OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Proclamation No. 427 (Arroyo)

Source: Official Gazette. Vol. 99, No. 41. Office of the President. 2003. p. 6261.
Layout 2
MALACAÑANG MANILA
Proclamation No. 427
DECLARING A STATE OF REBELLION
Whereas, certain elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, armed with high-powered firearms and explosives, acting upon the instigation and command and direction of known and unknown leaders, have seized a building in Makati City, put bombs in the area, publicly declared withdrawal of support for, and took arms against the duly constituted Government, and continue to rise publicly and show open hostility, for the purpose of removing allegiance to the Government certain bodies of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, and depriving the President of the Republic of the Philippines, wholly or partially, of her powers and prerogatives which constitute the crime of rebellion punishable under Article 134 of the Revised penal Code, as amended;
Whereas, these misguided elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines are being supported, abetted and aided by known and unknown leaders, conspirators and plotters in the government service and outside the government.
Whereas, under Section 18, Article VII of the present Constitution, whenever it becomes necessary, the President, as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, may call out such Armed Forces to suppress the rebellion;
Now, therefore, I, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, hereby confirm the existence of an actual and ongoing rebellion, compelling me to declare a state of rebellion.
In view of the foregoing, I am issuing General Order No. 4 in accordance with Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution, calling out the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police to immediately carry out the necessary actions and measures to suppress and quell the rebellion with due regard to constitutional rights.
City of Manila, July 27, 2003.
(Sgd.) Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo President of the Philippines
By the President:
(Sgd.) Alberto G. Romulo Executive Secretary
This work is in the public domain because it is a work of the Philippine government (see Republic Act No. 8293 Sec. 176).
All official Philippine texts of a legislative, administrative, or judicial nature, or any official translation thereof, are ineligible for copyright.
An additional license tag is required in order to demonstrate why this work is freely licensed or in the public domain in the United States.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Proclamation No. 435 (Arroyo)

Source: Official Gazette. Vol. 99, No. 42. Office of the President. 2003. pp. 6440–6441.
Layout 2
MALACAÑAN PALACE MANILA
PROCLAMATION NO. 435
DECLARING THAT THE STATE OF REBELLION HAS CEASED TO EXIST
WHEREAS, by virtue of Proclamation No. 427 dated July 27, 2003, a state of rebellion was declared;
WHEREAS, by virtue of General Order No. 4 dated July 27, 2003, which was issued on the basis of Proclamation No. 427 dated July 27, 2003 and pursuant to Article VII, Section 18 of the Constitution, the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police were directed to suppress the rebellion;
WHEREAS, the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police have effectively suppressed and quelled the rebellion.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, hereby declare that the state of rebellion has ceased to exist.
City of Manila, AUG. 11, 2003.
By the President: (SGD.) ALBERTO G. ROMULO Executive Secretary
This work is in the public domain because it is a work of the Philippine government (see Republic Act No. 8293 Sec. 176).
All official Philippine texts of a legislative, administrative, or judicial nature, or any official translation thereof, are ineligible for copyright.
An additional license tag is required in order to demonstrate why this work is freely licensed or in the public domain in the United States.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Radio Station Wow v. Johnson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
326 U.S. 120
Radio Station Wow v. Johnson
Argued: March 1, 1945. --- Decided: June 18, 1945
See 19 N.W.2d 853.
Mr. James Lawrence Fly, of New York City, for petitioners.
Mr. Don W. Stewart, of Lincoln, Neb., for respondent.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER 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
# Radio Officers' Union of Commercial Telegraphers Union, AFL v. National Labor Relations Board

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Frankfurter

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
347 U.S. 17
Radio Officers' Union of Commercial Telegraphers Union, AFL v. National Labor Relations Board
Argued: Nov. 9, 10, 1953. --- Decided: Feb 1, 1954
[Syllabus from pages 17-20 intentionally omitted]
No. 5:
Mr. Emanuel Butter, New York City, for petitioner.
Mr. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
No. 6:
Mr. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. John J. Manning, Boston, Mass., for respondents.
No. 7:
Mr. Julius Kass, New York City, for petitioner.
Mr. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice REED 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
# Radio Times/1923/10/12/The Chief Engineer

