OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Shakespeare's Sonnets (1923) Yale/Text/Sonnet 12

Layout 2
12
When I do count the clock that tells the time, And see the brave day sunk in hideous night; When I behold the violet past prime, And sable curls, all silver'd o'er with white; 4 When lofty trees I see barren of leaves, Which erst from heat did canopy the herd, And summer's green all girded up in sheaves, Borne on the bier with white and bristly beard, 8 Then of thy beauty do I question make, That thou among the wastes of time must go, Since sweets and beauties do themselves forsake And die as fast as they see others grow; 12 And nothing 'gainst Time's scythe can make defence Save breed, to brave him when he takes thee hence.
2 brave: beautiful 6 erst: formerly 9 question make: meditate
# Shakespeare's Sonnets (1923) Yale/Text/Sonnet 124

Layout 2
124
If my dear love were but the child of state, It might for Fortune's bastard be unfather'd, As subject to Time's love or to Time's hate, Weeds among weeds, or flowers with flowers gather'd. 4 No, it was builded far from accident; It suffers not in smiling pomp, nor falls Under the blow of thralled discontent, Whereto the inviting time our fashion calls: 8 It fears not policy, that heretic, Which works on leases of short number'd hours, But all alone stands hugely politic, That it nor grows with heat, nor drowns with showers. To this I witness call the fools of time, 13 Which die for goodness, who have liv'd for crime.
1 child of state: born of circumstances, accidental 2 for: because it was 4 Weeds . . . gather'd; cf. n. 7 thralled discontent: discontent held in subjection 8 Whereto: to which fashion: custom, usage 9 policy: craft 11 hugely politic: extremely wise 13, 14 Cf. n.
# SCAPIN-301

GENERAL HEADQUARTERS SUPREME COMMANDER FOR THE ALLIED POWERS
18 November 1945 AG 360 (18 Nov 45)BSS-E (SCAPIN - 301)
| MEMORANDUM FOR | : | IMPERIAL JAPANESE GOVERNMENT |
| THROUGH | : | Central Liaison Office, Tokyo. |
| SUBJECT | : | Commercial and Civil Aviation. |
1. You will abolish by 31 December 1945 all governmental and semi-governmental bodies concerned with commercial or other civil aviation in any of its aspects except those activities specifically authorized for operation under the direction of the Supreme Commander.
2. You will take necessary measures by 31 December 1945 to effect the dissolution of all companies, partnerships, or associations of any kind which have been engaged in any way with relation to commercial air transport or other civilian air operations, or in pilot or other training related to aircraft design, construction, maintenance or operation.
3. You will submit to this headquarters not later than 15 December 1945 a register of officers, principal operating officials, professional engineering and research personnel, pilots and instructors of the organizations affected by the above dissolution.
4. On and after 31 December 1945 you will not permit any governmental agency or individual, or any business concern, association, individual Japanese citizen or group of citizens, to purchase, own, possess, or operate any aircraft, aircraft assembly, engine, or research, experimental, maintenance or production facility related to aircraft or aeronautical science including working models.
5. You will not permit the teaching of, or research or experiments in aeronautical science, aerodynamics, or other subjects related to aircraft or balloons.
6. Acknowledgment of receipt of this memorandum is directed.
A personal signature appears here
H. W. ALLEN, Colonel, A.G.D. Asst Adjutant General.
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
# SCAPIN1778

GENERAL HEADQUARTERS
SUPREME COMMANDER FOR THE ALLIED POWERS
AG 684(16 Sept 47)GC-TNG APO 500 (SCAPIN 1778) 16 September 1947
| MEMORANDUM FOR: | JAPANESE GOVERNMENT |
| THROUGH: | Central Liaison Office, Tokyo |
| SUBJECT: | Liancourt Rocks Bombing Range |
1. The islands of Liancourt Rocks (or Take Shima), located 37° 15’ north, 131° 50’ east, are designated as a bombing range.
2. The inhabitants of Oki-Retto (Oki-Gunto) and the inhabitants of all the ports on the west coast of Honshu north to the 38th parallel, north latitude, will be notified prior to each actual use of this range. This information will be disseminated through Military Government units to local Japanese civil authorities.
       FOR THE SUPREME COMMANDER:
       R. M. LEVY,
    for Colonel, AGD,
Adjutant General.
Rescinded by SCAPIN 2160, 6 July 51
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
# SCAPIN2160

C/S ROK_______ D C/S FEC______ D C/S SCAP_✓_K SGS_S_____N__ File__(illegible text)
GENERAL HEADQUARTERS
SUPREME COMMANDER FOR THE ALLIED POWERS
APO 500
AG 684 (6 Jul 51) GC-TNG 6 July 1951
SCAPIN 2160
| MEMORANDUM FOR: | JAPANESE GOVERNMENT |
| SUBJECT: | Liancourt Rocks (Take-Shima) Bombing Range |
1. Rescission: Memorandum, GHQ SCAP, AG 684 (16 Sep 47) GC-TNG, SCAPIN 1778, subject: Liancourt Rocks Bombing Range, 16 September 1947.
2. The islands of Liancourt Rocks (Take-Shima) located 37°15’ North, 131°52’ East are designated as a bombing range.
3. The danger areas of this range are as described:
    a. Surface Danger Area – The area within a five mile radius of Liancourt Rocks 37°15’N - 131°52’E.
    b. Air Space Danger Area – The airspace within a five mile radius of Liancourt Rocks 37°15’N - 131°52’E extending to an altitude of 30,000 feet.
4. The inhabitants of Oki-Retto (Oki-Gunto) and the inhabitants of all the ports on the west coast of the island of Honshu north to the 40th parallel, north latitude, will be notified fifteen days prior to use of this Range. When the Range is used for periods in excess of fifteen days, warning reminders will be disseminated to the inhabitants indicated above every fifteen days. This information will be forwarded through the Government Section, General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers to the Japanese Government for dissemination to the local civil authorities in the areas concerned.
    FOR THE SUPREME COMMANDER:
K. B. BUSH Brigadier General, USA Adjutant General
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
# Screws v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
325 U.S. 91
Screws v. United States
Argued: Oct. 20, 1944. --- Decided: May 7, 1945
Mr. James F. Kemp, of Atlanta, Ga., for petitioners.
Mr. Charles Fahy, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the following opinion, in which the CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice REED, concur.

## 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
# Screvane v. Lomenzo

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
382 U.S. 11
Screvane v. Lomenzo
Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Leo A. Larkin, Morris Handel and George H. P. Dwight, for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of New York, Daniel M. Cohen, Asst. Sol. Gen., Donald Zimmerman, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., George D. Zuckerman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Leonard B. Sand and Max Gross, for appellees.
Oct. 11, 1965.
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
# Screvane v. Lomenzo/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
382 U.S. 11
Screvane v. Lomenzo
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
[For concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Harlan, see WMCA, Inc., et al. v. Lomenzo, 86 S.Ct. 24.]

## 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
# Screw-Guns

* "Screw-Guns" in Ballads and Barrack-Room Ballads (1892)
* "Screw-Guns" in Departmental Ditties and Ballads and Barrack-Room Ballads (1919)
# Shapleigh v. Mier

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
299 U.S. 468
Shapleigh v. Mier
Argued: Dec. 9, 1936. --- Decided: Jan 4, 1937
Mr. H. R. Gamble, of El Paso, Tex., for petitioners.
Mr. Richard F. Burges, of El Paso, Tex., for respondent.
Mr. Justice CARDOZO 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
# Shapiro v. Wilgus

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
287 U.S. 348
Shapiro v. Wilgus
Argued: Nov. 10, 1932. --- Decided: Dec 5, 1932
Messrs. Jacob Weinstein, of Philadelphia, Pa. (Francis Biddle, of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for petitioner.
Mr. Sidney E. Smith, of Philadelphia, Pa., for respondents.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 349-350 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice CARDOZO 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
# Son of God! thy people's shield!

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
Prayer for the Lord's promised presence by John Newton
    Son of God! thy people's shield!
    Must we still thine absence mourn?
    Let thy promise be fulfilled,
    Thou hast said, "I will return!"
    Gracious Leader now appear,
    Shine upon us with thy light!
    Like the spring, when thou art near,
    Days and suns are doubly bright.
    As a mother counts the days
    Till her absent son she see;
    Longs and watches, weeps and prays,
    So our spirits long for thee.
    Come, and let us feel thee nigh,
    Then thy sheep shall feed in peace;
    Plenty bless us from on high,
    Evil from amongst us cease.
    With thy love, and voice, and aid,
    Thou canst every care assuage;
    Then we shall not be afraid,
    Though the world and Satan rage.
    Thus each day for thee we'll spend,
    While our callings we pursue;
    And the thoughts of such a friend
    Shall each night our joy renew.
    Let thy light be ne'er withdrawn,
    Golden days afford us long!
    Thus we pray at early dawn,
    This shall be our evening song.
# Son Christopher

As serialized in Once a Week.
* Part 1
* Part 2
* Part 3
* Part 4
* Part 5
* Part 6
* Part 7
* Part 8
# Sharrow v. Brown

Supreme Court of the United States
405 U.S. 968
Sharrow v. Brown
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
No. 71-5762
Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Reported below: 447 F. 2d 94.
# Sharpe v. Buchanan/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
317 U.S. 238
Sharpe v. Buchanan
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted and the petition for certiorari is also granted. It appears from the record that after a hearing the district court denied an application for habeas corpus filed by petitioner, who is confined in a state penitentiary pursuant to a judgment of conviction of a state court. The circuit court of appeals affirmed the district court's order, 6 Cir., 121 F.2d 448, on the sole ground that petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies by applying to the state courts for habeas corpus, although an application for a writ of error coram nobis had previously been denied by the Kentucky Court of Appeals. Sharpe v. Commonwealth, 284 Ky. 88, 143 S.W.2d 857. The circuit court of appeals denied a petition for rehearing, 133 F.2d 100, when it appeared that an application for habeas corpus, filed in a state court after the circuit court of appeals had rendered its judgment, was still pending on appeal in the Kentucky Court of Appeals. After the petition for certiorari was filed here, the Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the state court's order denying habeas corpus. Sharpe v. Commonwealth, Ky., 165 S.W.2d 993, decided November 13, 1942. It thus appears that this obstacle to a consideration of the merits of petitioner's application, which the circuit court of appeals encountered, has now been removed. The judgment is therefore vacated, without costs, and the cause remanded to the circuit court of appeals for such further proceedings as it may deem appropriate.
So ordered.
Judgment vacated.

## 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
# Sharpe v. Bonham

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
224 U.S. 241
Sharpe v. Bonham
Argued: March 12, 1912. --- Decided: April 1, 1912
Mr. John M. Gaut for appellants.
Messrs. W. C. Caldwell, Frank Slemons, J. H. Zarecor, and W. B. Lamb for appellees.
Memorandum opinion by direction of the court. By Mr. Justice Hughes:

## 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
# Sharpe v. Doyle

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 686
Sharpe v. Doyle
ERROR to the Superior Court of the city of New York.
The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Charles E. Whitehead for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. William Henry Arnoux, 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
# Shattuck v. Shattuck

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
138 U.S. 146
Shattuck v. Shattuck
[Statement of Case from pages 146-148 intentionally omitted]
John F. Duncombe and C. E. Whitehead, for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 148-150 intentionally omitted]
Charles A. Clark, for appellees.
Mr. Justice FIELD, after stating the facts as above, 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
# Sharpe v. Buchanan

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
317 U.S. 238
Sharpe v. Buchanan
Submitted on Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis Nov. 21, 1942.
Decided Dec. 14, 1942.
Mr. Howard M. Sharpe, pro se.
No appearance 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
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 2 Scene 2

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 1 Scene 5

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 1 Scene 8

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 1 Scene 9

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 2 Scene 1

Scena Secunda.
Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 2 Scene 3

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 3 Scene 2

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 1 Scene 6

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 1 Scene 7

Layout 2
# Shakespeare - First Folio facsimile (1910)/The Tragedy of Coriolanus/Act 3 Scene 1

Actus Tertius.
Layout 2
# Southern Construction Company v. Pickard

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
371 U.S. 57
Southern Construction Company v. Pickard
Argued: Oct. 16, 1962. ---
William J. Harbison, Nashville, Tenn., for petitioners.
Edward Gallagher, Washington, D.C., 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
# Southern Cotton Oil Company v. Texas/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
197 U.S. 134
Southern Cotton Oil Company v. Texas
Argued: November 1, 2, 1904. --- Decided: February 27, 1905
The Southern Cotton Oil Company is a New Jersey corporation doing business in the state of Texas by virtue of a permit issued June 3, 1897, under the laws of the state. The object of this suit is to forfeit the permit of the company for the violation of the anti-trust statutes of the state. The violation of the statutes alleged against it is the same as that alleged against the National Cotton Oil Company in No. 37. [National Cotton Oil Co. v. Texas, 197 U.S. 115, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 379, 49 L. ed. --.] The defenses are the same, and were presented by demurrer. The demurrer was overruled, and, the Southern Cotton Oil Company declining to plead further, judgment was entered forfeiting its permit to do business in the state, except such as might be and constitute interstate commerce. The judgment was affirmed by the court of civil appeals. A rehearing was denied, and a writ of error from the supreme court refused. This writ of error was then sued out.
The questions are identical with those presented in No. 37, and on its authority the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals is 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
# Southern California Edison Company v. Railroad Commission of California/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
280 U.S. 588
Southern California Edison Company v. Railroad Commission of California
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of California denied.

## 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
# Southern Cotton Oil Company v. Texas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
197 U.S. 134
Southern Cotton Oil Company v. Texas
Argued: November 1, 2, 1904. --- Decided: February 27, 1905
Messrs. William V. Rowe, R. S. Lovett, Ralph Oakley, and James A. Baker for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. C. K. Bell 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
# Southern Burlington County N.A.A.C.P. v. Township of Mount Laurel/Concurrence Mountain

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Mountain
* Pashman
* Wikipedia article
[p193] MOUNTAIN, J. (concurring).
I agree with the conclusions reached in the Court's opinion and essentially with the opinion itself. In one important respect, however, I disagree. The Court rests its decision upon a ground of State constitutional law. I reach the same result by concluding that the term, ‘general welfare,’ appearing in N.J.S.A. 40:55-32, can and should properly be interpreted with the same amplitude attributed to that phrase in the opinion of the Court, as well as otherwise in the manner there set forth. I therefore would rest the conclusions we here announce upon an interpretation of the statute, and not upon the State constitution.
Accordingly, since I read the statute-without resort to the Constitution-to justify, if not compel, our decision, I find it unnecessary to express any view as to the merits of the constitutional argument set forth in the Court's opinion.
# Southern California Edison Company v. Railroad Commission of California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
280 U.S. 588
Southern California Edison Company v. Railroad Commission of California
Messrs. Roy V. Reppy and W. C. Mullendore, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Mr. Arthur T. George, of Los Angeles, Cal., for respondents.

## 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
# Southern Development Company of Nevada v. Silva

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
125 U.S. 247
Southern Development Company of Nevada v. Silva
Wm. M. Stewart, A. T. Britton, and A. B. Browne, for appellant.
J. P. Langhorne and John H. Miller, for appellee.
LAMAR, 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