OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Aptheker v. Secretary of State

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

## Concurring Opinions

    Black
    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
378 U.S. 500
Aptheker v. Secretary of State
Argued: April 21, 1964. --- Decided: June 22, 1964
John J. Abt, New York City, and Joseph Forer, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Abram Chayes, Washington, D.C., for appellee.
Mr. Justice GOLDBERG 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
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Tertullian: Part Fourth/On Exhortation to Chastity/Chapter 11

Chapter XI.—The More the Wives, the Greater the Distraction of the Spirit.
For (in that case) the shame is double; inasmuch as, in second marriage, two wives beset the same husband—one in spirit, one in flesh. For the first wife you cannot hate, for whom you retain an even more religious affection, as being already received into the Lord’s presence; for whose spirit you make request; for whom you render annual oblations. Will you stand, then, before the Lord with as many wives as you commemorate in prayer; and will you offer for two; and will you commend those two (to God) by the ministry of a priest ordained (to his sacred office) on the score of monogamy, or else consecrated (thereto) on the score even of virginity, surrounded by widows married but to one husband? And will your sacrifice ascend with unabashed front, and—among all the other (graces) of a good mind—will you request for yourself and for your wife chastity?
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Tertullian: Part Fourth/On Exhortation to Chastity/Chapter 5

Chapter V.—Unity of Marriage Taught by Its First Institution, and by the Apostle’s Application of that Primal Type to Christ and the Church.
For the laying down of the law of once marrying, the very origin of the human race is our authority; witnessing as it emphatically does what God constituted in the beginning for a type to be examined with care by posterity.  For when He had moulded man, and had foreseen that a peer was necessary for him, He borrowed from his ribs one, and fashioned for him one woman; whereas, of course, neither the Artificer nor the material would have been insufficient (for the creation of more). There were more ribs in Adam, and hands that knew no weariness in God; but not more wives in the eye of God. And accordingly the man of God, Adam, and the woman of God, Eve, discharging mutually (the duties of) one marriage, sanctioned for mankind a type by (the considerations of) the authoritative precedent of their origin and the primal will of God. Finally, “there shall be,” said He, “two in one flesh,” not three nor four. On any other hypothesis, there would no longer be “one flesh,” nor “two (joined) into one flesh.” These will be so, if the conjunction and the growing together in unity take place once for all. If, however, (it take place) a second time, or oftener, immediately (the flesh) ceases to be “one,” and there will not be “two (joined) into one flesh,” but plainly one rib (divided) into more. But when the apostle interprets, “The two shall be (joined) into one flesh” of the Church and Christ, according to the spiritual nuptials of the Church and Christ (for Christ is one, and one is His Church), we are bound to recognise a duplication and additional enforcement for us of the law of unity of marriage, not only in accordance with the foundation of our race, but in accordance with the sacrament of Christ. From one marriage do we derive our origin in each case; carnally in Adam, spiritually in Christ. The two births combine in laying down one prescriptive rule of monogamy. In regard of each of the two, is he degenerate who transgresses the limit of monogamy. Plurality of marriage began with an accursed man. Lamech was the first who, by marrying himself to two women, caused three to be (joined) “into one flesh.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ Dirigendam.
* ↑ Gen. ii. 21, 22.
* ↑ Or, “but no plurality of wives.”
* ↑ Apud Deum.
* ↑ Gen. ii. 24.
* ↑ Eph. v. 31.
* ↑ Gen. iv. 18, 19.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Tertullian: Part Fourth/On Exhortation to Chastity/Chapter 6