Biography of Peter Pendleton Eckersley, from The Radio Times, issue 3, 12 October 1923, p. 84.
THE
Chief Engineer.
BY ONE WHO KNOWS HIM.
"P" STANDS for Peter. Does P.P. indicate Peter Piper, and if so where's the pickled pepper Peter Piper picked? The pickles he left behind him at school—too many to bring away—but his engineers will tell you about the pep—er —he puts into his work. [Horrible!—Ed.]
To get the real Eckersley wild-life-in-natural-surroundings touch, you want to see him slouching down the passage, shoulders well up, hair on end, pipe in mouth, hands in pocket, and even then you will probably only wonder who the fellow like a roadmender with bolshevistic tendencies is.
He sports a lie like yellow fever with measles, and, if chance directs your footsteps to the engineers' lair, you can always spot it glowing through the haze of electrons. In fact, to let out a jealously-guarded secret, it was used on one occasion to replace a worn-out valve.
A Prodigious Worker.
Sometimes he broadcasts, just to keep in fettle: for, of course, in days before the B.B.C., he was a popular low comedian under the cognomen "Two Emma Toc." He will stroll up to the microphone (still pipe in mouth) and make a few noises like a milk-can in an empty tram, and call it "That Freedom." (This, ladies and gentlemen, is the finest example extant of broadcasting in ancient history.)
The Chief Engineer's position is no sinecure. He is head of a very large department and bears heavy responsibility for a satisfactory transmission every night at each of the stations.
He, for instance, occasionally visits one of the provincial stations. He calls this taking a holiday from work, and his little excursion runs on something of the following lines. He puts on pressure at the office and works at high tension all day. In fact, his output is remarkable.
At about 6 o'clock he precipitates himself into a train and arrives at the station selected in a state of low-frequency energy. This is, of course, rectified by the Station Director, and after capacity is reached Captain Eckersley inspects the apparatus in the station. He may also indulge in a little playful badinage with local oscillating fiends, or investigate suggested new sites for the main aerial. Any little amusement of this sort he enjoys after the day's work.
Correspondence Galore.
The inspecting over, the C.E. catches the night-mail and arrives in the head office at 9 a.m. next morning with an angelic smile, which widens to a grin as he views the trays of letters awaiting his attention. He is great on correspondence; here is a letter taken at random from his tray:—
"DEAR MADAM.—
"Your aerial has probably been jammed by your neighbour's cat, especially as you say in your letter that 'last night it was osculating something 'orrid.'
"The only remedy I can suggest is that you disinfect—I mean disconnect the aerial, at the same time earthing the jammed cat. Write me if it continues to transmit.
"Yours, etc."
But the very thought of the amount of correspondence he gets through has reduced the writer to a state of nervous prostration.
# Qaumi Tarana

* related portals: National anthems, Pakistan.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
The Qaumi Tarana (Urdu: قومى ترانہ) ("National Anthem") is the national anthem of Pakistan. The music of the anthem was composed by Ahmed Ghulamali Chagla, with lyrics written by Abu-Al-Asar Hafeez Jullandhuri. It was officially adopted in 1954 although the music had been composed in 1950 and had been used on several occasions, to replace the original anthem by Jagannath Azad. The lyrics speak of a "Sacred Land" referring to Pakistan and a "Flag of the Crescent and Star" referring to the national flag. The national anthem is played during any event involving the hoisting of the flag, for example Pakistan Day (March 23) and Independence Day (August 14).Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Lyrics

