United States v. Goldback
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Virginia
The defendant [Abraham Goldbackj is a j manufacturer of lucifer matches. As a nov- ! city in his line of business, instead of putting . up his matches in a box of one compartment, ' he provides two sliding drawers in each box, i the drawers being open on top when drawn i out, each holding about forty-two matches, and I not large enough to hold by possibility as i much as, or more than, fifty; the package i holding from eighty to ninety matches.
Read the full summary
The defendant [Abraham Goldbackj is a j manufacturer of lucifer matches. As a nov- ! city in his line of business, instead of putting . up his matches in a box of one compartment, ' he provides two sliding drawers in each box, i the drawers being open on top when drawn i out, each holding about forty-two matches, and I not large enough to hold by possibility as i much as, or more than, fifty; the package i holding from eighty to ninety matches. It is | not pretended that there is any design on the i part of the manufacturer to defraud the revenue. The information is in the nature of a j…
1Opinion of the Court
HUGHES, District Judge.
Section 3437 provides that friction matches, ‘fin parcels or packages containing one hundred matches or less." shall be stamped with a one cent stamp on “each parcel or package.” The device of this manufacturer is a package but little if any greater in size than the ordinary match-, box; and it is so contrived that one-half of its contents may be used without disturbance to the other half. That, and its novelty, and not any design to defraud the revenue, are all that distinguish it from the ordinary matchbox.
It is contended by the United States attorney that the two…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Package Machinery Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951
- The Plymouth RockDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1877