OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 107 (112)

107 (112). To relieve a stinging pain.
[Bhṛgu.—sāuryam utā ’bdāivatam. ānuṣṭubham.]
Wanting in Pāipp. Used by Kāuç. (31. 27) with vi. 105, in a remedial rite against cold and catarrh.
Translated: Henry, 42, 117; Griffith, i. 379.
1. Down from the sky the seven rays of the sun make pass the waters, streams of ocean; these have made fall thy sting (çalyá).
The comm. regards çalya as used figuratively of a stinging disease: çalyavat pīḍākāriṇaṁ kāsaçleṣmādirogam. The seven rays are to him the seven forms of the sun, as given in TA. i. 7. 1.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 108 (113)

108 (113). Against enemies: to Agni.
[Bhṛgu.—dvyṛcam. āgneyam. trāiṣṭubham: 1. bṛhatīgarbhā.]
Wanting in Pāipp. Used by Kāuç. (48. 37) in a witchcraft rite with hymns 31, 34, and 59 (see under 31); and both verses separately are reckoned to the duḥsvapnanāçana gaṇa (note to 46. 9).
Translated: Ludwig, p. 517; Henry, 42, 118; Griffith, i. 380.
1. Whoever seeks to harm us in secret, whoever us openly—us, O Agni, one of our people, knowingly, or a stranger—to meet them let the toothed áraṇī go; let there be of them no abode (vā́stu), O Agni, nor offspring.
The comm. explains araṇī as ārtikāriṇī rākṣasī 'a pain-causing she-demon'; by its form it should be a fem. to áraṇa 'strange.' Again (as at iv. 16. 1) SPP. unaccountably reads (with the comm., who explains it as an antarhitanāman) in a nas tāyát (instead of na stāyát), and in pada-text tāyát, although every known pada-ms. ⌊begins the word with s- and⌋ stāyát alone has etymological justification. Some of the saṁhitā-mss. (including our W.I.) read āví sv- in a-b. The mss. also vary between tā́n and tā́m (our Bp. and all our saṁhitā-mss. have the latter; both editions give the former). ⌊One does not easily see how the Anukr. justifies its definition.⌋
2. Whoever shall assail us asleep or waking, standing or moving, O Jātavedas, in accord with Vāiçvānara as ally, do thou meet and burn them out, O Jātavedas.
All SPP's pada-mss., and one of ours (D.), read suptā́m in a, by a frequent error. Ludwig suggests vāivasvatena for vāiçvānareṇa in c; it would certainly be an improvement to the sense.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 104 (109)

104 (109). Concerning Atharvan's cow.
[Brahman.—ātmadāivatam. trāiṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Used by Kāuç. (66. 17) in a savayajña, having as sava a cultivated field {urvarākhye savayajñe, comm.).
Translated: Henry, 41, 116; Griffith, i. 379.—Cf. above, v. 11, introduction.
1. Who, enjoying companionship with Brihaspati, shall shape [its] body at his will—the spotted milch-cow, well-milking, with constant calf, given by Varuṇa to Atharvan?
The translation implies in d tanvàm as read by Ppp.; compare RV. x. 15. 14 d (AV. xviii. 3. 59 reads tanvàs, but with much better reason than here), also iii. 48.4 b and vii. 101. 3 b. The comm. refers to v. 11 as explaining the cow referred to. Some of the mss. (including our Bp.E.O.K.) accent sakhyàm in c, and SPP. adopts it in his text; ours has the correct sakhyám. Ppp. begins with kaṁ, and has in b, for nítyavatsām, dhenum etām, and in c tāṁ bṛhaspatyā sakhyā.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 106 (111)

106 (111). Deprecation for offenses.
[Atharvan.—mantroktadāivatam uta jātavedasam (c, d, vāruṇam). bṛhatīgarbhā triṣṭubh.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Applied by Kāuç. (6. 2), in the parvan sacrifice, with offerings in expiation of any thing spilt or overlooked in the ceremony; and later (46. 24), when a direction at the sacrifice has not been fully executed. Used also for a similar purpose in Vāit. in the agniṣṭoma (12. 5), and again later (16. 8).
Translated: Henry, 41, 117; Griffith, i. 379.
1. If (yát) in forgetfulness we have done aught, O Agni, have offended, O Jātavedas, in our behavior (cáraṇa), from that do thou protect us, O forethoughtful one; unto beauty be there immortality for us [thy] companions.
The sense of the last pāda is obscure and doubtful. The comm. takes çubhé as loc. = çobhane sān̄ge karmaṇi. Ppp. reads tasmāt for tatas in c, and çukhe in d. The second half-verse is more irregular than the Anukr. admits.
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 101 (106)

101 (106). As to food enjoyed in a dream.
[Yama.—duḥsvapnanāçanadevatyam. ānuṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Used by Kāuç. (46. 12) in a rite against ill effect from food eaten in dreams, and reckoned (note to 46. 9) to the duḥsvapnanāçana gaṇa.
Translated: Ludwig, p. 444; Henry, 40, 115; Griffith, i. 378.—Given by Bergaigne-Henry, Manuel, p. 157, without other comment than is implied in the title.
1. What food I eat in dream, [and that] is not found in the morning—be all that propitious to me, for that is not seen by day.
The comm. appears to regard nahí in c as two independent words. A corresponding verse is found in ĀpÇS. x. 13. 11 and HGS. i. 17. 4; reading thus: yad annam adyate naktam (H. sāyam) na tat prātaḥ kṣudho ‘vati (H. av. kṣ.): sarvaṁ tad asmān mā hiṅsīr (H. -sīn) nahi tad dadṛçe divā (H. divā dadṛçe divaḥ). Ppp. has nas instead of me in c. ⌊☞ See p. 1045.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 102 (107)

102 (107). Accompanying self-relief.
[Prajāpati.—mantroktanānādevatyam. virāṭ purastādbṛhatī.]
Wanting in Pāipp. Kāuç. (52. 15) prescribes it in a rite for welfare, "with action as given in the verse" (iti mantroktam).
Translated: Henry, 41, 115; Griffith, i. 378.
1. Having paid homage to heaven and earth, to the atmosphere, to Death, I will urinate standing erect; let not the lords (īçvará) harm me.
⌊The squatting posture in making water is, I believe, general with the natives of India to this day. So Hesiod, Works and Days, 727: μηδ' ἀντ΄ἠελίοιο τετραμμένος ὀρθὸς ὀμιχεῖν...ἑζόμενος κτλ. Cf. xiii. 1. 56 and my note.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 105 (110)

105 (110). An exhortation to holy life.
[Atharvan.—mantroktadevatyam. ānuṣṭubham.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Quoted by Kāug. (55. 16) in the upanayana ceremony, as the teacher takes the pupil by the arm and sets him facing eastward; and the second half-verse later in the same (56. 16), as he makes the pupil turn so as to face him.
Translated: Henry, 41, 117; Griffith, i. 379.
​1. Striding away from what is of men, choosing the words (vácas) of the gods, turn thou unto guidances, together with all [thy] companions.}}
Ppp. reads saha for vacas in b, and, for d, devo devānāṁ sakhyā juṣāṇaḥ. The comm. paraphrases praṇītīs by prakṛṣṭanayanādivedabrahmacaryaniyatīḥ.
# Arthur v. Morgan

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
112 U.S. 495
Arthur v. Morgan
Sol. Gen. Phillips, for plaintiff in error.
Edward Hartley and Walter H. Coleman, 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
# Arthur v. Jacoby