Chapter VI.—The Objection from the Polygamy of the Patriarchs Answered.
“But withal the blessed patriarchs,” you say, “made mingled alliances not only with more wives (than one), but with concubines likewise.” Shall that, then, make it lawful for us also to marry without limit? I grant that it will, if there still remain types—sacraments of something future—for your nuptials to figure; or if even now there is room for that command, “Grow and multiply;” that is, if no other command has yet supervened: “The time is already wound up; it remains that both they who have wives act as if they had not:” for, of course, by enjoining continence, and restraining concubitance, the seminary of our race, (this latter command) has abolished that “Grow and multiply.” As I think, moreover, each pronouncement and arrangement is (the act) of one and the same God; who did then indeed, in the beginning, send forth a sowing of the race by an indulgent laxity granted to the reins of connubial alliances, until the world should be replenished, until the material of the new discipline should attain to forwardness: now, however, at the extreme boundaries of the times, has checked (the command) which He had sent out, and recalled the indulgence which He had granted; not without a reasonable ground for the extension (of that indulgence) in the beginning, and the limitation of it in the end. Laxity is always allowed to the beginning (of things).  The reason why any one plants a wood and lets it grow, is that at his own time he may cut it. The wood was the old order, which is being pruned down by the new Gospel, in which withal “the axe has been laid at the roots.” So, too, “Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth,” has now grown old, ever since “Let none render evil for evil” grew young. I think, moreover, that even with a view to human institutions and decrees, things later prevail over things primitive.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Gen. i. 28.
* ↑ Repastinationis.  Comp. de Cult. Fem., l. ii. c. ix., repastinantes.
* ↑ Comp. Matt. iii. 10.
* ↑ Ex. xxi. 24; Lev. xxiv. 20; Deut. xix. 21; Matt. v. 38.
* ↑ See Rom. xii. 17; Matt. v. 39; 1 Thess. v. 16.
# Anna Karenina (Garnett)/Part Four
### Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
* Chapter 13
* Chapter 14
* Chapter 15
* Chapter 16
* Chapter 17
* Chapter 18
* Chapter 19
* Chapter 20
* Chapter 21
* Chapter 22
* Chapter 23
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume V/Novatian/A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity/Preface

A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity.
Preface.
Novatian’s treatise concerning the Trinity is divided into thirty-one chapters. He first of all, from chapter first to the eighth, considers those words of the Rule of Truth or Faith, which bid us believe on God the Father and Lord Almighty, the absolutely perfect Creator of all things.  Wherein among the other divine attributes he moreover ascribes to Him, partly from reason and partly from the Holy Scriptures, immensity, eternity, unity, goodness, immutability, immortality, spirituality; and adds that neither passions nor members can be attributed to God, and that these things are only asserted of God in Scripture anthropopathically.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Which we call the Creed.
* ↑ From the ninth chapter to the twenty-eighth he enters upon the diffuse explanation also of those words of our creed which commend to us faith in the Son of God, Jesus Christ, the Lord our God, the Christ promised in the Old Testament, and proves by the authority of the old and new covenant that He is very man and very God. In chapter eighteenth he refutes the error of the Sabellians, and by the authority of the sacred writings he establishes the distinction of the Father and of the Son, and replies to the objections of the above-named heresiarchs and others. In the twenty-ninth chapter he treats of faith in the Holy Spirit, saying that finally the authority of the high admonishes us, after the Father and the Son, to believe also on the Holy Spirit, whose operations he recounts and proves from the Scriptures. He then labours to associate the unity of God with the matters previously contended for, and at length sets forth the sum of the doctrines above explained. [Anthropopathy, see cap. v. p. 615.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume V/Novatian/On the Jewish Meats/Part 4

Chapter IV.  Argument.—To These Things Also Was Added Another Reason for Prohibiting Many Kinds of Meats to the Jews; To Wit, for the Restraint of the Intemperance of the People, and that They Might Serve the One God.
To these considerations, then, thus enumerated, were added also other reasons for which many kinds of meats were withheld from the Jews; and that this might be so, many things were called unclean, not as being condemned in themselves, but that the Jews might be restrained to the service of one God; because frugality and moderation in appetite were becoming to those who were chosen for this purpose. And such moderation is always found to be approximate to religion, nay, so to speak, rather related and akin to it; for luxury is inimical to holiness. For how shall religion be spared by it, when modesty is not spared? Luxury does not entertain the fear of God; since while pleasures hurry it on, it is carried forward to the sole daring of its desires: for the reins being loosened, it increases in the application of expense without measure, as if it were its food, exceeding its patrimony with its modesty; or as a torrent rushing from the mountain-peaks not only overleaps what is opposed to it, but carries with it those very hindrances for the destruction of other things. Therefore these remedies were sought for to restrain the intemperance of the people, that in proportion as luxury was diminished, virtuous manners might be increased. For what else did they deserve, than that they should be restrained from using all the pictures of divers meats, who dared to prefer the vilest meats of the Egyptians to the divine banquets of manna, preferring the juicy meats of their enemies and masters to their liberty? They were truly worthy that the slavery which they had coveted should pamper them, if the food that was more desirable and free was so ill pleasing to them.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume V/Novatian/On the Jewish Meats
## Contents

* Part 1
* Part 2
* Part 3
* Part 4
* Part 5
* Part 6
* Part 7
# At the Earth's Core/Prolog

AT THE EARTH’S CORE
PROLOG
IN THE ﬁrst place please bear in mind that I do not expect you to believe this story. Nor could you wonder had you witnessed a recent experience of mine when, in the armor of blissful and stupendous ignorance, I gaily narrated the gist of it to a Fellow of the Royal Geological Society on the occasion of my last trip to London.
You would surely have thought that I had been detected in no less a heinous crime than the purloining of the Crown Jewels from the Tower, or putting poison in the coffee of His Majesty the King.
The erudite gentleman in whom I conﬁded congealed before I was half through—it is all that saved him from exploding—and my dreams of an Honorary Fellowship, gold medals, and a niche in the Hall of ​Fame faded into the thin, cold air of his arctic atmosphere.
But I believe the story, and so would you, and so would the learned Fellow of the Royal Geological Society, had you and he heard it from the lips of the man who told it to me. Had you seen, as I did, the fire of truth in those gray eyes; had you felt the ring of sincerity in that quiet voice; had you realized the pathos of it all—you, too, would believe. You would not have needed the final ocular proof that I had—the weird rhamphorhynchus-like creature which he had brought back with him from the inner world.
I came upon him quite suddenly, and no less unexpectedly, upon the rim of the great Sahara Desert. He was standing before a goat-skin tent amidst a clump of date palms within a tiny oasis. Close by was an Arab douar of some eight or ten tents.
I had come down from the north to hunt lion. My party consisted of a dozen children of the desert—I was the only "white" man. As we approached the little clump of ​verdure I saw the man come from his tent and with hand-shaded eyes peer intently at us. At sight of me he advanced rapidly to meet us.
"A white man!" he cried. "May the good Lord be praised! I have been watching you for hours, hoping against hope that this time there would be a white man. Tell me the date. What year is it?"
And when I had told him he staggered as though he had been struck full in the face, so that he was compelled to grasp my stirrup leather for support.
"It cannot be!" he cried after a moment. "It cannot be! Tell me that you are mistaken, or that you are but joking."
"I am telling you the truth, my friend," I replied. "Why should I deceive a stranger, or attempt to, in so simple a matter as the date?"
For some time he stood in silence, with bowed head.
"Ten years!" he murmured, at last, "Ten years, and I thought that at the most it could be scarce more than one!"
​That night he told me his story—the story that I give you here as nearly in his own words as I can recall them.
# Ascent of Mount Carmel/Book 1/Chapter XV

CHAPTER XV
Wherein are expounded the remaining lines of the aforementioned stanza.
. . . oh, happy chance! — I went forth without being observed, My house being now at rest.
These lines take as a metaphor the miserable estate of captivity, a man’s deliverance from which, when none of the gaolers’ hinder his release, he considers a ‘happy chance.’ For the soul, on account of original sin, is truly as it were a captive in this mortal body, subject to the passions and desires of nature, from bondage and subjection to which it considers its having gone forth without being observed as a ‘happy chance’ — having gone forth, that is, without being impeded or engulfed by any of them.
2. For to this end the soul profited by going forth upon a ‘dark night’ — that is, in the privation of all pleasures and mortification of all desires, after the manner whereof we have spoken. And by its ‘house being now at rest’ is meant the sensual part, which is the house of all the desires, and is now at rest because they have all been overcome and lulled to sleep. For until the desires are lulled to sleep through the mortification of the sensual nature, and until at last the sensual nature itself is at rest from them, so that they make not war upon the spirit, the soul goes not forth to true liberty and to the fruition of union with its Beloved.
END OF THE FIRST BOOK

## Footnotes

* ↑ [Lit., ‘after.’]
* ↑ [Lit., ‘comprehended.’]
# Ascent of Mount Carmel/Book 2

BOOK THE SECOND
OF THE ‘ASCENT OF MT. CARMEL’
Wherein is treated the proximate means of ascending to union with God, which is faith; and wherein therefore is described the second part of this night, which, as we said, belongs to the spirit, and is contained in the second stanza, which is as follows.

## Contents

* Chapter I
* Chapter II
* Chapter III
* Chapter IV
* Chapter V
* Chapter VI
* Chapter VII
* Chapter VIII
* Chapter IX
* Chapter X
* Chapter XI
* Chapter XII
* Chapter XIII
* Chapter XIV
* Chapter XV
* Chapter XVI
* Chapter XVII
* Chapter XVIII
* Chapter XIX
* Chapter XX
* Chapter XXI
* Chapter XXII
* Chapter XXIII
* Chapter XXIV
* Chapter XXV
* Chapter XXVI
* Chapter XXVII
* Chapter XXVIII
* Chapter XXIX
* Chapter XXX
* Chapter XXXI
* Chapter XXXII
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arce, Manuel

Edition of 1900.
​ARCE, Manuel, Mexican priest, b. in Aguascalientes, 5 April, 1725; d. in Bologna, Italy, 28 June, 1785. He was a Jesuit, was distinguished for his learning, and was in succession rector of the colleges belonging to his order in Puebla, Zacatecas, and Guadalajara, and then took charge of the Jesuit missions among the Chichimecan Indians. When Charles III. of Spain expelled the Jesuits from his dominions, 25 June, 1767, Father Arce went to Bologna, Italy, and, with funds furnished mostly by other Jesuits belonging to rich Mexican families, he founded a benevolent institution for the old and needy, called the Hospital for Septuagenarians. There he personally attended to everything concerning the care of the inmates, even to cleaning their rooms and cooking their food, until his death.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Argüello, Luis Antonio

Edition of 1900.
​ARGÜELLO, Luis Antonio, governor of California, b. in San Francisco, Cal., in 1784; d. there in 1830. He was a member of a large and influential family, was governor of California from November, 1822, till November, 1825, and had been military officer under the Spanish government. He was the first governor under the Mexican rule, and the only one under the Mexican empire. He was also the first native of California called to serve in this capacity. While in office he was led into numerous dealings with the Russians, who had founded a colony in the northern part of the territory, and ​his policy toward them was highly liberal, even dangerously so. Before he became governor he had acquired some note by an exploring expedition into the unknown northern parts of California.—His sister, Concepcion (b. in San Francisco, Cal., in 1790; d. in Benecia in 1857), was noted for her romance with Rezánof, the first Russian explorer that showed definite designs upon any part of California. In 1806 Rezánof, in the interests of the Russian colony at Sitka, had resolved to open trade with the Californians, and to establish, if possible, a Russian colony in the territory. To further his ends, he became betrothed to the young Concepcion, hoping for personal aid from the influential Argüello family. He returned to Russia to get further government approval for his projects, and suddenly died while absent. Concepcion never married, and died, a nun, half a century later. Her social position gave her story prominence, and it has been used by Bret Harte in one of his best-known poems.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arents, Albert

Edition of 1900.
​ARENTS, Albert, metallurgist, b. in Clausthal, Germany, 14 March, 1840. He was educated at the mining schools in Clausthal and Berlin, studying also at the university of Berlin. After coming to the United States he was variously occupied as mining superintendent and also in charge of metallurgical mills and smelting works in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, and Utah. He has contributed valuable technical papers to the “Transactions of the American Institute of Mining Engineers,” having been elected a member of that society in 1882. Among his inventions are the siphon tap, now everywhere used on lead furnaces, the Eureka lead furnace, extensively employed throughout Colorado and Utah, and the well-known roasting furnace that bears his name.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Argall, Samuel

Edition of 1900.
​ARGALL, Sir Samuel, English deputy governor of Virginia, b. in Bristol, England, in 1572; d. in 1639. He was one of the early adventurers to Virginia, his first public exploit being the abduction of Pocahontas. By the present of a copper kettle, Argall induced the Indian in charge of the girl to entice her on board his vessel, hoping to receive a large ransom from her father; but this Powhatan refused to give. When Sir Thomas Dale was governor of Virginia, in 1613, Argall with his sanction commanded an expedition that destroyed the French settlements of St. Croix and Port Royal in Nova Scotia, and that of St. Saviour on Mt. Desert island. As deputy governor of Virginia from 1617 to 1619 he distinguished himself by many acts of tyranny and rapacity, so that he was recalled to England in 1619. He had amassed a fortune by trading in violation of law, but was shielded from punishment by his partner, the earl of Warwick. He was hated by the colonists for his enactment of severe sumptuary laws, and for his arbitrary conduct in general. Argall took part in the expedition against the Algerines in 1620, was knighted in 1623, and in 1625 joined an expedition against the Spanish. Purchas gives an account of his voyage from Jamestown in 1610, and has also preserved his letter, written in 1618, about his voyage to Virginia. After the death of Lord Delaware, Capt. Argall took charge of his estate, and was accused by Lady Delaware, in letters still in existence, of the grossest peculation. See Beverley's “History of the Present State of Virginia” (London, 1705); Abiel Holmes's “Annals of America” (Cambridge, 1829); Marshall's “Life of Washington”; Bancroft's “History of the United States” (New York, 1884); and “Virginia Vetusta” (Albany, 1885).
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arenales, José

Edition of 1900.
​ARENALES, José (ah-reh-nah'-les), Argentine geographer, b. in Buenos Ayres about 1790. He entered the army when quite young, was promoted to the rank of lieutenant-colonel of artillery about 1825, and in 1833 took charge of the topographical department of Buenos Ayres, and then travelled through almost every portion of South America. His highly interesting report of some of these travels was published under the title of “Noticias historicas y descriptivas sobre el gran pais del Chaco y Río Bermejo, con observaciones relativas a un plan de navegación y de colonización.”
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Argenson D', Pierre de Voyer

Edition of 1900.
​ARGENSON D', Pierre de Voyer, viscount, French governor of Canada, b. in 1626; d. in France about 1709. He came of a noble family of Touraine, and distinguished himself in several military engagements. He became governor of Canada on 27 Jan., 1657, and held the office until 1661. Under his administration Canada was not only occupied in repelling Indian incursions, but was torn by internal quarrels. He made some progress, however, in discovery in the region on Hudson bay and beyond Lake Superior.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arias, Francisco Gabino

Edition of 1900.
​ARIAS, Francisco Gabino, Argentine traveller, b. in Salto, Buenos Ayres; d. about 1808. In 1774, when a colonel in the army, he explored the desert known as “Gran Chaco.” On 3 June, 1780, he undertook an expedition having for its object the pacification of the Indians, which lasted until 31 Jan., 1781, and in 1782 he explored the river Bermejo, and proved that it flowed into the Paraguay and not into the Parana, as had formerly been supposed. He also gave valuable information about the navigability of the river and the character of the tribes living near it. His narrative of this expedition was published by his son, Dr. José Antonio Arias, by order of the government.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arbuthnot, Marriot

Edition of 1900.
​ARBUTHNOT, Marriot, British admiral, b. in 1711; d. in London, 31 Jan., 1794. He was a nephew of Dr. John Arbuthnot, the poet. He became post-captain in 1747, and in 1775 was made naval commissioner at Halifax, where he resided until 1778. He returned to England a rear admiral, and in 1779 was made vice admiral, and commander-in-chief on the American station. Soon after arriving at his destination he was blockaded in New York harbor by the French fleet under D'Estaing. In December, 1779, he conveyed the troops of Sir Henry Clinton to Charleston, and coöperated with him in laying siege to that city. The fleet appeared off the harbor on 9 March, 1780, and entered it on 9 April. After a short siege the city surrendered on 12 May, and was given up to pillage. For this success Arbuthnot received the thanks of parliament. On 16 March, 1781, Arbuthnot obtained some advantage over the French fleet in an engagement off the capes of Virginia. In 1793 he was made admiral of the blue. At the time of his service in America, Arbuthnot was old and inefficient, and Sir Henry Clinton complained bitterly to the home government of his incapacity.