OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Anton Joseph Binterim

From volume 2 of the work.
Born at Düsseldorf, 19 September, 1779; died at Bilk, 17 May, 1855, a theologian of repute and for fifty years parish-priest of Bilk. He attended the Jesuit school in his native town, and then entered the Franciscan Order at Düsseldorf, 8 May, 1796. After his studies at Düren at Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle), he was ordained priest at Cologne, 19 September, 1802. On the suppression (1803) of the Franciscan monastery to which he was attached, he was forced to retire from the religious life; after the usual examinations, he was appointed pastor of Bilk, 21 June, 1805, and administered the parish until his death. Father Binterim was the author of numerous theological treatises in defence of the Church against the attacks of the rationalists of the day, drawing his material from ancient ecclesiastical and literary sources. His many successes in controversy gained him numerous enemies and particularly the hatred of the partisans of Hermes who accused him of unlawful intrigue with Rome, evil transactions with the Jesuits, and treasonable practices against the Government. At one period, he suffered imprisonment for six months in the citadel of Wesel. Father Binterim wrote indefatigably against the existing evil of mixed marriages and the Prussian legislation of 17 August, 1825, on such marriages, depriving the mother of all rights in the education of her child; he advised the formation of societies to protest against such abuses, and urged on pastors the duty of warning the young of the evils following upon marriages with Protestants. Resisting all offers of preferment, he remained in his parish until his death. He left his large library to the people of his parish.
Binterim's writings are chiefly remarkable for their depth of research into the sources of ecclesiastical history and literature. In particular his principal work, "Die vorzüglichsten Denkwürdigkeiten der christkatholischen Kirche mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Disciplin derselben in Deutchland, frei bearbeitet nach der Schrift des Neapolitaners Pelliccia (de christianâ ecclesiæ primæ mediæ et novissimæ ætatis politiâ)" (7 vols., 17 parts, Mainz, 1825-41), is illustrative of many points of Christian Archæology. In addition to this mention may be made of: "Pragmatische Geschichte der deutschen Concilien" (7 vols., Mainz, 1835-49); and "Die alte und neue Erzdiöcese Köln" (Mainz, 1828-30), a treatise on the geography, statistics, and history of the Archdiocese of Cologne. He also wrote a large number of smaller works on theological, historical, controversial, and apologetic subjects, such as matrimonial questions; the use of Latin in the church ritual; the discussion as to whether St. Peter was ever in Rome, or was Bishop of Rome; the Monita Secreta of the Jesuits (Düsseldorf, 1853), an old myth revamped in Northern Germany; the sale of Hosts in Germany and France (2d ed., Düsseldorf, 1852).
KESSEL, in Kirchenlez., II, 848.
William Devlin.
# Brown v. United States (263 U.S. 78)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
263 U.S. 78
Brown v. United States (263 U.S. 78)
Argued: Oct. 19, 1923. --- Decided: Nov 12, 1923
Mr. J. H. Peterson, of Pocatello, Idaho, for Brown and another.
Mr. W. W. Dyar, of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
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
# Brown v. United States (356 U.S. 148)

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

## Dissenting Opinions

    Black
    Brennan
United States Supreme Court
356 U.S. 148
Brown v. United States (356 U.S. 148)
Argued: Oct. 22, 1957. --- Decided: March 31, 1958
See 356 U.S. 948, 78 S.Ct. 776.
Mr. George W. Crockett, Jr., Detroit, Mich., for petitioner.
Mr. Ralph S. Spritzer, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Brown v. United States (276 U.S. 134)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
276 U.S. 134
Brown v. United States (276 U.S. 134)
Argued: Jan. 4, 1928. --- Decided: Feb 20, 1928
Mr. Robert N. Golding, of Chicago, Ill., for Brown.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 135-136 intentionally omitted]
The Attorney General, for the United States.
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
# Brown v. United States (256 U.S. 335)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
256 U.S. 335
Brown v. United States (256 U.S. 335)
Argued: Nov. 19, 1920. --- Decided: May 16, 1921
Messrs. James R. Dougherty, of Beeville, Tex., E. C. Brandenburg, of Washington, D. C., and W. E. Pope, of Corpus Christi, Tex., for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from page 336-337 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Stewart, for the United States.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 337-341 intentionally omitted]
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
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Bl. Jean-Gabriel Perboyre

From volume 8 of the work.
Missionary and martyr, born at Puech, Diocese of Cahors, France, 6 January, 1802; martyred at Ou-Tchang-Fou, China, 11 September, 1840.
Jean-Gabriel was one of eight children born to Pierre Perboyre and Marie Rigal. By reason of his piety, he was the model of his companions during his childhood. While acting as companion to his younger brother, in the preparatory seminary of Moutauban, he felt the Divine call to the priesthood, and after obtaining the consent of his father to take the step, he entered the noviciate of the Congregation of the Mission, in the seminary of Montauban, December, 1818. On the feast of the Holy Innocents, 1820, he made the four vows of the Vincentians. He was raised to the priesthood, 23 September, 1825, in the chapel of the Sisters of Charity, by Bishop Dubourg, of New Orleans, and on the following day he said his first Mass. Shortly after, he was sent to the seminary of Saint-Flour to teach dogmatic theology, and two years later, he was appointed superior of the preparatory seminary of Saint-Flour. His great sanctity and marvellous success induced his superiors, in 1832, to appoint him subdirector of the novitiate in Paris. He continued in this office until 1835, when he had sought and begged and prayed for, permission to go to China, there to preach, to suffer, and to die. He left Havre on 21 March, and on 29 August, 1835, arrived at Macao, where he spent some time studying the Chinese language. On 21 December, 1835, he began his journey to Ho-Nan, the mission assigned him. In January, 1838, he was transferred to the mission of Hou-Pé, in which, as in that of Ho-Nan, he laboured zealously and with great success. In September, 1839, the persecutions against Christians broke out in Hou-Pé, and Jean-Gabriel was one of the first victims. The events leading to his death bear a striking resemblance to the Passion and Death of Christ. A neophyte, like another Judas, betrayed Jean-Gabriel for thirty ounces of silver. He was stripped of his garments and clothed with rags, bound, and dragged from tribunal to tribunal. At each trial, he was treated inhumanly, tortured both in body and in soul. Finally, he was taken to Ou-Tchang-Fou, and after unparalleled tortures, was condemned to death. The sentence was ratified by an imperial edict, and on 11 September, 1840, Jean-Gabriel was led to death with seven criminals. The holy priest was strangled to death on a cross.
[Jean-Gabriel was declared Venerable by Gregory XVI in July, 1843, beatified by Leo XIII on 9 November, 1889, and canonized by John Paul II on 2 June, 1996. His feast is celebrated on 11 September. — Ed.]
Joseph S. Glass.
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Bl. Joanna of Portugal

From volume 8 of the work.
Born at Lisbon, 16 February, 1452; died at Aveiro, 12 may, 1490; the daughter of Alfonso V, King of Portugal, and his wife Elizabeth. She was chiefly remarkable for the courage and persistency with which she opposed all attempts on the part of her father and brother to make her marry. She had resolved from childhood to be the spouse of Christ and, when possible to enter the religious state; but being the next heir to the throne in default of male issue, her wish was particularly obnoxious to her family and to the country. Joanna was very beautiful and her hand was sought by several princes. Once, in her father's absence, she had to act as regent of the kingdom, and in that office is said to have shown great capacity.
After many struggles, she entered the Dominican house called the Convent of Jesus, at Aveiro, where the rule was severe and very strictly kept. For a time she was compelled, for political reasons, to leave it and go back to Court. Finally, however, she was professed; and her life in the convent was so penitential, holy, and heroically humble, that she died in the odour of sanctity, and miracles followed her decease.
F. M. CAPES
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Bl. Ignacio de Azevedo

From volume 7 of the work.
Born at Oporto, Portugal, 1528; died near Palma, one of the Canary Islands, 15 July, 1570. He entered the Society of Jesus at Coibra, 28 December, 1548, and became successively rector of the Jesuit college at Lisbon, provincial of Portugal, and rector at Broja. St. Francis Borgia, soon after his election as superior general of the Society, appointed Ignacio visitor of the missions of Brazil. After three years of arduous labour in that country he returned to Rome, but asked to be sent back as missionary to Brazil. With thirty-nine companions he started on his voyage, but was seized and martyred by Huguenot pirates near the island of Palma. The forty martyrs were beatified on 11 May, 1854.
LEO A. KELLY
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Bl. Ippolito Galantini

