OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Heroes of the hour: Mahatma Gandhi, Tilak Maharaj, Sir Subramanya Iyer/Index

INDEX
| PAGE. |
| A |
| Africa, south—position of the Indian immigrant | 12 |
| Agarkar | 94 |
| Age of consent bill | 103 |
| Aston's judgment against Tilak | 129 |
| B |
| Besant, Mrs. | 255 |
| Boer War and Indians | 24 |
| C |
| Chiplunkur, V. K. | 95 |
| D |
| Deccan Education Society | 100 |
| F |
| Fergusson College | 100 |
| G |
| Gandhi, M. K. | 1 |
| —— Birth and parentage | 4 |
| —— English Education | 8 |
| —— Deportation | 39 |
| —— First visit to South Africa | 17 |
| —— Mother's death | 9 |
| —— Nursing of the Zulus | 29 |
| —— Passive Resistance | 33 |
| —— Return to India | 21 |
| —— Second visit to South Africa | 22 |
| —— Started Indian opinion | 26 |
| —— And Phœnix Asrama | 29 |
| —— And Plague | 27 |
| Gokhale. H. N. | 102 |
| Gokhale in South Africa | 43 |
| H |
| Hotchener | 268 |
| I |
| Indian immigrant, position of, in South Africa | 12 |
| —— Opinion | 26 |
| —— Women in South Africa | 47 |
| —— And Boer War | 24 |
| Internment and Sir S. Subramanya Aiyar | 255 |
| K |
| Kelkar, N. C. | 102 |
| M |
| Madhava Rao, V. P. | 265 |
| N |
| Narayanasami a deported youth | 41 |
| O |
| Orion | 105 |
| P |
| Parthasarathi Aiyangar, M.O. | 261 |
| Partition of Bengal | 131 |
| Passive Resistance | 33 |
| Phœnix Settlement | 27 |
| Plague among Indians in South Africa | 27 |
| Polak, Mr. H. S. L. | 39 |
| Prince of Wale's visit to Madura | 223 |
| R |
| Rajagopalachariar, Honourable Dewan Bahadur | 273 ​ |
| Ramanujachariar, V. K. | 262 |
| Ryotwari Settlement | 233 |
| S |
| Self-Government, Tilak on | 136 |
| Sivaji celebration | 117 |
| South African Union | 42 |
| Subrahmanya Aiyar, Dr. Sir S. | 199 |
| —— Early Education | 220 |
| —— Father | 218 |
| —— After Retirement | 248 |
| —— As an Advocate | 236 |
| —— As Judge of the High Court | 244 |
| —— As Theosophist | 251 |
| —— Nominated to the Legislative Council | 223 |
| —— Presents the people's address | 223 |
| —— And the Congress birth | 227 |
| —— And Mehta compared | 212 |
| T |
| Tilak-Maharaj | 35 |
| —— on Self-Government | 136 |
| —— on Volunteering | 197 |
| Tilak's Evidence before the Decentralisation Committee | 137 |
| —— first imprisonment | 100 |
| —— security cases | 178 |
| —— Tilak and Congress | 109 |
| —— and famine | 113 |
| —— and plague | 115 |
| U |
| Union Immigration bill | 43 |
| Union of South Africa | 42 |
| V |
| Vedas, researches into the | 105 |
| Vijayaraghava Acharyar, C. | 260 |
| Volunteering, Tilak on | 197 |
| W |
| Williams, Mr. Williams | 220 |
| Z |
| Zulu Rebellion | 29 |
# Heroes of the hour: Mahatma Gandhi, Tilak Maharaj, Sir Subramanya Iyer

Heroes of the Hour
MAHATMA GANDHI
TILAK MAHARAJ
SIR SUBRAMANYA IYER
GANESH & CO. MADRAS.
A time like this demands Great hearts, strong minds, true faith, and willing hands: Men whom the lust of office cannot kill, Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy: Men who possess opinions and a will: Men who have honour, men who will not lie.
 —Oliver Wendell Holmes.
FOREWORD :
| I have pleasure in warmly commending this volume to all who desire to understand the many-faced beauty and heroism of the spirit embodied in India's great men. Here are three noble Indian types, worthy of our homage and admiration. May many more such Heroes come to us, Heroes not only of the Hour but for all Time. ||||
| Adyar, | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | ANNIE BESANT. |
| 4th March, 1918. | $\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,$ | ANNIE BESANT. |
PUBLISHERS' NOTE :
* In presenting this volume to the public the Publishers desire to thank their contributors and wish to add that the proem and the biography of Dr. Sir S. Subramanya Iyer are from the pen of Mr. K. Vyasa Rao.
CONTENTS
PAGE :
| Proem | v |
| Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi | 1 |
| Tilak Maharaj | 85 |
| Dr. Sir S. Subramanya Iyer | 199 |
Index
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
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 1

GONDIBERT.
The First Book.
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 10

CANTO the Fourth.
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 12

CANTO the Sixth.
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 13

CANTO the Seventh.
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem

'Gondibert' is an unfinished epic poem. This transcription is of the most complete version published during the author's lifetime. The corrections listed in the Errata have been incorporated. Since the {{errata}} template doesn't work properly with {{ppoem}}, the changes have been annotated using {{tooltip}}. The transcription is true to the original, including erratic spellings, etc., with one small exception. In some instances, on a few pages, W's are printed as VV; these have been standardised to W.
GONDIBERT:
AN HEROICK
POEM;
WRITTEN BY
Sir WILLIAM D'AVENANT.
LONDON, Printed for John Holden, and are to be sold at his Shop at the sign of the Anchor in the New-Exchange, 1651.
* Errata
* The Authour's Preface To His Much Honour'd Friend Mr Hobs
* The Answer of Mr. Hobbes to Sr. Will. D'Avenant's Preface Before Gondibert
* To Sr Will. D'Avenant, Upon His Two First Books of Gondibert, Finish'd Before His Voyage to America (Waller)
* To Sr Will. D'Avenant, Upon His Two First Books of Gondibert, Finish'd Before His Voyage to America (Cowley)
Gondibert: The First Book
* Canto the First
* Canto the Second
* Canto the Third
* Canto the Fourth
* Canto the Fifth
* Canto the Sixth
Gondibert: The Second Book
* Canto the First
* Canto the Second
* Canto the Third
* Canto the Fourth
* Canto the Fifth
* Canto the Sixth
* Canto the Seventh
* Canto Eighth
Gondibert: The Third Book
* Canto the First
* Canto the Second
* Canto the Third
* Canto the Fourth
* Canto the Fifth
* Canto the Sixth
* Post-script
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
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 11

CANTO the Fifth.
# Gondibert: An Heroick Poem/Canto 14

The numbering of the stanzas on page 154 is incorrect. The numbering recovers on the following page and continues correctly to the end of the canto.
CANTO the Eighth.
The End of the Second Book.
# Gondeck v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Harlan
United States Supreme Court
382 U.S. 25
Gondeck v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.
Arthur Roth, for petitioner.
Leo M. Alpert, for respondents.
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
# Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist/Chapter 3

​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/40 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/41 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/42 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/43 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/44 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/45 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/46 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/47
# Henry Coe v. Armour Fertilizer Works

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
237 U.S. 413
Henry Coe v. Armour Fertilizer Works
Argued: January 20, 1915. --- Decided: May 3, 1915
[Syllabus from pages 413-415 intentionally omitted]
Mr. W. A. Carter for plaintiff in error.
Mr. O. K. Reaves for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsels from page 415 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Pitney 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
# Henry Bradshaw

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Henry Bradshaw."
* 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.
* "Bradshaw, Henry," in Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900, London: Smith, Elder, & Co. (1885–1900) in 63 vols.
* "Bradshaw, Henry (poet)," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Henry Bradshaw," in Catholic Encyclopedia, (ed.) by Charles G. Herbermann and others, New York: The Encyclopaedia Press (1913)
# Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist/Chapter 2

​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/28 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/29 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/30 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/31 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/32 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/33 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/34 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/35 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/36 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/37 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/38 ​Page:Henry Derozio, the Eurasian, poet, teacher, and journalist. With appendices (IA henryderozioeura00edwarich).pdf/39
# Holt v. Hobbs/Concurrence Ginsburg

Cite as: Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. 352, 370 (2015) (Ginsburg, J., concurring).
* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Ginsburg Sotomayor
JUSTICE GINSBURG, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR joins, concurring.
Unlike the exemption this Court approved in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014), accommodating petitioner's religious belief in this case would not detrimentally affect others who do not share petitioner's belief. See id., at 740, 745–746, and n. 8, 764 (GINSBURG, J., dissenting). On that understanding, I join the Court's opinion.

## 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
# Holt v. Indiana Manufacturing Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
176 U.S. 68
Holt v. Indiana Manufacturing Company
Argued: December 19, 20, 1899. --- Decided: January 15, 1900
This suit was brought in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Indiana by the Indiana Manufacturing Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Indiana, against Sterling R. Holt and others, taxing officers of Marion county, Indiana, and of a township in said county, and some others, constituting the board of review of that county, all of whom were citizens of Indiana, to enjoin the collection of certain personal taxes for the years 1892, 1893, 1894, and 1895, assessed upon the capital stock and tangible property of the company. The bill alleged that the larger part of the assessment made by the taxing authorities was for the supposed value of certain rights under letters patent from the United States owned by the company, and which the company insisted were not subject to taxation by the state authorities; that the capital stock, aside from the tangible property, represented solely the supposed value of the letters patent; and that the taxes in respect of the tangible property had been paid by the company. Complainant charged that the assessment was illegal, unconstitutional, and void, and averred that the suit was instituted 'to redress the deprivation, under color of a law of the state of Indiana, of a right secured by the laws of the United States, and, further, that it is a suit arising under the patent laws of the United States.' The circuit court entered a decree, in accordance with the prayer of the bill, perpetually enjoining the collection of the taxes claimed to be due in respect of the capital stock, in so far as the value thereof was derived from patent rights or letters patent owned by complainant. An appeal was taken to the circuit court of appeals for the seventh circuit, and dismissed by that court for want of jurisdiction. 46 U.S. App. 717, 80 Fed. Rep. 1, 25 C. C. A. 301.
The circuit court of appeals held that the suit was not one arising under the patent laws of the United States, and that, as the jurisdiction of the circuit court could rest only on the ground that the constitutional rights of complainant were infringed by the laws of the state of Indiana which were repugnant to and in contravention of the Constitution of the United States, an appeal would not lie to that court, and could only be taken directly to this court under § 5 of the judiciary act of March 3, 1891.
Messrs. William L. Taylor, Solicitor General John K. Richards, Merrill Moores, Cassius C. Hadley, William A. Ketcham, and Alfred R. Hovey for appellants.
Chester Bradford and Alonzo Greene Smith for appellee.
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller 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
# Holt v. Henley

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
232 U.S. 637
Holt v. Henley
Argued: March 5, 1914. --- Decided: March 16, 1914
Messrs. S. O. Bland and R. T. Armistead for appellant.
Messrs. Norvell L. Henley and o. d. Batchelor 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
# Hints towards the formation of a more comprehensive theory of life/The Nature of Life

THE NATURE OF LIFE.
On The Definitions Of Life Hitherto Received. Hints Towards A More Comprehensive Theory.
* Part 1
* Part 2
* Part 3
* Part 4
* Part 5
* Part 6
# Hipolite Egg Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
220 U.S. 45
Hipolite Egg Company v. United States
Argued: January 5, 1911. --- Decided: March 13, 1911
Messrs. Thomas E. Lannen and Edward T. Fenwick for plaintiff in error and appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from page 46 intentionally omitted]
Assistant Attorney General Fowler for defendant in error and appellee.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 47-49 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

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

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
130 U.S. 456
Hurlbut v. Schillinger
L. L. Bond and E. A. West, for appellant.
George W. Hey, for appellees.
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
# Hurley v. Commission of Fisheries of Virginia/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
257 U.S. 223
Hurley v. Commission of Fisheries of Virginia
Argued: Oct. 10, 11, 1921. --- Decided: Dec 5, 1921
Appellant sought a temporary injunction restraining the Virginia Commission of Fisheries from removing the stakes and marks which designated the boundaries of certain oyster grounds in the Rappahannock river, planted by him and which he claimed the right to occupy, and thereby opening the same for public use and enjoyment.
He maintained that the Commission was proceeding under a state statute invalid because it failed to provide for proper notice and hearing and that the proposed action would deprive him of property without due process of law contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment.
A majority of the three judges composing the court below concluded (264 Fed. 116) that the Commission had acted in substantial compliance with the challenged statute, that whatever rights of property appellant claimed in respect of the specified lands, or the oysters thereon, were necessarily based upon the statute itself, and that he could not both assail it and rely upon it in the same proceeding (Kansas City, etc., R. R. v. Stiles, 242 U.S. 111, 117, 37 Sup. Ct. 58, 61 L. Ed. 176), and further that the evidence showed conclusively that the threatened action would not deprive him of any property which he could rightfully claim. It accordingly refused to grant a temporary injunction, but did not dismiss complainant's bill. We find no reason to interfere with this decree, and it is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Mr. Justice CLARKE concurs in the result.

## 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
# Hurley v. Jones

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
97 U.S. 318
Hurley v. Jones
MOTION to reinstate a cause dismissed under the sixteenth rule.
Mr. Fillmore Beall in support of the motion.
Mr. W. F. Sapp, 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
# Hurd v. Hodge Urciolo

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 24
Hurd v. Hodge Urciolo
Argued: Jan. 15, 16, 1948. --- Decided: May 3, 1948
Messrs. Charles H. Houston and Phineas Indritz, both of Washington, D.C., for petitioners.
Messrs. Henry Gilligan and James A. Crooks, both of Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Mr. Philip B. Perlman, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of court.
[Argument of Counsel from page 25 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Chief Justice VINSON 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
# Hurd v. Hodge Urciolo/Concurrence Frankfurter

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Frankfurter
United States Supreme Court
334 U.S. 24
Hurd v. Hodge Urciolo
Argued: Jan. 15, 16, 1948. --- Decided: May 3, 1948
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, concurring.
In these cases, the plaintiffs ask equity to enjoin white property owners who are desirous of selling their houses to Negro buyers simply because the houses were subject to an original agreement not to have them pass into Negro ownership. Equity is rooted in conscience. An injunction is, as it always has been, 'an extraordinary remedial process, which is granted, not as a matter of right, but in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion.' Morrison v. Work, 266 U.S. 481, 490, 45 S.Ct. 149, 153, 69 L.Ed. 394. In good conscience, it cannot be 'the exercise of a sound judicial discretion' by a federal court to grant the relief here asked for when the authorization of such an injunction by the State of the Union violates the Constitution-and violates it, not for any narrow technical reason, but for considerations that touch rights so basic to our society that, after the Civil War, their protection against invasion by the States was safeguarded by the Constitution. This is to me a sufficient and conclusive ground for reaching the Court's result.

## 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
# Hurley v. Commission of Fisheries of Virginia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
257 U.S. 223
Hurley v. Commission of Fisheries of Virginia
Argued: Oct. 10, 11, 1921. --- Decided: Dec 5, 1921
Messrs. Thomas B. Snead and S. S. P. Patteson, both of Richmond, Va., for appellant.
[Syllabus from pages 223-225 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Robert W. Schultice, of Norfolk, Va., for appellees.
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
# Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush

"Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush" (also titled "Mulberry Bush" or "This Is the Way") is an English nursery rhyme and singing game. It has a Roud Folk Song Index number of 7882. It uses the tune which Nancy Dawson danced into fame in The Beggar's Opera in mid-1700s London. The same tune is also used for "Lazy Mary, Will You Get Up" and "Nuts in May". A variant is used for "The Wheels on the Bus". Warning: template has been deprecated.
* "Here we go round the Mulberry Bush" in "Dorsetshire Children's Games, &c" by John Symonds Udal (The Folk-Lore Journal, 1889)
* "The Mulberry Bush" in The Baby's Opera by Edmund Evans and Walter Crane (1900)
* "Here we go round the bramble-bush" in A Book of Nursery Rhymes by Charles Welsh (1901)
* "Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush" in The Nursery Rhymes of Mother Goose by Arthur Rackham (St. Nicholas, 1913)
# Herdman v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
352 U.S. 518
Herdman v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
Argued: Dec. 4, 1956. --- Decided: Feb 25, 1957
Mr. Donald S. McNamara, Columbus, Ohio, for the petitioner.
Mr. John Eckler, Columbus, Ohio, for the respondent.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN 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