OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# North Dakota Law Review/Volume 1/Number 3/Extracts from Address

EXTRACTS FROM ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT CUPLER TO MINNESOTA BAR ASSOCIATION
Some reference was made in the January Bar Briefs concerning the visit of President Cupler to the meeting of the Minnesota Bar Association. The space of this publication is too limited to permit printing of the address in full, even at this time. The following are some of the observations made by the President on that occasion, and represent, in part, his view of the benefits that have resulted from the passage of the Bar Act:
“The Association is more democratic. Every lawyer and every judge is a member and has an equal voice in the affairs of the Association. There is now no room for the charge that the Association is run by any group or clique of lawyers.
“By reason of the fact that every lawyer and judge is a member of the Association, social intercourse is improved, and a more friendly feeling exists among the lawyers as well as between the Bench and the Bar.
“There has been a marked increase in the interest shown by the members of the bar and by the bench in the affairs of the Bar Association. There has been a better attendance at annual meetings; and there have been better programmes.. At our last meeting many of the district judges attended, and the entire Supreme Court was there and participated in the sessions, several of the judges reading papers, and entering into the discussions.
“My observance has been that our plan of organization automatically raises the ethical standards of the profession. There is an instinctive desire on the part of every member of the bar to conform to the high ideals of the profession, and to the code of ethics prescribed by the organization to which he belongs. We have found that by giving the ​association the power to discipline its members the work of the so-called “Grievance Committee” is not increased but on the contrary minor infractions disappear, and the State Bar Board is called upon to act only occasionally, and then in the most serious derelictions. I really believe that the fears expressed by some of the members of your Bar to this feature of your proposed bill have no real foundation in fact.”
# North Dakota Law Review/Volume 1/Number 3/1925 Annual Meeting

1925 ANNUAL MEETING
The Cass County Bar Association has perfected its organization for the handling of the annual meeting of the State Association, which will be held in the City of Fargo this year. The Chairmen of the various committees are as follows:
These Committees are already at work, under the general direction of the Executive Committee of the Cass County Bar Association, consisting of the following local officers: V. R. Lovell, President; H. G. Nilles, Vice-President; Emanuel Sgutt, Secretary. This committee, again, is co-operating with the President of the State Association, Hon. A. W. Cupler, of Fargo.
# North Dakota Law Review/Volume 1/Number 3/Coolidge and Economy

COOLIDGE AND ECONOMY
Speaking to the members of the Government’s business organization on the 26th of last month, President Coolidge said, among other things:
“As I am pledged to economy in my requests for funds, so you are pledged to economy in the expenditure of the funds which may be granted by Congress. No longer are the funds appropriated by Congress regarded as the minimum amount which is to be expended. Every dollar that is saved by careful administration adds to the amount by which ​taxes may be reduced in the future. It is practical economy which I have in mind and which we must practice. I had rather talk of saving pennies and save them than theorize in millions and save nothing … We cannot look to a reduction in pay to effect a reduction in the Government payroll. What we are looking for is a reduction in the number of employees. Let me remind you that the Government pay roll for 1924 reached the staggering total of $1,680,000,000. … It is an unpleasant and difficult task to separate people from the Federal service. But it can be done. It will be done. … If the practice of economy is not popular, the results of it are viewed with tremendous satisfaction.”
General Lord, Director of the Budget, on that same occasion, made use of the following terse sentence:
“Travel less, buy less, ship less, build less, employ less, write less, print less, use less, waste nothing.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 19

Chapter XIX.—When the Council was assembled, the Emperor delivered a Public Address.
The bishops held long consultations; and after summoning Arius before them, they made an accurate test of his propositions; they were intently on their guard, not to come to a vote on either side. When at length the appointed day arrived on which it had been decided to settle the doubtful points, they assembled together
in the palace, because the emperor had signified his intention of taking part in the deliberations. When he was in the same place with the priests, he passed through to the head of the conference, and seated himself on the throne which had been prepared for him, and the synod was then commanded to be seated; for seats had been arranged on either side along the walls of the palatial rooms, for it was the largest, and excelled the other chambers.
After they were seated, Eusebius Pamphilus arose and delivered an oration
in honor of the emperor, returning thanks to God on his account. When he had ceased speaking, and silence was restored, the emperor delivered himself in the following words: “I give thanks to God for all things, but particularly, O friends, for being permitted to see your conference. And the event has exceeded my prayer, in that so many priests of Christ have been conducted into the same place; now, it is my desire that you should be of one mind and be partakers of a consentient judgment, for I deem dissension in the Church of God as more dangerous than any other evil. Therefore when it was announced, and I understood you were in discord, an unwholesome thing to hear, I was deeply pained in soul; and least of all does it profit you, since you are the conductors of divine worship and arbiters of peace. On this account it is, that I have called you together in a holy Synod, and being both your emperor and your fellow-physician, I seek for you a favor which is acceptable to our common Lord, and as honorable for me to receive, as for you to grant. The favor which I seek is, that you examine the causes of the strife, and put a consentient and peaceful end thereto so that I may triumph with you over the envious demon, who excited this internal revolt because he was provoked to see our external enemies and tyrants under our feet, and envied our good estate.” The emperor pronounced this discourse in Latin, and the interpretation was supplied by one at his side.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Eus. V. C. iii. 10–12.
* ↑ Theodoret, H. E. i. 7, places this oration in the mouth of Eustathius, bishop of Antioch. The variations in the speech as recorded by Sozomen, show his classic view of reporting. Theodoret’s report of Constantine’s address is equally divergent.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 24

Chapter XXIV.—Concerning Melitius; the Excellent Directions made by the Holy Council in his Complications.
After an investigation had been made into the conduct of Melitius when in Egypt, the Synod sentenced him to reside in Lycus,
and to retain only the name of bishop; and prohibited him from ordaining any one either in a city or a village. Those who had previously been ordained by him, were permitted by this law, to remain in communion and in the ministry, but were to be accounted secondary in point of dignity to the clergy in church and parish.
When by death an appointment became vacant, they were allowed to succeed to it, if deemed worthy, by the vote of the multitude, but in this case, were to be ordained by the bishop of the Church of Alexandria, for they were interdicted from exercising any power or influence in elections. This regulation appeared just to the Synod, for Melitius
and his followers had manifested great rashness and temerity in administering ordination; so that it also deprived the ordinations which differed from those of Peter of all consideration. He, when he conducted the Alexandrian Church, fled on account of the persecution then raging, but afterwards suffered martyrdom.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Lycus (Lycopolis) is not named in the letter of the Synod which says simply that he should reside in his own city. Soz. took the fact from Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 71, where Melitius, in the brief to Alexander, calls himself bishop of Lycus. This is a proof of our historian’s use of the same documents to amplify the statements of Socrates.
* ↑ Soc. i. 9, for text of the letter.
* ↑ The best text reads Melitius, not Meletius, so Athanas. and Soc.; usually the books write Meletius and Meletians. We follow the reading.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 25

Chapter XXV.—The Emperor prepared a Public Table for the Synod, after inviting its Members to Constantinople, and honoring them with Gifts, he exhorted all to be of One Mind, and forwarded to Alexandria and every other place the Decrees of the Holy Synod.
At the very time that these decrees were passed by the council, the twentieth anniversary
of the reign of Constantine was celebrated; for it was a Roman custom to have a feast on the tenth year of every reign. The emperor, therefore, thought it to be opportune, and invited the Synod to the festival, and presented suitable gifts to them; and when they prepared to return home, he called them all together, and exhorted them to be of one mind about the faith and at peace among themselves, so that no dissensions might henceforth creep in among them. After many other similar exhortations, he concluded by commanding them to be diligent in prayer, and always to supplicate God for himself, his children, and the empire, and after he had thus addressed those who had come to Nicæa, he bade them farewell. He wrote to the churches in every city, in order that he might make plain to those who had not been present, what had been rectified by the Synod; and especially to the Church of Alexandria he wrote more than this; urging them to lay aside all dissent, and to be harmonious in the faith issued by the Synod; for this could be nothing else than the judgment of God, since it was established by the Holy Spirit from the concurrence of so many and such illustrious high priests, and approved after accurate inquiry and test of all the doubtful points.

## Footnotes

* ↑ This feast, called Vicennalia, is mentioned in Eus. V. C. iii. 15, 16.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 2