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
103 U.S. 677
Arthur v. Jacoby
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Smith for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Lewis Sanders and Mr. George N. Sanders, contra.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE 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
# Arthur v. Jacoby/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
103 U.S. 677
Arthur v. Jacoby
This was a suit to recover back duties paid under protest. The bill of exceptions stated it was proven at the trial that all the goods charged with the duties were 'pictures painted by hand, and their value depended on the skill of the particular artist who painted them, and the porcelain ground on which they were painted was only used to obtain a good surface on which to paint, and was entirely obscured from view when framed or set in any manner, and formed no material part of the value of said painting on porcelain, and did not in itself constitute an article of chinaware, being manufactured simply as a ground for the painting, and not for any use independent of the paintings.' The collector exacted a duty of fifty per cent ad valorem under the clause in schedule B, sect. 2504, Revised Statutes, relating to 'china, porcelain, and parian ware, gilded, ornamented, or decorated in any manner,' while the importer claims they were dutiable at ten per cent ad valorem only, under the clause in schedule M, which embraces 'paintings and statuary not otherwise provided for.' In other words, the collector claimed they were decorated china or porcelain ware, and the importer that they were paintings on china or porcelain. The evidence seems to have left no doubt on this subject, for it is expressly stated in the bill of exceptions to have been proved that the porcelain ground on which the painting was done 'did not in itself constitute an article of chinaware.' Such being the case, the painting which was done on it did not make it decorated chinaware. Confessedly the goods were paintings done by hand, and as it is not claimed they were 'otherwise provided for' than as chinaware decorated, it follows the court was right in directing a verdict in favor of the importer for the difference between ten and fifty per cent. It is a matter of no importance in this case that the colors used were metallic, and that the pictures were baked to make the colors more firm. If the jury had found a verdict in favor of the defendant, the court should have set it aside as against what is admitted to have been proved. Under such circumstances a judgment will not be reversed on account of a positive instruction to find for the plaintiff. Pleasants v. Fant, 22 Wall. 116.
As the bill of exceptions states that the facts on which the case depends were proved, we cannot say that the admission in evidence of samples of 'similar' importations on which duties had been paid at ten per cent could have prejudiced the collector's case. The question which the court decided was, that the goods were not chinaware, but paintings.
Judgment 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
# Arthur v. Lahey

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
96 U.S. 112
Arthur v. Lahey
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
In the years 1872 and 1873, Lahey & Co. imported from France certain articles of silk manufacture, on which Arthur, the collector of the port of New York, imposed and collected a duty of sixty per cent, under the eighth section of the act of June 30, 1864. 13 Stat. 210. Among the articles so imported was a quantity of laces which the importers insisted were commercially known as 'thread laces,' and liable to a duty of only thirty per cent ad valorem, under the nineteenth section of the act of March 2, 1861 (12 id. 190), as amended by the sixth section of the act of July 14, 1862 (id. 550). Having paid, under protest, the duty exacted, the importers brought this action for the excess beyond thirty per cent. The judge at the trial submitted to the jury the question, whether the articles were commercially known as 'thread laces;' and the jury having found that they were, there was a verdict for the plaintiffs. Judgment was rendered thereon, and the collector sued out a writ of error.
Mr. Assistant-Attorney-General Smith, for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Edwards Pierrepont and Mr. William Stanley, contra.
MR. JUSTICE HUNT 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
# Arthur v. Herold/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
100 U.S. 75
Arthur v. Herold
We think it was not error for the court to say to the jury that ground chicory was the same thing as burnt chicory. The chicory root cannot be ground until it is burned, and burnt chicory is not an article of commerce until it is ground. Whether or not the article imported was a new preparation, and something other than ground chicory, that is to say, whether it was prepared chicory and not simply ground chicory, was a question of fact that was properly left to the jury.
Judgment 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
# Arthur v. Homer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
96 U.S. 137
Arthur v. Homer
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
In 1873, Homer & Co. imported into the port of New York certain goods, of which linen was the basis, upon which the collector imposed and collected duties at the rate of forty per cent, under the seventh section of the act of June 30, 1864 (13 Stat. 209). The importers insisted that they were dutiable at thirty-five per cent only, under the twenty-second section of the act of March 2, 1861 (12 id. 192), and brought this action to recover the alleged excess of duties.
The plaintiffs introduced testimony tending to show that the goods were dress patterns, or patterns for dresses, designed for ladies' wear, each piece, or the contents of each carton, comprising the material for a garment, either as an overskirt (polonaise) or dress (robe a jour), although not made up. The size of these patterns or articles varied from about eight to twelve yards. About the edge, or above it, and arranged so as to form an appropriate ornamentation to the article when made up for wear, there was worked, sometimes in cotton thread and sometimes in linen thread, more or less embroidery. The amount of this embroidery and its elaboration was a substantial and influential element in the cost or value of the article.
The component material of chief value in the articles in question was flax or linen, as embroidered; and in the condition in which they were imported,-packed in cartons and boxes,-the value of the goods exceeded thirty cents per square yard.
The testimony further showed that the general descriptive and commercial names of the articles in question were polonaise and robe, more particularly described as linen embroidered robes and linen embroidered polonaise, &c.
The court below directed the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiffs; and from the judgment entered upon such verdict this writ of error is brought.
The Solicitor-General for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Edward Hartley, contra.
MR. JUSTICE HUNT 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
# Arthur v. Moller