From volume 8 of the work.
Founder of the Congregation of Christian Doctrine of Florence; b. at Florence of obscure parentage, 12 October. 1565; d. 20 March, 1619. While still a child a wonderful cure turned his thoughts towards the service of God, and he devoted himself to teaching the truths of the Christian religion in the Jesuit church of Florence. He was only twelve years old when he attracted the attention of the Archbishop Alexander de' Medici (afterwards Leo XI), who gave him the church of Sta Lucia al Prato in which to carry on his work. He divided his time between his trade of silk-weaving and the religious instruction of poor children and adults, and at sixteen felt impelled to found a society for this purpose. The opposition aroused by his solicitude for the poor he overcame by the exercise of wonderful patience. Generous benefactors made it possible for him to erect an oratory, which Clement VIII dedicated in honour of St. Francis, in 1602, and in which the work begun at Sta Lucia was continued. The foundation was called the Congregation of Christian Doctrine under the invocation of Sts. Francis and Lucy. It was divided into fifteen classes, according to the age and religious knowledge of the pupils, each class being governed by special rules and assisting in the instruction of the class below. The members of the first class were admitted to the congregation after a good confession.
Ippolito was indefatigable in his work, collecting alms from the wealthy Florentines, which he distributed among the poor, founding and reorganizing branches of his congregation, which spread to Volterra, Lucca, Pistoia, Modena, etc. He introduced the practice of nocturnal adoration to draw the people from the theatre and sinful amusements. In Florence, the members of his congregation, by reason of their modesty, were called Van Chetoni. Ippolito was the object of violent persecution, envy and malice accusing him of sharing the errors of Luther, of introducing new rules and reforms. One of his spiritual sons accused him before the pope and Grand Duke Cosimo of excessive severity, but the charge was not sustained, and Ippolito's congregation was declared to be for God's glory and the public good. Shortly before the holy man's death the grand duke founded a perpetual chaplaincy for the order. Ippolito made a pilgrimage to Loreto to place his foundation under the protection of the Blessed Virgin. The statutes of the congregation were approved by the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, and confirmed by Leo XII in a decree of 17 September, 1824. The founder was beatified by the same pontiff, 13 May, 1825. His ascetical works, written for the government and direction of his congregation, had been approved by Benedict XIV in 1747, and were published at Rome in 1831, together with a brief life of the saint by Canon Antonio Santelli.
BRISCHAR in Kirchenlex., s.v. Doctrinarier.
Blanche M. Kelly.
# Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Bl. James Thompson

From volume 8 of the work.
(Also known as James Hudson).
Martyr, born in or near York; having nearly all his life in that city, died there, 28 November, 1582.
He arrived at Dr. Allen's college at Reims 19 September, 1580, and in May of the next year, by virtue of a dispensation, was admitted at Soissons, with one Nicholas Fox, to all Sacred orders within twelve days, although at the time he was so ill that he could hardly stand. He was sent on the mission the following 10 August, and was arrested at York on 11 August, 1582. On being taken before the Council of the North he frankly confessed his priesthood, to the astonishment of his fellow citizens who knew that he had not been away more than a year. He was then loaded with double irons and was imprisoned, first in a private prison, till his money was exhausted, and then in the castle. On 25 November he was brought to the bar and condemned to the penalties of high treason. Three days later he suffered with great joy and tranquillity at the Knavesmire, protesting that he had never plotted against the queen, and that he died in and for Catholic Faith. While he was hanging, he first raised his hands to heaven, then beat his breast with his right hand, and finally made a great sign of cross. In spite of his sentence, he was neither disembowelled nor quartered, but was buried under the gallows.
John B. Wainewright.
# Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States

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

## Concurring Opinions

    Black
    Clark
United States Supreme Court
371 U.S. 156
Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States
Argued: Oct. 15 and 16, 1962. --- Decided: Dec 3, 1962
[Syllabus from pages 156-158 intentionally omitted]
David Axelrod, Chicago, Ill., for appellants in No. 27.
David D. Weinberg, Omaha, Neb., for appellants in No. 28.
Robert W. Ginnane, Washington, D.C., for appellees United States and Interstate Commerce Commission.
J. Max Harding, Lincoln, Neb., for appellee Nebraska Short Line Carriers, Inc.
Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn (121 U.S. 182)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
121 U.S. 182
Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn
Charles Dunn, a minor, by his guardian ad litem, sued the Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Company, to recover damages for personal injuries, in the district court for Ramsey county, state of Minnesota. The defendant (plaintiff in error in this court) seasonably filed its petition, affidavit, and bond for the removal of the action to the United States circuit court. The petition alleged that the defendant was a corporation organized under the laws of Iowa, and that plaintiff was, at the time of the commencement of the action, and still was, a citizen of the state of Minnesota. The plaintiff answered by affidavit, denying that he was a citizen of Minnesota, and alleging that he was, at the time his action accrued, and ever since that time had been, and still was, a citizen of the territory of Montana. The allegation of the petition being thus denied, the court refused 'to accept the security offered, and transfer the cause, until proof was made of the citizenship of the plaintiff. The defendant having offered no such proof, the court, against its objection and exception, proceeded to try the cause. On appeal to the supreme court of Minnesota, the judgment of the state district court was affirmed. See 27 N. W. Rep. 448. The defendant thereupon brought this writ.
C. D. O'Brien and Enoch Totten, for the motion.
No brief filed in opposition.
WAITE, C. 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
# Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn (121 U.S. 182)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
121 U.S. 182
Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn
This case is within the spirit, although not within the letter, of rule 32. The state court refused to let go its jurisdiction on a petition for removal, and the supreme court of the state has affirmed the ruling of the trial court to that effect. The only question for our consideration on the writ of error is whether this decision was right. The case is advanced, to be brought on for hearing in the way provided by rule 32; that is to say, under the rules prescribed by rule 6 in regard to motions to dismiss writs of error or appeals.

## 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
# Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn (122 U.S. 513)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
122 U.S. 513
Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn
Eppa Hunton and Jeff. Chandler, for plaintiff in error.
Enoch Totten and C. D. O'Brien, for defendant in error.
WAITE, C. 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
# Burlington Railway Company v. Simmons

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
123 U.S. 52
Burlington Railway Company v. Simmons
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal because the decree appealed from is not final, but interlocutory only The case is in substance this: A bill was filed by a junior mortgagee against the mortgagor and a prior mortgagee, to foreclose his mortgage, and to establish his right to redeem from the prior mortgage. The defense was that, under certain proceedings had for the foreclosure of the prior mortgage, his right to redeem had been cut off, and the mortgaged property sold free of his lien. The decree appealed from finds: (1) That the junior mortgage is still a valid and subsisting lien, and that the right of its trustee and beneficiaries to redeem had not been cut off by the proceedings for the foreclosure of the earlier mortgage. (2) That those claiming title under the sale upon the foreclosure of that mortgage, and certain other parties, are entitled to redeem the junior mortgage, 'by paying off the amount due' thereon, 'at such time as shall hereafter be fixed and determined by a further order or decree to be entered in this cause.' (3) In case none of the parties claiming under the prior mortgage redeem the junior mortgage, and the junior mortgagee redeems the prior one, then that the junior mortgage shall be foreclosed, and a sale of the property 'shall be had, under a decree to be entered by this court,' and the proceeds shall be applied-First, 'to paying off the amount paid to redeem from the first' mortgage; second, the amount found due on the second mortgage; and the balance, if any, paid to the mortgagor. (4) 'In the event that none of these parties shall redeem from the others, * * * then a sale' of the mortgaged property 'shall be had, pursuant to such decree as may hereafter be entered herein, and from the proceeds shall be paid off-First, the amount which it may be hereafter determined is due on the first' mortgage; 'second, * * * the amount which it may hereafter be determined is due on the second' mortgage; and, third, the balance, if any, to the mortgagor. It was then ordered that, 'for the purpose of determining the amount necessary to be paid by any of the parties in making redemption, as herein provided,' the cause be referred to a master, 'to find and report' the amount due on both the first and the second mortgages, in accordance with certain principles of accounting, which were specifically stated. The whole then concludes as follows: 'This decree being interlocutory, it is ordered that said cause stand continued for further order and decree.' From this decree the appeal was taken. The case is reported as Simmons v. Taylor, 23 Fed. Rep. 849.
H. B. Turner and B. F. Lee, for the motion T. F. Withrow, in opposition.
WAITE, C. 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
# Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn."
* 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.
* Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn (121 U.S. 182)
* Burlington Railway Company v. Dunn (122 U.S. 513)
# Caldwell v. Parker

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
252 U.S. 376
Caldwell v. Parker
Argued: March 4 and 5, 1920. --- Decided: April 19, 1920
Messrs. Henry E. Davis, of Washington, D. C., and Charles D. Kline, of Anniston, Ala., for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 377-379 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Neil P. Sterne, of Anniston, Ala., and J. Q. Smith, of Birmingham, Ala., for appellee.
Mr. Chief Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

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