Cohn v. Erhardt
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
At Law. Action to recover back customs duties alleged to have been illegally exacted by the defendant, collector of the port of New York.
Read the full summary
At Law. Action to recover back customs duties alleged to have been illegally exacted by the defendant, collector of the port of New York. The merchandise involved in the present suit was imported by the plaintiff's from Europe in April and Juno, 1889, and was classified for duty by the defendant, collector, as “manufactures of iron,” under Schedule 0 (Heyl, now, paragraph 216) of the Tariff Act of March 3, 1883, as follows: “216. Manufactures, articles, or wares not specially enumerated or provided for in this act, composed wholly or in part of iron, steel, copper, lead, nickel, pewter, tin,…
1Opinion of the Court
La. omisk, Circuit Judge;.
The articles here enumerated are indisputably “ japanned.” As such they are within the phra.se "'japanned ware of all kinds” in the tariff act. To take them out of that clause, trade testimony is all that is relied upon. The extreme extent to which such testimony goes in this case is this: that in a branch of trade which deals in a very large number of articles, those articles which it deals in and which are japanned are called “japanned ware” to distinguish them apparently from the articles in which that trade deals which are not japanned. It appears, however, by…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cribari v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1938
- In re ZeimerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1895