O. G. Hempstead & Son v. United States

122 F. 752, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4854
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 28, 1903
DocketNos. 42, 83
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 122 F. 752 (O. G. Hempstead & Son 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
O. G. Hempstead & Son v. United States, 122 F. 752, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4854 (circtedpa 1903).

Opinion

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

Following the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in United States v. Presbyterian Hospital, 18 C. C. A. 338, 71 Fed. 866, 38 U. S. App. 201, where the list of articles declared to be free of duty clearly embraces such museum or preparation jars as are now in controversy, the ruling of the board concerning these articles must be set aside. On similar grounds, the reagent bottles should also have been admitted free of duty, or, at most, should have been charged with duty, under paragraph 99, as plain .glass bottles, and not under paragraph 100, as ornamented or decorated. Tariff Act July 24, 1897, 30 Stat. 156, c. 11 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1633]. The lettering upon the bottles is for utility, and not for ornament: Koscherak v. United States, 39 C. C. A. 166, 98 Fed. 596. That the lettering is so well done as to improve the appearance of the bottles, seems to me to be of no importance. It remains lettering merely, without the slightest attempt at ornament, unless the white line drawn around the label is to be considered an attempt to decorate.

The surgical scissors should also have been admitted free of duty: United States v. Massachusetts Hospital, 41 C. C. A. 114, 100 Fed. 932.

Judgment may be entered in each case in accordance with this opinion.

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

Related

Thomas v. Hempstead
129 F. 1007 (Third Circuit, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
122 F. 752, 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4854, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/o-g-hempstead-son-v-united-states-circtedpa-1903.