United States v. Southmayd
Supreme Court of the United States
This case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court, of the United States for the Southern District of New York. It involved the same question as the preceding case of Marriott v. Bruñe, viz. whether, in calculating the duties upon an importation of sugar, allowance should be made for leakage and drainage, with the additional fact in evidence, that the purchaser abroad takes into consideration the probable loss íe fixing the price to be paid.
Read the full summary
This case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court, of the United States for the Southern District of New York. It involved the same question as the preceding case of Marriott v. Bruñe, viz. whether, in calculating the duties upon an importation of sugar, allowance should be made for leakage and drainage, with the additional fact in evidence, that the purchaser abroad takes into consideration the probable loss íe fixing the price to be paid. There was in this case only a single' importation, which was made from Porto Bico, in September, .1849., The weight of the sugar,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woodbury
This case was an importation of both sugar and molasses, under circumstances raising no question, except one, which has not been settled in the preceding case of Marriott v. Bruñe et al.
The additional point here arises on the evidence of several witnesses,, that, when sugars of this .kind are purchased abroad, the buyer usually takes into-consideration in fixing the price, that the drainage or waste in weight will probably equal near five per cent, on the whole. It is argued, that the price abroad is, therefore, lower in this proportion on this account; and hence, that no deduction should be…
2Cited by1 opinion
- The United States, in Error v. Horace Southmayd and Stephen C. SouthmaydSupreme Court of the United States · 1850