Charles Morningstar & Co. v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
On Application for Review of Decisions by the Board of United States General Appraisers. For decisions below, see G. A. 5,912 (T. D. 26,011) and G. A. 6,576 (T. D. 28,073), affirming the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York on importations of so-called “white dextrine.”
1Opinion of the Court
PLATT, District Judge.
The merchandise in both suits is the same. It is made by treating starch with an acid vapor in such way that the granules are disintegrated, and the mass becomes more gelatinous.
Paragraph 285 of the tariff act of 1897 (Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule G, 30 Stat. 173 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1653]) relates to starch. Paragraph 286 covers “Dextrine, burnt starch, gum substitute, or British gum.” The higher rate is on the dextrines. When starch has become sufficiently gummy by treatment, it was deemed best that it should pay the higher rate. The importer thinks it…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Baumhauer v. AustinCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1911
- Advance Solvents & Chemical Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1946
- United States v. GavinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- United States v. JonesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915