Bentley v. Roan

4 Va. 153
CourtCourt of Appeals of Virginia
DecidedJune 15, 1790
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Va. 153 (Bentley v. Roan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bentley v. Roan, 4 Va. 153 (Va. Ct. App. 1790).

Opinion

On the other side, it was said, by the attorney general, that merchandize was nomen collectivum, and comprehended every article on board. That chariots and harness might be imported for sale as well as any other goods; and there was nothing which shewed an intention to make a distinction in their favour. That it was to no purpose to say, that if they had been imported by land there would have been no duty; for the same argument would be as applicable to all the other articles, on which it was admitted duties ought to be paid: and it would defeat the law unless every part of the cargo was subjected to duty, as the door would be otherwise open to every species of fraud in the entry. That the chariot and harness probably came in packages ; and therefore satisfied the words relied on by the appellant’s counsel. That the term merchandize lost nothing of its comprehensive character, by being associated with the words “spirits, wine, sugar and coffee;” for the reference was general; and was intended to comprize every article, which any of the preceding words would include.

And of that opinion was the court; and the sentence was affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Va. 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bentley-v-roan-vactapp-1790.