OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arce, Francisco

Edition of 1900.
​ARCE, Francisco, pioneer, b. in Lower California in 1822; d. in 1878. From the age of eleven he lived in Alta California. At the time of the American conquest in 1846 he was a military officer, and was secretary to Gen. José Castro, commander of the Californian forces. His name is known from his connection with a party of men who, in June, 1846, were bringing horses, generally supposed to belong to the Californian government, from Sonoma to the south. Capt. John C. Fremont, then in command of an American surveying party in the territory, incited American settlers to assail the ​party, seize upon the horses, and begin hostilities against the Californian government. From this Arce-affair of 6 June dates the beginning of the “Bear Flag” revolt and of the seizure of California by the Americans.
# Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography/Arey, Harriet Ellen

Edition of 1900.
​AREY, Harriet Ellen (Grannis), author, b. in Cavendish, Vt., 14 April, 1819. Her father, John Grannis, was a member of the Canadian parliament at the breaking out of the rebellion of 1837, and was obliged to flee to the United States, where he afterward held positions of trust. The daughter became a school-teacher in Cleveland, and a contributor to periodicals. She married Oliver Arey in 1848, and edited the “Youth's Casket” and the “Home Monthly.” Her principal work is “Household Songs and other Poems” (New York, 1854).
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 70 (73)

70 (73). Against an enemy's sacrifice.
[Atharvan.—pañcarcam. mantroktadevatyam uta çyenadevatākam. trāiṣṭubham: 2. atijagatīgarbhā jagatī; 3-5. anuṣṭubh (3. puraḥkakummati).]
The first two verses are found in Pāipp. xix. Used by Kāuç. (48. 27), with vi. 54, in a charm to spoil an enemy's sacred rites.
Translated: Ludwig, p. 374; Grill, 46, 187; Henry, 26, 91; Griffith, i. 360; Bloomfield, 90, 557.
1. Whatsoever he yonder offers with mind, and what with voice, with sacrifices, with oblation, with sacred formula (yájus), that let perdition, in concord with death, smite, his offering, before it comes true.
2. The sorcerers, perdition, also the demon—let them smite his truth with untruth; let the gods, sent by Indra, disturb (math) his sacrificial butter; let not that meet with success which he yonder offers.
TB. (as above) omits the meter-disturbing devā́s in c, and reads, in 'd, sámṛddhim (error for sám ardhi?), and, at the end, karóti. The comm. understands at the beginning yātudhā́nā (as fem. sing.). The verse (11 + 11: 13 + 11) is in no proper sense jagatī.
3. Let the two speedy over-kings, like two falcons flying together, smite the sacrificial butter of the foeman, whosoever shows malice against us.
The comm. understands in a, 'two messengers of death, thus styled'; the meaning is obscure. Almost all the authorities (save our R.?T., and this doubtless by accident) have at the end -aghāyánti; the comm., however, reads -yáti, as do, by emendation, both the edited texts.
4. Turned away [are] both thine arms; I fasten up thy mouth; with the fury of divine Agni—therewith have I smitten thine oblation.
The comm. understands bāhū in a also as object of nahyāmi, and understands the arms as fastened behind (pṛṣṭhabhāgasambaddhāu). ⌊TB. (ii. 4. 2$^2$) has our a, b (with ápa for the ápi of our b) as the c, d of a vs. which is immediately followed by our next vs.⌋
5. I fasten back thine arms; I fasten up thy mouth; with the fury of terrible Agni—therewith have I smitten thine oblation.
SPP. has at the beginning ápi, his authorities being equally divided between ápi and ápa. The majority of ours (only D. noted to the contrary) have ápa, which is decidedly to be preferred, as corresponding also to 4 a, and as less repetitious. ⌊TB. (ii. 4. 23) has our vs., with ápa again (see vs. 4) in b, devásya bráhmaṇā for ghorásya manyúnā in c, and sárvam for téna and kṛtám for havís in d.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 68 (70, 71)

68 (70, 71). Praise and prayer to Sarasvatī.
[1-2. Caṁtāti.—dvyṛcam. sārasvatam. 1. anuṣṭubh; 2. triṣṭubh.—3. Çaṁtāti.—sārasvatam. gāyatrī.]
None of the verses are found in Pāipp. Here again the Anukr., the comm., and some mss. differ in division from our first mss., and make our third verse a separate hymn.* In Kāuç. (81. 39) the first two verses (= hymn 70) come in with other Sarasvatī verses in the pitṛmedha; the third verse (= hymn 71) not with them, in spite of its kindred character, but in both the bṛhat and laghuçānti gaṇas (9. 2, 4). Vāit. introduces the hymn (doubtless the two verses) twice (8. 2, 13), once with hymn 40, once with hymn 9 and other verses, in praise of Sarasvatī. *⌊So also SPP's text. The decad-division cuts the hymn between vss. 2 and 3: cf. p. 389.⌋
Translated: Henry, 26, 90; Griffith, i. 359.
1. O Sarasvatī, in thy courses, in thy heavenly domains, O goddess, enjoy thou the offered oblation; grant us progeny, O goddess.
The second half-verse is the same with 20. 2 c, d, and nearly so with 46. i c, d.
​2. This [is] thine oblation, rich in ghee, O Sarasvatī; this the oblation of the Fathers that is to be consumed (?); these thy most wealful utterances; by them may we be rich in sweet.
The translation implies the emendation of āsyàm in c to āçyàm; the comm. makes it from the root as 'throw,' and = kṣepanīyam. Perhaps (Roth) ājyam is the true reading; Henry understands yát as pple: "going to the mouth of the Fathers." The first pāda is jagatī.
3 (71. 1). Be thou propitious, most wealful to us, very gracious, O Sarasvatī; let us not be separated from sight of thee.
The verse occurs in TA. iv. 42. 1 and AA. i. 1. 1, with the variant, for c, mā́ te vyòma saṁdṛ́çi; and LÇS. v. 3. 2 has the same, but with saṁdaças (misprint for -dṛç-?) at the end. In i. 1. 3, TA. has another version, with the same ending, but with bhava in a expanded to bhavantu divyā́ ā́pa óṣadhayaḥ. ⌊Cf. also Kaṭha-hss., p. 115; MGS. i. 11. 18 and p. 156 under sakhā.⌋
# Atharva-Veda Samhita/Book VII/Hymn 69 (72)

69 (72). Prayer for good fortune.
[Çaṁtāti.—sukhadevatākam. pathyāpan̄kti.]
Found also in Pāipp. xx. Included, like the preceding hymn, in the two çānti gaṇas (Kāuç. 9. 2, 4), and by the schol. (note to 9. 7) in yet a third.
Translated: Henry, 26, 91; Griffith, i. 360.
1. Weal for us let the wind blow; weal for us let the sun burn; be the days weal for us; [as] weal let the night be applied; weal for us let the dawn shine forth.
The whole verse occurs in TA. iv. 42. 1, with pavatām mātaríçvā for vātu in a, and rā́triḥ in d. MS., in iv. 9. 27, has only four pādas, with ‘bhí added before vātu in a. VS. has the same amount, our a, b being xxxvi. 10 a, b (with pavatam for vātu in a), and our c, d being xxxvi. 11 a (with rā́triḥ instead of our rā́tri). All have alike in d the strange expression práti dhīyatām. The Anukr. ignores the deficiency of two syllables in a. ⌊Ppp. has me for nas all four times; also ‘bhivāte for vātu, and tapati for -tu.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Minucius Felix/Title Page

Minucius Felix.
[Translated by the Rev. Robert Ernest Wallis, Ph.D.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Introductory Note
## Contents

* Preface
* Life
* Exegetical Works
* Critical Works
* Apologetical Works
* Dogmatic Works
* Practical Works
* Editions of Origin
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Introductory Note/Apologetical Works

(3)  Apologetical Works.
His great apologetical work was the treatise undertaken at the special request of his friend Ambrosius, in answer to the attack of the heathen philosopher Celsus on the Christian religion, in a work which he entitled Λόγος ἀληθής or A True Discourse. Origen states that he had heard that there were two individuals of this name, both of them Epicureans, the earlier of the two having lived in the time of Nero, and the other in the time of Adrian, or later. Redepenning is of opinion that Celsus must have composed his work in the time of Marcus Aurelius (161–180 a.d.), on account of his supposed mention of the Marcionites (whose leader did not make his appearance at Rome before 142 a.d.), and of the Marcellians (followers of the Carpocratian Marcellina), a sect which was founded after the year 155 a.d. under Bishop Anicetus. Origen believed his opponent to be an Epicurean, but to have adopted other doctrines than those of Epicurus, because he thought that by so doing he could assail Christianity to greater advantage. The work which Origen composed in answer to the so-styled True Discourse consists of eight books, and belongs to the latest years of his life. It has always been regarded as the great apologetic work of antiquity; and no one can peruse it without being struck by the multifarious reading, wonderful acuteness, and rare subtlety of mind which it displays. But the rule which Origen prescribed to himself, of not allowing a single objection of his opponent to remain unanswered, leads him into a minuteness of detail, and into numerous repetitions, which fatigue the reader, and detract from the interest and unity of the work. He himself confesses that he began it on one plan, and carried it out on another. No doubt, had he lived to re-write and condense it, it would have been more worthy of his reputation.  But with all its defects, it is a great work, and well deserves the notice of the students of Apologetics. The table of contents subjoined to the translation will convey a better idea of its nature than any description which our limits would permit us to give.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Cf. Contra Celsum, I. c. viii. ad fin.
* ↑ Cf. Redepenning, vol. ii. p. 131, note 2.
* ↑ Contra Celsum, I. ch. viii.
* ↑ Preface, b. i. § 6.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Minucius Felix/The Octavius of Minucius Felix/Elucidations

Elucidations.
I.
(Editions, p. 171.)
For an interesting account of the bibliographical history of this work, see Dupin. It passed for the Eight Book of Arnobius until a.d. 1560, and was first printed in its true character at Heidelberg in that year, with a learned preface by Balduinus, who restored it to its true author.
II.
(The neighing of horses, note 1, p. 183.)
It strikes me as singular that the Edinburgh edition, which gives a note to each of the instances that follow, should have left me to supply this reference to the case of Darius Hystaspes.  The story is told, as will be remembered by all who have ever read it, by Herodotus, and is certainly one of the most extraordinary in history, when one reflects that a horse elected a great monarch, and one whose life not a little affected the fortunes of mankind. A knavish groom was indeed the engineer of this election, as often, in such events, the secret springs of history are hidden; but, if the story is not wholly a fable, the coincidence of thunder in the heavens is most noteworthy. It seemed to signify the overruling of Providence, and the power of God to turn the folly, not less than the wrath, of men, to God’s praise. See Herod., book iii. cap. lxxxvi.
III.
(From nothing, p. 194.)
From this chapter, if not from others, it had been rashly affirmed that our author imagined that the soul perishes with the body, and is to be renewed out of nothing. The argument is wholly ad hominem, and asserts nothing from the author’s own point of view, as I understand it. He gives what is “sufficient for his argument,” and professes nothing more. He was not a clergyman, nor is his work a sermon to the faithful. He defies any one to deny, that, if God could form man out of nothing, He can make him anew out of nothing. The residue of the argument is a brilliant assertion of the imperishability of matter, in terms which might satisfy modern science; and the implication is, that the soul no more perishes to the sight of God than does the body vaporized and reserved in the custody of the elements.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen

See also: Origen

## Contents

* Title Page
* Introductory Note
* Prefatory Notice
* Prologue of Rufinus
* Origen De Principiis
* A Letter to Origen from Africanus About the History of Susanna
* A Letter from Origen to Africanus
* A Letter from Origen to Gregory
* Origen Against Celsus
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/A Letter from Origen to Gregory/Elucidation

Elucidation.
This golden letter, doubtless genuine, was attended with very great consequences, of which we shall gather more hereafter. It is worthy of the solemn consideration of young students to whom this page may come.  Gregory was unbaptized when Origen (circa a.d. 230) thus addressed his conscience.
On the letters here inserted, let me refer the student to Routh, Reliqu., ii. pp. 312–327; also same vol., pp. 222–228; also iii. 254–256.
For the facts concerning this letter to Gregory, see Cave, i. p. 400.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/A Letter from Origen to Gregory
## Contents

* A Letter from Origen to Gregory
* Elucidation
# Atchison Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of California

United States Supreme Court
283 U.S. 380
Atchison Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of California
Argued: April 23, 24, 1931. --- Decided: May 18, 1931
[Syllabus from pages 381-383 intentionally omitted Messrs. C. W. Durbrow, of San Francisco, Cal., and Frank Karr and Robert Brennan, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 381-386 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Arthur T. George, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellees.
Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES 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
# Atchison Railway Company v. Saxon

United States Supreme Court
284 U.S. 458
Atchison Railway Company v. Saxon
Argued: Jan. 8, 1932. --- Decided: Feb 15, 1932
Messrs. A. H. Culwell, of El Paso, Tex., and E. E. McInnis, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Mr. Winbourn Pearce, of Temple, Tex., for respondent.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS, 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
# Atchison Railway Company v. Nichols

United States Supreme Court
264 U.S. 348
Atchison Railway Company v. Nichols
Argued: Feb. 26, 1924. --- Decided: April 7, 1924
Messrs. R. O. Brennan and Edgar W. Camp, both of Los Angeles, Cal., and Gardiner Lathrop, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Messrs. M. K. Young and Lyndol L. Young, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Mr. Justice McKENNA 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
# Atchison Railway Company v. Toops

United States Supreme Court
281 U.S. 351
Atchison Railway Company v. Toops
Argued: March 6, 7, 1930. --- Decided: April 14, 1930
Messrs. William Osmond, of Great Bend, Kan., and William R. Smith and Alfred A. Scott, both of Topeka, Kan., for petitioner.
Mr. Carr W. Taylor, of Hutchinson, Kan., 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
# Atchison Railway Company v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Atchison Railway Company v. United States."
* 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.
* Atchison Railway Company v. United States (256 U.S. 205)
* Atchison Railway Company v. United States (269 U.S. 266)
* Atchison Railway Company v. United States (279 U.S. 768)
* Atchison Railway Company v. United States (284 U.S. 248)
# Atchison Railway Company v. United States (256 U.S. 205)

United States Supreme Court
256 U.S. 205
Atchison Railway Company v. United States
Argued: March 22, 1921. --- Decided: April 18, 1921
Messrs. Alexander Britton, of Washington, D. C., Gardiner Lathrop, of Chicago, Ill., and Evans Browne, of Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Davis, for the United States.
Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER 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
# Barack Obama's Letter to John Gage regarding the Bureau of Prisons

20 October 2008
| “ | John Gage National President American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO 80 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Dear President Gage, I am writing regarding working conditions at the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) conrrectional institutions. I share your concern that these facilities are becoming increasingly dangerous places to work due to correctional officer understaffing and prison inmate overcrowding. Several years of inadequate budget requests by the Bush administration have led to a critical juncture for BOP – in terms of safety and security for both correctional staff and prison inmates. Budget pressures have forced BOP to rely on overtime for current correctional staff instead of hiring additional staff, leving the correctional workforce spread thin. Budget pressures also have resulted in prison inmat overcrowding getting worse, often forcing BOP to house prison inmates in makeshift quarters in many institutions. Correctional officer understaffing and prison inmate overcrowding are resulting in a spike in the number of serious assaults, murders, and large-scale inmate riots in BOP facilities. I agree with you that these adverse trends cannot continue. I pledge to you that an Obama administration will address the underfunding problems that are resulting in the deterioration of the safety and security of BOP institutions. My administration will review salary and budgeting decisions that have underminded safety at BOP facilites and will work with the BOP workforce and the union to address workplace concerns. Thank you, John, for everything you and your members do for America. Sincerely, [signature] Barack Obama | ” |
# Barack Obama's Letter to John Gage regarding the Transportation Security Administration

