In re Ballin
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
At Law. The firm of Ballin, Joseph & Co. imported by the City of Richmond, July 21, 1890, into the port of New York certain worsted cloths, composed entirely of worsted, which were returned by the appraisers on the invoice-as “woolen cloths” under 80 cents, and duty was thereupon assessed on said merchandise by the collector at the rate of 35 cents per pound and 35 per centum ad valorem, under the provisions of the tariff act of March 3, 1883, (Tariff Ind. par. 362,j and the…
Read the full summary
At Law. The firm of Ballin, Joseph & Co. imported by the City of Richmond, July 21, 1890, into the port of New York certain worsted cloths, composed entirely of worsted, which were returned by the appraisers on the invoice-as “woolen cloths” under 80 cents, and duty was thereupon assessed on said merchandise by the collector at the rate of 35 cents per pound and 35 per centum ad valorem, under the provisions of the tariff act of March 3, 1883, (Tariff Ind. par. 362,j and the act of May 9, 1890, entitled “An act providing for the classification of worsted cloths as woolens.” The importers duly…
1Opinion of the Court
Lacombe, Circuit Judge,
(orally.) There is nothing on the face of this act indicating that it is intended to repeal, or in any way alter, any act imposing customs duties. It is contended that in the existing state of affairs when this act was passed, in the former statutes, in the decisions of the courts, and in the debates of congress, we may find sufficient to warrant the conclusion that it was the intention of congress by the passage of this act to deal with the question of the duty to be laid upon goods' such as are imported here, and to change their status, so as to lay upon them a higher…
2Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896