OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 2/12th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 22

Chap. XXII.—An Act regulating pensions to persons on board private armed ships.
1812, ch. 107. 1813, ch. 58. Act of March 4, 1814, ch. 20. Act of March 3, 1817, ch. 60. Act of April 16, 1818, ch. 60. Act of Jan. 22, 1824, ch. 15. Act of June 30, 1834, ch. 134. Act of March 3, 1837, ch. 40. The two per cent. reserved in the hands of the collectors and consuls, to be paid into the treasury, to constitute a fund, &c. Secretary of the Navy to place certain persons on the pension list.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the two per centum reserved in the hands of the collectors and consuls by the act of June, eighteen hundred and twelve, entitled “An act concerning letters of marque, prizes, and prize goods,” shall be paid to the treasury, under the like regulations provided for other public money, and shall constitute a fund for the purposes provided for by the seventeenth section of the before mentioned act.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the Secretary of the Navy be authorized and required to place on the pension list, under the like regulations and restrictions, as are used in relation to the navy of the United States, any officer, seaman or marine, who, on board of any private armed ship or vessel bearing a commission of letter of marque, shall have been wounded or otherwise disabled in any engagement with the enemy; allowing to the captain a sum not exceeding twenty dollars per month; to lieutenants and sailing master a sum not exceeding twelve dollars each per month; to marine officer, boatswain, gunner, carpenter, master’s mate and prize masters, a sum not exceeding ten dollars each per month; to all other officers a sum not exceeding eight dollars each per month, for the highest rate of disability, and so in proportion; and to a seaman, or acting as a marine, the sum of six dollars per month, for ​the highest rate of disability, and so in proportion; which several pensions shall be paid, by direction of the Secretary of the Navy, out of the fund above provided, and from no other.
Commanding officers to enter the names, &c. of wounded persons in a journal.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the commanding officer of every vessel having a commission, or letters of marque and reprisal, shall enter in his journal the name and rank of any officer, and the name of any seaman, who, during his cruise, shall have been wounded or disabled as aforesaid, describing the manner and extent, as far as practicable, of such wound or disability.
Collectors to transmit a transcript of such journals to the Secretary of the Navy, &c.Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That every collector shall transmit quarterly to the Secretary of the Navy, a transcript of such journals as may have been reported to him, so far as it gives a list of the officers and crew, and the description of wounds and disabilities, the better to enable the secretary to decide on claims for pensions.
Approved, February 13, 1813.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 2/12th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 31

Chap. XXXI.—An Act to raise ten additional companies of Rangers.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized, to raise ten additional companies of rangers, on the same provisions, conditions, and restrictions as those authorized to be raised byAct of Jan. 2, 1812, ch. 11. Act of Jan. 29, 1813, ch. 15. “An act authorizing the President of the United States to raise certain companies of rangers for the protection of the frontier of the United States,” which said companies shall be in lieu of one of the regiments authorized to be raised by the act in addition to the act, entitled “An act to raise an additional military force, and for other purposes,” passed the twenty-ninth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and thirteen.
Approved, February 25, 1813.
# United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company."
* 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.
* United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (225 U.S. 306)
* United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (231 U.S. 274)
* United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (333 U.S. 169)
* United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (284 U.S. 195)
* United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (229 U.S. 244)
# United States v. Baltimore/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 424
United States v. Baltimore
This is an appeal from a decree confirming as valid a claim of the cities of Baltimore and New Orleans to land in that part of the State of Louisiana which constituted the former Spanish province of West Florida.
The suit was brought under the eleventh section of the act of June 22, 1860, which we construed in Scull v. United States, supra, p. 410.
The foundation of the claim is a petition of Philip Robinson to the commandant Don Thomas Estevan, dated Jan. 20, 1804.
This petition recites that Robinson had, in the year 1797, by the permission of Estevan's predecessor, established himself on a tract of land, which he describes, and that he had unfortunately lost the permit by the burning of his house. Fearing lest some intruder might encroach upon his rights, he begs a renewal of the order or permit.
The reply to this is as follows:--
'GALVESTON, Jan. 20, 1804.
'This party may remain in the possession of the land settled by him under the permit of my predecessor, and he will apply to the intendant-general for his formal title.
'THOMAS ESTEVAN.'
No other title, grant, cession, survey, or order of survey was ever issued on this claim. It was a mere permit for possession and settlement, and no more. There was here no perfected title. There was no title at all, nor any thing which purported to give title. The title remained in the Spanish government until transferred to ours; and except the part which has been patented to others, it remains there now. There is nothing on which the claimant, under the eleventh section of the act, as we understand it, is entitled to recover in this suit.
If there is any just claim in this case, it belongs to the class of imperfect, incomplete, equitable rights over which Congress has reserved control, and which could only be confirmed in the mode pointed out before the commissioners under the act of 1860.
The decree of the District Court confirming the claim will be, therefore, reversed, with directions to dismiss the petition; and it is
So ordered.