Chapter II.—Of the Bishops of the Large Towns in the Reign of Constantine; and how, from fear of Licinius, Christianity was professed cautiously in the East as far as Libya, while in the West, through the Favor of Constantine, it was professed with Freedom.
During the consulate of Constantine Cæsar and Crispus Cæsar, Silvester governed the Church of Rome; Alexander, that of Alexandria; and Macarius, that of Jerusalem. Not one, since Romanus,
had been appointed over the Church of Antioch on the Orontes; for the persecution it appears, had prevented the ceremony of ordination from taking place. The bishops assembled at Nicæa not long after were, however, so sensible of the purity of the life and doctrines of Eustathius, that they adjudged him worthy to fill the apostolic see; although he was then bishop of the neighboring Berœa, they translated him to Antioch.
The Christians of the East, as far as Libya on the borders of Egypt, did not dare to meet openly as a church; for Licinius had withdrawn his favor from them; but the Christians of the West, the Greeks, the Macedonians, and the Illyrians, met for worship in safety through the protection of Constantine, who was then at the head of the Roman Empire.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Who this Romanus was is uncertain, as his name does not occur in the catalogue of bishops of Antioch, according to Hieronymus’ edition of the Chronicon, nor in Nicephorus. In one index at the end of a codex of Eusebius’ History, in Florence, his name occurs as the twenty-second, in order, and between Philagonius and Eustathius. Theodoret, H. E. i. 3, gives the succession Vitalis, Philagonius.
* ↑ Cf. Soc. i. 23, 24.
* ↑ For a narrative of the treatment of the Christians by Licinius, and the war between Constantine and Licinius on their account, see Soc. i. 3, 4.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 20

Chapter XX.—After having given Audience to both Parties, the Emperor condemned the Followers of Arius and banished them.
The next debate by the priests turned upon doctrine.
The emperor gave patient attention to the speeches of both parties; he applauded those who spoke well, rebuked those who displayed a tendency to altercation, and according to his apprehension of what he heard, for he was not wholly unpracticed in the Greek tongue, he addressed himself with kindness to each one. Finally all the priests agreed with one another and conceded that the Son is consubstantial with the Father. At the commencement of the conference there were but seventeen who praised the opinion of Arius, but eventually the majority of these yielded assent to the general view. To this judgment the emperor likewise deferred, for he regarded the unanimity of the conference to be a divine approbation; and he ordained that any one who should be rebellious thereto, should forthwith be sent into banishment, as guilty of endeavoring to overthrow the Divine definitions. I had thought it necessary to reproduce the very document concerning the matter, as an example of the truth, in order that posterity might possess in a fixed and clear form the symbol of the faith which proved pacificatory at the time but since some pious friends, who understood such matters, recommended that these truths ought to be spoken of and heard by the initiated and their initiators
only, I agreed with their council; for it is not unlikely that some of the uninitiated may read this book. While I have concealed such of the prohibited material as I ought to keep silent about, I have not altogether left the reader ignorant of the opinions held by the synod.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Eus. V. C. iii. 13, 14; Soc. i. 8.
* ↑ μύσται καὶ μυσταγωγοί , as applied to the Christian mysteries. The principle here adduced is different from that which ruled with Ruf. H. E. i. 6; Soc. i. 8.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 23

Chapter XXIII.—Canons appointed by the Council; Paphnutius, a certain Confessor, restrains the Council from forming a Canon enjoining Celibacy to all who were about to be honored with the Priesthood.
Zealous of reforming the life of those who were engaged about the churches, the Synod enacted laws which were called canons.
While they were deliberating about this, some thought that a law ought to be passed enacting that bishops and presbyters, deacons and subdeacons, should hold no intercourse with the wife they had espoused before they entered the priesthood; but Paphnutius,
the confessor, stood up and testified against this proposition; he said that marriage was honorable and chaste, and that cohabitation with their own wives was chastity, and advised the Synod not to frame such a law, for it would be difficult to bear, and might serve as an occasion of incontinence to them and their wives; and he reminded them, that according to the ancient tradition of the church, those who were unmarried when they took part in the communion of sacred orders, were required to remain so, but that those who were married, were not to put away their wives. Such was the advice of Paphnutius, although he was himself unmarried, and in accordance with it, the Synod concurred in his counsel, enacted no law about it, but left the matter to the decision of individual judgment, and not to compulsion. The Synod, however, enacted other laws regulating the government of the Church; and these laws may easily be found, as they are in the possession of many individuals.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. i. 11. Cf. the perverted text of the Canones Nicæni, in Ruf. H. E. i. 6.
* ↑ Soc. i. 11.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book I/Chapter 22

Chapter XXII.—Acesius, Bishop of the Novatians, is summoned by the Emperor to be present at the First Council.
It is related, that the emperor, under the impulse of an ardent desire to see harmony re-established among Christians, summoned Acesius, bishop of the church of the Novatians,
to the council, placed before him the definition of the faith and of the feast, which had already been confirmed by the signatures of the bishops, and asked whether he could agree thereto. Acesius answered that their exposition defined no new doctrine, and that he accorded in opinion with the Synod, and that he had from the beginning held these sentiments with respect both to the faith and to the feast. “Why, then,” said the emperor, “do you keep aloof from communion with others, if you are of one mind with them?” He replied that the dissension first broke out under Decius, between Novatius and Cornelius,
and that he considered such persons unworthy of communion who, after baptism, had fallen into those sins which the Scriptures declare to be unto death;
for that the remission of those sins, he thought, depended on the authority of God only, and not on the priests. The emperor replied, by saying, “O Acesius, take a ladder and ascend alone to heaven.” By this speech I do not imagine the emperor intended to praise Acesius, but rather to blame him, because, being but a man, he fancied himself exempt from sin.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. i. 10, who derived it from Auxanon, a presbyter, who accompanied Acesius to Nice. Cf. i. 13.
* ↑ Eus. H. E. vi. 43–46.
* ↑ 1 John v. 16.
* ↑ Socrates’ statement of the source of his information is passed over, as well as his criticism of prejudiced historians. The comment substituted by Soz. is, nevertheless, a partially correct interpretation.
# Not at Home to Callers

Not at Home to Callers Says the Naked Tree — Bonnet due in April — Wishing you Good Day —
# Not to Keep

* "Not to Keep" in New Hampshire, a Poem with Notes and Grace Notes (1923}
* "Not to Keep" in Miscellaneous Poems to 1920 (1999)
# Not any higher stands the Grave

Not any higher stands the Grave For Heroes than for Men — Not any nearer for the Child Than numb Three Score and Ten —
This latest Leisure equal lulls The Beggar and his Queen Propitiate this Democrat A Summer's Afternoon —
# Not any sunny tone

Not any sunny tone From any fervent zone Find entrance there — Better a grave of Balm Toward human nature's home — And Robins near — Than a stupendous Tomb Proclaiming to the Gloom How dead we are —
# Not in this World to see his face—

* "The First Lesson" in Poems (1890)
* "Not in this world to see his face" in The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson (1924)
# Not knowing when the Dawn will come

Not knowing when the Dawn will come, I open every Door, Or has it Feathers, like a Bird, Or Billows, like a Shore —
# Not seeing, still we know—

Not seeing, still we know — Not knowing, guess — Not guessing, smile and hide And half caress —
And quake — and turn away, Seraphic fear — Is Eden's innuendo "If you dare"?
# Not that he goes—we love him more

Not that he goes — we love him more Who led us while he stayed. Beyond earth's trafficking frontier, For what he moved, he made.
# Not Yet my Soul

* Not yet, my soul in Underwoods (1887)
* Not Yet my Soul, a public domain recording read for LibriVox by Jannie Meisberger (19 May 2013)
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Apology to the Emperor/Apologia Ad Constantium/Chapter 26

26. How Athanasius acted when this took place.
Now why did they form this plot against me, and treacherously lay an ambush to take me, when it was in their power to enforce the order by a written declaration? The command of an Emperor is wont to give great boldness to those entrusted with it; but their desire to act secretly made the suspicion stronger that they had received no command. And did I require anything so very absurd? Let your Majesty’s candour decide. Will not every one say, that such a demand was reasonable for a Bishop to make? You know, for you have read the Scriptures, how great an offence it is for a Bishop to desert his Church, and to neglect the flocks of God. For the absence of the Shepherd gives the wolves an opportunity to attack the sheep. And this was what the Arians and all the other heretics desired, that during my absence they might find an opportunity to entrap the people into impiety. If then I had fled, what defence could I have made before the true Bishops? or rather before Him Who has committed to me His flock? He it is Who judges the whole earth, the true King of all, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Would not every one have rightly charged me with neglect of my people? Would not your Piety have blamed me, and have justly asked, ‘After you had returned under the authority of our letters, why did you withdraw without such authority, and desert your people?’ Would not the people themselves at the day of judgment have reasonably imputed to me this neglect of them, and have said, ‘He that had the oversight of us fled, and we were neglected, there being no one to put us in mind of our duty?’ When they said this, what could I have answered? Such a complaint was made by Ezekiel against the Pastors of old; and the blessed Apostle Paul, knowing this, has charged every one of us through his disciple, saying, ‘Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.’ Fearing this, I wished not to flee, but to receive your commands, if indeed such was the will of your Piety. But I never obtained what I so reasonably requested, and now I am falsely accused before you; for I resisted no commands of your Piety; nor will I now attempt to return to Alexandria, until your Grace shall desire it. This I say beforehand, lest the slanderers should again make this a pretence for accusing me.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ez. xxxiv. 2, &c.
* ↑ 1 Tim. iv. 14.