OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Soldiers and Civilians who left Port Louis

Soldiers and Civilians who left Port Louis on the Argentine Schooner Sarandí on 5 January 1833, and the Prisoners sent to Buenos Aires by José María Pinedo in the British Schooner Rapid on 1 January 1833
Lista de la Tropa, sus familias y Peones de la Isla de Malvinas, que vienen de pasaje en la "Sarandí"
Capitan: D. Juan Antonio Gomila Cabo I. Miguel Hernandez y su mujer Maria Romero Soldados: José Barrera, José Gómez, Manuel Francisco Fernández, Toribio Montesuma
Batallon del Río de la Plata: Sargento: Santiago Almandos
Soldados: José Soto, José Rodríguez
Patricios de Buenos Aires: Soldados: Juan Castro y su mujer Manuela Navarro, Antonio García
Guardia Argentina: Cabo: Daniel Molina
Soldados: Juan J. Rivas y su mujer María I. Beldaño, Dionisio Godoy, Hipólito Villarreal y su mujer Lucía Correa y dos hijos, Gregorio Durán y su mujer Carmen Manzanares, con dos hijos, Benito Vidal y su mujer Maria Saisa
Individuos de la Isla (no pertenecientes a la Comandancia militar): Joaquín Acuña, su mujer Juana Mateo González, su mujer Marica
Extranjeros: José Viel, Juan Quedy, Francisco Ferreyra
1 preso: Máximo Vbarnes (Warnes), que fué destinado
Mujeres pertenecientes a los militares que vienen presos en la goleta inglesa "Rapid" y que vienen en dicha "Sarandí"
María Rodríguez, con tres hijos; Anastasia Romero; Encarnación Álvarez; Carmen Benítez; Tránsita González, con un hijo
Militares que venían presos en la goleta inglesa "Rapid"
Batallón de Artillería: Soldado: José Antonio Díaz
Rio de la Plata: Soldados: Manuel Delgado, Mariano Gadea, Manuel Suares
Patricios de Buenos Aires: Cabo I: Francisco Ramírez Soldados: Bernardino Cáceres, Manuel Sáenz Valiente, Antonio Moncada Sargento 2: José María Díaz
y José María Pinedo (quien firma)

## Source

* Archivo General de la Nación (Buenos Aires), Sala III, 16-6-5.
* Fitte, Ernesto J. La agresión norteamericana a las Islas Malvinas: Crónica documental. Buenos Aires: Emecé, 1966. 556 p.
* Curiosos Detalles de Un Despojo, Publicado en: Conciencia Política, revista del Centro de Estudiantes de Ciencias Políticas de la Universidad Católica Argentina (Nº21 - 2004).
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Soldiers of Freedom

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Soldiers of Freedom."
* 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.
* "Soldiers of Freedom" by Woodrow Wilson in Armistice Day (1927)
* "Soldiers of Freedom", a poem by Katharine Lee Bates from Patriotic pieces from the Great War (1918)
# Soliah v. Heskin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
222 U.S. 522
Soliah v. Heskin
Argued: December 5, 1911. --- Decided: January 9, 1912
Messrs. Edward Engerud and P. G. Swenson for plaintiffs in error.
The court declined to hear Mr. J. S. Watson for defendants in error.
Memorandum opinion by direction of the court. Mr. Justice Lamar:

## 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
# Soldiers of Christ, Arise

* related portals: Hymns.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
   Wesley initially wrote the hymn as a poem titled "The Whole Armour of God, Ephesians VI" in 1747 and was used to defend against criticism of Methodism in the United Kingdom. During their evangelical careers, both Charles Wesley and his brother John Wesley received physical abuse because of them. As a result, this hymn was written and also became known as "The Christian's bugle blast" because of the military references and the apparent call to arms when it was set to music. The hymn was published as "Soldiers of Christ, Arise" in 1749 in Hymns and Sacred Poems with 16 verses of 8 lines. In 1780, it was published as a hymn in John Wesley's A Collection of Hymns for the Use of the People Called Methodists with 12 verses. Since 1847, the hymn is usually only performed with 3 verses.
   [...] Wesley wrote a unique piece of music entitled "Soldiers of Christ" for the hymn to be set to. However the hymn has been set to other tunes as well. One of several tunes for the hymn is by William P. Merrill (1867–1954) however, the main alternative piece of music that is used for the hymn is "Diademata" by George Job Elvey. It is opined that this music has become more associated with "Soldiers of Christ, Arise" than the original "Soldiers of Christ" music.
   —Warning: template has been deprecated.
* "Soldiers of Christ Arise!" in The Canadian Soldiers' Song Book, 1918
* "Soldiers of Christ, Arise" in The Army and Navy Hymnal, 1920
* "Soldiers of Christ, Arise" (unsourced)
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Soldiers of Christ, Arise (unsourced)

Soldiers of Christ arise, and put your armour on, strong in the strength which God supplies through his eternal Son; strong in the Lord of Hosts, and in his mighty power, who in the strength of Jesus trusts is more than conqueror.
Stand then in his great might, with all his strength endued, but take to arm you for the fight the panoply of God; that having all things done, and all your conflicts passed, ye may o'ercome through Christ alone and stand entire at last.
Pray without ceasing, pray, (your Captain gives the word) his summons cheerfully obey and call upon the Lord; to God your every want in instant prayer display, pray always, pray and never faint, pray without ceasing, pray.
From strength to strength go on, wrestle and fight and pray, tread all the powers of darkness down and win the well-fought day. Still let the Spirit cry in all his soldiers, "Come!" till Christ the Lord, descends from high and takes the conq'rors home.
# Studies in Constitutional Law

Preface
Of the three following essays two have been published separately, the one in 1878, the other in 1884. In the first I have attempted to make a critical survey of the English Constitution, combined with as complete a classification as possible, of its sources. I trust that I have not omitted anything essential. I do not examine into the institutions themselves, nor do I attempt to describe them; such a subject cannot be dealt with in a hundred pages. I am satisfied, first, to distinguish different parts of the political compact; next to note the special characteristics of each according to its origin, and lastly, to define the general spirit of the Constitution in which these parts are merged.
The second essay, à propos of a question of method, opens a number of vistas and, so to say, side-views of the Constitution of the United States. These views are tolerably numerous; they throw light over a considerable surface, so that the reader can form a fairly complete picture of the whole Constitution. A good
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Studies in Constitutional Law/Preface to Second Edition

​Monsieur Boutmy further, with great ingenuity, carries over to America, so to speak, the contrast between English and French ideas of government. He shows that, marked as are the contrasts between the English Monarchy and the American Republic, the institutions of the English people on both sides the Atlantic are in essence though not in form the same, and that they stand in marked contrast with the institutions of France. All the characteristics, he suggests, which distinguish the Constitution of England from every one of the constitutions of France reappear, though in a curiously changed shape, in America. In the United States, as in England, custom has the authority of law. The constitutional history of the United States is as obviously as the constitutional history of England the record of an attempt to close political contests by means of treaties. The development of American no less than of English political institutions has been the result of a long conflict between powers which existed prior to the Constitution. The crown, the nobility, and the commons existed long before the English Constitution had even a name. The States, Monsieur Boutmy insists, created the American nation; it was certainly not the American people which created the States.
Of the translation I have said little. Anyone who can read French should study the works of a writer ​so lucid and brilliant as Monsieur Boutmy in the author’s own language. The object of the translator has been not to render the French original sentence by sentence, and still less word for word, but to give, as far as possible, the meaning, the effect, and the spirit of each of Monsieur Boutmy’s pages.
An Appendix to the second edition of the Études de Droit Constitutionnel contains replies to some of Monsieur Boutmy’s critics. This Appendix is omitted in the translation. The criticisms being for the most part unknown in England, the answers thereto have, it is conceived, little interest for English students.
For the few notes, enclosed in brackets and marked (D), I am myself solely responsible.
A. V. Dicey.
Oxford. May, 1891.
# Studies in Constitutional Law/Introduction

Studies in
Constitutional Law
Studies in
Constitutional Law
France–England–United States
by
Émile Boutmy
Member of the Institute of France; Principal of the School of Political Science
translated from the second french edition by
E. M. Dicey
with an introduction by
A. V. Dicey, B.C.L.
Vinerian Professor of English Law, Oxford
London
Macmillan and Co.
and New York
1891
All Rights Reserved
# Studies in Constitutional Law/Preface

Richard Clay and Sons, Limited
London and Bungay.
Introduction
Monsieur Boutmy’s Études de Droit Constitutionnel has reached a second edition in his own country. It has both in England and America been recognized by all persons interested in the comparative study of institutions as a brilliant and original essay on the essential differences between English and French constitutionalism.
In introducing the book in an English form to readers unable to enjoy the French original, I can confidently recommend it to the attention of students. The work was originally composed for Frenchmen; hence the author occasionally insists upon features in the English Constitution which to Englishmen may appear to be too well known to require notice or explanation. But the fact that the essay is written by a foreigner for foreigners, though it may seem at first sight to limit the utility of the book for English students, is in reality one of its great recommendations. We all forget to note matters with which we are familiar. Hence the best ​descriptions of a country’s institutions have been often, not to say generally, composed by foreign observers. A stranger who has carefully studied the policy of a nation which is not his own seizes the broad outline of its political system more easily than can a native. If he overlooks or mistakes a few details, he obtains a better general view of the whole constitutional fabric than can a man who looks at the institutions of his country from the inside. Monsieur Boutmy is no exception to this rule. He has indeed mastered all that can be learnt from the best English historians such as Freeman or Stubbs; writing before the appearance of Mr. Bryce’s exhaustive monograph on the American Commonwealth, he displays a more intimate knowledge of the American Constitution and of American politics than is generally possessed by well-educated Englishmen. But his claim to attention does not depend upon erudition. The aim of his book is to criticize and explain the constitutional ideas which govern the action of the English people in the light thrown upon them by a comparison with the ideas which have guided the constitution makers of France. It is this comparison which constitutes the true value of Monsieur Boutmy’s work. An Englishman learns from it no new facts about the institutions of his country, but he is taught to look at familiar facts from a new point of view.
# Studies in Historic Materialism

Studies in Historic Materialism are three essays written by Max Beer between January 1908 and May 1909, published in those dates in the Socialist Democrat, a newspaper in England.

### Chapter I

* Introduction and Chapter I: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (January 1908)
* Chapter I: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (February 1908)

### Chapter II

* Chapter II: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (March 1908)
* Chapter II: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (April 1908)
* Chapter II: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (June 1908 )
* Chapter II: The Rise of Jewish Monotheism (January 1909)

### Chapter III

* Chapter III - The Rise of Christianity (February 1909)
* Chapter III - The Rise of Christianity (April 1909)
* Chapter III - The Rise of Christianity (May 1909)
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
# Shelton v. United States (356 U.S. 26)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
356 U.S. 26
Shelton v. United States
Jay Paul Shelton, pro se.
Solicitor General Rankin, for the United States.
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

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

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Frankfurter

## Linked case(s)

231 Ark. 641 174 F. Supp. 351 364 U.S. 479
United States Supreme Court
364 U.S. 479
Shelton et al. v. Tucker et al.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
No. 14. Argued: November 7, 1960. --- Decided: December 12, 1960.
174 F. Supp. 351 and 231 Ark. 641, 331 S.W.2d 701, reversed.
Robert L. Carter argued the cause for appellants in No. 14. With him on the brief were Thad D. Williams, Harold B. Anderson and George Howard, Jr.
[p480] Herschel H. Friday, Jr. and Louis L. Ramsay, Jr. argued the cause for appellees in No. 14. With them on the brief were E. Harley Cox and Robert V. Light.
Edwin E. Dunaway argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners in No. 83.
Robert V. Light and Herschel H. Friday, Jr. argued the cause for respondents in No. 83. With them on the briefs were Bruce Bennett, Attorney General of Arkansas, and Thorp Thomas, Assistant Attorney General.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court.
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
# Shelton v. Tiffin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
47 U.S. 163
Shelton v. Tiffin

## 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
# Shelton v. United States (356 U.S. 26)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
356 U.S. 26
Shelton v. United States
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. Upon consideration of the entire record and confession of error by the Solicitor General that the plea of guilty may have been improperly obtained, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.

## 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
# Shelton v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Shelton 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.
* Shelton v. United States (46 U.S. 270)
* Shelton v. United States (356 U.S. 26)
# Shelton v. United States (46 U.S. 270)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
346 U.S. 270
Shelton v. United States
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# South Africa Act, 1909, Amendment Act, 1925

* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa, Acts of the Parliament of South Africa.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Act No. 9 of 1925. First published on 27 May 1925 in Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 1477, and came into force upon publication. Repealed on 31 May 1961 by the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961.
Act
To amend the South Africa Act, 1909.
(Assented to 15th May, 1925.) (Signed by the Governor-General in Dutch.)
Preamble.Whereas the people of the Union of South Africa, being a God-fearing people, have consistently acknowledged Almighty God as the Supreme Leader by Whom the destinies of the peoples of the earth are governed and determined:
And whereas the people represented by the former Colonial Parliaments and the National Convention entered upon Union in prayerful dependence on God:
And whereas the specific mention of the sovereignty and guidance of the Almighty was in no wise omitted from the South Africa Act, 1909, through any want of recognition towards Him:
And whereas it is the desire of the people that the sovereignty and guidance of God shall be specifically mentioned:
​Be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of the Union of South Africa, as follows:―
1. Section one of the South Africa Act, 1909, is hereby repealed and the following new section substituted therefor:―
| Sovereignty and guidance of Almighty God acknowledged. | 1. The people of the Union acknowledge the sovereignty and guidance of Almighty God. |
2. The South Africa Act, 1909, is hereby further amended by the insertion of the following new part after section one hundred and fifty-two:―
“Part XI.
Supplementary.
| Short title. | 153. This Act may be cited as the South Africa Act, 1909.” |
3. This Act may be cited for all purposes as the South Africa Act, 1909, Amendment Act, 1925
This work is in the public domain because it was created and first published in South Africa and it is an official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or an official translation of such a text.
According to the Copyright Act, 1978, § 12 (8) (a), "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts."
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# South Africa Act, 1909, Further Amendment Act, 1925

* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa, Acts of the Parliament of South Africa.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Act No. 34 of 1925. First published on 5 August 1925 in Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 1496, and came into force upon publication. Repealed on 31 May 1961 by the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961.
Act
To amend section fourteen of the South Africa Act, 1909.
Be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of the Union of South Africa, as follows:―
1. Section fourteen of the South Africa Act, 1909, is hereby amended by the deletion of the word “ten” and the substitution therefor of the word “eleven”.
2. This Act may be cited for all purposes as the South Africa Act, 1909, Further Amendment Act, 1925.
This work is in the public domain because it was created and first published in South Africa and it is an official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or an official translation of such a text.
According to the Copyright Act, 1978, § 12 (8) (a), "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts."
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Sister! Since I met thee last

* Sister! Since I met thee last, in The New Monthly Magazine Volume 39, 1833.
* Sister! Since I met thee last, in National Lyrics, and Songs for Music, 1834.
# Sister, awake! close not your eyes

Sister, awake! close not your eyes, The day her light discloses; And the bright morning doth arise Out of her bed of roses.
See the clear sun, the world's bright eye, In at our window peeping; Lo, how he blusheth to espy Us idle wenches sleeping!
Therefore awake, make haste I say, And let us without staying All in our gowns of green so gay Into the park a maying.
# Sister Anna's Probation

As serialized in Once a Week.
* Part 1
* Part 2
* Part 3
* Part 4
* Part 5
# Sistare v. Sistare

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
218 U.S. 1
Sistare v. Sistare
Argued: November 1, 1909. --- Decided: May 31, 1910
Messrs. Robert Goeller and Benjamin Slade for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 2-6 intentionally omitted]
Mr. William J. Brennan for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 6-7 intentionally omitted]
Mr. 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
# Smith v. Wilson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
273 U.S. 388
Smith v. Wilson
Argued: Jan. 5, 6, 1927. --- Decided: Feb 21, 1927
Messrs. A. D. Lipscomb, of Beaumont, Tex., and Frederick S. Tyler, of Washington, D. C., for appellants.
Mr. A. R. Rucks, of Angleton, Tex., for appellees.
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
# Smith v. Washington Gaslight Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
154 U.S. 559
Smith v. Washington Gaslight Company
Argued February 18, 1869 Decided March 1, 1869.
Mr. Chief Justice CHASE 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
# Sonnet 58 (Shakespeare)

One of the 154 sonnets by Shakespeare from the collection Shakespeare's Sonnets (1609).
* "Sonnet 58," in Shake-speares Sonnets, Never before Imprinted (1609)
* "Sonnet 58," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by William J. Rolfe (1883)
* "Sonnet 58," in Shakespeare's Sonnets, (ed.) by Edward Bliss Reed, The Yale Shakespeare (1923)
The Sonnets of William Shakespeare
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse