OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Poweshiek

​ POWESHIEK COUNTY was created on the 17th of February, 1843, and named for a chief of the Sac Indians. The name signified “Roused Bear.” This county is in the fifth tier west of the Mississippi River, in the fourth north of the Missouri State line, is twenty-four miles square and contains five hundred eighty-two square miles.
Richard B. Ogden was the first white settler, taking a claim in Union township in the spring of 1843. Daniel and Joseph W. Satchell and Richard Cheeseman settled near him the same year. In 1844 Mahlon Woodward, Thomas Rigdon and others arrived. William English settled on Mill Creek in 1845 where he built the first sawmill in the county. Martin Snyder, in 1846, took a claim adjoining the land upon which Montezuma stands. Henry Zook settled in a grove on Bear Creek in 1845 and in 1846 John J. Talbott with his wife, seven sons and six daughters came from Ohio, locating in a grove which took the name of the family and which was near where Brooklyn stands. Talbott entered the first tract of land in the county in 1851 and became the first postmaster. The survey of public lands was completed in 1847. The first school was taught in the winter of 1847-8 by Stephen Moore in a log cabin in Union township. In 1847 the first mail route was established from Iowa City to Fort Des Moines, running through Poweshiek County, over which the mail was carried on horseback.
The county was organized in April, 1848, by the election of the following officers: Richard B. Ogden, Martin Snyder and Jacob Yeager, commissioners; Stephen Moore, clerk; Isaac G. Wilson, treasurer, and William English, sheriff. The county-seat was located at Montezuma where land was entered by the county and platted ​for the town. Lots were sold to raise money to build a court-house. William H. Barnes erected the first building at the new county-seat in 1848. Isaac G. Wilson built a log hotel the same year and in June, 1850, the first store was opened by Gideon Wilson. In 1856 John Casady established the first newspaper, the Montezuma Republican.
In March, 1854, J. B. Grinnell, Dr. Thomas Holyoke, Rev. Homer Hamlin and Henry M. Hamilton from the States of New York and Massachusetts laid out a town for the purpose of planting a colony and founding a college. The town was named Grinnell for the projector of the enterprise. During the year several buildings were erected; a store was opened by Anor Scott, a hotel was started by George Chambers and a small building erected for school and church purposes. Grinnell college was founded in 1855.
Brooklyn was platted by Robert Manatt in April, 1855, and the first house built the same year by Robert Shimer. Malcom was laid out in 1866 by Abel Kimball and Z. P. Wigton. The Rock Island Railroad was built through the towns of Grinnell and Brooklyn in 1863.
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Pottawattamie

​ POTTAWATTAMIE COUNTY lies on the east side of the Missouri River in the third tier north of the Missouri State line. It is one of the largest counties in the State containing an area of nine hundred sixty square miles. Next the Missouri River are level bottom lands ranging in width from three to ten miles; while back of these high bluffs rise abruptly to a height of from one to three hundred feet. Eastward the surface is broken into steep ravines and hills gradually becoming gently rolling prairie. As originally created in 1847 Pottawattamie County embraced the territory now divided into the counties of Fremont, Page, Taylor, Adams, Montgomery, Mills, Cass and a portion of Ringgold, Union, Adair, Guthrie, Decatur and Harrison. Its name is derived from the Pottawattamie tribe of Indians which formerly occupied that portion of Iowa. A sketch of the earliest settlements has been given in another place.
The county was organized in September, 1848, by the ​election of the following officers: A. H. Perkins, David D. Yearsley and George D. Coulter, commissioners; T. Burdick, clerk; Alexander McRea, sheriff.
The first town laid out was called Hart’s Bluff and stood on the present site of Council Bluffs, which was later called “Traders Point,” and was established by Mormons who were the early settlers. In 1846 Colonel Kane of Pennsylvania came to the settlement and organized the “Mormon Battalion” for service in the Mexican War. He was a warm friend of the Mormons who changed the name of their town to Kanesville in his honor. It retained this name until 1853 when the Legislature, acting upon a petition of the citizens of the village, changed it to Council Bluffs. Evan Greene was the first postmaster, appointed in 1848. The first court was held by Judge James Sloan in 1851. In 1849-50-51 vast numbers of gold seekers passed through Kanesville on their way to California and large stores were established to furnish supplies for the long overland journey. It became one of the chief outfitting frontier towns and was for several years infested with lawless desperadoes who were strong enough to defy the civil authorities. The citizens finally organized and resorted to lynch law before these outlaws could be driven out.
In 1848, Orson Hyde, one of the Mormon leaders, established a weekly newspaper at Kanesville, named the Frontier Guardian, which was conducted in the interest of the Mormon church. In 1850 L. W. Babbitt established a weekly Democratic paper the Bugle. In 1853 a United States Land Office was established at Council Bluffs.
Most of the Mormon settlers who founded Kanesville and were among the pioneers in that part of the State eventually joined their brethren in Utah and were among the founders of Salt Lake City.
The Methodists of Kanesville organized a society in 1850 of which Rev. William Simpson was the first pastor. ​In 1853 they built the first church in Council Bluffs. The Rock Island Railroad was completed to Council Bluffs in May, 1869.
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Ringgold

​ RINGGOLD COUNTY was created in 1851 and named for Major Samuel Ringgold who was mortally wounded in the Battle of Palo Alto in the Mexican War. It lies on the Missouri State line in the fourth tier east of the Missouri River and contains five hundred forty-two square miles. The Platte and several branches of the Grand River flow through the county in a southerly direction. Belts of native woods are found along the water courses but a large part of the county is rolling prairie through which the larger streams cut the drift to a depth of from one to two hundred feet.
The first settler was Charles H. Schooler who, in 1844, located with his family in the southeast corner of the county, they were for two years the only white people. In 1846 James M. Tithrow and family settled near them. In ​the spring of 1848 several families took claims in various portions of the county. In 1851 commissioners chosen by the Legislature located the county-seat four miles south of the center of the county where a town was laid out and named Urbana.
In October, 1852, while Ringgold was attached to Taylor County, Judge Taylor ordered an election district to be made of Ringgold to be called Schooler township and a voting place to be at the house of Lot Hobbs where the citizens might vote at the presidential election in November. In January, 1855, commissioners were again chosen to relocate the county-seat. The place selected was on a farm belonging to Edward A. Temple, who sold it to the county. Here a town was laid out and named Mount Ayr. Soon after an election was held at which the following officers were chosen: J. C. Hagans, judge; M. R. Brown, clerk; J. W. Cofer, recorder and treasurer, and Hiram Imus, sheriff. A log court-house was erected in the spring of 1856 where the first court was held by Judge J. S. Townsend in May, 1857. The first settlers in Mount Ayr were David Edwards, Oran, Give, Chester Stancliff, B. B. Dunning and A. G. Beal who located there in 1855. Dr. E. Keith was the first physician and Henry Crabb the first merchant.
In 1852 L. P. Allen came to Ringgold County from North Carolina, bringing with him two slaves, a boy fourteen and a girl sixteen years of age. Finding that he could not legally hold slaves in Iowa, he sold them to a man in St. Josephs, Missouri, for a thousand dollars.
The Mount Ayr Republican was the first newspaper in the county and was established in the spring of 1861 by P. O. James with George Burton as editor. The Burlington was the first railroad in the county.
# Hitchcock v. Galveston/Dissent Bradley

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Bradley
United States Supreme Court
96 U.S. 341
Hitchcock v. Galveston
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY, with whom concurred MR. JUSTICE MILLER and MR. JUSTICE FIELD, dissenting.
I dissent from the judgment of the court in this case, being of opinion that the provise requiring the assent of the property holders related to the entire work around each block, and not merely to the kind of pavement to be used; and that the contractors had no authority to do any work on any particular block, without such previous assent.

## 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
# Hitchman Coal Coke Company v. Mitchell

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
245 U.S. 229
Hitchman Coal Coke Company v. Mitchell
Argued: March 2 and 3, 1916. ---
Restored to Docket for Reargument March 13, 1916.
Reargued Dec. 15 and 18, 1916.
Decided Dec. 10, 1917.
[Syllabus from pages 229-232 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Hannis Taylor, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. George R. E. Gilchrist, of Wheeling, W. Va., for petitioner.
Mr. Charles E. Hogg, of Point Pleasant, W. Va., and Mr. Charles J. Hogg, of Charleston, W. Va., for respondents.
Mr. Justice PITNEY 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
# Hitchcock v. Buchanan

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 416
Hitchcock v. Buchanan
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois.
This was an action of assumpsit by Hitchcock as indorsee, against Buchanan and Waugh as drawers, of the following bill of exchange:--
'OFFICE OF BELLEVILLE NAIL MILL CO., BELLEVILLE, ILLS.,
'$5,477.13. Dec. 15th, 1875.
'Four months after date, pay to the order of John Stevens, Jr., cashier, fifty-four hundred and seventy-seven 13/100 dollars, value received, and charge same to account of Belleville Nail Mill Co.
'WM. C. BUCHANAN, Pres't.
'JAMES C. WAUGH, Sec'y.
'TO J. H. PIEPER, Treas., Belleville, Illinois.'
The declaration alleged that the defendants, on the 15th of December, 1875, 'at the office of Belleville Nail Mill Co., Belleville, Ills., made their certain bill of exchange' (describing it), and, after it had been accepted by the drawee, delivered it to the payee therein named, and he indorsed it to the plaintiff, and the bill at maturity was presented for payment, and payment refused, and the bill protested for non-payment, and the defendants, knowing that it would not be paid by the acceptor, had omitted to provide funds for its payment. A copy of the instrument above set forth, and of the acceptance and indorsement thereon, was filed with the declaration.
The defendants, after oyer craved and had, severally filed. general demurrers to the declaration, which were sustained by the Circuit Court, and judgment given for the defendants, on the ground that the instrument declared on was the bill of exchange of the Belleville Nail Mill Company, and not the bill of the defendants.
Mr. Thomas G. Allen for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. C. W. Thomas for the defendants in error.
MR. JUSTICE GRAY, after stating the case, 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
# Hitchcock v. Buchanan/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
105 U.S. 416
Hitchcock v. Buchanan
The bill of exchange declared on is manifestly the draft of the Belleville Nail Miss Company, and not of the individuals by whose hands it is subscribed. It purports to be made at the office of the company, and directs the drawee to charge the amount thereof to the account of the company, of which the signers describe themselves as president and secretary. An instrument bearing on its face all these signs of being the contract of the principal cannot be held to bind the agents personally. Sayre v. Nichols, 7 Cal. 535; Carpenter v. Farnsworth, 106 Mass. 561, and cases there cited.
The allegation in the declaration, that the defendants made 'their' bill of exchange, is inconsistent with the terms of the writing sued on and made part of the record, and is not admitted by the demurrer. Dillon v. Barnard, 21 Wall 430; Binz v. Tyler, 79 Ill. 248.
The provision of the statute of Illinois (ed. 1877, title Practice, sects. 34, 36) prohibiting defendants sued on written instruments from denying their signatures, except under plea verified by affidavit, has no application where the fact of signature is admitted by demurrer, and the only issue is one of law.
Judgment affirmed.

## Notes

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

HISTORY OF JOURNALISM IN THE UNITED STATES
HISTORY OF JOURNALISM
IN THE UNITED STATES
BY
GEORGE HENRY PAYNE
D. APPLETON AND COMPANY NEW YORKLONDON 1920
copyright, 1920, by D. APPLETON AND COMPANY
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
TO
THE MEMORY OF
THEODORE ROOSEVELT
WHO UNDERSTOOD THE NEWSPAPER— AND NEWSPAPERMEN
page
CONTENTS
APPENDICES
HISTORY OF JOURNALISM
IN THE UNITED STATES
# Horne v. George H. Hammond Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
155 U.S. 393
Horne v. George H. Hammond Company
Robert M. Morse, Jr., and Eugene P. Carver, for plaintiff in error.
George Putnam, for defendant in error.
Mr. Chief Justice FULLER.

## 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
# Horne v. George H. Hammond Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
155 U.S. 393
Horne v. George H. Hammond Company
The title of this cause describes plaintiff in error as 'of Chelsea, in said district,' and the decedent as 'late of Chelsea,' and the defendant as 'a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Michigan.' The writ and the original declaration do not appear in the record. The amended declaration commences thus: 'Plaintiff says that she is the widow of the late Granville P. Horne, of Chelsea, Suffolk county, commonwealth of Massachusetts, and that she was duly appointed by the probate court of Suffolk county administratrix of his estate.'
As the transcript of the record does not show that the circuit court had jurisdiction of the suit, which depended upon the citizenship of the parties, and counsel, upon having their attention called to the matter, have furnished nothing of record which would supply the defect, the judgment must be reversed, at the costs of plaintiff in error, and the cause be remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. Robertson v. Cease, 97 U.S. 646, 649; Anderson v. Watt, 138 U.S. 694, 702, 11 Sup. Ct. 449; Timmons v. Land Co., 139 U.S. 378, 11 Sup. Ct. 585; Denny v. Pironi, 141 U.S. 121, 11 Sup. Ct. 966.
Ordered accordingly.

## 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
# Horn v. Mitchell

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
243 U.S. 247
Horn v. Mitchell
Argued: January 11 and 12, 1917. --- Decided: March 6, 1917
Messrs. Joseph F. O'Connell, James E. O'Connell, all Daniel T. O'Connell for appellant.
Assistant Attorney General Warren for appellee.
Memorandum opinion by Mr. Justice Pitney, by direction 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
# Getting Married/Labor Exchanges and the White Slavery

Suppose, again, a woman presents herself at the Labor Exchange, and states her trade as that of a White Slave, meaning the unmentionable trade pursued by many thousands of women in all civilized cities. Will the Labor Exchange find employers for her? If not, what will it do with her? If it throws her back destitute and unhelped on the streets to starve, it might as well not exist as far as she is concerned; and the problem of unemployment remains unsolved at its most painful point. Yet if it finds honest employment for her and for all the unemployed wives and mothers, it must find new places in the world for women; and in so doing it must achieve for them economic independence of men. And when this is done, can we feel sure that any woman will consent to be a wife and mother (not to mention the less respectable alternative) unless her position is made as eligible as that of the women for whom the Labor Exchanges are finding independent work? Will not many women now engaged in domestic work under circumstances which make it repugnant to them, abandon it and seek employment under other circumstances? As unhappiness in marriage is almost the only discomfort sufficiently irksome to induce a woman to break up her home, and economic dependence the only compulsion sufficiently stringent to force her to endure such unhappiness, the solution of the problem of finding independent employment for women may cause a great number of childless unhappy marriages to break up spontaneously, whether the marriage laws are altered or not. And here we must extend the term childless marriages to cover households in which the children have grown up and gone their own way, leaving the parents alone together: a point at which many worthy couples discover for the first time that they have long since lost interest in one another, and have been united only by a common interest in their children. We may expect, then, that marriages which are maintained by economic pressure alone will dissolve when that pressure is removed; and as all the parties to them will certainly not accept a celibate life, the law must sanction the dissolution in order to prevent a recurrence of the scandal which has moved the Government to appoint the Commission now sitting to investigate the marriage question: the scandal, that is, of a great number matter of the evils of our marriage law, to take care of the pence and let the pounds take care of themselves. The crimes and diseases of marriage will force themselves on public attention by their own virulence. I mention them here only because they reveal certain habits of thought and feeling with regard to marriage of which we must rid ourselves if we are to act sensibly when we take the necessary reforms in hand.
# Getting Married/Domestic Change of Air

Our relief at the morality of the reassurance that man is not promiscuous in his fancies must not blind us to the fact that he is (to use the word coined by certain American writers to describe themselves) something of a Varietist. Even those who say there is only one man or woman in the world for them, find that it is not always the same man or woman. It happens that our law permits us to study this phenomenon among entirely law-abiding people. I know one lady who has been married five times. She is, as might be expected, a wise, attractive, and interesting woman. The question is, is she wise, attractive, and interesting because she has been married five times, or has she been married five times because she is wise, attractive, and interesting? Probably some of the truth lies both ways. I also know of a household consisting of three families, A having married first B, and then C, who afterwards married D. All three unions were fruitful; so that the children had a change both of fathers and mothers. Now I cannot honestly say that these and similar cases have convinced me that people are the worse for a change. The lady who has married and managed five husbands must be much more expert at it than most monogamic ladies; and as a companion and counsellor she probably leaves them nowhere. Mr Kipling's question
          "What can they know of England that only England know?"
disposes not only of the patriots who are so patriotic that they never leave their own country to look at another, but of the citizens who are so domestic that they have never married again and never loved anyone except their own husbands and wives. The domestic doctrinaires are also the dull people. The impersonal relation of sex may be judicially reserved for one person; but any such reservation of friendship, affection, admiration, sympathy and so forth is only possible to a wretchedly narrow and jealous nature; and neither history nor contemporary society shews us a single amiable and respectable character capable of it. This has always been recognized in cultivated society: that is why poor people accuse cultivated society of profligacy, poor people being often so ignorant and uncultivated that they have nothing to offer each other but the sex relationship, and cannot conceive why men and women should associate for any other purpose.
As to the children of the triple household, they were not only on excellent terms with one another, and never thought of any distinction between their full and their half brothers and sisters; but they had the superior sociability which distinguishes the people who live in communities from those who live in small families.
The inference is that changes of partners are not in themselves injurious or undesirable. People are not demoralized by them when they are effected according to law. Therefore we need not hesitate to alter the law merely because the alteration would make such changes easier.
# Getting Married/Home Manners are Bad Manners

On the other hand, we have all seen the bonds of marriage vilely abused by people who are never classed with shrews and wife- beaters: they are indeed sometimes held up as models of domesticity because they do not drink nor gamble nor neglect their children nor tolerate dirt and untidiness, and because they are not amiable enough to have what are called amiable weaknesses. These terrors conceive marriage as a dispensation from all the common civilities and delicacies which they have to observe among strangers, or, as they put it, "before company." And here the effects of indissoluble marriage-for-better-for-worse are very plainly and disagreeably seen. If such people took their domestic manners into general society, they would very soon find themselves without a friend or even an acquaintance in the world. There are women who, through total disuse, have lost the power of kindly human speech and can only scold and complain: there are men who grumble and nag from inveterate habit even when they are comfortable. But their unfortunate spouses and children cannot escape from them.