Pott v. Arthur
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bradley
This was an action brought by James Pott, Edwin Young, and James B. Young, against Arthur, the collector of customs of New York, to recover back duties paid on books imported in August,-1874. A duty of twenty-five per-cent ad! valorem was exacted ; whilst the plaintiffs claim that they should have been required to pay only ninety per cent of that amount, or twenty-two and a half per cent ad valorem.
As the law stood at the time, in sect. 2504, schedule M, of the Revised Statutes, a duty of twenty-five per cent ad valorem. was imposed óu “books, pamphlets, blank books, &e.” But by sect. 2503 it…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Kush v. RutledgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Versie Kimble v. D. J. McDuffy Inc. And Industrial Foundation of the South, and All of Its SubscribersCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- United States v. TempleSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- In Re KometUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · 1989
- Yankee Network, Inc. v. Federal Communications CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.