OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Brooklyn Eagle/1903/Angelina A. Wilcox

* related portals: Joseph Henderson.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Angelina A. Wilcox (1863-1923) obituary in Brooklyn Eagle of Brooklyn, New York City on 11 June 1903
Angelina A. Wilcox.
Angelina A. Wilcox, daughter of the late Captain Joseph Henderson, formerly a prominent pilot of the Sandy Hook service, died yesterday, aged 40 years, at her home, 633 Willoughby avenue. The funeral service will be held at her late residence, Saturday afternoon at 2:30 o'clock.
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
# Brooklyn Eagle/1904/Miss Elizabeth Betts

Elizabeth Betts (1835-1908) obituary in Brooklyn Eagle of Brooklyn, New York City on March 9, 1904
Miss Elizabeth Betts. Islip, Long Island, March 9, 1904. Miss Elizabeth Betts, the oldest woman resident of Islip, died yesterday at the home of former Supervisor Charles G. Sands, aged 90 years. The deceased was born in New York City, but the major portion of her life had been spent in the towns of Islip and Babylon. She came of English-Scotch ancestry, her father being a native of the Yorkshire section of England, her mother was born in Ayr, Scotland. Her parents came to America nearly a century ago, and for many years conducted the old Shakespeare Inn at Islip, on Theater alley, near Park Row. Later the family came to Babylon, where Mr. Betts for a number of years conducted a tannery. Mrs. Charles G. Sands, a niece, at whose home she died, alone survives her, being the last survivor of a very large family. The funeral will take place afternoon from the Sands residence, the Rev. A. H. Fish officiating. The interment will be in the family plot in the rural cemetery at Babylon.
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
# Brooklyn Eagle/1918/Famous Faster Dr. Tanner Dies

Henry Samuel Tanner (1831-1918) obituary in the Brooklyn Eagle of Brooklyn, New York City on December 31, 1918
Famous Faster Dr. Tanner Dies. Went Without Food for 40 Days in 1880. Lived to Be 91 Years Old. San Diego, California; December 31, 1918. Dr. Henry S. Tanner, proponent of fasting for longevity, 91 years old, died Saturday at the county hospital after an illness of nearly a year. Dr. Tanneries practical application of the theory that health and long life depended on long periods of fasting, attracted attention a number of years ago. No relatives of the doctor have been found. Prior to coming to San Diego. about ten years ago, he lived in Los Angeles and In former years made his home in Litchfield, Ohio. For several weeks in the summer of 1880, Dr. Henry S. Tanner was the most talked about man in America, if not in the world. This came about through his fast of forty days, conducted at New York, under strict medical and scientific supervision, hu being the first person of modern times to voluntarily undergo such an ordeal. Dr. Tanner first came into notice in 1877 at Minneapolis, Minnesota, through his determination to abstain from food as an expedient of relief from asthma-rheumatism and an ailment of the heart. A ten day period was fixed upon, that being then considered about the limit of human endurance. Finding himself benefitted from the first, according to the conviction which he held to until the end of his life, ho continued the fast for forty-two days. Owing to widespread doubt, especially in medical circles, as to the genuineness of Tanner's exploit, he offered to repeat the performance under any conditions which might be named. After long negotiations, it was arranged that the test should he made under the supervision of a prominent medical college of New York, and it commenced at noon, June 28, 1880. Tanner won the test, abstaining from food for an even forty days. Physicians in all parts of the world telegraphed warnings an to the manner of his breaking fast and it was freely predicted that he would not long survive the first food. The subject disregarded all advice, first partaking of a peach and then a large slice of watermelon. No ill effects followed. Tanner was born in England, February 7, 1831. Previous to his first fast his health was so precarious that he anticipated an early death. Thirty-seven years later, at the age of 88, he announced that since the incidents mentioned his health had been invariably excellent.
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
# Bassett's Scrap Book/Volume 5

* March 1907
* April 1907
* May 1907
* June 1907
* July 1907
* August 1907
* September 1907
* October 1907
* November 1907
* December 1907
* January 1908
* February 1908
# Bass Ratcliff Gretton v. State Tax Commission

