OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Gillis v. Stinchfield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
159 U.S. 658
Gillis v. Stinchfield
Action by A. W. Stinchfield against J. N. Gillis, John T. Faxon, administrator of the estate of F. B. Rice, deceased, and J. N. Voss. A judgment for plaintiff was affirmed by the supreme court of California (40 Pac. 98), and defendants bring error. Dismissed.
This was an action brought by Stinchfield against Gillis and others in the superior court of Tuolumne county, Cal., to recover the value of certain gold alleged to have been taken by defendants from the mining claim of plaintiff. Gillis for many years had held and asserted ownership of a mining claim known as the 'Carrington,' and had sold and conveyed by deed of grant, bargain, and sale a portion of the ground to Stinchfield. Immediately after executing the deed to Stinchfield, Gillis located that portion of the claim which he retained, and denominated his location the 'Carrington,' and afterwards Stinchfield located the ground he had purchased and denominated it the 'Pine Tree' claim. Thereafter Gillis, or those under him, entered upon the ground he had sold to Stinchfield at the intersection of two veins, one of which had its apex in the portion of the original claim which Gillis had retained, and the other had its apex in the ground sold to Stinchfield, and dug out and appropriated a large amount of gold, the space of vein intersection from which the gold was taken being entirely in Stinchfield's ground.
The trial court gave judgment for Stinchfield, and Gillis appealed to the supreme court of California, by which the judgment of the lower court was affirmed. 40 Pac. 98. The supreme court was of opinion that Gillis was estopped, under the law of California, by his deed to Stinchfield, from claiming priority of title of the space of vein intersection by reason of the location which he had made after the execution of the deed, but before the location by Stinchfield of the ground conveyed to him. The same conclusion had been reached and announced on a former appeal. 96 Cal. 33, 30 Pac. 839.
A writ of error from this court having been allowed, a motion to dismiss was submitted.
J. C. Campbell, for plaintiff in error.
M. A. Wheaton and F. J. Kierce, for defendant in error.
Mr. Chief Justice FULLER, 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
# Gilliam v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 727
Willie L. GILLIAM v. UNITED STATES.
Willie L. Gilliam, pro se.
Solicitor General Cox, for the United States.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
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
# Gilliam v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 727
Willie L. GILLIAM v. UNITED STATES.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. Upon the suggestion of the Solicitor General and an examination of the entire record, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 82 S.Ct. 917, 8 L.Ed.2d 21.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

## 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
# Gillis v. State of California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
293 U.S. 62
Gillis v. State of California
No. 28 Argued: Oct. 8-9, 1934. --- Decided: Nov 5, 1934
Mr. Ernest C. Carman, of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Messrs. H. H. Linney and U.S. Webb, both of San Francisco, Cal., for the State of California.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS, 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
# Geddes v. Anaconda Copper Mining Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
254 U.S. 590
Geddes v. Anaconda Copper Mining Company
Argued: April 25, 26, 1919. ---
Restored to Docket for Reargument. Dec. 8, 1919.
Reargued March 3, 4, 1920.
Decided Jan. 24, 1921.
Messrs. Thomas J. Walsh and C. B. Nolan, both of Helena, Mont., for appellants.
Messrs. W. B. Rodgers, of Butte, Mont., and L. O. Evans, of Butte, Mont., for appellees.
Mr. Justice CLARKE 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
# Geekie v. Kirby Carpenter

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
106 U.S. 379
Geekie v. Kirby Carpenter
S. D. Hastings, Jr., for plaintiffs in error.
L. S. Dixon and B. J. Brown, for defendant in error.
BLATCHFORD, 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
# Gee, Kid! But I Like You

Joseph Lamb Gee, Kid! But I Like You 1.jpg
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Greece

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Greece."
* 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.
* Greece, a poem by Lydia Huntley Sigourney (1827)
* Greece, a poem by Lydia Huntley Sigourney (1834)
* Greece, a poem by Henry David Thoreau
* Greece, who am I that should remember thee, poem by Henry David Thoreau
* "Greece," by Pierre-Antoine Lebrun in A Sheaf Gleaned in French Fields (pp. 27−28), London: C. Kegan Paul & Co. (1876)
* "Greece," in Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition (1875–1889)
* "Greece," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Greece," in Catholic Encyclopedia, (ed.) by Charles G. Herbermann and others, New York: The Encyclopaedia Press (1913)

