Grace v. Collector of Customs of Port & District of San Francisco
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United states for the Northern District of California. The only question before the court upon tills appeal involves the interpretation of paragraph 88 of the "Wilson tariff act. of August 28, 1891. It appears from the record that, in the month of May, 1893, appellants imported into the port of San Francisco 50 cases, containing in all 14,400 bottles, invoiced as “empty pint wine bottles,” which on .Tune 28, 1895, the local appraisers…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United states for the Northern District of California. The only question before the court upon tills appeal involves the interpretation of paragraph 88 of the "Wilson tariff act. of August 28, 1891. It appears from the record that, in the month of May, 1893, appellants imported into the port of San Francisco 50 cases, containing in all 14,400 bottles, invoiced as “empty pint wine bottles,” which on .Tune 28, 1895, the local appraisers returned as "colored glass bottles holding not more than one pint and not less than one-quarter of a pint.” On July 9,…
1Opinion of the CourtHawley, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Paragraph 88 of the Wilson tariff act, considered as a whole, without reference to paragraphs 103 and 101 in the McKinley tariff act, is susceptible of but one construction. It will be observed that it is divided into three distinct and separate subdivisions, each of which, in the language used, is plain, clear, and definite, and entirely free from ambiguity, doubt, or uncertainty. To interpret it, independent of other acts, would simply be to copy it. It would be construed to mean just what it says. The duty on bottle glassware mentioned in the first…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Hobbs v. McLeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- United States v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- American Net & Twine Co. v. WorthingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Aldridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
- Robertson v. SalomonSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ex Parte FlakeCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- United States v. RossCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1898
- O. G. Hempstead & Son v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1907
- American Bank Protection Co. v. City Nat. Bank of JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1913
- United States v. Austin, Nichols & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903