A. Maschmeijer, Jr., Inc. v. United States

26 Cust. Ct. 26, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedJanuary 11, 1951
DocketC. D. 1292
StatusPublished

This text of 26 Cust. Ct. 26 (A. Maschmeijer, Jr., Inc. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A. Maschmeijer, Jr., Inc. v. United States, 26 Cust. Ct. 26, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2 (cusc 1951).

Opinion

Mollison, Judge:

This protest involves the classification status for tariff purposes of a substance described on the invoice as “Dementhol-ized Corn Mintoil.” It was assessed with duty at the rate of 25 per centum ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 58 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for peppermint oil, and is claimed to be properly dutiable at only 12% per centum ad valorem under the provision in the same paragraph, as amended by the French Trade Agreement, T. D. 48316, for “all other essential and distilled oils not specially provided for." For convenience, the entire text of both provisions is set forth in the margin.1

[27]*27There seems to be no question but that the involved oil is a distilled or essential oil not mixed or compounded with, or containing, alcohol, the sole question at issue being whether it is embraced within the provision for peppermint oil under which it was classified, the plaintiff maintaining the negative in this regard.

Witnesses for both the plaintiff and for the defendant are in agreement that there is a volatile oil obtained from the plant Mentha piper-ita which is known and recognized commonly, commercially, and scientifically in the United States as peppermint oil. The oil here in question is a volatile oil obtained from the plant Mentha anensis. The record shows that such oil is variously known as cornmint oil, Brazilian peppermint oil, and as Japanese peppermint oil, and that sometimes the word “dementholized” is added to the name. The significance of the word “dementholized” in the invoice description of the merchandise at bar was not directly explained in the record, but it would appear proper to infer from certain exhibits received in evidence that the oil in question had been partially dementholized, that is to say, some, but not all, of the menthol had been removed from it prior to importation.

It is the defendant’s position that the provision for peppermint oil in the tariff act includes all forms, varieties, or species of peppermint oil, and that the oil in question falls within that category.

Counsel for both parties have explored the issue from all aspects, and have offered evidence treating of the common, commercial, and scientific meanings of the term “peppermint oil,” as well as the physical and chemical properties thereof, and of cornmint oil, and the uses to which they may be put.

There is no contention here by either party that the commercial meaning of the term differs from the common meaning, so there is no question of the invocation and application of the rule of commercial designation.

On behalf of the plaintiff there was offered and received in evidence as exhibit 2 a sample of oil identified by the chief chemist and manager of the plaintiff as dementholated cornmint oil such as is here involved. There was also received in evidence without objection as exhibit 3 a sample identified by the same witness as peppermint oil. At this point it may be said that the evidence offered by the plaintiff establishes, and it does not appear to be disputed by the defendant, that the physical and chemical characteristics of peppermint oil as represented by exhibit 3 differ from those of cornmint oil as represented by exhibit 2 in that peppermint oil has a pleasant, aromatic, minty odor and a taste described as “not bitter,” while cornmint oil “has somewhat of a bitter odor to it,” and a bitter taste, and peppermint oil has a “much larger menthol count compared with cornmint oil, and a much lower menthone.”

It may also be said to have been established by the evidence, and not controverted, that the uses of the oils represented by exhibits 2 [28]*28and 3 are different. Tbe principal use of cornmint oil, apparently including the dementholized cornmint oil, exhibit 2, was stated to be the production of menthol, while the main use of peppermint oil, exhibit 3, was stated to be as a flavoring agent in candies, confectionery, liqueurs, etc.

An examination into the common meaning of the term “peppermint oil,” as treated by lexicographers, reveals that Mentha piperita is generally given as the source. Thus, Funk & Wagnafls New Standard Dictionary, 1942, gives the following definition under “peppermint”:

1. A pungent aromatic European herb (Mentha piperita), naturalized in the United States, used in medicine and confectionery * * *. 2. An oil or other preparation from peppermint.
The New Century Dictionary, 1946:
peppermint * * *. A menthaceous herb, Mentha piperita, cultivated for its aromatic pungent oil; this oil, or some preparation of it; * * *.
Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2d Ed., 1945:
peppermint * * * 1. A pungent and aromatic mint (Mentha piperita) with dark-green lanceolate leaves and whorls of small pink flowers in spikes.
2. The volatile oil obtained by distilling the herb; * * *.

Under the table of oils in the same dictionary, the source of “peppermint” oil is given as “Peppermint,” and in the same table the source of “Japanese peppermint” oil is given as “Corn mint (Mentha arven-sis) ,” indicating that the term “peppermint oil,” modified by a proper adjective, is applied to cornmint oil or the oil derived from Mentha arvensis.

The article in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1947, Yol. 17, p. 498, under the heading “peppermint,” seems to carry this connection a little further. The pertinent portion of the first paragraph of the article reads as follows:

Peppermint, an indigenous perennial herb of the family Labiatae, and genus Mentha (see Mint), the specific name being Mentha piperita, is distinguished from other species of the genus by its stalked leaves and oblong-obtuse spike-like heads of flowers. It is met with, near streams and in wet places, in several parts of England and on the European continent, where — as also in the United States— it is cultivated for the sake of its essential oil. * * *

This would seem to indicate that the source of peppermint oil is Mentha piperita. However, further on in the article the following appears:

Peppermint oil is largely distilled at Canton, a considerable quantity being sent to Bombay, also a large quantity of menthol. The species cultivated in the neighbourhood of Canton, is Mentha arvensis, var. glabrata. In Japan also the distillation of oil of peppermint forms a considerable industry, the plant cultivated being M. arvensis, var. piperascens. * * *

This latter would indicate that the oil derived from Mentha arvensis is also considered to be peppermint oil. This appears to be the view [29]*29of numerous chemical and technical authorities cited during the trial and in the briefs. Thorpe’s Dictionary of Applied Chemistry, 4th Ed., Yol. VIII, at p. 660, contains the following under the heading “Oils of Peppermint”:

There are two general types of Oil of Peppermint produced from the fresh flowering tips of (1) Mentha piperita mainly in the TJ. S. A., and (2) Mentha arvensis mainly in Japan, China, and Formosa.

E. J. Parry, The Chemistry of Essential. Oils and Artificial Perfumes, 4th Ed., 1921, contains the following at p. 211:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Bosch Magneto Co.
13 Ct. Cust. 569 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1926)
Wedemeyer v. United States
7 Cust. Ct. 141 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Cust. Ct. 26, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-maschmeijer-jr-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1951.