That question, arising upon the above statute, was presented in York v. Texas, 137 U.S. 15, 19, ante, 9, and it was there held that state legislation 'simply forbidding the defendant to come into court and challenge the validity of service upon him, in a personal action, without surrendering himself to the jurisdiction of the court, but which does not attempt to restrain him from fully protecting his person, his property, and his rights against any attempt to enforce a judgment rendered without due service of proess ,' was not forbidden by the fourteenth amendment.
Upon the record of this case there was color for the motion to dismiss, and, upon the authority of York v. Texas, the motion to affirm the judgment is sustained.

## 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
# Kong Kristian
## 1

    King Christian stood by the lofty mast
    In mist and smoke;
    His sword was hammering so fast,
    Through Gothic helm and brain it passed;
    Then sank each hostile hulk and mast,
    In mist and smoke.
    "Fly!" shouted they, "fly, he who can!
    Who braves of Denmark's Christian,
    Who braves of Denmark's Christian,
    In battle?"

## 2

    Niels Juel gave heed to the tempest's roar,
    Now is the hour!
    He hoisted his blood-red flag once more,
    And smote upon the foe full sore,
    And shouted loud, through the tempest's roar,
    "Now is the hour!"
    "Fly!" shouted they, "for shelter fly!
    Of Denmark's Juel who can defy,
    Of Denmark's Juel who can defy,
    The power?"

## 3

    Wessel rent
    Thy murky sky!
    Then champions to thine arms were sent;
    Terror and Death glared where he went;
    From the waves was heard a wail, that rent
    Thy murky sky!
    From Denmark thunders Tordenskiol',
    Let each to Heaven commend his soul,
    Let each to Heaven commend his soul,
    And fly!

## 4

    Path of the Dane to fame and might!
    Dark-rolling wave!
    Receive thy friend, who, scorning flight,
    Goes to meet danger with despite,
    Proudly as thou the tempest's might,
    Dark-rolling wave!
    And amid pleasures and alarms,
    And war and victory, be thine arms,
    And war and victory, be thine arms,
    My grave!
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Kolosvarer poem

* related portals: History of the Romanies.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Translated in 1882 "The Gypsies"
I've known no father since my birth, I have no friend alive on earth; My mother's dead this many day, The girl I loved has gone her way; Thou violin with music free Alone art ever true to me.
# Komada Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
215 U.S. 392
Komada Company v. United States
Argued: November 29, 30, 1909. --- Decided: January 3, 1910
This case is before us on a writ of certiorari to the United States circuit court of appeals for the ninth circuit. The question is the proper classification, under the tariff act of July 24, 1897 (30 Stat. at L. 151, chap. 11, U.S.C.omp. Stat. 1901, p. 1626), of a Japanese beverage Known as 'sake.' 'Sake' is not named in that act, but § 7 (p. 205), frequently spoken of as 'the similitude section,' reads as follows:
'That each and every imported article, not enumerated in this act, which is similar, either in material, quality, texture, or the use to which it may be applied, to any article enumerated in this act as chargeable with duty, shall pay the same rate of duty which is levied on the enumerated article which it most resembles in any of the particulars before mentioned; and if any nonenumerated article equally resembles two or more enumerated articles on which different rates of duty are chargeable, there shall be levied on such nonenumerated article the same rate of duty as is chargeable on the article which it resembles, paying the highest rate of duty.'
In November, 1904, petitioner imported some sake at the port of San Francisco, and, following prior rulings, the collector, under the similitude section, held it similar to still wine containing more than 14 per of absolute alcohol, and dutiable accordingly at 50 cents per gallon, under paragraph 296 (p. 174). The petitioner protested and claimed that it was either a nonenumerated manufactured article, dutiable at 20 per cent ad valorem, under § 6 (p. 205), or, by reason of similitude to ale, porter, or beer, at 20 cents per gallon under paragraph 297 (p. 174). Both the board of general appraisers and the circuit court sustained the protest, feeling themselves constrained by the decision of the dircuit court for the southern district of New York (Nishimiya v. United States, 131 Fed. 650), and that of the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit (United States v. Nishimiya, 69 C. C. A. 588, 137 Fed. 396). On appeal, the United States circuit court of appeals for the ninth circuit reversed the decision of the circuit court and sustained the classification made by the collector.
Thomas Fitch, W. Wickham Smith, J. M. Thurston, Stanley Jackson, and J. J. Dunne for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 393-395 intentionally omitted]
Mr. J. C. McReynolds and Attorney General Wickersham for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from page 395 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Brewer 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
# Kolovrat v. Oregon

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
366 U.S. 187
Kolovrat v. Oregon
Argued: March 30, 1961. --- Decided: May 1, 1961
Mr. Lawrence S. Lesser, Washington, D.C., for petitioners.
Miss Catherine Zorn, Salem, Or., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLACK 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
# Kolod v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 136
Kolod et al. v. United States
On Petition for Rehearing
No. 133. Argued: October 9, 1967 --- Decided: January 29, 1968
After the petition for a writ of certiorari in this case was filed, petitioners' counsel, as alleged in their petition for rehearing, learned of a government agency's electronic monitoring of a petitioner's conversations at his place of business. The Solicitor General sought to justify nondisclosure by the Government on the basis of the Justice Department's determination that the eavesdropped information was not arguably relevant to this prosecution.
Held: This Court cannot accept the Department's ex parte determination of relevancy in lieu of such a determination in an adversary District Court proceeding, to be confined to the content of any electronically eavesdropped conversations at petitioner's place of business and the pertinence thereof to petitioners' subsequent convictions.
Rehearing and certiorari granted; 371 F. 2d 983, vacated and remanded.
Edward Bennett Williams, Harold Ungar and W.H. Erickson for petitioners.
Solicitor General Griswold, former Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Sidney M. Glazer for the United States.
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
# JSC News Release Log 1990/90-002

Note to Editors: STS-32 Inflight Crew Press Conference
A press conference with the STS-32 astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia will be conducted during the upcoming mission.
Accredited news media who wish to participate must be located at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. The exact date for the event has yet to be determined, but is expected to occur after the primary mission objectives have been met.
The news conference will be broadcast live on NASA Select television and available for live use and rebroadcast. NASA Select programming is carried on RCA SATCOM F2R, transponder 13, located at 72 degrees West Longitude. Media may also monitor the event live from various NASA field centers.
# J. M. Grant's RIGDON/To the Reader

TO THE READER
PLEASE read this before you proceed; by so doing you will save time, and comprehend more perfectly the contents of the following pages.
PART I contains some facts which did not come under my observation, as they occurred before my acquaintance with Elder Rigdon; you will therefore understand that men of the strictest veracity have written and related the same to me, as they witnessed them when they transpired.
After the summer of 1833, you will please consider me a witness, with others, of the course taken by Elder Rigdon, in Ohio. All the circumstances in PART II that I did not witness, have been related to me by those whose words I rely on with the same confidence that I rely on the uniformity of the course of nature.
In the same light you may read PART III.
PART IV contains a collection of important facts, taken from the statements of men whose words may be relied on with the most implicit confidence. I have before me the testimony of a highly respectable gentleman of the State of Delaware, who was taken into one of the secret meetings held in the city of Nauvoo, at which time four men were ordained, under the hands of Elder Rigdon, to be Prophets, Priests and Kings unto the Gentiles, the same witness relates the titles claimed by Elder Rigdon, also the facts relating to the Army, Officers, &c. In the testimony given at the trial you will find the same subject carried out.
PART V. shows the disordered state of Mr. Rigdon’s mind, his course, &c. It will be for the candid reader to judge, whether the facts collected justify the conclusion or not.
J.M.G.
# JSC News Release Log 1990

​JSC News Release Log
This work is in the public domain because it was created by the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), whose copyright policy states that "NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted".
Please note that use of NASA logos is restricted by law, but these are not copyright restrictions.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# JSC News Release Log 1990/90-001

Astronaut Crew Named to International Microgravity Mission
USAF Col. Ronald J. Grabe has been named to command STS-42, a nine-day mission aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia in December, 1990. Stephen S. Oswald will be the pilot, and William F. Readdy will fly as a mission specialist. Mary L. Cleave, Ph.D., and Norman E. Thagard, Ph.D., were assigned to the flight as mission specialists in June, 1989.
Columbia's cargo bay will carry the International Microgravity Laboratory (IML-1) in which five NASA astronauts and two payload specialists will conduct a variety of studies and experiments in the fields of materials processing and life sciences.
The two payload specialists will be named in the near future.
Grabe, commanding his first Shuttle mission, will make his third flight in space. He flew previously as pilot on STS-51J in October, 1985, and on STS-30 in May, 1989. He was born June 13, 1945 in New York, NY.
Oswald will make his first space flight. He was born June 30, 1951, in Seattle, WA, but considers Bellingham, WA, to be his hometown. Readdy, also making his first flight, was born January 24, 1952, in Quonset Point, RI, but considers McLean, VA, to be his hometown.
Cleave will make her third space flight, having flown as mission specialist on STS 61-B in November, 1985, and on STS-30 in May, 1989. She was born February 5, 1947, in Southampton, NY.
Thagard will make his fourth space flight. He flew as mission specialist on STS-7 in June, 1983, on STS 51-B in April, 1985, and on STS-30 in May, 1989. Thagard was born July 3, 1943, in Marianna, FL, but considers Jacksonville, FL, to be his hometown.
# Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville (189 U.S. 434)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
189 U.S. 434
Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville
Argued: March 13, 1903. --- Decided: March 23, 1903
Messrs. Charles T. Cates, Jr., and Heber J. May for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. G. W. Pickle, J. W. Culton, and Messrs. Pickle & Turner 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
# Knox v. McElligott

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
258 U.S. 546
Knox v. McElligott
Argued: April 18, 1922. ---
Mr. Stark B. Ferriss, of New York City, for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. James A. Fowler, of Knoxville, Tenn., for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice McKENNA 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
# Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville."
* 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.
* Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville (189 U.S. 434)
* Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville (200 U.S. 22)
See also Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Company.
# Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville (200 U.S. 22)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
200 U.S. 22
Knoxville Water Company v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Knoxville
Argued: December 11, 12, 1905. --- Decided: January 2, 1906
Messrs. Charles T. Cates, Jr., R. E. L. Mountcastle, and Samuel G. Shields for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 23-25 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. John W. Green and J. W. Culton for appellees.
Mr. Justice Harlan 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
# K-K-K-Katy (sheet music, 1918)

* information about this edition.
* related portals: Song lyrics, Sheet music.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons gallery, Commons category, Wikidata item.
"K-K-K-Katy" was a popular World War I-era song written by Geoffrey O'Hara in 1917 and published in 1918. The sheet music advertised it as "The Sensational Stammering Song Success Sung by the Soldiers and Sailors," reflecting a time when speech impediments could be poked fun at—albeit gentle fun in this case. The song tells the story of Jimmy, a young soldier "brave and bold," who stuttered when he tried to speak to girls.
Jimmy was a soldier brave and bold Geoffrey O'Hara Geoffrey O'Hara - K-K-K-Katy (cover).jpg Billy_Murray_-_K-K-K-Katy.ogg
The Sensational Stammering Song The Soldiers And Sailors Sing
K-K-K-Katy
GEOFFREY O'HARA
Army Song Leader
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 1967, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 56 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
# K. James Ist. and the tinker

Dated from external evidence.
K. James Ist.
AND THE
TINKER.
To which is added,
King WILLIAM and his bold FORESTER.
PAUL and NANNY.
Braw JOHNNY BUTE.
Entered according to Order,
* K. James Ist. and the tinker
* King William and his bold forester
* Paul and Nanny
* Braw Johnny Bute
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
# K-K-K-Katy

* "K-K-K-Katy" (1918), sheet music published by Leo Feist, Inc.
* "K-K-K-Katy" (1918), a recorded version performed by Billy Murray
* "K-K-K-Katy" (1928), as performed by soldiers in the film Noah's Ark