Arthur H. Thomas Co. v. United States

Sullivan, Judge:

The plaintiff corporation in these three protests -expresses dissatisfaction with the action of the collector at the port of Philadelphia in assessing duty under the Tariff Act of 1930 at “85% on so-called cover glasses or slides, glass for optical instruments or equipment, etc.” (Italics ours). The words in quotation are identical in each protest. There are several claims for lower rates of duty.

Paragraph 218 (a) covers—

Biological, chemical, metallurgical, pharmaceutical, and surgical articles and utensils of all kinds, including all scientific articles, and utensils, * * *…