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
266 U.S. 271
Bass Ratcliff Gretton v. State Tax Commission
Argued: April 21, 1924. --- Decided: Nov 17, 1924
Messrs. James M. Beck, of Washington, D. C., and George Carlton Comstock and Robert C. Beatty, both of New York City, for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 272-274 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Carl Sherman and C. T. Dawes, both of Albany, N. Y., for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 275-277 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice SANFORD 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
# Bass v. Taft

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
137 U.S. 458
Bass v. Taft
Phil B. Thompson, Jr., for plaintiff 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
# Basset v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
76 U.S. 38
Basset v. United States
Both the pleas of the defendants were pleas of nul tiel record, the first denying the existence of the recognizance, and the second denying the pending of the indictment at the time the recognizance was taken. A plea of nul tiel record to a supposed record of the court in which the plea is made is tried by the court, because it is an issue to be determined by the inspection of its own records. But where the record of a foreign court is denied by this plea the issue is to be tried by a jury, because the existence of the record to be inspected must first be made by proof, which it may be necessary to submit to a jury.
When a court sits in place of a jury and finds the facts this court cannot review that finding. If there is any error in such case, shown by the record, in admitting or rejecting testimony, it can be reviewed here. But when the court, by permission of the parties, takes the place of the jury, its finding of facts is conclusive, precisely as if a jury had found them by verdict.
In the case before us, however, the court did not sit to supply the place of a jury, because the record, the existence of which was denied by both pleas, was the record of the court in which the pleas were made. When, therefore, such record as did exist in regard to the matters in issue, was presented to the court, the only question to be determined, on which the court could exercise any judgment, was a question of law, namely, whether in legal effect there was found a record of the recognizance, and a subsisting legal judgment of conviction and punishment prior to the taking of the recognizance.
Both these questions of law are proper for review here, and are fairly presented by the agreed statement of what the record is.
1. In regard to the first, there is no doubt that the recognizance was taken, and remains in the records of the court.
2. As regards the second plea, it appears by the record that all which took place took place during the same term of the court, and we see no reason to doubt that the court had power during that term, for proper cause, to set aside the judgment rendered on confession. This control of the court over its own judgment during the term is of every-day practice. #fn-s-s The judgment then being set aside the indictment remained, and the recognizance of the prisoner and his sureties to appear and answer to it was valid.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
# Bassett's Scrap Book

Monthly periodical published by the League of American Wheelmen from 1903 to 1924. Changed name to the Official Bulletin and Scrap Book of the League of American Wheelmen in 1914.

## Bassett's Scrap Book

* Volume 1 (Mar. 1903—Feb. 1904)
* Volume 2 (Mar. 1904—Feb. 1905) IA
* Volume 3, Volume 4 (Mar. 1905—Feb. 1907) IA
* Volume 5, Volume 6 (Mar. 1907—Feb. 1909) (transcription project)
* Volume 7, Volume 8 (Mar. 1909—Feb. 1911) IA
* Volume 9, Volume 10, Volume 11 (Mar. 1911—Dec. 1913) IA

## Official Bulletin and Scrap Book of the League of American Wheelmen

* Volumes 12 & 13 (Jan. 1914—Dec. 1915) IA
* Volumes 14 & 15 (Jan. 1916—Dec. 1917) IA
* Volumes 16 & 17 (Jan. 1918—Dec. 1919) IA
* Volumes 18 & 19 (Jan. 1920—Dec. 1921) IA
# Basset v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
76 U.S. 38
Basset v. United States
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Ohio.
The United States sued Basset and another on a recognizance of bail, to which they pleaded two pleas:1. That there was no record of any such recognizance in the court.
2. That there was no indictment, as recited in said recognizance, pending against their principal when the recognizance was entered into, because they say that he had pleaded guilty to the indictment, and judgment had passed against him, and he had been delivered to the jail of Erie County, and had entered upon the expiation of his sentence.
The United States took issue on both these pleas, and the case was submitted to the court without a jury.
1. In respect to the first plea, the production of the record of the case showed that the recognizance was taken, and remained among the rolls and records of the court; so that there seemed nothing in the plea.
2. As regarded the second, it appeared by the record that to the indictment which the prisoner was held to answer by the recognizance, he had at an earlier period of the same term pleaded guilty, and had been sentenced to imprisonment in the jail of Erie County for six months, and was sent to that prison. But a few days after, on motion of the district attorney, he was brought back on a writ of habeas corpus. When he was thus brought again into court, on motion of the district attorney, the former judgment was set aside, and the prisoner had leave to withdraw his plea of guilty formerly entered. It was after this was done that the recognizance on which this action was brought was given, conditioned for the appearance of the prisoner from day to day during the term; and on his failing to appear the second day his recognizance was declared to be forfeited. All of this took place during the same term of the court.
The court below decided that there was a record of the recognizance denied by the first plea, and that there was no such record of conviction and sentence as that set up in the second plea. On motion of defendants a new trial was granted, which was also by the court, and on this trial a statement of facts, agreed to and signed by counsel for both parties, was presented to the court, on which it rendered the same judgment that it had before. This statement of facts consisted of extracts from the records of the court, and it was upon the inspection of this record that the court decided the case.
The judgment was now brought here by Basset and the other obligors in the recognizance, and was submitted by them, without counsel, upon the record; and contra, upon a brief of Mr. Hoar, A. G., and Mr. Field, Assistant A. G.
Mr. Justice MILLER 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
# Basket v. Hassell (108 U.S. 267)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
108 U.S. 267
Basket v. Hassell
Argued: April 16, 1883. ---
It is now urged that the indorsement and delivery of the c
nevertheless good as a will of personalty under the laws of
Tennessee, and, passing the title as such, entitled the appellant
to a decree for the payment of the money. But the conclusion is
not justified by the assumption, for a will of personalty in
Tennessee does not take effect until probate, (St. Tenn. 1871, §
appointed previously, as in case of intestacy, to whom the decree
in this case awarded it. The petition is, therefore, denied.

## 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
# Bolling v. Lersner

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 594
Bolling v. Lersner
ERROR to the Supreme Court of Appeals of the State of Virginia.
Motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Mr. James V. Brook and Mr. James R. Tucker in support of the motion. Mr. Conway Robinson, 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
# Bolles v. Town of Brimfield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
120 U.S. 759
Bolles v. Town of Brimfield
Thos. S. McClelland and Geo. A. Sanders, for plaintiffs in error.
H. B. Hopkins, for defendant in error.
HARLAN, 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
# Bolling v. Sharpe

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case which deals with civil rights, specifically, segregation in the District of Columbia's public schools. Originally argued on December 10–11, 1952, a year before Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), Bolling was reargued on December 8 and 9, 1953, and was unanimously decided on May 17, 1954, the same day as Brown. The Bolling decision was supplemented in 1955 with the second Brown opinion, which ordered desegregation "with all deliberate speed." Bolling did not address school desegregation in the context of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, which applies only to the states, but held that school segregation was unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In Bolling, the Court observed that the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution lacked an Equal Protection Clause, as in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court held, however, that the concepts of Equal Protection and Due Process are not mutually exclusive. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
347 U.S. 497
Bolling v. Sharpe
Argued: Dec. 8, 9, 1953. --- Decided: May 17, 1954
Messrs.
George E. C. Hayes, James M. Nabrit, Washington, D.C., for petitioners.
Mr. Milton D. Korman, Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Mr. Chief Justice WARREN 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
# Broken Ties and other Stories

Broken Ties and Other Stories
Macmillan and Co., Limited London · Bombay · Calcutta · Madras Melbourne
The Macmillan Company New York · Boston · Chicago Dallas · San Francisco
The Macmillan Co. of Canada, Ltd. Toronto
Broken Ties and Other Stories
By Rabindranath Tagore
Macmillan and Co., Limited St. Martin’s Street, London 1925
Copyright
Printed in Great Britain
[Advertisements]
By Rabindranath Tagore
Gitanjali. (Song Offerings.) Translated by the Author. With an Introduction by W. B. Yeats, and a Portrait by W. Rothenstein. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
Fruit-Gathering. A Sequel to “Gitanjali.” Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
Gitanjali and Fruit-Gathering. With Illustrations in colour and half-tone by Nandalal Bose, Surendranath Kar, Abanindranath Tagore, and Nobindranth Tagore. Crown 8vo. 10s. net.
The Gardener. Lyrics of Love and Life. Translated by the Author. With Portrait. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
The Crescent Moon. Child-Poems. Translated by the Author. With 8 Illustrations in Colour. Pott 4to. 5s. net.
Stray Birds. Poems. With a Frontispiece by Willy Pogány. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
Lover’s Gift and Crossing. Poems. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
The Fugitive. Poems. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
Chitra. A Play. Translated by the Author. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
The King of the Dark Chamber. A Play. Translated by Kshitish Chandra Sen. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
The Post Office. A Play. Translated by Devabrata Mukerjea. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
The Cycle of Spring. A Play. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.
Sacrifice and other Plays. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
​Red Oleanders. A Drama. Crown 8vo.
The Home and the World. A Novel. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
The Wreck. A Novel. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
Gora. A Novel. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
Mashi and other Stories. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Hungry Stones and other Stories. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Broken Ties and other Stories. Crown 8vo.
Sādhana: The Realisation of Life. Lectures. Extra Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Nationalism. Extra Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Personality. Lectures delivered in America. Illustrated. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Creative Unity. Extra Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
My Reminiscences. Illustrated. Extra Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
Glimpses of Bengal. Selected from the Letters of Rabindranath Tagore, 1885 to 1895. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
One Hundred Poems of Kabir. Translated by Rabindranath Tagore, assisted by Evelyn Underhill. Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
The Autobiography of Maharshi Devendranath Tagore (Father of Rabindranath Tagore) Translated by Satyendranath Tagore and Indira Devi. With Introduction by Evelyn Underhill, and Portrait. Extra Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd.
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Caladonia

An eight page chap-book containing a number of ballads and songs. The publication date is based on information on the website of the National Library of Scotland, the source of the work.
CALADONIA.
To which are added,
Queen Mary's Lamentation
The Maid of the Mill.
Despairing Mary.
PATRIOTIC SONG.
Nobody coming to Marry Me.
STIRLING: Printed and Sold, by M Randall,
page
* Caladonia
* Queen Mary's Lamentation
* The Maid of the Mill
* Despairing Mary
* A Patriotic Song
* Nobody Coming to Marry Me
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
# Cakes, Cookies and Confections/Index

Index
CAKES
CONFECTIONS
COOKIES
FILLINGS
GENERAL DIRECTIONS FOR CAKES
ICINGS
# Bearden v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
372 U.S. 252
Bearden v. United States
William C. Collins, for petitioner.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller and Philip R. Monahan, for the United States.
On Petition for Writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
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
# Bearden v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
372 U.S. 252
Bearden v. United States
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Elchuk v. United States, 370 U.S. 722, 82 S.Ct. 1574, 8 L.Ed.2d 802.
Mr. Justice WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

## 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
# Beard v. Stahr

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 41
Beard v. Stahr
Frederick Bernays Wiener, for appellant.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick and John G. Laughlin, Jr., for appellees.
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
# Beard v. Stahr/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 41
Beard v. Stahr
The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint. The action is premature. The appellant will not be removed from the active list of the Regular Army unless the Secretary of the Army exercises the discretionary authority to remove him conferred by 10 U.S.C. § 3794, 10 U.S.C.A. § 3794. The Secretary has not stated that he will so exercise his discretion as to remove appellant. If the Secretary does not remove the appellant it will be unnecessary to pass on the constitutional objections which have been urged. If appellant is removed, the Court is satisfied that adequate procedures for seeking redress will be open to him. Compare Aircraft & Diesel Equipment Corp. v. Hirsch, 331 U.S. 752, 772 773, 67 S.Ct. 1493, 1503, 91 L.Ed. 1796. Accordingly, the application for a stay is denied.
Judgment vacated and cause remanded with directions.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE is of the opinion that further consideration of the question of jurisdiction should be postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits and would grant the application for a stay.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the decision of this case.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, with whom Mr. Justice BLACK concurs, dissenting.

## 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