OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Men-at-the-Bar/Monckton, John Lionel Alexander

​Monckton, John Lionel Alexander, educated at Oriel Coll., Oxon, a student of Lincoln's Inn 16 Jan., 1882 (then aged 20), called to the bar 26 Jan., 1885 (eldest son of Sir John Braddick Monckton, town clerk city of London); born , 1862 (see Foster's Baronetage).
    59, Cromwell Road, S.W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Moncreiff, Frederick Charles

​Moncreiff, Hon. Frederick Charles, undergrad. New Coll., Oxon, a member of the North-eastern circuit, author of Liability of Innkeepers and Wit and Wisdom of the Bench and the Bar, a student of the Middle Temple 6 May, 1869, called to the bar 30 April, 1874 (4th son of Rt. Hon. James, Lord Moncreiff, LL.D.); born 15 Oct., 1847 (see Foster's Peerage).
    24, Davies Street, Berkeley Square, W.; 3, Pump Court, Temple, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Key, Richard William

​Key, Richard William, a member of the Northern circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 4 Nov., 1868 (then aged 20), called to the bar 6 June, 1871 (only son of Richard Charles Key, of Suffolk Lodge, Stamford Hill, London); born 25 Dec., 1847; married 9 Aug., 1870, Augusta, dau. of Mr. J. H. Bridgman, of Bridport, Dorset.
    2, Hare Court, Temple, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Key, Thomas

​Key, Thomas, joint editor of Davidson's Precedents and of Compendium of Precedents in Conveyancing, a student of Lincoln's Inn 8 Nov,, 1852 (then aged 19), certificate of honour Jan., 1856, called to the bar 30 April, 1856 (eldest son of Thomas Hewett Key, Esq., of University Coll., London); born , 1833.
    11, Campden House Road, Kensington, W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kidston, John Wallace

​Kidston, John Wallace, M.A., B.C.L. Queen's Coll., Oxon, a student of Lincoln's Inn 17 Nov., 1875 (then aged 24), called to the bar 3 July, 1878 (2nd son of William Kidston, late of Glasgow, merchant, dec.); born , 1851.
    Pall Mall Club, S.W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kilby, George Charles

​Kilby, George Charles, deputy superintendent and remembrancer Calcutta, matric. London Univ. 1869, a student of the Middle Temple 2 May, 1868, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1871 (eldest son of George Kilby, of York, dec., formerly a merchant in Calcutta); born , ; married 31 Oct., 1872, Laura Blanche, 2nd dau. of late Henry E. Scott, Esq., of Bevelan, Midlothian.
    Calcutta.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kettle, Rupert Edward Cooke

​Kettle, Rupert Edward Cooke, undergrad. St. John's Coll., Camb., goes the Oxford circuit, a student of the Middle Temple 19 Jan., 1874, called to the bar 7 May, 1879 (eldest son of His Honour Sir Rupert Alfred Kettle, of Merridale, co. Staff, and of the Middle Temple, Knt., judge of county courts); born 26 Dec., 1854.
    Merridale, Wolverhampton; 59, Colmore Row, Birmingham.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kettle, Sir Rupert Alfred

​Kettle, Sir Rupert Alfred, Knt., judge of county courts (circuit No. 23) since 1859, knighted 1 Dec, 1880, one of the committee for framing county court rules, assistant chairman quarter sessions co. Stafford, J.P., D.L., J.P. cos. Hereford, Worcester, and Merioneth, a student of the Middle Temple 2 June, 1842, called to the bar 6 June, 1845, bencher 24 Nov., 1882 (5th son of Thomas F. Kettle, of Birmingham, merchant, dec.); born 9 Jan., 1817; married 18 Dec, 1851, Mary, dau. and heir of late William Cooke, Esq., of Merridale, co. Stafford; she died 13 July, 1884, leaving issue (see Foster's Baronetage).
    Glan-y-don, Towyn, Merioneth; Merridale, Wolverhampton; Reform Club
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kettlewell, Herbert Harrison

​Kettlewell, Herbert Harrison, B.A., Christ Coll., Camb., 1878, a student of Lincoln's Inn 4 May, 1877 (then aged 23), called to the bar 29 June, 1881 (eldest son of William Christian Kettlewell, Esq., late of Moor House, Yorks dec.); born , 1855.
    2, New Square, Lincoln's Inn, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Khory, Edaljee Jamsetjee

​Khory, Edaljee Jamsetjee, practises before the High Court of Bombay, a student of the Inner Temple 9 June, 1879 (then aged 30), called to the bar 3 May, 1882 (only son of Jamsetjee Maneckjee Khory, of Calcutta, merchant); born , 1849.
    Bombay.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kilburn, Burleigh Dunbar

​Kilburn, Burleigh Dunbar, B.A., Christ Church, Oxon, 1883, a student of the Inner Temple 24 Jan., 1882 (then aged 21), called to the bar 29 April, 1885 (only son of William Edward Kilburn, of St. Laurence, Isle of Wight); born , 1861.
    St. Laurence, Isle of Wight.
# Mors Benefica

"Give me to die unwitting of the day,"
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1897), "Mors Benefica" in Poems, now first collected.
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1908), "Mors Benefica" in The poems of Edmund Clarence Stedman.
# Morse Dry Dock Repair Company v. The Northern Star

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
271 U.S. 552
Morse Dry Dock Repair Company v. The Northern Star
Argued: May 6 and 7, 1926. --- Decided: June 7, 1926
Messrs. A. H. Stetson, of New York City, and William E. Leahy, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
Mr. Frank A. Bernero, of New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice HOLMES 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
# Morse v. Boswell/Dissent Douglas

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
393 U.S. 1052
Morse v. Boswell
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, dissenting.
When this case was before us earlier on an application for a stay, I filed a dissenting opinion, 393 U.S. 802, 89 S.Ct. 709, 21 L.Ed.2d 430, indicating that the issues to be presented on the petition for certiorari were at least in part substantial.
Some of the enlistment contracts with which we deal provide that these Reservists agree to active duty in 'time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress,' as provided in 10 U.S.C. § 672. The latter section calls for active duty 'In time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress, or when otherwise authorized by law.' And see 10 U.S.C. § 673.
The call-up was pursuant to a 1966 Act, 80 Stat. 981, which authorized the President to activate any unit of the Reserve for a period not to exceed 24 months.
There has been no declaration of a national emergency either by Congress or by the President.
There has been no declaration of war by the Congress.
How then can 10 U.S.C. § 672 and the enlistment contracts be dishonored?
The only answer given is that the phrase 'when otherwise authorized by law' contained in 10 U.S.C. § 673 covers all future laws that may be passed.
That phrase, as I understand it, refers to existing law, not to any law that may be passed. Mrs. Justice Holmes said as much in United States v. Dalcour, 203 U.S. 408, 421, 27 S.Ct. 58, 51 L.Ed. 248. In his case the words were 'otherwise provided by law' and he said:
'These words must be taken to refer to existing provisions and not to be merely a futile permission to future legislatures to make a change.'
The meaning must of course depend on the precise setting of the phrase. It does real violence to reason and to morality to read § 672 as an openend power to change any promise willy-nilly. As I indicated in my dissent when the stay was before us, the phrase 'when otherwise authorized by law' has meaning when construed as referring to existing law alone. See 393 U.S. 808-809, at n. 17, 89 S.Ct. 712.
When we allow it a more expanded meaning as embracing all future laws passed, we become an agency for helping to create an awesome credibility gap.
We should construe laws as fulfilling, not breaking, promises made by this all-powerful government to its citizens, unless no alternative is open to us.
The alternative is plain: to apply the 1966 Act to all enlistment contracts that do not contain the solemn promise that active duty starts only on a declaration of war or a declaration of a national emergency.
This case should be set for argument.

## 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
# Morse v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Morse 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.
* Morse v. United States (229 U.S. 208)
* Morse v. United States (267 U.S. 80)
* Morse v. United States (270 U.S. 151)
See also United States v. Morse.
# Morse v. United States (229 U.S. 208)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
229 U.S. 208
Morse v. United States
Argued: May 2, 1913. --- Decided: May 26, 1913
Messrs. George A. King and William B. King for appellant.
Mr. Frederick De Courcy Faust, Acting Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

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

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
95 U.S. 551
Morrow v. Whitney
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the States of Wisconsin.
This is an action of ejectment brought in the Brown County Circuit Court, Wisconsin, by Whitney and Baker, for the possession of a tract of land, consisting of ninety-four acres and a fraction of an acre, situated in the borough of Fort Howard, in that county and State. On the trial, the plaintiffs deraigned title to the premises from one Pierre Grignon, to whom a patent of the United States was issued June 2, 1870. The defendant Morrow set up an adverse possession of the premises in himself, and parties through whom he derived his interest, for more than forty years, under a claim of title founded upon a written instrument as a conveyance of the premises. On the trial he relied upon a legislative confirmation of a claim under the act of Congress of Feb. 21, 1823, of one Alexis Gardapier, from whom he traced his title.
Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, and, it having been affirmed by the Supreme Court of the State, Morrow sued out this writ of error. The additional facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Timothy O. Howe for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Matt. H. Carpenter, contra.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD 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
# Morse v. Boswell

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
393 U.S. 802
Morse v. Boswell
For opinions of the Court see 393 U.S. 802, 89 S.Ct. 41 and 42, 21 L.ed.2d 86.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, dissenting.

## 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
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, George Edward Aubert

​Ross, George Edward Aubert, practises before the High Court at Allahabad, a student of the Middle Temple 30 May, 1868, called to the bar 17 Nov., 1871 [4th son of (Hon.) Alexander Ross, a judge of High Court of Agra, North-west Provinces India]; born , ; married Nov., 1878, Mary Lomax, 2nd dau. of late William Sampson Hodgkinson, of Wookey Hole and Wells, Somerset, and has issue.
    Allahabad, North-west Provinces India.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, John Cameron

​Ross, John Cameron, a student of the Inner Temple 7 Nov., 1860 (then aged 25), called to the bar 6 June, 1863 (2nd son of late William Ross, of Skeldon, British Guiana); born , 1835.
    Skeldon, British Guiana.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, Frederick John Gaunter

​Ross, Frederick John Gaunter, counsel at Penang, a student of the Middle Temple 1 Nov., 1867, called to the bar 1 May, 1871 (2nd son of John Ross, late of Penang, East Indies, surgeon, dec.); born , .
    Pena.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, John

​Ross, John, a student of Lincoln's Inn 2 Nov., 1831 (then aged 24), called to the bar 8 June, 1838 (4th son of William Ross, Esq., of London); born , 1807.
    5, Furnival's Inn, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, Edward Charles

​Ross, Edward Charles, a student of the Middle Temple 11 Feb., 1830, called to the bar 8 June, 1838 (eldest son of John Pemberton Ross, of the island of St. Vincent); born , .
    St. Vincent, West Indies.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross-of-Bladensberg, Robert Skeffington

​Ross-of-Bladensberg, Robert Skeffington, M.A. Exeter Coll., Oxon, B.A. 1873, late capt. royal South Down militia, J.P., D.L., co. Down, a member of the Jesuit Society, a student of Lincoln's Inn 3 May, 1871 (then aged 24), called to the bar 30 April, 1875 (eldest son of David Ross-of-Bladensberg, Esq., of Rosstrevor, co. Down); born 26 Jan., 1847 (see Foster's Peerage, V. Massereene).
    Rosstrevor, co. Down.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, Hamilton

​Ross, Hamilton, special pleader and conveyancer, a student of the Middle Temple 6 June, 1874, called to the bar 25 June, 1879 (5th son of Henry James Ross, of St. Kitts, and of the Middle Temple, bar.-at-law); born , .
    St. Kitts, West Indies.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Rostron, Simpson

​Rostron, Simpson, a student of the Middle Temple 21 Jan., 1856, called to the bar 17 Nov., 1858 (only son of late Lawrence Rostron, Esq., of Edenfield, co. Lanc., formerly of Bowden, Cheshire); born 24 April, 1853; married 12 Sept., 1868, Christiana Jane, only dau. of late William Riley, Esq., of Outwoods, Warwickshire.
    Beddington, Surrey; 1, Hare Court, Temple, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, Alexander Henry

​Ross, Alexander Henry, M.P. Maidstone since 1880, M.A., Christ Church, Oxon, 1864, from Eton, late major West Kent militia, sometime member of Metropolitan Asylums Board, J.P. Middlesex, a student of the Inner Temple 17 Jan., 1851 (then aged 21), called to the bar 9 June, 1854 (2nd son of late Charles Ross, Esq.); born 21 Oct., 1829; married , 1859, Juliana, dau. of William Moseley, Esq., of Leaton Hall, co. Stafford, and has issue.
    9, Upper Berkeley Street, W.; Carlton Club.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Ross, Edward Charles Russell

​Ross, Edward Charles Russell, LL.B., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1865, visitor of lunatics since 1877, chairman of Lord Chancellor's Board of Lunacy 1874-7, a student of the Inner Temple 4 Nov., 1864 (then aged 23), called to the bar 30 April, 1869 (4th son of Horatio Ross, Esq., of Fernlee, Caterham, Surrey); born , 1841.
    Ben Wyvis Forest, Ross-shire; 67, Eaton Place, S.W.
# Mississippi v. Turner/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
In this case, the State of Mississippi has requested a 30-day extension of time within which to file a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Mississippi Supreme Court. The State submits that the extension is required due to "state budgetary cuts," which have resulted in a reduction in appellate staff.
The law states that the "time for appeal or application for a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of a State court in a criminal case shall be as prescribed by the rules of the Supreme Court." 28 U.S.C. § 2101(d). Those rules provide that "[a] petition for a writ of certiorari to review a judgment in any case, civil or criminal, entered by a state court of last resort . . . shall be deemed in time when it is filed with the Clerk of this Court within 90 days after the entry of judgment," Rule 13.1. This period may be extended by a Justice of this Court "for good cause shown" for a period not to exceed 60 days, Rule 13.2, but an application for such an extension "is not favored," Rule 13.6.
In my view, counsel's overextended caseload is not "good cause shown," unless it is the result of events unforeseen and uncontrollable by both counsel and client. That is not so here. Like any other litigant, the State of Mississippi must choose between hiring more attorneys and taking fewer appeals. Its budget allocations cannot, and I am sure were not expected to, alter this Court's filing requirements.
The application is denied.
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
# Mississippi v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
498 U.S. 16
Mississippi v. United States
No. 113, Original

## 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
# Missouri, Bright Land of the West

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
* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Missouri! Missouri! bright land of the West! Where the way worn emigrant always found rest, Who gave to the farmer reward for his toil, Expended in turning and breaking the soil. Awake to the notes of the bugle and drum, Awake from your slumber the tyrant hath come!
And swear by your honor your chains shall be riven, And add your bright star to our flag of eleven.
They forced you to join in their unholy fight, With fire and with sword, with power and with might. ´Gainst father and brother, and loved ones so near, ´Gainst women, and children, and all you hold dear; They've o´er run your soil, insulted your press, They´ve murdered your citizens—shown no redress—
So swear by your honor your chains shall be riven, And add your bright star to our flag of eleven.
Missouri! Missouri! oh, where thy proud fame! Free land of the west, thy once cherished name, Now trod in the dust by a despot´s command, Proclaiming his own tyrant law o´er the land; Brave men of Missouri, strike without fear, McCulloch, and Jackson, and Price are all near.
Then swear by your honor your chains shall be riven, And add your bright star to our flag of eleven.
# Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Cade

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
233 U.S. 642
Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Cade
Argued: February 24, 1914. --- Decided: May 11, 1914
Messrs. Joseph M. Bryson, Aldis B. Browne, Alexander S.C.oke, and A. H. McKnight for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 643-645 intentionally omitted]
No appearance for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Ward

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
244 U.S. 383
Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Ward
Argued: April 30, 1917. --- Decided: June 4, 1917
Messrs. Alexander Britton, Joseph M. Bryson,Charles C. Huff, Alexander H. McKnight, and C. S. Burg for plaintiffs in error.
No appearance for defendants in error.
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
# Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Harris

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
234 U.S. 412
Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Harris
Argued: February 24, 1914. --- Decided: June 8, 1914
Messrs. Joseph M. Bryson, Aldis B. Browne, Alexander S.C.oke, and A. H. McKnight for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 413 intentionally omitted]
No counsel appeared for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 414 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

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

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Missolonghi."
* 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.
* "Missolonghi," in The American Cyclopædia (1879)
* "Missolonghi," in Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition (16) (1883)
* "Missolonghi," in The Nuttall Encyclopædia, (ed.) by James Wood, London: Frederick Warne and Co., Ltd. (1907)
* "Missolonghi," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Missolonghi," in The New Student's Reference Work, Chicago: F.E. Compton and Co. (1914)
* "Missolonghi," in Collier's New Encyclopedia, New York: P. F. Collier & Son Co. (1921)
In literature:
# Miller v. California

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Miller v. California."
* 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.
* 1967 • Miller v. California (389 U.S. 968),
* 1968 • Miller v. California (392 U.S. 616),
* 1973 • Miller v. California (413 U.S. 15),
* 2003 • Miller v. California (540 U.S. 1009)
* 2004 • Miller v. California (355 F.3d 1172)
# Miller v. Austen

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
54 U.S. 218
Miller v. Austen

## 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
# Miller v. Brass Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
104 U.S. 350
Miller v. Brass Company
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. John S. Beach for the appellants.
Mr. C. R. Ingersoll, 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
# Miller v. Brooklyn Life Insurance Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
79 U.S. 285
Miller v. Brooklyn Life Insurance 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