OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Davis

United States Supreme Court
279 U.S. 34
Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Davis
Argued: Nov. 23, 1928. --- Decided: Feb 18, 1929
Messrs. Thomas W. Davis, of Wilmington, N. C., and Henry E. Davis, of Florence, S.C.., for petitioner.
Messrs. William C. Wolfe, of Orangeburg, S.C.., and Thomas H. Peeples, of Columbia, S.C.., for respondent.
Mr. Justice SANFORD 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
# Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Florida

United States Supreme Court
295 U.S. 301
Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Florida
Argued: and Submitted March 4-5, 1935. --- Decided: April 29, 1935
[Syllabus from pages 301-303 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Carl H. Davis, of Wilmington, N.C., Robert C. Alston, of Atlanta, Ga., W. E. Kay, of Jacksonville, Fla., and Wm. Hart Sibley, of Atlanta, Ga., for Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
Mr. Henry P. Adair, of Jacksonville, Fla., for Brooks-Scanlon Corporation et al.
Mr. J. V. Norman, of Washington, D.C., for Wilson Lumber Co.
Messrs. Cary D. Landis, or Tallahassee, Fla., and August G. Gutheim, of Washington, D.C., for the State of Florida.
Mr. Theo. T. Turnbull, of Tallahassee, Fla., for Florida Railroad Commission.
The Attorney General, for the United States.
Mr. Justice CARDOZO 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
# Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Ford

United States Supreme Court
287 U.S. 502
Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Ford
Argued: Dec. 14, 1932. --- Decided: Jan 9, 1933
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina.
Messrs. Henry E. Davis, of Florence, S.C., and Thomas W. Davis, of Wilmington, N.C., for appellants.
Mr. W. C. Davis, of Manning, S.C., for appellee.
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
# Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Doughton

United States Supreme Court
262 U.S. 413
Atlantic Coast Line Company v. Doughton
NORFOLK SOUTHERN R. CO.
v.
SAME.
No. 727.
SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. CO.
v.
SAME.
No. 744.
SOUTHERN RY. CO.
v.
SAME.
No. 756.
Argued April 25, 1923.
Decided June 4, 1923.
Mr. Thomas W. Davis, of Wilmington, N. C., for appellant Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
[Argument of Counsel from page 414 intentionally omitted]
Mr. W. B. Rodman, of Norfolk, Va., for appellant Norfolk Southern R. Co.
Mr. Murray Allen, of Raleigh, N. C., for Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.
Mr. S. R. Prince, of Washington, D. C., for appellant Southern Ry. Co.
Messrs. Geo. H. Brown, of Washington, N. C., and Wm. P. Bynum, of Greensboro, N. C., for appellees.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS 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
# Beneš Hermanow

* related portals: Czech literature.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This poem comes from the so called Queen's Court Manuscript, alleged mediaeval work whose real author was most probably Václav Hanka in the early 19th century.
English-language translations of Beneš Heřmanóv include:
* Benesh Hermanow, in Cheskian Anthology by John Bowring (1832)
* Beneš Hermanow, in Bohemian Poems, Ancient and Modern by Albert Henry Wratislaw (1849)
* Benes Hermanow, in The Queen's Court Manuscript with Other Ancient Bohemian Poems by Albert Henry Wratislaw (1852)
# Bengal

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Bengal."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.
* Portal:West Bengal
* East Bengal in British India, formed the Portal:Bangladesh.
# Bengal Dacoits and Tigers/Dacoit Stories

DACOIT STORIES
CONTENTS
DACOIT STORIES
# Benedictus Deus

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Benedictus Deus."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, 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.
* Benedictus Deus by Benedict XII (1336)
* Benedictus Deus by Pius IV (1564)
# Benefit of Clergy Act 1275

* related portals: England.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Part of the First Statute of Westminster
STATUTUM WEST' PRIMUM. The Statute of WESTMINSTER, the First, Made at Westminster 25 die Aprilis, Anno 3 EDWARDI I. and Anno Dom. 1275.
Benefit of Clergy Act 1275
1275 (3 Edw. 1) C A P. II.
THESE be the Acts of King EDWARD, Son to King HENRY, made at Westminster at his first Parliament general after his Coronation, on the Mondayof Easter Utas, the third Year of his Reign, by his Council, and the Assent of Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, and all the Commonalty of the Realm being thither summoned, because our Lord the King had great Zeal and Desire to redress the State of the Realm in such Things as required Amendment, for the common Profit of holy Church, and of the Realm: And because the State of the holy Church had been evil kept, and the Prelates and religious Persons of the Land grieved many ways, and the People otherwise intreated than they ought to be, and the Peace less kept, and the Laws less used, and the Offenders less punished than they ought to be, by reason where of the People of the Land feared the less to offend; the King hath ordained and established these Acts underwritten, which he intendeth to be necessary and profitable unto the whole Realm.
A Clerk convict of Felony, delivered to the Ordinary, shall not depart without Purgation.
18 El. c. 7. Hob. 288. Chart. de Pardon, Br. 21.
Enforced in Part by 23. H. 8. c. 11. And altered by 28 H. 8. c. 1. which ordains that Persons in holy Orders shall be subject to the same Pains that others be. 2 Inst. 164.
IT is provided also, That when a Clerk is taken for guilty of Felony, and is demanded by the Ordinary, he shall be delivered to him according to the Privilege of Holy Church, on such Peril as belongeth to it, after the Custom aforetimes used.
(2) And the King admonisheth the Prelates, and enjoineth them upon the Faith that they owe to him, and for the common Profit and Peace of the Realm, that they which be indicted of such Offences by solemn Inquest of lawful Men in the King's Court in no manner shall be delivered without due Purgation, so that the King shall not need to provide any other Remedy therein.'
Note : this act is listed in the Chronological Table of Statutes as the Benefit of Clergy Act, 1275
This work is in the public domain worldwide because it was created by a public body of the United Kingdom with Crown Status and commercially published before 1974.
See Crown copyright artistic works, Crown copyright non-artistic works and List of Public Bodies with Crown Status.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Bengal Dacoits and Tigers

BENGAL DACOITS AND TIGERS
BY MAHARANI SUNITY DEVEE, C.I. OF COOCH BEHAR
Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co. 1916
To dear little Dhrubendra
"WOODLANDS" 1916
PRINTED BY N. MUKHERJEE, B.A., AT THE ART PRESS, 1, WELLINGTON SQUARE, CALCUTTA
CONTENTS
DACOIT STORIES
TIGER STORIES
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 1932, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 91 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
# Benefit of Clergy Act 1267

* related portals: England.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Statutes made at Marlborough, alias Marleberge, 18 Novemb. Anno 52 HEN. III. and Anno Dom. 1267.
Benefit of Clergy Act 1267
1267 (52 Hen. 3) C A P. XXVI.
IN the Year of Grace, One thousand two hundred sixty seven, the two and fiftieth Year of the Reign of King HENRY, Son of King JOHN, in the Utas of St. Martin, the said King our Lord providing for the better Estate of his Realm of England, and for the more speedy Ministration of Justice, as belongeth to the Office of a King, the more discreet Men of the Realm being called together, as well of the higher as of the lower Estate: It was provided, agreed, and ordained, that whereas the Realm of England of late had been disquieted with manifold Troubles and Dissensions; for Reformation whereof Statutes and Laws be right necessary, whereby the Peace and Tranquillity of the People must be observed:Wherein the King, intending to devise convenient Remedy, hath made these Acts, Ordinances, and Statutes underwritten, which he willeth to be observed for ever firmly and inviolably of all his Subjects, as well high as low.
A Clerk bailed upon a Capital Offence, refuseth to answer.
IF a Clerk, for any Crime or Offence touching the Crown, be arrested, and after by the King's Commandment, let to bail, or replevied, so that they, to whom he was let to bail, have him before our Justices, the Sureties from henceforth, nor they to whom he was let to bail, shall not be amerced (if they have his Body before our Justices) although he will not answer before them, by reason of a Clerk's Privilege, nor cannot by reason of his Ordinary.
Bro. Cofom 111. 2 Inst. 150.
Altered by 28 H. 8. c. 1. and 32 H. 8. c. 3. which or dain that Clergy shall be used as others be.
Note : this act is listed in the Chronological Table of Statutes as the Benefit of Clergy Act, 1267
This work is in the public domain worldwide because it was created by a public body of the United Kingdom with Crown Status and commercially published before 1974.
See Crown copyright artistic works, Crown copyright non-artistic works and List of Public Bodies with Crown Status.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Breard v. City of Alexandria

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 622
Breard v. City of Alexandria
Argued: March 7, 8, 1951. --- Decided: June 4, 1951
[Syllabus from pages 622-623 intentionally omitted]
Mr. E. Russell Shockley, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
Mr. Frank H. Peterman, Alexandria, La., for appellee.
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
# Breard v. City of Alexandria/Dissent Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 622
Breard v. City of Alexandria
Argued: March 7, 8, 1951. --- Decided: June 4, 1951
Mr. Justice BLACK, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS joins, dissenting.
On May 3, 1943, this Court held that cities and states could not enforce laws which impose flat taxes on the privilege of door-to-door sales of religious literature, Jones v. Opelika, 319 U.S. 103, 63 S.Ct. 890, 87 L.Ed. 1290; Murdock v. Com. of Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S.Ct. 870, 87 L.Ed. 1292, or which make it unlawful for persons to go from home to home knocking on doors and ringing doorbells to invite occupants to religious, political or other kinds of public meetings. Martin v. Struthers, 319 U.S. 141, 63 S.Ct. 862, 87 L.Ed. 1313. Over strong dissents, these laws were held to invade liberty of speech, press and religion in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Today a new majority adopts the position of the former dissenters and sustains a city ordinance forbidding door-to-door solicitation of subscriptions to the Saturday Evening Post, Newsweek and other magazines. Since this decision cannot be reconciled with the Jones, Murdock and Martin v. Struthers cases, it seems to me that good judicial practice calls for their forthright overruling. But whether this is done or not, it should be plain that my disagreement with the majority of the Court as now constituted stems basically from a different concept of the reach of the constitutional liberty of the press rather than from any difference of opinion as to what former cases have held.
Today's decision marks a revitalization of the judicial views which prevailed before this Court embraced the philosophy that the First Amendment gives a preferred status to the liberties it protects. I adhere to that preferred position philosophy. It is my belief that the freedom of the people of this Nation cannot survive even a little governmental hobbling of religious or political ideas, whether they be communicated orally or through the press.
The constitutional sanctuary for the press must necessarily include liberty to publish and circulate. In view of our economic system, it must also include freedom to solicit paying subscribers. Of course homeowners can if they wish forbid newsboys, reporters or magazine solicitors to ring their doorbells. But when the homeowner himself has not done this, I believe that the First Amendment, interpreted with due regard for the freedoms it guarantees, bars laws like the present ordinance which punish persons who peacefully go from door to door as agents of the press.

## 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
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Burma

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Cameroon

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Cape Verde

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Cayman Islands

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Chile

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Chad

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Burundi

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Cambodia

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# CIA World Fact Book, 2004/Canada

This page was last updated on 1 January 2003
This is a snapshot of the CIA World Fact Book as it existed on 26 March 2005
# Bird children, the little playmates of the flower children

* related portals: Children's poetry.
* sister projects: Commons gallery, Commons category, Wikidata item.
Bird Children
The Little Playmates
of the Flower Children
By Elizabeth Gordon
Drawings by M.T. Ross
Published by P.F.Volland & Company Chicago
Copyright 1912
P.F. Volland & Company
All Rights Reserved
Sixth Edition
To all children who love Birds and Flowers, and especially to my little friend
Dorothy Virginia,
this book is lovingly dedicated.
FOREWORD
IRDS are only another expression of God's love, and we are told that not even a sparrow shall fall to the ground without the notice of the Father.
Birds are poetry come to life and set to music. If you should stand at the edge of a forest at sundown and hear the birds singing their good-night songs, hear the sleepy little notes grow fainter and fainter until the silence came, — then when the dusk had deepened, you should hear the night birds begin their plaintive songs, you would realize what a different place our beautiful world would be without birds.
Even in great cities we have always some birds. The saucy little sparrow, who comes so boldly begging crumbs at your window, likes the cities best. ​Only very thoughtless people, or those who do not understand, would harm or frighten a bird.
They are real little people, and I am sure that when you have come to know them you will love them as much as you have learned to love the Flower Children.
The publishers and the author have received so many letters from parents commending Flower Children for its instructive features, and from children, demanding “more” delightful play-mates, that they offer “Bird Brothers and Sisters,” believing that “The little playmates of the Flower Children” will prove as welcome visitors as “The Little Cousins of the Fields and Garden.”
The author and the artist wish to thank the children for their many expressions of interest and for their loyal support.
—ELIZABETH GORDON
—M. T. ROSS
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 1937, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 86 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
# Bird v. Benlisa

