Shoten v. United States

The appellant in this case imported merchandise which was entered at the port of Honolulu, Hawaii, in December, 1922. This merchandise was invoiced as cotton wadding, and was assessed for duty at 40 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 921 of the Tariff Act of 1922 as being a “manufacture of cotton not specially provided for.”

The importer made protest insisting that it should have been classified under paragraph 1560 simply as “cotton” and therefore admitted free of duty. There was an alternative claim that it might be admitted at 5 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 901 as “cotton waste,…