## See also

* Hellas
* Portal:Greece
# Greece (Thoreau)

"When life contracts into a vulgar span"
* "Greece" in Poems of Nature (1895)
* "Greece" in The Writings of Henry David Thoreau (1906) Vol. 5
# Gitanjali/Index of first words

These translations are of poems contained in three books—Naivédya, Kheyá, and Gitánjali—to be had at the Indian Publishing House, 22 Cornwallis Street, Calcutta; and of a few poems which have appeared only in periodicals.
INDEX OF FIRST WORDS
THE END
Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.
# Gitlow v. New York/Dissent Holmes

* This page is part of a WikiProject to improve the United States Supreme Court case pages. To participate see the project page.
* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Holmes
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES, dissenting.
MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS and I are of opinion that this judgment should be reversed. The general principle of free speech, it seems to me, must be taken to be included in the Fourteenth Amendment, in view of the scope that has been given to the word 'liberty' as there used, although perhaps it may be accepted with a somewhat larger latitude of interpretation than is allowed to Congress by the sweeping language that governs or ought to govern the laws of the United States. If I am right, then I think that the criterion sanctioned by the full Court in Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47, 52, applies. "The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive [673] evils that [the State] has a right to prevent." It is true that in my opinion this criterion was departed from in Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, but the convictions that I expressed in that case are too deep for it to be possible for me as yet to believe that it and Schaefer v. United States, 251 U.S. 466, have settled the law. If what I think the correct test is applied, it is manifest that there was no present danger of an attempt to overthrow the government by force on the part of the admittedly small minority who shared the defendant's views. It is said that this manifesto was more than a theory, that it was an incitement. Every idea is an incitement. It offers itself for belief and if believed it is acted on unless some other belief outweighs it or some failure of energy stifles the movement at its birth. The only difference between the expression of an opinion and an incitement in the narrower sense is the speaker's enthusiasm for the result. Eloquence may set fire to reason. But whatever may be thought of the redundant discourse before us it had no chance of starting a present conflagration. If in the long run the beliefs expressed in proletarian dictatorship are destined to be accepted by the dominant forces of the community, the only meaning of free speech is that they should be given their chance and have their way.
If the publication of this document had been laid as an attempt to induce an uprising against government at once and not at some indefinite time in the future it would have presented a different question. The object would have been one with which the law might deal, subject to the doubt whether there was any danger that the publication could produce any result, or in other words, whether it was not futile and too remote from possible consequences. But the indictment alleges the publication and nothing more.
# Gitanjali/end matter

BY RABINDRANATH TAGORE
THE GARDENER
LYRICS OF LOVE AND LIFE
TRANSLATED BY THE AUTHOR
With Portrait. Crown 8vo. 45. 6d. net.
DAILY MAIL.—"Flowers as fresh as sunrise… One cannot tell what they have lost in the translation, but as they stand they are of extreme beauty... They are simple, exalted, fragrant—episodes and incidents of every day transposed to faery."
DAILY NEWS.—"The verses in this book are far finer and more genuine than even the best in Gitanjali."
OBSERVER.—"Mr. Tagore does not in his poetry set the themes of life to great music; he speaks them in a soft voice to the heart with all the simplicity and directness in his power. He takes the little intimate things which comprise life and fashions them into pearls which reflect the colour of the sky, the mightiness of love and life. He has vision ; he has intelligence :n love, the last test of a man's nature."
PALL MALL GAZETTE.—"No one can read it without a sense of the original music in his ear, and we have a very genuine curiosity to hear Mr. Tagore recite the authentic Bengali versions which he has rendered himself so delicately in this fresh and truly poetic book."
MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd., LONDON.
BY RABINDRANATH TAGORE
THE CRESCENT MOON
CHILD-POEMS
Translated by the Author from the Original Bengali.
With 8 Illustrations in Colour.
Pott 4to. 4s. 6d. net
GLOBE.—"In The Crescent Moon Rabindranath Tagore offers a revelation more profound and more subtle than that in the Gitanjali. He opens to us the child-mind... His revelation of the child-mind is richer, more complete, more convincing than any of which we have had previous knowledge... The poems depict every phase of the child's imagination. Their richness and beauty will be sufficiently obvious from the exam pies we have given, and these qualities are even more apparent when the poet turns from childhood itself to gaze upon the motherhood which enfolds it."
OBSERVER.—Every one who knows—and who does not?—the sensitive delicacy and strength of Mr. Tagore's mind and work will realise how delightful must be his poems about children. They are. They have a singular fragrance and beauty of their own."
SADHANA:
THE REALISATION OF LIFE
LECTURES
Extra Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MAHARSHI
DEVENDRANATH TAGORE
[FATHER OF RABINDRANATH TAGORE]
With Introduction by Evelyn Underbill. Shortly.
8vo.
MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd., LONDON.
# Gitanjali/front matter

GITANJALI
MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited
LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd.
TORONTO
# Giulietta

Giulietta
By Letitia Elizabeth Landon (L. E. L.)
From Forget Me Not, 1833
Compiled by Peter J. Bolton
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
# Gitanjali/99

99
When I give up the helm I know that the time has come for thee to take it. What there is to do will be instantly done. Vain is this struggle.
Then take away your hands and silently put up with your defeat, my heart, and think it your good fortune to sit perfectly still where you are placed.
These my lamps are blown out at every little puff of wind, and trying to light them I forget all else again and again.
​ But I shall be wise this time and wait in the dark, spreading my mat on the floor; and whenever it is thy pleasure, my lord, come silently and take thy seat here.
# Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press

Source: 1997 Congressional Record, Vol. 143, Page E2218 (November 7, 1997). www.gpo.gov. Congressman Sam Farr. United States House of Representatives. Section: Extensions of Remarks.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
HON. SAM FARR
OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, November 7, 1997
FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I want to address the House for a time about the sanctity of one of America's most treasured rights: the freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech is central to most every other right that we hold dear in the United States and serves to strengthen the democracy of our great country.
It is unfortunate, then, when actions occur that might be interpreted as contrary to this honored tenet.
Currently there is a dispute between journalists in my district and the new owners of the Monterey County Herald newspapers. All employees of the newspaper were required to reapply for their jobs when the new owners took over the paper. Several of the employees—some of them prize-winning journalists—were not rehired.
This action has left many in the community feeling that the newspaper is acting unfairly toward the reporters and fearing that it will affect the tenor of the news reported. Further there are suspicions that the owners may be engaging in antiunion efforts, casting further pall on the ability of the paper to serve the reading public.
I urge every American—no matter the position they hold in this society of ours—to carefully consider the actions they take when those actions concern the dissemination of public information. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are much too powerful rights to be lost to squabbles over the union or nonunion status of employees. They are too basic to the structure and fabric of American life to fall victim to bottom line dollar equations.
I know the fired employees and the new owners of the Herald continue to negotiate over this matter. I am hopeful that the two sides can come to a mutually satisfactory arrangement that leaves the journalists reporting, the paper profiting, and the reading public informed.
____________________
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
# Freedom of Information Act

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Freedom of Information Act."
* 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.
Legislation:
* Freedom of Information Act (United States), a law enacted in the United States when President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 4, 1966 signed it into law. The provisions are codified in 5 U.S.C. 552: Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings.
* Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth.) , an Australian Act providing for similar issues.
* Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic.) , an Victorian Act providing for similar issues.
* Freedom of Information Act 1989 (NSW), a New South Wales Act providing for similar issues.
* Freedom of Information Act 1991 (SA), a South Australian Act providing for similar issues.
* Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA), a Western Australian Act providing for similar issues.
* Freedom of Information Act 2000 (c. 36), an Act of UK Parliament which introduced a public "right to know" in relation to public bodies.
* Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (asp 13), covers public bodies over which the Scottish Parliament, rather than United Kingdom Parliament, has jurisdiction, fulfilling a similar purpose to the UK-level Freedom of Information Act 2000.
* Freedom of Information Act, 2002 (Act 5 of 2003), an Indian Act that provides for similar policy. Repealed by the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act 22 of 2005)
* Freedom of Information Act 2014 (No. 30 of 2014), an Irish Act providing for similar issues.
Non-legislative text:
* Freedom of Information Act (Presidential memorandum), 2009 United States presidential memorandum
* Freedom of Information Act (The Wire), 2010
# Freedom of Election Act 1275

* related portals: England.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Part of the First Statute of Westminster
STATUTUM WEST' PRIMUM. The Statute of WESTMINSTER, the First, Made at Westminster 25 die Aprilis, Anno 3 EDWARDI I. and Anno Dom. 1275.
Freedom of Election Act 1275
1275 (3 Edw. 1) C A P. V.
THESE be the Acts of King EDWARD, Son to King HENRY, made at Westminster at his first Parliament general after his Coronation, on the Mondayof Easter Utas, the third Year of his Reign, by his Council, and the Assent of Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, and all the Commonalty of the Realm being thither summoned, because our Lord the King had great Zeal and Desire to redress the State of the Realm in such Things as required Amendment, for the common Profit of holy Church, and of the Realm: And because the State of the holy Church had been evil kept, and the Prelates and religious Persons of the Land grieved many ways, and the People otherwise intreated than they ought to be, and the Peace less kept, and the Laws less used, and the Offenders less punished than they ought to be, by reason where of the People of the Land feared the less to offend; the King hath ordained and established these Acts underwritten, which he intendeth to be necessary and profitable unto the whole Realm.
There shall be no Disturbance of Free Elections.
Elections shall be free.
Br. Amercement, 6, 13, 32, 35, 37. 2 Inst. 168.
AND because Elections ought to be free, the King commandeth upon great Forfeiture, that no Man by force of Arms, nor by Malice, or Menacing, shall disturb any to make free Election.
Note : this act is listed in the Chronological Table of Statutes as theFreedom of Election Act, 1275
* ↑ For because the State of the holy Church, readbecause the State of his Kingdom and of the holy Church, &c.
* ↑ For no Man, &c. read no great Man or other,&c.
* ↑ Not in the Original. See 9 Ed. 2.stat. 1. c. 14. relating to Election of Dignities of the Church.
This work is in the public domain worldwide because it was created by a public body of the United Kingdom with Crown Status and commercially published before 1974.
See Crown copyright artistic works, Crown copyright non-artistic works and List of Public Bodies with Crown Status.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Graves v. Texas Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
298 U.S. 393
Graves v. Texas Company
Argued: April 2, 3, 1936. --- Decided: May 18, 1936
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Alabama.
Messrs. F. H. Moore and Richard T. Rives, both of Montgomery, Ala., for appellants.
Mr. John S.C.oleman, of Birmingham, Ala., for appellee.
[Argument of Counsel from page 394 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice BUTLER 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
# Graves v. United States (165 U.S. 323)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
165 U.S. 323
Graves v. United States
C. C. Cole, for plaintiff in error.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Whitney, for the United States.
Mr. Justice PECKHAM 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
# Graveyard Rats

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Graveyard Rats."
* 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.
* "The Graveyard Rats," a short story by Henry Kuttner
* "Graveyard Rats," a novelette by Robert Ervin Howard
# Graves v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Graves 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.
* Graves v. United States (150 U.S. 118)
* Graves v. United States (165 U.S. 323)
# French Revolution

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "French Revolution."
* related portals: French Revolution.
* 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.
* "French Revolution," in Catholic Encyclopedia, (ed.) by Charles G. Herbermann and others, New York: The Encyclopaedia Press (1913)
* "French Revolution, The," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* The French Revolution by Hilaire Belloc.
* "The French Revolution", a poem by William Blake.
* The French Revolution by Thomas Carlyle.
* The French Revolution and the Irish by G. K. Chesterton.
* "The French Revolution" in The Harvard Classics, Volume 51 (1914) by Robert Matteson Johnston
* "French Revolution", a poem by William Wordsworth
# French Poets and Novelists

* French Poets and Novelists (London: Macmillan & Co., 1878).
    — First English book edition.
* French Poets and Novelists (Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1883).
    — First Continental book edition.
* French Poets and Novelists (London: Macmillan & Co., 1884).
    — Second English book edition.