## 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
# United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
293 U.S. 454
United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.
No. 221 Argued: Dec. 12, 13, 1934. --- Decided: Jan 7, 1935
On
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio.
The Attorney General and Mr. Daniel W. Knowlton, of Washington, D.C., for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission.
Mr. Harold N. McLaughlin, of Cleveland, Ohio, for appellants Johnston and others.
Messrs. Jacob Aronson, of New York City, and Nye F. Morehouse, of Chicago, Ill., 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
# United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company (225 U.S. 306)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
225 U.S. 306
United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company
Argued: January 15 and 16, 1912. --- Decided: June 10, 1912
Solicitor General Lehmann for the United States.
Mr. P. J. Farrell for the Interstate Commerce Commission.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 307-309 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Ernest A. Bigelow for the Federal Sugar Refining Company.
Messrs. George F. Brownell and Herbert A. Taylor for the Railroad Companies.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 309-311 intentionally omitted]
Mr. William N. Dykman for interveners.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 311-314 intentionally omitted]
Mr. H. B. Closson for Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal.
Mr. Chief Justice White delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

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

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 424
United States v. Baltimore
APPEAL from the District Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
The Solicitor-General for the United States.
Mr. Edward Janin, 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
# United States v. Ballard (81 U.S. 457)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
81 U.S. 457
United States v. Ballard
The question is whether the description of fees now collected under the general regulations of the Treasury Department of February, 1857, includes the sums collected under these regulations for licenses to steamers, and as compensation for the inspections and examinations made for the year under the Steamboat Act of August 30th, 1852, in addition to the fees for issuing enrolments and licenses.
These sums are collected as fees under the regulations, and are not distinguished from the collector's fees proper, except by the circumstance that they are described as a compensation for inspections and examinations. The provision, that these sums shall be quarterly accounted for and paid over to the United States, does not distinguish them from fees and emoluments to be accounted for under the act of the 17th of June, 1864, or under the regulations of the Treasury Department of February, 1857.
The language of the regulations is, that the fees are to be charged, and collected, and accounted for, and paid over to the United States by collectors, in the same manner as other revenue. This language obviously means that they are to be accounted for in all cases, and paid over, unless retained under authority of law. The act of June 17th, 1864, authorizes the collector to retain the fees and a commission of three per cent. on moneys collected and accounted for, paying over to the Treasury only the excess beyond two thousand five hundred dollars; and there is no distinction in the regulations between the fees for admeasurement, licenses, &c., and the fees for licenses as a compensation for inspections and examinations.
We think, therefore, that the collector was authorized to retain all descriptions of fees paid him not in excess of two thousand five hundred dollars. It follows that the demurrer was properly overruled; and, as the defendant did not think it proper to reply, but allowed judgment to be entered upon the plea, the other plea of nil debet became immaterial, and the judgment was properly entered for the defendant.
It is, therefore,
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
# United States v. Benz

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
282 U.S. 304
United States v. Benz
Argued: Dec. 8, 1930. --- Decided: Jan 5, 1931
The Attorney General and Mr. Thomas D. Thacher, of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
Mr. Francis Biddle, of Philadelphia, Pa., for Benz.
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
# United States v. Bergh

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Burton
United States Supreme Court
352 U.S. 40
United States v. Bergh
Argued: Oct. 15, 1956. --- Decided: Nov 19, 1956
Mr. Alan S. Rosenthal, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Mr. Justice CLARK 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
# United States v. Berkeness

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
275 U.S. 149
United States v. Berkeness
Argued: Oct. 11, 1927. --- Decided: Nov 21, 1927

## 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
# United States v. Berdan Firearms Manufacturing Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
156 U.S. 552
United States v. Berdan Firearms Manufacturing Company

## 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
# United States v. Bennitz/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
64 U.S. 255
United States v. Bennitz
The claimant applied to Micheltorena, in 1844, for a concession of five square leagues of land, lying in the valley of the Sacramento river, and bounded on the west by that stream. The petition was referred to Captain Sutter, who reported that the land was vacant.
The secretary reported, that the Governor having deferred any action upon petitions like the present, until he could make a visit to the region of the Sacramento and San Joaquin, it would be proper to dispose of this in the same manner.
The Governor so ordered, authorizing the applicant to take provisional possession, until he could make his visit. The suit of the claimant was submitted to the board of commissioners on this testimony, and it was rejected, as invalid.
Upon appeal to the District Court, the claimant proved that he was a soldier in the war of Micheltorena, and an officer in one of the companies of Sutter. That the Governor acknowledged his services in that war, and verbally recognised the validity of his claim for the land specified, and that it would be perfected by means of the 'general title' of Sutter. The claimant also proved, that in March, 1845, two persons went upon the land, to make improvements under his claim. That one of them shortly after retreated, from fear of the Indians; that the other (Julien) made some improvement and cultivation, and occupied the land twelve or fifteen months, when he was killed by them. In the case of the United States v. Reading, 18 How., 1, it was proved that Julien occupied the land of that claimant.
The merits of the claims arising under the general title of Sutter have been discussed in the cases of Nye and Bassett, reported in 21 How. R., 408, 412. This claim is in all respects similar; and, for the reasons assigned in those cases, is invalid.
Decree reversed. Cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the petition.

## 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
# United Nations Security Council Resolution 1697

* related portals: United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Adopted by the Security Council at its 5501st meeting, on 31 July 2006
The Security Council,
Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, including resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978) of 19 wel;wjeioiopfrwaekpr1978 and 1655 (2006) of 31 January 2006 as well as statements of its President on the situation in Lebanon, in particular the statement of 18 June 2000 (S/PRST/20000/31),
Expressing deepest concern at the escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and Israel since 12 July 2006,
Taking note of the letter dated 7 July 2006 (S/2006/496) from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Lebanon to the United Nations conveying to the Secretary-General the request that the Security Council extend the mandate of UNIFIL for a further period of six months,
Having examined the Secretary-General's report on UNIFIL of 22 July 2006 (S/2006/560), including its observations that, as a result of continuing hostilities along the Blue Line, UNIFIL has been impeded to carry out its activities effectively, and noting in this context the Secretary-General's recommendation that the mandate of the Force be extended for a period of one month pending consideration of other options for future arrangements in South Lebanon,
* Urges all concerned parties to abide scrupulously by their obligation to respect the safety of UNIFIL and other United Nations personnel, and avoid any course of action which might endanger United Nations personnel, and calls on them to allow the Force to resupply its positions, conduct search and rescue operations on behalf of its personnel and undertake any other measures the Force deems necessary to ensure the safety of its personnel;
* Decides to extend the mandate of UNIFIL until 31 August 2006;
* Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

## References

This work is excerpted from an official document of the United Nations. The policy of this organisation is to keep most of its documents in the public domain in order to disseminate "as widely as possible the ideas (contained) in the United Nations Publications".
Pursuant to UN Administrative Instruction ST/AI/189/Add.9/Rev.2 available in English only, these documents are in the public domain worldwide:
* Official records (proceedings of conferences, verbatim and summary records, …)
* United Nations documents issued with a UN symbol
* Public information material designed primarily to inform the public about United Nations activities (not including public information material that is offered for sale).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# United Nations Security Council Resolution 1691

* related portals: United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Adopted by the Security Council at its 5473rd meeting, on 22 June 2006
The Security Council,
Having examined the application of the Republic of Montenegro for admission to the United Nations (S/2006/409),
Recommends to the General Assembly that the Republic of Montenegro be admitted to membership in the United Nations.
This work is excerpted from an official document of the United Nations. The policy of this organisation is to keep most of its documents in the public domain in order to disseminate "as widely as possible the ideas (contained) in the United Nations Publications".
Pursuant to UN Administrative Instruction ST/AI/189/Add.9/Rev.2 available in English only, these documents are in the public domain worldwide:
* Official records (proceedings of conferences, verbatim and summary records, …)
* United Nations documents issued with a UN symbol
* Public information material designed primarily to inform the public about United Nations activities (not including public information material that is offered for sale).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# United Nations Security Council Resolution 1694

* related portals: United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Adopted by the Security Council at its 5487th meeting, on 13 July 2006
The Security Council,
Recalling its previous resolutions and statements of its President, including its resolution 1667 (2006) of 31 March 2006,
Noting that the report of the Secretary-General of 14 March 2006 (S/2006/159) recommended, inter alia, changes to the configuration of the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), in view of the completion by the mission of a number of tasks, and in the context of a review of the appropriate mandates for and composition of the mission, and that his report of 9 June 2006 (S/2006/376) reiterated his recommendation for the addition of a formed police unit,
Determining that the situation in Liberia continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security,
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
1. Decides to increase the authorized size of UNMIL’s civilian police component by 125, and to decrease the authorized size of UNMIL’s military component by 125, from the current authorized levels;
2. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.
This work is excerpted from an official document of the United Nations. The policy of this organisation is to keep most of its documents in the public domain in order to disseminate "as widely as possible the ideas (contained) in the United Nations Publications".
Pursuant to UN Administrative Instruction ST/AI/189/Add.9/Rev.2 available in English only, these documents are in the public domain worldwide:
* Official records (proceedings of conferences, verbatim and summary records, …)
* United Nations documents issued with a UN symbol
* Public information material designed primarily to inform the public about United Nations activities (not including public information material that is offered for sale).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse