Jones, Ex'x, Etc. v. Van Benthuysen

Supreme Court

Jones, Ex'x, Etc. v. Van Benthuysen

115 U.S. 464, 6 S. Ct. 128, 29 L. Ed. 446, 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1856

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedNovember 23, 1885

Docket68

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 115 U.S. 464 (Jones, Ex'x, Etc. v. Van Benthuysen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones, Ex'x, Etc. v. Van Benthuysen, 115 U.S. 464, 6 S. Ct. 128, 29 L. Ed. 446, 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1856 (1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Ohiee Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court. This was a suit brought by Yan Benthuysen, the defendant in error, a commission merchant engaged in the sale of manufactured tobacco, to recover back from Stockdále, a collector of internal revenue, certain taxes paid under protest, on the amount of sales of tobacco in a bonded warehouse. The sole controversy is about the liability of the merchant to pay taxes upon the amount of revenue stamps affixed to the tobacco at the time of its' removal from the warehouse. The case was' here at the October Term, 1880, and is reported in 103 U. S. 87. We then decided that he was “ not liable to be taxed for the revenue stamps Required to be affixed to the tobacco before the removal thereof from a bonded warehouse, unless they were at the time of such sales so affixed, whereby they entered into the value of the tobacco and formed a part of the price thereof.” Under this ruling the judgment of the court below was reversed, and the cause sent back for a new trial. The present writ of error was brought for a review of the judgment upon the second trial. The bill of exceptions shows that the charge to the jury was almost in the exact language of the opinion of this'court construing the law on which the rights of the parties depend, and it covered the whole case.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Ohiee Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court. This was a suit brought by Yan Benthuysen, the defendant in error, a commission merchant engaged in the sale of manufactured tobacco, to recover back from Stockdále, a collector of internal revenue, certain taxes paid under protest, on the amount of sales of tobacco in a bonded warehouse. The sole controversy is about the liability of the merchant to pay taxes upon the amount of revenue stamps affixed to the tobacco at the time of its' removal from the warehouse. The case was' here at the October Term, 1880, and is reported in 103 U. S. 87. We then decided that he was “ not liable to be taxed for the revenue stamps Required to be affixed to the tobacco before the removal thereof from a bonded warehouse, unless they were at the time of such sales so affixed, whereby they entered into the value of the tobacco and formed a part of the price thereof.” Under this ruling the judgment of the court below was reversed, and the cause sent back for a new trial. The present writ of error was brought for a review of the judgment upon the second trial. The bill of exceptions shows that the charge to the jury was almost in the exact language of the opinion of this'court construing the law on which the rights of the parties depend, and it covered the whole case.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 U.S. 464, 6 S. Ct. 128, 29 L. Ed. 446, 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-exx-etc-v-van-benthuysen-scotus-1885.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack