Question:
Read the text and answer the questions.
CHAPTER XXIX.

"Thus doth the ever-changing course of thing! Run a perpetual circle, ever turning; And that same day, that highest glory brings, Brings us to the point of back returning."

DANIEL,

In scenes like that just related, it is not easy to collect details. All that was ever known, beyond the impetuous manner of the assault in which the ruins were carried, was in the dire result. Half the French on the islet were weltering in their blood, and the surface of the rocks was well sprinkled with enemies who had not been more fortunate. It had been a desperate onset, in which mortification increased natural intrepidity, which had been nobly resisted, but in which numbers had necessarily prevailed. Among the English slain was Sir Frederick Dashwood himself; he lay about a yard from his own gig, with a ball directly through his head. Griffin was seriously hurt, but Clinch was untouched, on the low rampart, waving an English Jack--after having hauled down a similar emblem of the French. His boat had first touched the rock, her crew had first reached the ruin, and, of all in her, he himself had taken the lead. Desperately had he contended for Jane and a commission, and this time Providence appeared to smile on his efforts. As for Raoul, he lay in front of his own rampart, having rushed forward to meet the party of Clinch, and had actually crossed swords with his late prisoner, when a musket-ball, fired by the hands of McBean, traversed his body.
1. Do we know all the specifics of what happened in this incident?
2. What nationality was Sir Frederick Dashwood?
3. What happened to him?
4. How?
5. Where was he found?
6. How close?
7. What percentage of the French were killed?
8. Was Clinch killed?
9. Where was he seen?
10. Was he holding something?
11. What
12. Had he done something with an enemy flag?
13. What?
14. Did the smaller army win?
15. Whose vessel arrived first?
16. Who had a fight with him?
17. What happened to him?
18. Who shot him?

Numbered answers:
1. No
2. English
3. He was slain
4. A ball through his head
5. Near his gig
6. About a yard away
7. 50
8. No
9. On a rampart
10. Yes
11. An English Jack
12. Yes
13. He hauled it down
14. No
15. Clinch's
16. Raoul
17. He was killed by a musket-ball
18. McBean

Question:
Read the text and answer the questions.
ISTANBUL, Turkey (CNN) -- In a landmark case, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Tuesday that Turkish authorities failed to protect a woman from her abusive ex-husband, effectively allowing his pattern of domestic violence to lead to the killing of her mother at gunpoint.

Judges unanimously ruled that the Turkish state violated three articles prohibiting torture and discrimination, and ensuring the right to life of the victim.

Legal experts said the ruling sets a precedent throughout Turkey and Europe for governments to protect women from domestic abuse.

"It's a very good decision," said Pinar Ilkkaracan, co-founder of the Istanbul-based organization Women for Women's Human Rights. "This means now that the state must take effective measures to protect women from violence."

According to a Turkish government study released in February, four out of 10 Turkish women are beaten by their husbands. The European Union-funded poll concluded that "one out of 10 women has reported to have been beaten during her pregnancy."

Turkey passed the Family Protection Act in 1998, which is supposed to offer women protection against domestic violence.

But in the case, Opuz v. Turkey, judges ruled that the "discriminatory judicial passivity in Turkey created a climate that was conducive to domestic violence."

Court documents state that in the southeastern Turkish city of Diyarbakir, Nahide Opuz, 36, and her mother were the repeat victims of attacks by the woman's ex-husband, Huseyin Opuz, referred to as H.O.

"Criminal proceedings were brought against H.O. on three occasions," the court wrote. On one occasion, Huseyin Opuz ran over the two women with a car. In 2001, he stabbed his ex-wife seven times with a knife. The ex-wife survived the assault. Turkish authorities detained and then released her ex-husband after fining him the equivalent of about $580.
1. Who made a ruling?
2. Who wasn't protected?
3. Who was menacing her?
4. Was he nice to her?
5. In what country did this happen?
6. Who was murdered?
7. How was she killed?
8. Who didn't protect her?
9. How many statutes did it not follow?
10. What wasn't allowed by these statutes?
11. Who spoke about the event?
12. Did Ilkkaracan think this was a good development?
13. What group did Ilkkaracan start?
14. Where is that group located?
15. What law did Turkey pass on this subject?
16. When?
17. What was the woman's name?
18. And her ex-husband?
19. How old was the woman?
20. What town did she live in?

Numbered answers:
1. the European Court of Human Rights
2. a woman
3. her ex-husband
4. no
5. Turkey
6. the woman's mother
7. at gunpoint
8. Turkish authorities
9. three
10. torture and discrimination
11. Pinar Ilkkaracan
12. yes
13. Women for Women's Human Rights
14. Istanbul
15. the Family Protection Act
16. 1998
17. Nahide Opuz
18. Huseyin Opuz
19. 36
20. Diyarbakir

Question:
Read the text and answer the questions.
Chapter 32 The Disposal of a Bonanza

'SUCH was Ritter's narrative,' said I to my two friends. There was a profound and impressive silence, which lasted a considerable time; then both men broke into a fusillade of exciting and admiring ejaculations over the strange incidents of the tale; and this, along with a rattling fire of questions, was kept up until all hands were about out of breath. Then my friends began to cool down, and draw off, under shelter of occasional volleys, into silence and abysmal reverie. For ten minutes now, there was stillness. Then Rogers said dreamily--

'Ten thousand dollars.'

Adding, after a considerable pause--

'Ten thousand. It is a heap of money.'

Presently the poet inquired--

'Are you going to send it to him right away?'

'Yes,' I said. 'It is a queer question.'

No reply. After a little, Rogers asked, hesitatingly:

'ALL of it?--That is--I mean--'

'Certainly, all of it.'

I was going to say more, but stopped--was stopped by a train of thought which started up in me. Thompson spoke, but my mind was absent, and I did not catch what he said. But I heard Rogers answer--

'Yes, it seems so to me. It ought to be quite sufficient; for I don't see that he has done anything.'

Presently the poet said--

'When you come to look at it, it is more than sufficient. Just look at it--five thousand dollars! Why, he couldn't spend it in a lifetime! And it would injure him, too; perhaps ruin him--you want to look at that. In a little while he would throw his last away, shut up his shop, maybe take to drinking, maltreat his motherless children, drift into other evil courses, go steadily from bad to worse--'
1. Who had told a narration?
2. Who was informed of this?
3. What was their immediate response?
4. Was it brief?
5. What did they do afterwards?
6. Did they eventually become quiet again?
7. Who broke the quiet?
8. How much money was involved?
9. Was it to be sent immediately?
10. Who had asked about that?
11. Did the narrator find this question to be unusual?
12. Did the narrator intend to send the entire sum?
13. Did he pause to reflect?
Numbered answers:
1. Ritter
2. two friends.
3. a profound and impressive silence
4. No
5. both men broke into a fusillade of exciting and admiring ejaculations
6. Yes
7. Rogers
8. Ten thousand dollars
9. Yes
10. the poet
11. Yes
12. Yes
13. Yes