C. B. Richard & Co. v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. This case involves the construction of the provision in Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule N, par. 454, 30 Stat. 194 [U. S. Comp.
Read the full summary
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. This case involves the construction of the provision in Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule N, par. 454, 30 Stat. 194 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1678], reading as follows: “Statuary, not specially provided for in this act, twenty per centum ad valorem; but the term ‘statuary’ as used in this act shall be understood to Include only such statuary as is cut, carved, or otherwise wrought by hand from a solid block or mass of marble, stone, alabaster, or from metal.”
1Opinion of the CourtHough, District Judge
(after stating the facts). The subject of this protest is an art object brought from Italy and belonging to.the *955class of metal statuary ruled upon in Tiffany v. United States, 71 Fed. 691, 18 C. C. A. 297. In the ordinary acceptation of the word it is “statuary,” but that word is given by paragraph 454 of the tariff act of 1897 (Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule N, 30 Stat. 194 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1678]) a specific and peculiar definition, to be construed in accordance with the Tiiiany Case, supra.
The protesting importer contends that the commercial agreement between the United…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. Julius Wile Bro. & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1904
- Tiffany v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Altman v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1909