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
97 U.S. 365
Arthur v. Moller
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
The question involved in this case is, whether certain articles imported by the defendants, Charles Moller and Paul E. Vacquerel, into the port of New York, known as decalcomanie pictures, are subject to duties as 'printed matter,' or as 'manufactures of paper, or of which paper is a component material, not otherwise provided for.' 12 Stat. 192; 13 id. 213; Rev. Stat., p. 474, sect. 2504, also p. 479.
The statutes impose the duties in the language following; viz., On 'books, periodicals, pamphlets, blank-books, bound or unbound, and all printed matter, engravings, bound or unbound, illustrated books and papers, and maps and charts, twenty-five per cent ad valorem.' Rev. Stat., supra.
On 'paper, sized or glued, suitable only for printing-paper, twenty-five per cent ad valorem; printing, unsized, used for books and newspapers exclusively, twenty per cent ad valorem; manufactured of, or of which paper is a component material not otherwise provided for, thirty-five per cent ad valorem.' Id., p. 479, sect. 2504.
The goods in question were chromo-lithographs, consisting of landscapes, scenery, and other figures, printed from oil-stones upon paper, with one color printed on top of the other until the picture is finished.
They are used for any purpose to which painting by hand can be applied. There are no letters constituting language upon the face of the paper.
They are made by means of lithographic stones, and printed from the stones successively one after the other, according to the number of colors; the difference between them and a chromo-lithograph being that a chromo is printed positive, while decalcomaine is printed positive and negative, but chiefly negative.
After the picture is printed, it is sometimes covered with a metal leaf, which is also put on by the process of printing; a sizing is printed on from the stone, the metal leaf being placed on top of the sizing by hand, it being too brittle to be placed on by the roller, and it is run through the press, which prints the metal leaf on top of the picture.
Arthur, the collector of the port, imposed and collected a duty of thirty-five per cent ad valorem upon the articles, as a manufacture of paper. The importers paid the duty under protest, and brought suit to recover the excess. The court below decided that the pictures were dutiable as printed matter, and not as manufactures of paper, and gave judgment for the plaintiffs. Arthur then brought the case here.
Mr. Assistant-Attorney-General Smith for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. James B. Craig, contra.
MR. JUSTICE HUNT 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
# Betty Zane

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article.
Zane was a heroine of the Revolutionary War on the American frontier
CONFUSED AND VEXED, BETTY SANK AT THE FOOT OF THE TREE
BETTY ZANE
BY ZANE GREY
AUTHOR OF THE HERITAGE OF THE DESERT, RIDERS OF THE PURPLE SAGE, DESERT GOLD, ETC.
ILLUSTRATIONS BY LOUIS F. GRANT
NEW YORK GROSSET & DUNLAP PUBLISHERS
TO THE BETTY ZANE CHAPTER OF THE DAUGHTERS OF THE REV- OLUTION THIS BOOK IS RESPECT- FULLY DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR
* Note
* PROLOGUE
* CHAPTER I
* CHAPTER II
* CHAPTER III
* CHAPTER IV
* CHAPTER V
* CHAPTER VI
* CHAPTER VII
* CHAPTER VIII
* CHAPTER IX
* CHAPTER X
* CHAPTER XI
* CHAPTER XII
* CHAPTER XIII
* CHAPTER XIV
* CHAPTER XV
* AFTERWORD
# Base-Ball Ballads/When "Wifey" Reads Dope

WHEN "WIFEY" READS DOPE.
# Base-Ball Ballads/When the Bug Is on the Bawl

WHEN THE BUG IS ON THE BAWL.
# Baseball Guide and Record Book 1962

BASEBALL GUIDE and RECORD BOOK 1962 •
COMPILED BY
J. G. TAYLOR SPINK
IN COLLABORATION WITH
PAUL A. RICKART
AND
CLIFFORD KACHLINE
PUBLISHED BY
CHARLES C. SPINK & SON
2018 Washington Avenue
St. Louis
Copyright, 1962, by The Sporting News Publishing Co.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.
* For Class A renewal records (books only) published between 1923 and 1963, check the Stanford University Copyright Renewal Database.
* For other renewal records of publications between 1922–1950, see the University of Pennsylvania copyright records.
* For all records since 1978, search the U.S. Copyright Office records.
Works published in 1962 could have had their copyright renewed in 1989 or 1990, i.e. between January 1st of the 27th year after publication or registration and December 31st of the 28th year. As this work's copyright was not renewed, it entered the public domain on January 1st, 1991.
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.
It is imperative that contributors ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Base-Ball Ballads/The Test

THE TEST.
# Base-Born

"My parents had great joy, I wis"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1912), "Base-Born" in The Unconquered Air, and Other Poems (1912).
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Base-Born" in Poems I.
# Base-Ball Ballads/The Ump's Midwinter Dream

THE UMP'S MIDWINTER DREAM.
# Base-Ball Ballads/The Song of the Base Hit

THE SONG OF THE BASE HIT.
# Base-Ball Ballads/The Winter League Wonder

THE WINTER LEAGUE WONDER.
# Baseball Joe on the School Nine

Book 2 in the Baseball Joe series
Baseball Joe on
the School Nine
OR
Pitching for the Blue Banner
By LESTER CHADWICK
AUTHOR OF "BASEBALL JOE OF THE SILVER STARS." "THE RIVAL PITCHERS," "A QUARTER-BACK'S PLUCK." "BATTING TO WIN." ETC.
ILLUSTRATED
NEW YORK CUPPLES & LEON COMPANY
THE NEXT MOMENT THE HORSEHIDE WENT SPEEDING TOWARD THE PLATE. Baseball Joe on the School NinePage 200
CONTENTS
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
# Because

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Because."
* 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.
* "Because", a poem by W. F. McSparran
* "Because", a poem by Sara Teasdale
# Because I could not stop for Death—

* "The Chariot" in Poems (1890)
* "Because I could not stop for Death" in The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson (1924)
# Because Thou Hast Said

Because Thou hast said, “Do this for My sake,” The mystical bread we gladly partake; We thirst for the Spirit that flows from above, And long to inherit Thy fullness of love.
’Tis here we look up and grasp at Thy mind, ’Tis here that we hope Thine image to find; The means of bestowing Thy gifts we embrace; But all things are owing to Jesus’ grace.
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
# Beazell v. Ohio ex rel. Chatfield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
269 U.S. 167
Beazell v. Ohio ex rel. Chatfield
Submitted on Motion to Dismiss or Affirm Oct. 5, 1925.
Decided Nov. 16, 1925.
Messrs. Province M. Pogue and Harry M. Hoffheimer, both of Cincinnati, Ohio, for plaintiff in error Beazell.
Mr. Frank F. Dinsmore, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for plaintiff in error Chatfield.
Mr. John Wilson Brown, III, of Washington, D. C., for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice STONE 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