OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# 35. The Story of the Compassionate Father

35-01
One day, Jesus was teaching many people who had gathered to hear him. These people were tax collectors and also other people who did not try to obey the Law of Moses.
35-02
Some religious leaders saw Jesus talking to these people as friends. So they began to tell each other that he was doing wrong. Jesus heard them talk, so he told them this story.
35-03
“There was a man who had two sons. The younger son told his father, ‘Father, I want my inheritance now!’ So the father divided his property between his two sons.”
35-04
“Soon the younger son gathered all that he had and went far away and wasted his money in sinful living.”
35-05
“After that, a severe famine occurred in the land where the younger son was, and he had no money to buy food. So he took the only job he could find, feeding pigs. He was so miserable and hungry that he wanted to eat the pigs’ food.”
35-06
“Finally, the younger son said to himself, ‘What am I doing? All my father’s servants have plenty to eat, and yet here I am starving. I will go back to my father and ask to be one of his servants.’”
35-07
“So the younger son started back towards his father’s home. When he was still far away, his father saw him and felt compassion for him. He ran to his son and hugged him and kissed him.”
35-08
“The son said, ‘Father, I have sinned against God and against you. I am not worthy to be your son.’”
35-09
“But his father told one of his servants, ‘Go quickly and bring the best clothes and put them on my son! Put a ring on his finger and put sandals on his feet. Then kill the best calf so we can have a feast and celebrate, because my son was dead, but now he is alive! He was lost, but now we have found him!’”
35-10
“So the people began to celebrate. Before long, the older son came home from working in the field. He heard the music and dancing and wondered what was happening.”
35-11
“When the older son found out that they were celebrating because his brother had come home, he was very angry and would not go into the house. His father came out and begged him to come and celebrate with them, but he refused.”
35-12
“The older son said to his father, ‘All these years I have worked faithfully for you! I never disobeyed you, and still you did not give me even one small goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But this son of yours has wasted your money doing sinful things. When he came home, you killed the best calf to celebrate!’”
35-13
“The father answered, ‘My son, you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But it is right for us to celebrate because your brother was dead, but now is alive. He was lost, but now we have found him!’”
A Bible story from: Luke 15
# Out of Time's Abyss
## Contents

* Chapter I
* Chapter II
* Chapter III
* Chapter IV
* Chapter V
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1950, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 73 years or less. 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
# Out of Sight

They held a polo meeting at a little country town, And all the local sportsmen came to win themselves renown. There came two strangers with a horse, and I am much afraid They both belonged to what is called "the take-you-down brigade".
They said their horse could jump like fun, and asked an amateur To ride him in the steeplechase, and told him they were sure The last time round he'd sail away with such a swallow's flight The rest would never see him go -- he's finish out of sight.
So out he went; and, when folk saw the amateur was up, Some local genius called the race "the Dude-in-Danger Cup". The horse was known as "Who's Afraid", by "Panic" from "The Fright" -- But still his owners told the jock he's finish out of sight.
And so he did; for Who's Afraid, without the least pretence, Disposed of him by rushing through the very second fence; And when they ran the last time round the prophecy was right -- For he was in the ambulance, and safely "out of sight".
This work is in the public domain in Australia because it was created in Australia and the term of copyright has expired. According to Australian Copyright Council - Duration of Copyright, the following works are public domain:
* published non-government works whose author died before January 1, 1955,
* anonymous or pseudonymous works and photographs published before January 1, 1955, and
* government works published more than 50 years ago (before January 1, 1974).
This work is also in the public domain in the United States because it was first published outside the United States (and not published in the U.S. within 30 days), and it was first published before 1989 without complying with U.S. copyright formalities (renewal and/or copyright notice) and it was in the public domain in Australia on the URAA date (January 1, 1996). This is the combined effect of Australia having joined the Berne Convention in 1928, and of 17 USC 104A with its critical date of January 1, 1996.
Because the Australian copyright term in 1996 was 50 years, the critical date for copyright in the United States under the URAA is January 1, 1946.
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
# Peoples Bank & Trust Company of Mountain Home v. Globe International Publishing, Inc.

Plaintiff Nellie Mitchell, 96, sued defendant Globe International Publishing, Inc., after the defendant's tabloid Sun published her photo above the headline, "World's oldest newspaper carrier, 101, quits because she's pregnant!" After the district court denied the publisher's motion for summary judgment, Mitchell v. Globe Int'l Pub'g, Inc., 773 F. Supp. 1235 (W.D. Ark. 1991), the case was tried to a jury.
The jury awarded compensatory damages of $650,000 and punitive damages of $850,000. The publisher then moved for a remittitur, which was denied. Peoples Bank & Trust Company of Mountain Home v. Globe Int'l, Inc., 786 F. Supp. 791 (W.D. Ark. 1992).
In Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Mountain Home v. Globe International Publishing, Inc., 978 F.2d 1065 (8th Cir. 1992), the court of appeals held that the district court should have granted remittitur. The jury's verdict was otherwise upheld. For the district court decision on remand, see Mitchell v. Globe Int'l Pub'g, Inc., 817 F. Supp. 72 (W.D. Ark. 1993).
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
978 F.2d 1065
PEOPLES BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MOUNTAIN HOME, CONSERVATOR OF THE ESTATE OF NELLIE MITCHELL, AN AGED PERSON, v. GLOBE INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS "SUN"
Appeal from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas
No. 92-1522. --- Submitted: Sept. 17, 1992. Delivered: Feb. 21, 1992. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied: Dec. 11, 1992
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
Philip S. Anderson, Little Rock, Ark., argued (John E. Tull, III, Paul M. Levy, Michael B. Kahane and Phillip J. Zisook, on the brief), for appellant.
Phillip H. McMath and Sandy S. McMath, Little Rock, Ark., argued (Roy Danuser, Mountain Home, Ark., on the brief), for appellee.}}
[Before BOWMAN, Circuit Judge, and HEANEY and ROSS, Senior Circuit Judges. Opinion of the court by Judge HEANEY.]
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
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
# Peoples v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
378 U.S. 586
Peoples v. United States
Benny Peoples, pro se.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg and Julia P. Cooper, for the United States.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth 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
# Peoples v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
378 U.S. 586
Peoples 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 to the Court of Appeals for consideration in light of Fallen v. United States, 378 U.S. 139, 84 S.Ct. 1689.
Mr. Justice CLARK, Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice STEWART dissent.

## 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
# People v. Weaver

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
100 U.S. 539
People v. Weaver
ERROR to the Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. George F. Edmunds and Mr. Matthew Hale for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. R. W. Peckham, contra.
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
# Peoples Bank & Trust Company of Mountain Home v. Globe International, Inc.

Plaintiff Nellie Mitchell, 96, sued defendant Globe International Publishing, Inc., after the defendant's tabloid Sun published her photo above the headline, "World's oldest newspaper carrier, 101, quits because she's pregnant!" After the district court denied the publisher's motion for summary judgment, Mitchell v. Globe Int'l Pub'g, Inc., 773 F. Supp. 1235 (W.D. Ark. 1991), the case was tried to a jury.
The jury awarded compensatory damages of $650,000 and punitive damages of $850,000. The publisher then moved for a remittitur. In Peoples Bank & Trust Company of Mountain Home v. Globe International, Inc., 786 F. Supp. 791 (W.D. Ark. 1992), the district court denied the defendant's motion for remittitur. This denial was ultimately reversed on appeal. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Mountain Home v. Globe Int'l Pub'g, Inc., 978 F.2d 1065 (8th Cir. 1992), on remand sub nom. Mitchell v. Globe Int'l Pub'g, Inc., 817 F. Supp. 72 (W.D. Ark. 1993).
U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Harrison Division
786 F. Supp. 791
PEOPLES BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF MOUNTAIN HOME, Conservator of the Estate of Nellie Mitchell, an Aged Person, Plaintiff, v. GLOBE INTERNATIONAL, INC. d/b/a "Sun", Defendant.
No. Civ. 91-3001. --- Delivered: Feb. 21, 1992.
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
[p792] Phillip H. McMath, McMath Law Firm, Little Rock, Ark., Roy E. Danuser, Mountain Home, Ark., for plaintiff.
Phillip S. Anderson, John E. Tull, Williams & Anderson, Little Rock, Ark., for defendant.
[Memorandum opinion by Chief Judge H. FRANKLIN WATERS.]
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
# Order Constituting the Army of Virginia

Ordered: 1st. The forces under Major-Generals Fremont, Banks, and McDowell, including the troops now under Brigadier-General Sturgis at Washington, shall be consolidated and form one army, to be called the Army of Virginia.
2d. The command of the Army of Virginia is specially assigned to Major-General John Pope, as commanding general. The troops of the Mountain Department, heretofore under command of General Fremont, shall constitute the First Army Corps, under the command of General Fremont; the troops of the Shenandoah Department, now under General Banks, shall constitute the Second Army Corps, and be commanded by him; the troops under the command of General McDowell, except those within the fortifications and city of Washington, shall form the Third Army Corps, and be under his command.
3d. The Army of Virginia shall operate in such manner as, while protecting western Virginia and the national capital from danger or insult, it shall in the speediest manner attack and overcome the rebel forces under Jackson and Ewell, threaten the enemy in the direction of Charlottesville, and render the most effective aid to relieve General McClellan and capture Richmond.
4th. When the Army of the Potomac and the Army of Virginia shall be in position to communicate and directly co-operate at or before Richmond, the chief command, while so operating together, shall be governed, as in like cases, by the Rules and Articles of War.
A. LINCOLN.
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
# Petrowski v. Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 495
Petrowski v. Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company
Argued: March 7, 1956. --- Decided: March 26, 1956
Mr. Richard P. Tinkham, Jr., Wausaw, Wis., for petitioner.
Mr. Victor M. Harding, Milwaukee, Wis., for respondent.
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
# Petrowski v. Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 495
Petrowski v. Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company
Argued: March 7, 1956. --- Decided: March 26, 1956
Respondent, Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company, filed a motion to quash the return of service of summons on the grounds that the District Court acquired no personal jurisdiction over it and that the power of attorney which it had filed with the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles of the State of Wisconsin did not authorize him to accept service of process for it in this case. After this motion was denied, respondent filed its answer to the complaint in which it again pressed its claim that the District Court lacked personal jurisdiction over it. Subsequently, however, respondent filed (1) a motion to amend its answer and to interplead; (2) a counterclaim; (3) a stipulation and order adding a party-plaintiff and amending the complaint and answer; and (4) a stipulation that judgment be entered against the alleged insured in favor of the additional party-plaintiff. The latter stipulation included the following provision, together with others consistent with it and confirmatory of its purpose:
'1. That each of the parties to this stipulation voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the above entitled Court without service of process herein, the same as if personal service had been obtained by each against the other.' 226 F.2d 135.
Following a trial on the merits, judgment was entered against respondent, but the Court of Appeals, with one judge dissenting, reversed on the ground that respondent's motion to quash should have been granted.
Upon examination of the record and the law, we conclude that the District Court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and that respondent, by its stipulation, waived any right to assert a lack of personal jurisdiction over it. We, therefore, reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case to it for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.

## 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
# Petroleum Exploration v. Burnet/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
288 U.S. 467
Petroleum Exploration v. Burnet
Argued: Feb. 8, 1933. --- Decided: March 13, 1933
Petitioner, a Maine corporation, in making its tax returns of income derived from the operation of oil wells in the years 1925, 1926, and 1927, claimed a deduction from gross income of a depreciation allowance on account of the capitalized costs of drilling the oil wells. The Commissioner refused to allow the deductions and assessed a corresponding deficiency against the taxpayer. On appeal the Board of Tax Appeals held that the deductions should have been allowed. 23 B.T.A. 890. On petition for review the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the order of the Board. 61 F.(2d) 273. The court held that the deductions claimed were included in the depletion allowance fixed by section 234(a)(8) of the Revenue Act of 1926, 26 USCA § 986(a)(8), at 27 1/2 per cent. of petitioner's gross income for the years in question, and could not be allowed as depreciation of improvements. This Court granted certiorari (287 U.S. 592, 53 S.Ct. 121, 77 L.Ed. --) to resolve a conflict of the decision below with that of the Court of Claims in Dakota-Montana Oil Co. v. United States, 59 F.(2d) 853. For reasons stated in United States v. Dakota-Montana Oil Co., 288 U.S. 459, 53 S.Ct. 435, 77 L.Ed. 893, decided this day, the Commissioner rightly refused to allow the deductions claimed and the judgment below is
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
# Petroleum Exploration v. Public Service Commission of Kentucky

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
304 U.S. 209
Petroleum Exploration v. Public Service Commission of Kentucky
Argued: April 4, 5, 1938. --- Decided: May 2, 1938
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
Messrs. W. J. Brennan, and E. C. O'Rear, of Frankfort, Ky., for appellant.
Mr. J. W. Jones, of Frankfort, Ky., for appellees.
Mr. Justice REED 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
# Petroleum Exploration v. Burnet

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
288 U.S. 467
Petroleum Exploration v. Burnet
Argued: Feb. 8, 1933. --- Decided: March 13, 1933
Mr. Robert Ash, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
The Attorney General and Mr. G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Mr. Justice STONE 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
# Poems (Douglas)

POEMS
by
SARAH PARKER DOUGLAS,
"THE IRISH GIRL."
Third Edition.
AYR:
PRINTED FOR TIE AUTHORESS AT THE AYRSHIRE EXPRESS OFFICE.
1861.
TO
MRS. BAIRD, OF CAMBUSDOON,
AS A SLIGHT RECOGNITION OF KINDNESSES RECEIVED,
THIS VOLUME IS GRATEFULLY INSCRIBED
BY
The Authoress.
NOTE TO THIRD EDITION.
Five years have now elapsed since the second "edition of the "Poems" appeared, and for a considerable time the entire issue has been out of print. To meet the demands of a circle of admirers which, I am proud to say, has been gradually widening, I have committed the present volume to the press, weeded of such of my earlier effusions as were either defective in construction or too ephemeral in interest to merit republication. This is therefore the completest collection of my verses yet given to the world; and should it win as much popular favour as that with which its predecessors were honoured, I shall have good reason to congratulate myself upon my third appeal to my patrons—the warm-hearted people of Ayrshire,—whose uniform kindness to "the Irish Girl" for many years I highly appreciate, and shall ever most gratefully cherish.
Ayr, November, 1861,
CONTENTS.
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
# Poems (Mitford)/Sybille

SYBILLE.
A NORTHUMBRIAN TALE.
ARGUMENT.
The following Poem was written at the request of a near relation, who wished me to compose a Tale adapted to the picturesque and enchanting scenery of the ancient domains of our family, now in the possession of Bertram Mitford, Esq.
The Lord de Bertram, (one of the followers of William the Conqueror) married Sybille, the heiress of Sir Johannes de Mitford, and died, I believe, in the Holy Land. This is the only historical foundation for the story; but tradition is fertile in incident, and has assigned to the beautiful ruin of Mary's Chapel, a tale nearly similar to the one I have attempted to ​relate. It has too, within a very few years, been the scene of a most extraordinary occurrence. An unfortunate and guilty female, an inhabitant of Morpeth, resolved, when in the last stage of a consumption, to close her eyes within the sacred precincts of the Lady's chapel. She retired accordingly; and though every effort, that humanity could dictate, was made to remove her to a more comfortable habitation, she resisted, with wild and delirious strength, all attempts to tear her from the situation she had chosen. After lingering a few weeks she died, and was buried on the spot. I have alluded to this circumstance in the sixth stanza of the introductory verses.
# Poems (Mitford)/The Pen and the Sword

THE PEN AND THE SWORD.
ARGUMENT.
The following fragment is chiefly taken from a French translation of the 40th chapter of the Tahkemoni, a Hebrew work, supposed to have been written about the 13th century, by the Rabbi Jehuda Charizi, and in which that author attempts to imitate Hariri, one of the most celebrated Arabic poets of his time. I have so materially altered the structure of the poem, and changed, or totally omitted so many passages, that I can scarcely call these verses an imitation of the beautiful original, from which most of the images are derived. Yet even my imperfect translation may convey some idea of the fire and boldness of the Hebrew poet.