20 October 2008.
| “ | John Gage National President American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO 80 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Dear President Gage, I am writing regarding the important issues that your Transportation Security Officer (TSO) members have raised about the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). If I am elected President, I will work to ensure that TSOs have collective bargaining rights and a voice at work to address issues that arise locally and nationally. Advocating for TSOs to receive collective bargaining rights and workplace protections will be a priority for my administration. It is unacceptable for TSOs to work under unfair rules and without workplace protections – this makes it more difficult for them to perform their jobs. Since 2001, TSA has had the unfettered ability to deny its workforce even the most basic labor rights and protections. Other law enforcement officers – from Border Patrol Agents to Federal Protective Officers to the U.S. Capitol Police – all have collective bargaining rights. Collective bargaining rights ensure that federal agencies run as effectively as possible and are able to focus on protecting our national security. Collective bargaining agreements also provide an excellent structure to address issues such as a fair promotion system, the scheduling of overtime, shift rotation, health and safety improvements, parking, child care and public transportation subsidies. By addressing day-to-day issues in a manner that is both functional and fair, I believe the unacceptably high attrition rate of TSOs will improve and more TSOs will remain on the job resulting in the career, professional, and highly trained workforce the public and Congress demanded following the terrible events of September 11th. I also support re-examining the flawed Performance Accountability and Standards System (PASS) for TSOs to determine whether it meets minimum standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability. If it does not, we should replace it with the General Schedule (GS) wage system used by the rest of federal government, including other agencies in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As President, I will make sure that the documented waste and mismanagement at TSA is subject to the same rules regarding contracting as other federal agencies. This year, TSA gave an enormous $1.2 billion sole source contract for human resources services without regard to the rules that require them to allow current TSA employees to compete for that work. Thank you, John, for everything you and your members do for America. Sincerely, [signature] Barack Obama | ” |
# Barack Obama's Letter to John McCain regarding ethics reform

Obama's letter regarding ethics reform sent on 2 February 2006.
| “ | The Honorable John McCain United States Senate 241 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Thank you for inviting me to participate in the meeting yesterday to discuss lobbying and ethics reform proposals currently before the Senate. I appreciate your willingness to reach out to me and several other Senate Democrats to discuss what should be done to restore public confidence in the way that Congress conducts its business. The discussion clearly underscored the difficult challenge facing Congress. You and many in the Democratic Caucus have played a major role in reform efforts in the Senate. In fact, the Indian Affairs Committee hearings you led were instrumental in promoting public awareness of the culture of corruption that has permeated the nation's capital. As you know, Senator Harry Reid and others in the Democratic Caucus have taken an important step by introducing S. 2180, the Honest Leadership Act, which imposes many of the same disclosure requirements for lobbyists that you have proposed, while also strengthening enforcement, eliminating "pay to play" schemes, and imposing more restrictive rules on meals, gifts, and travel that Members and their staff can receive from special interests that advocate before Congress. This bill, which now has the support of 40 members of the Democratic Caucus, represents a significant step in addressing many of the worst aspects of corruption that have come to light as a result of the Justice Department investigation of Jack Abramoff. I know you have expressed an interest in creating a task force to further study and discuss these matters, but I and others in the Democratic Caucus believe the more effective and timely course is to allow the committees of jurisdiction to roll up their sleeves and get to work on writing ethics and lobbying reform legislation that a majority of the Senate can support. Committee consideration of these matters through the normal course will ensure that these issues are discussed in a public forum and that those within Congress, as well as those on the outside, can express their views, ensuring a thorough review of this matter. Given the state of affairs in Washington, we have a historic opportunity to make fundamental changes in the way our government operates so that the actions we take as public officials are responsive and transparent to the American people. Thank you again for your interest in this important matter. Sincerely, [signature] Barack Obama United States Senator | ” |