| قومى ترانہ (Urdu) | Transliteration | Translation |
| پاک سرزمین شاد باد كشور حسين شاد باد تو نشان عزم علیشان | ارض پاکستان مرکز یقین شاد باد | Pāk sarzamīn shād bād Kishwar-e-hasīn shād bād Tū nishān-e-`azm-e-`alīshān Arz-e-Pākistān! Markaz-e-yaqīn shād bād | Blessed be the sacred land Happy be the bounteous realm Symbol of high resolve Land of Pakistan! Blessed be thou, citadel of faith |
| پاک سرزمین کا نظام قوت اخوت عوام قوم ، ملک ، سلطنت | پائندہ تابندہ باد شاد باد منزل مراد | Pāk sarzamīn kā nizām Qūwat-e-ukhūwat-e-`awām Qaum, mulk, sultanat Pā-inda tābinda bād! Shād bād manzil-e-murād | The order of this sacred land Is the might of the brotherhood of the people May the nation, the country, and the state Shine in glory everlasting! Blessed be the goal of our ambition |
| پرچم ستارہ و ہلال رہبر ترقی و کمال ترجمان ماضی شان حال | جان استقبال سایۂ خدائے ذوالجلال | Parcham-e-sitāra-o-hilāl Rahbar-e-tarraqqī-o-kamāl Tarjumān-e-māzī, shān-e-hāl Jān-e-istiqbāl! Sāyah-e-Khudā-e-Zū-l-Jalāl | This flag of the crescent and star Leads the way to progress and perfection Interpreter of our past, glory of our present Inspiration of our future! Symbol of the Almighty's protection |
# Raymond v. Chicago Edison Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
207 U.S. 42
Raymond v. Chicago Edison Company
Argued: April 8, 9, 1907. ---
These cases involve the same principle as that already decided in No. 115 [[[207 U.S. 20]], 52 L. ed.-, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 7], and although the facts differ somewhat in the various cases, yet they present substantially the same questions, and the judgment in each case is therefore 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
# Raymond v. Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railway Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
243 U.S. 43
Raymond v. Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railway Company
Argued: and submitted January 31, 1917. --- Decided: March 6, 1917
Messrs. John T. Casey and Thomas J. Walsh for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Heman H. Field and George W. Korte for defendant in error.
Mr. Chief Justice White 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
# Raymond v. Chicago Edison Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
207 U.S. 42
Raymond v. Chicago Edison Company
Argued: April 8, 9, 1907. ---
Messrs. David K. Tone, James Hamilton Lewis, Harry A. Lewis, William F. Struckmann, William H. Stead, and George B. Gillespie for appellants.
Mr. Frank L. Shepard also for appellants in Nos. 116, 117, 120, 121.
Mr. Edward J. Brundage also for appellants in No. 117.
Messrs. William G. Beale, Gilbert E. Porter, Buell Mckeever, and Waldo F. Tobey for the Chicago Edison Company.
Mr. John P. Wilson for the Chicago City Railway Company.
Messrs. John S. Miller and Merritt Starr for the South Chicago City Railway Company.
Mr. James F. Meagher for the People's Gaslight & Coke Company.
Messrs. William G. Beale, Charles S. Holt, and William P. Sidley for the Chicago Telephone Company.
Messrs. William W. Gurley, Isaac M. Jordan, Arthur Dyrenforth, and Howard M. Carter for the Chicago Consolidated Traction Company.
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
# Raymond v. Thomas

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 712
Raymond v. Thomas
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina.
Mr. P. Phillips for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. W. W. Boyce for the defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE 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
# Republic of France v. French Overseas Corporation the Malcolm Baxter Jr

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
277 U.S. 323
Republic of France v. French Overseas Corporation the Malcolm Baxter Jr
Argued: April 16, 1928. --- Decided: May 21, 1928
Messrs. John M. Woolsey and Mark W. Maclay, both of New
York City, for petitioners.
Messrs. T. Catesby Jones and D. Roger Englar, both of New York City, for respondent.
[Argument of Counsel from page 328 intentionally omitted]
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
# Republic of South Africa Constitution Act

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Republic of South Africa Constitution Act."
* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa.
* 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.
* Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961
* Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1983
# Republic of China v. Liu

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
497 U.S. 1058
Republic of China v. Liu
No. 89-1769

## 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
# Republic of China v. Liu/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
Case below, 642 F.Supp. 297, 892 F.2d 1419.
Sept. 28, 1990. The petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed pursuant to Rule 46 of this 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
# Republic of Colombia v. Cauca Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
190 U.S. 524
Republic of Colombia v. Cauca Company
Argued: April 23, 24, 1903. --- Decided: May 18, 1903
Mr. William G. Johnson for appellant.
Messrs. John K. Cowen, John W. Beaumont, Edward H. Murphy, and Cowen, Cross, & Bond, for appellees.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Republic of Mexico v. Hoffman

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
324 U.S. 30
Republic of Mexico v. Hoffman
Argued: Jan. 11, 12, 1945. --- Decided: Feb 5, 1945
Mr. Morris Lavine, of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Mr. Harold A. Black, of Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Mr. Chief 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
# Richard II (Shakespeare)

