OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Sultan Railway Timber Company v. Department of Labor and Industries of Washington

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
277 U.S. 135
Sultan Railway Timber Company v. Department of Labor and Industries of Washington
Argued: and Submitted March 5, 1928. --- Decided: May 14, 1928
Mr. Frederic E. Fuller, of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Mark H. Wight and John H. Dunbar, both of Olympia, Wash., for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER 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
# Sultan Bahoo The Life and Teachings/Throne of Divine Guidance and Persuasion

Sultan-ul-Arifeen Sultan-ul-Faqr Hazrat Sakhi Sultan Bahoo Rehmat-ul-Allah Alayh returned from Dehli and started executing his duty of guiding and persuading people towards righteousness. From that day onwards, the Divine Radiance became so obvious from his self that hundreds of people found Divine Closeness just by his single glance.
Sultan-ul-Arifeen Hazrat Sakhi Sultan Bahoo Rehmat-ul-Allah Alayh has defined an independent Faqeer as compared to the conventional Pirs (mentors) and Sajadah Nasheen Shaikhs that: “An independent Faqeer is not bound by rules and regulations and is free from the restraints of expediencies. First, he is not bound to live at one place. Second, his benefit continues in every condition and in every way. Usually, he distributes the bounty of Faqr among common people while travelling from place to place.”
Hazrat Sakhi Sultan Bahoo travelled all his life to educate and guide people on the path of Faqr and distributed the treasure of the Divine Love and Knowledge among common people. He did this at the order of Allah, as he says:
"I disgrace my nafs (baser self) by begging from door to door just to obey and please my Allah. (Noor-ul-Huda Kalan) Usually, he travelled towards the Valley of Saun Sakeser, Multan, Dera Ghazi Khan, Dera Ismail Khan, Sindh and Balochistan for guiding and persuading people. Discussion about him cannot be found in any book or writing of other saints because he always remained away from the centre of culture and education of that age and never met any writer. His visit to Dehli is mentioned only once. He distributed the treasure of Ism-e-Allah Zaat mostly among the common villagers and then these villagers continued and proceeded his work."
Sultan-ul-Arifeen spent all his life wandering in streets and cities searching for the Seekers of Allah and taking them to the Divine Oneness, as he was ordered from the court of the Holy Prophet Sall’Allahu Alayhi Wa’alihi Wasallam to do the duty of guiding Men of Allah.
# Sultan Bahoo The Life and Teachings/Tasleem-o-Raza (Surrender and Submission to The Divine Will)

The basis and locus of Faqr is Tasleem-o-Raza, i.e. to surrender and submit before Allah and to be content at whatever His Will is, just to please Him. Tasleem means to admit whatever is written in one’s fate is only from Allah. He alone confers and prohibits everything and whatever He decides for His men can never be wrong or harmful for them. When one claims that he will be happy with everything written in his fate and will never complain to Allah or go against His Will, it is called Tasleem. When he actually has to face his fate and he remains satisfied; keeps his faith in Allah no matter how worse his fate apparently is; neither he complains nor runs away from his destiny, thus proving his claim of Tasleem, then this is called Raza i.e. to be pleased at Allah’s Will. Tasleem is a state of submission before the appearance of fate and Raza is surrendering to the Divine Will after the occurrence of whatever is written in fate.
In Faqr, the devoted Seeker of Allah considers every blessing and every loss as the Will and Decision of Allah. When blessed with something, he should not feel proud and in times of sorrow, he should not be disappointed. It is for one’s own good that in the worldly as well as spiritual life, he stays in the fear of displeasing Allah but at the same time hopes for the best from Him. He must be pleased with the consent of Allah and submit to Him in every condition like horror and distress, peace and grief, comfort and tension, convenience and misery, illness and health, hunger and satiation etc. Only such a Seeker is accepted and approved at the Court of Allah.
The state of Tasleem-o-Raza is one of the greatest among the several way stations of Faqr. Only after this station of Faqr, the access to the two very important and the highest stations is gained i.e. the Vision of Allah and the presence of Majlis-e-Mohammadi. Before these two, Tasleem-o-Raza is among the last stations and it is the station of Nafs-e-Mutmainna (The Satisfied Self).
Allah says in the Quran that only those people are destined to have the vision of Allah who surrender before His will.
"Who is better than the person who surrenders himself before the Will of Allah, he is the virtuous person (to have the Vision of Allah)." (Al-Nisa-125)
Hazoor Akram Sall’Allahu Alayhi Wa’alihi Wasallam says:
"The people who surrender before their Beloved’s Will, are conferred upon a new life every moment."
Ghaus-ul-Azam Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jilani Razi Allah Anhu expounds:
“At the occurrence of what is written in the fate, raising objection on Allah (to think against the Will of Allah) is the demise of Faith, Trust, Tauheed and loyalty. The heart possessing true faith never says ‘why’ & ‘how’, its job is to say ‘yes’ (i.e. he obeys to the Divine Ordain and does not opine). To argue and raise objections is infact the habit of the nafs.” (Fatah-Al-Rabbani-Majlis-01)
"Know, that man is not born of his own will, then how can everything happen with his accord. So it is better to submit everything to Allah and get yourself out of it." (Kaleed-ul-Tauheed Kalan)
# Spencer v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 577
Spencer v. United States
APPEAL from the Court of Claims.
This cause was argued by Mr. Joseph Casey for the appellant, and by Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Edwin B. Smith for the appellee.
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
# Spenserian Stanzas on Charles Armitage Brown

* "A Portrait", in The Poetical Works of John Keats (1884)
* "Spenserian Stanzas on Charles Armitage Brown", in The complete poetical works and letters of John Keats (1899), edited by Horace Elisha Scudder
# Spencer v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 577
Spencer v. United States
In this case, the Court of Claims has certified here, in answer to inquiries from us, (1) that the cotton in question did not come into the hands of any agent of the United States as abandoned or captured property, and was not sold as such; and (2) that the proceeds of the sale were not paid into the treasury of the United States.
Upon this state of facts, the judgment of the court below was clearly right. It is certain that no suit can be maintained against the United States under the Abandoned and Captured Property Act, if the property has neither been captured, seized, nor sold pursuant to its provisions, and the proceeds are not in the treasury.
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
# Spenserian Stanza, written at the Close of Canto II., Book V., of 'The Faerie Queene'

* "A Spenserian Stanza", in The Poetical Works of John Keats (1884)
* "Spenserian Stanza, written at the Close of Canto II., Book V., of 'The Faerie Queene'", in The complete poetical works and letters of John Keats (1899), edited by Horace Elisha Scudder
# Sutphen Estates v. United States/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
342 U.S. 19
Sutphen Estates v. United States
Argued: Oct. 11, 1951. --- Decided: Nov 5, 1951
Mr. Justice BLACK, dissenting.
Warner Brothers, Inc., has been guarantor on a lease of theater properties made by appellant Sutphen Estates. Under a court decree of dissolution Warner is to be split up into two companies, only one of which will expressly assume the Warner guarantee to Sutphen. Sutphen's lease can no longer be guaranted by the combined assets of the illegal corporation we have ordered dissolved. Perhaps it is inevitable that the guarantee will be impaired to some extent, but we should insure that Sutphen suffers no more than its fair share of whatever losses may result from the enforcement of the antitrust laws.
I am of the opinion that the issue of impairment can best be and should be determined by the District Court as a part of the dissolution proceedings. Furthermore, I cannot assent to an opinion that permits this question of impairment to remain open for adjudication elsewhere at some indefinite time in the future.
Dissolution of Warner, which we have ordered, cannot be completely consummated if the decree leaves in doubt whether both new companies are jointly obligated on Sutphen's lease. Cf. Continental Insurance Co. v. United States, 259 U.S. 156, 173-174, 42 S.Ct. 540, 545, 546, 66 L.Ed. 871. Surely, if we have the power to order a dissolution to prevent Sherman Act violations, we have power to insure that the newly created companies are permanently and totally disinterested in each other's future activities, and are in no way united by past obligations.

## 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
# Sutherland v. Mayer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
271 U.S. 272
Sutherland v. Mayer
Argued: April 14, 1926. --- Decided: May 24, 1926
Private rights and duties are affected by war only so far as they are incompatible with rights of war.
[Syllabus from pages 272-274 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. William D. Mitchell, Sol. Gen., and Dean Hill Stanley and E. N. Cherrington, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., for Sutherland.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 274-276 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Edward F. McClennen, of Boston, Mass., for Mayer.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 277-281 intentionally omitted]
Mr. John Caldwell Myers, of New York City (Mr. John W. Davis, of New York City, of counsel), for Reis and others.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 281-283 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND 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
# Sustainable Development Goals/9
## Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

9.1 Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all
9.2 Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and, by 2030, significantly raise industry’s share of employment and gross domestic product, in line with national circumstances, and double its share in least developed countries
9.3 Increase the access of small-scale industrial and other enterprises, in particular in developing countries, to financial services, including affordable credit, and their integration into value chains and markets
9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities
9.5 Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries, including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially increasing the number of research and development workers per 1 million people and public and private research and development spending
9.a Facilitate sustainable and resilient infrastructure development in developing countries through enhanced financial, technological and technical support to African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States
9.b Support domestic technology development, research and innovation in developing countries, including by ensuring a conducive policy environment for, inter alia, industrial diversification and value addition to commodities
9.c Significantly increase access to information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in least developed countries by 2020
# Sutphen Estates v. United States

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
342 U.S. 19
Sutphen Estates v. United States
Argued: Oct. 11, 1951. --- Decided: Nov 5, 1951
See 342 U.S. 907, 72 S.Ct. 289.
Mr. H. G. Pickering, New York City, for appellant.
Mr. Charles H. Weston, Washington, D.C., for the United States.
Mr. Joseph M. Proskauer, New York City, for appellees, Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., et al.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# Sutter Butte Canal Company v. Railroad Commission of California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
279 U.S. 125
Sutter Butte Canal Company v. Railroad Commission of California
Argued: March 6, 7, 1929. --- Decided: April 8, 1929
Messrs. Isaac Frohman and Douglas Brookman, both of San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 126-127 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Arthur T. George and Carl I. Wheat, both of San Francisco, Cal., for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 128-130 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT 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
# Swedenborg's Maximus Homo

This book is part of the New-Church Popular Series, which are designed to present the doctrines, philosophy, and spirit of the New Church in a simple, clear, and concise manner.
(Upload an image to replace this placeholder.)
CONTENTS.
SWEDENBORG'S MAXIMUS HOMO.
THE NEW CHURCH.
MEMORIAL TO THE GENERAL CONVENTION.
INDEPENDENT WITNESSES.
PREFATORY NOTE.
A large portion of the following pages has already appeared in print from time to time, either in pamphlet form or as newspaper or magazine articles.
But the practical importance of the subjects treated, together with the perfect harmony and unity of the essays, seem to justify and commend their publication in this more permanent and accessible form.
It is the author's hope and belief that, in this form, they will be more extensively circulated and read, and more useful, therefore, in awakening an interest in the new revealings, and promoting the spread of the New Christianity.
ABBREVIATIONS Of the works of Swedenborg quoted or referred to in the following pages.
| A. C. | stand for | Arcana Cœlestia. |
| A. E. | stand for“ | Apocalypse Explained. |
| A. R. | stand for“ | Apocalypse Revealed. |
| T. C. R. | stand for“ | True Christian Religion. |
| D. P. | stand for“ | Divine Providence. |
| D. S. S. | stand for“ | Doctrine of Sacred Scripture. |
| H. H. | stand for“ | Heaven and Hell. |
| D. F. | stand for“ | Doctrine of Faith. |
| N. J. D. | stand for“ | Doctrine of the New Jerusalem. |
| C. L. | stand for“ | Conjugial Love. |
| L. J. | stand for“ | Last Judgement. |
| Contin. L. J. | stand for“ | Continuation of Last Judgement. |
# Swedenborg's Maximus Homo/Memorial to the General Convention/Chapter 1

MEMORIAL
TO
THE GENERAL CONVENTION.
I.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
The following Memorial was sent to the "General Conventien of the New Church in the United States," at its session in 1880. It was drawn up under the authority and by the direction of the Board of Managers of the "Swedenborg Publishing Association," and was signed by 94 persons, most of whom belonged to societies in connection with the Convention. Many more signatures might have been obtained, if the Memorial had been more widely circulated. For it is estimated that more than two thousand (possibly more than four thousand) receivers of the heavenly doctrines in our country, are to-day in cordial sympathy with the views and beliefs herein expressed.
But while many receivers of these doctrines on both continents cordially accept the views of the Memorialists, the "Swedenborg Publishing Association," under whose auspices and direction ​this document was drafted, is, we believe, the only organized body of professed New Churchmen, that stands openly and squarely on the platform outlined in this Memorial.
At the end of each paragraph will be found references to the works of Swedenborg wherein the expressed beliefs of the Memorialists are plainly taught. In the pamphlet edition of the Memorial published several years ago, the full text of all these references is given, filling more than thirty pages. A few copies of this pamphlet are still on sale by the Swedenborg Publishing Association:—price 6 cents, post-paid.
# Spirella Manual (1913)/Section 19
## SECTION 19.SECTION 19.
### Returning Goods.

148. WE ARE SOMETIMES ASKED by beginners whether or not we will take back goods which may be left on their hands, and refund either the money or new fresh stock instead. We make it a positive rule not to take back or exchange anything that has been sent in accordance with the order. Saleswomen cannot afford to deal with any house which allows the privilege of returning second-hand goods. A rule with us to take back second-hand goods would be an imposition on our Corsetieres. Take your own case, far example. You would not want us to ship you second-hand corsets—those returned by another person. You are paying for newly made goods, and that is what we send you. Surplus corsets which may have been handled through one or more deliveries are more or less worn, not noticeably so to our customers, yet to the eye of a sales­woman who is constantly receiving new goods, they would be detected and would reflect on us. Thus, the rule, which we abide by strictly, is for the benefit of both you and ourselves.
149. We have hundreds of Saleswomen permanently and constantly engaged in the business who would protest against any different rule than the one adopted. However, it is our desire to correct mistakes we may make in filling orders. When any corsets not ordered are sent you return them at once, and we will gladly exchange them for the ones ordered, or for any others. IF ANY SUCH CORSETS ARE SO RE­TURNED, MARK YOUR NAME PLAINLY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE PACKAGE.
ALL CLAIMS FOR RETURN OF GOODS ON ACCOUNT OF ERROR, MUST BE MADE WITHIN FIVE DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF GOODS.
# Spirella Manual (1913)/Section 16
## SECTION 16.SECTION 16.
### What To Do When a License is Demanded.

145. THE UNITED STATES Supreme Court has decided in several cases that all local laws taxing commercial drummers, canvassers or agents who sell by sample only, and who represent houses not located in the State where they are at work, are unconstitutional and therefore void. This court is the supreme interpreter of the laws of the Nation and its edicts must be obeyed. The leading cases in which this decision has been made and affirmed are as follows: Robbins vs. The Shelby County Taxing District, 120 U. S., 489 S. c., 8 Supreme Court Rep. 592; Corson vs. Mary­land, 120 U. S., 502 S. C., 7 Supreme Court Rep. 655; Ex parte Insley, 33 Fed. Rep. 680; Simmons Hardware Co., vs. McGuire, Second Southern Rep., 592; State vs. Pratt, 9 Atl. Rep. 556. ​When a demand for license is made you should at once call upon the mayor of the town or city, or, if you are at work in the country, upon the sheriff or other proper officer, and call his attention to these decisions of the Supreme Court, and ask protection under them. If this does not secure protection, then place your case in the hands of a good local attorney, and he will see you through. Attorneys will generally take these cases for what they can get out of them in the way of damages for unlawful interference with your business.
Any officer demanding a license from a saleswoman places himself in contempt of the U. S. Supreme Court, and may be prosecuted accordingly.
# Spirella Manual (1913)/Section 17
## SECTION 17.SECTION 17.
### Weekly Reports.

146. NEXT IN IMPORTANCE to thorough preparation, are prompt and frequent report of your work. We do not suggest this in an arbi­trary spirit, but because the advantage of these reports both to you and to ourselves, is of the most positive kind. Those who are doing the larg­est business, who are making the largest individual sales and who express the greatest satisfaction in their work, are the ones who keep the office informed of how they work, the objections they have to meet, and what appears to them to be their weak points in taking orders and delivering. GIVE US YOUR HEARTY CO-OPERATION IN THIS; IT IS TO YOUR INTEREST TO DO SO.
# Spirella Manual (1913)/Section 18
## SECTION 18.SECTION 18.
### Never Cut Prices.

147. YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO DO SO.—In some instances you may be the gainer thereby; but you would lose that CONSCIOUSNESS of fair dealing which you must have to get the best results. It carries great force when you can truthfully say, "I never sold a corset for less than retail price in my life, and I cannot afford to do so now."
Should you offer to reduce the price you would not only weaken your position, but you would also lower the value of the goods in the estimation of your customer. Should any still insist that you know that you can afford to throw off, say:
"Miss (or Mrs,.) ————, I could afford to give you the corset for nothing and not miss it much; but to sell it for less than I would sell it to your neighbor, certainly would not be doing a fair business."
You, by the contract, are bound to maintain the regular retail price which in all cases you should do.