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
142 U.S. 664
Bird v. Benlisa
STATEMENT BY MR. JUSTICE BREWER.
This was an action of ejectment brought in the circuit court of Orange county, Fla., on May 25, 1887. The action was subsequently removed to the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of Florida. A trial in that court resulted in a verdict and judgment for the defendant in error, plaintiff below. That such judgment was correct, is conceded, unless plaintiff's right to recover was defeated by a tax-deed, with accompanying record and possession. That deed purported to be based on a sale for the taxes of 1873, and the description therein was as follows: Section 39, township 16, of range 27; section 37, in township 17, of range 27; and section 38, in township 17, of range 28,-containing 9,909 3/4 acres, lying and being in Orange county, Fla. It was executed December 13, 1876, and recorded the same day. The assessment roll was produced in evidence, and on it was found no description like that contained in the deed. There was, however, this entry, which plaintiff in error claimed was intended as a description of the lands found in the deed, to-wit:
Owner. Des. of Land. Sec. Town. Range. Acres. Am't.
Mazell, Partin & Partin Alexander --------- --------- -------- 7,800 $18 22
Spring Creek
Grant
Defendant relied on section 63, c. 1976, Laws 1874, p. 27, (which is the same as section 20, c. 1877, Laws 1872,) as follows:
'No suit or proceeding shall be commenced by a former owner or claimant, his heirs or assigns, or his or their legal representatives, to set aside any deed made in pursuance of any sale of lands for taxes, or against the grantee in such deed, his heirs or assigns or legal representatives, to recover the possession of said lands, unless such suit or proceedings be commenced within one year after the recording of such deed in the county where the lands lie, except upon the grounds that the said lands were not subject to taxation, or that the taxes were paid or tendered, together with the expenses chargeable thereon, before sale, and the recording of such deed shall be deemed such assertion of title or such entry into possession by the grantee, his heirs or assigns, as to authorize such suit or proceedings against him or them as for an actual entry.'
J. C. Drew, A. H. Garland, and H. J. May, for plaintiff in error.
J. C. Coopel and H. E. Davis, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice BREWER, after stating the facts in the foregoing languag, 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
# Bird v. Louisiana State Bank

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
93 U.S. 96
Bird v. Louisiana State Bank
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
Submitted on printed arguments by Mr. E. T. Merrick and Mr. G. W. Race for the plaintiffs in error. Argued by Mr. Thomas J. Durant, contra.
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY 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
# Bird v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Bird 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.
* Bird v. United States (180 U.S. 356)
* Bird v. United States (187 U.S. 118)
# Bird and Bough

1906
* The Partridge
* The March Glee
* The Bluebird
* The Song of the Toad
* The Coming of Phoebe
* Spring Gladness
* Early April
* Hepatica
* Trailing Arbutus
* Arbutus Days
* The Bush Sparrow
* The Swallow
* Early May
* In May
* The Blooming Orchards
* The Cuckoo
* Columbine
* The Vesper Sparrow
* Junes Coming
* The Hermit Thrush
* Bobolink
* Midsummer in the Catskills
* The Indigo Bird
* To the Bee Palm
* The Cardinal Flower
* In October
* The Downy Wood Pecker
* The Crow
* Snow-Birds
* The Heart o' the Woods
* To the Oregon Robin
* To the Golden-Crowned Sparrow in Alaska
* To the Lapland Longspur
* The Retuern
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
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