Middleton & Co. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. In the decision below the Circuit Court affirmed without opinion a decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers (G. A. 5,995 [T. D. 26,234]), in which a majority of the Board affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. In the decision below the Circuit Court affirmed without opinion a decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers (G. A. 5,995 [T. D. 26,234]), in which a majority of the Board affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York. The article in controversy wps described .by the Board as being commercially lino.wn as arrowroot, consisting of a fine floury form of starch extracted from the tubers or foots of 'the arrowroot plant, and being chiefly used for…
1Per curiam
In affirming the decision of the court below and of the Board of General Appraisers, we do not mean to decide that the importations in'controversy'Járrowroot in its starchy form) were, not' dutiable directly under paragraph 285 of the tariff act of July 24, 1897, c.11, § 1, Schedule G, 30 Stat. 173 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1653], as a “preparation fit for use as starch.” The Board held them dutiable under that paragraph indirectly’by similitude. Whether tins reasoning was sound'or not,"a correct result has' been reached. ■'
2Cited by1 opinion
- Schall & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955