Dominguez Bros. v. United States

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Dominguez Bros. v. United States

122 F. 556, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4839

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 9, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 122 F. 556 (Dominguez Bros. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dominguez Bros. v. United States, 122 F. 556, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4839 (circtedpa 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

It is clear to my mind that the tobacco in question, which the importers themselves brought in as “scrap leaf tobacco,” is properly described as “scrap” or “sweepings,” and is not “leaf” tobacco at all, in the meaning to be given to that word as it is used in the first .sentence of paragraph 214 in the tariff act of 1897 (Act July 24, 1897, 30 Stat. 169, c. 11 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1648]). This sentence is as follows: “The term wrapper tobacco, as used in this act, means that quality of leaf tobacco which is suitable for cigar wrappers, and the term filler tobacco means all other leaf tobacco.” The tobacco in question is suitable neither for wrappers nor for fillers, as these terms are commonly and commercially understood, although it appears from the evidence that, it may be used as a filler in the manufacture of one very small size of tobacco cigarettes; and I think, therefore, that the collector and the board of general appraisers were right in imposing a duty of 55 cents a pound, under paragraph 215, which applies this rate to “all other tobacco, manufactured or unmanufactured, not specially provided for in this act.”

The decision of the board of general appraisers is accordingly affirmed.

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

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

It is clear to my mind that the tobacco in question, which the importers themselves brought in as “scrap leaf tobacco,” is properly described as “scrap” or “sweepings,” and is not “leaf” tobacco at all, in the meaning to be given to that word as it is used in the first .sentence of paragraph 214 in the tariff act of 1897 (Act July 24, 1897, 30 Stat. 169, c. 11 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1648]). This sentence is as follows: “The term wrapper tobacco, as used in this act, means that quality of leaf tobacco which is suitable for cigar wrappers, and the term filler tobacco means all other leaf tobacco.” The tobacco in question is suitable neither for wrappers nor for fillers, as these terms are commonly and commercially understood, although it appears from the evidence that, it may be used as a filler in the manufacture of one very small size of tobacco cigarettes; and I think, therefore, that the collector and the board of general appraisers were right in imposing a duty of 55 cents a pound, under paragraph 215, which applies this rate to “all other tobacco, manufactured or unmanufactured, not specially provided for in this act.”

The decision of the board of general appraisers is accordingly affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 F. 556, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dominguez-bros-v-united-states-circtedpa-1903.