Bartram v. Robertson
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. This was an action to recover back duties alleged to have been illegally exacted by the collector at New York. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff sued out this writ of error. The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Field
The plaintiffs are merchants doing business in the city of New York, and in March and April, 1882, they made four importations of brown and unrefined sugars and'molasses, the produce and manufacture of the Island of St. Croix, which is a part of the dominions of the king of Denmark. The goods were regularly entered at the custom-house at the port of New York, the plaintiffs claiming at the time that they should -be admitted free of duty under the treaty with Denmark, because like articles, the produce and manufacture of the Hawaiian Islands, were, under the treaty with their king, and the act…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Whitney v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Toho Company, Ltd. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Toho Co. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Austro-Hungarian Consul v. G. A. WestphalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- M. H. Pulaski Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.