* related portals: Elizabethan drama.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, quotes, Wikidata item.
A historical play, believed to have been written circa 1595, and which is first part of a tetralogy, referred to by some scholars as the Henriad. It is followed by three plays concerning Richard's successors: Henry IV, Part 1; Henry IV, Part 2; and Henry V.
* The life and death of King Richard the Second, from a facsimile copy of the First Folio (1623) (transcription project)
* The Life and Death of Richard the Second, from The Plays of William Shakespeare, in eight volumes, vol. IV, with notes by Samuel Johnson (1765) IA
* The Tragedy of King Richard the Second, edited by C. H. Herford, The Warwick Shakespeare (1893) (HathiTrust)
* The Tragedy of King Richard the Second, in The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, Vol. IV, Oxford edition (1911) IA
* The Tragedy of King Richard II, edited by Ivor B. John, The Works of Shakespeare, The Arden Shakespeare, 1st ser. (1912) (external scan)
* The Tragedy of King Richard the Second, edited by Llewellyn M. Buell, The Yale Shakespeare (1921)
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago. Translations or editions published later may be copyrighted.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Richard II (1921) Yale/Text

The title page calls this play The Tragedy of King Richard the Second, but page 1 names the play The Life and Death of King Richard the Second.
Layout 2
The Life and Death of King Richard the Second
* Act I
* Act II
* Act III
* Act IV
* Act V
[DRAMATIS PERSONÆ
King Richard the Second
| John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | Uncles to the King |
| Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | Uncles to the King |
Duke of Aumerle, Son to the Duke of York
Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk
Duke of Surrey
Earl of Salisbury
Lord Berkeley
| Bushy, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | Servants to King Richard |
| Bagot, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | Servants to King Richard |
| Green, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | Servants to King Richard |
Earl of Northumberland
Henry Percy, surnamed Hotspur, his Son
Lord Ross
Lord Willoughby
Lord Fitzwater
Bishop of Carlisle
Abbot of Westminster
Lord Marshal
Sir Pierce of Exton
Sir Stephen Scroop
Captain of a Band of Welshmen
Isabel, Queen to King Richard
Duchess of Gloucester
Duchess of York
Lady attending on the Queen
Scene: Dispersedly in England and Wales.]
# Rewis v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
401 U.S. 808
Rewis et al. v. United States
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
No. 5342. Argued: January 19, 1971 --- Decided: April 5, 1971
Petitioners conducted a lottery operation in Florida, near the Georgia border. They were convicted along with two Georgia residents who placed bets at petitioners' establishment, of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1952, the Travel Act, which prohibits interstate travel with the intent to "promote, manage, establish, carry on, or facilitate" certain illegal activity. The District Court instructed the jury that if the Georgia bettors traveled to Florida for the purpose of gambling, they violated the Act, and that a defendant could be found guilty under the aiding and abetting statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2, without proof that he had personally performed every act constituting the charged offense. The Court of Appeals reversed the convictions of the Georgia bettors, holding that § 1952 did not make it a federal crime merely to cross a state line to place a bet, but upheld petitioners' convictions on the ground that gambling establishment operators are responsible for the interstate travel of their customers.
Held: Conducting a gambling operation frequented by out-of-state bettors does not, without more, constitute a violation of the Travel Act. Pp. 811-814.
418 F. 2d 1218, reversed.
MARSHALL, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all members joined except WHITE, J., who took no part in the decision of the case.
Albert J. Datz argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioners.
Sidney M. Glazer argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Wilson, Beatrice Rosenberg, and Michael G. Kelly.

## 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
# Rex Trailer Company v. United States

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 148
Rex Trailer Company v. United States
Argued: Dec. 5, 1955. --- Decided: Jan 9, 1956
Mr. Gustav H. Dongus, Indianapolis, Ind., for petitioner.
Mr. Melvin Richter, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice CLARK 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
# Rewards and Fairies/The Two Cousins

THE TWO COUSINS
Valour and Innocence Have latterly gone hence To certain death by certain shame attended. Envy—ah! even to tears!— The fortune of their years Which, though so few, yet so divinely ended.
Scarce had they lifted up Life's full and fiery cup, Than they had set it down untouched before them, Before their day arose They beckoned it to close— Close in destruction and confusion o’er them.
They did not stay to ask What prize should crown their task, Well sure that prize was such as no man strives for; But passed into eclipse Her kiss upon their lips— Even Belphœbe's, whom they gave their lives for!
# Rex Trailer Company v. United States/Concurrence Frankfurter

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 148
Rex Trailer Company v. United States
Argued: Dec. 5, 1955. --- Decided: Jan 9, 1956
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER concurs in the judgment substantially for the reasons given by him in his opinion in support of the Marcus decision. 317 U.S. at page 553, 63 S.Ct. at page 388.

## 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