Peat Import Corp. v. United States

4 Cust. Ct. 181, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 46
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 17, 1940
DocketC. D. 319
StatusPublished
Cited by61 cases

This text of 4 Cust. Ct. 181 (Peat Import Corp. 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
Peat Import Corp. v. United States, 4 Cust. Ct. 181, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 46 (cusc 1940).

Opinion

Evans, Judge:

This is an action against the United Statés wherein the plaintiff seeks to recover a sum of money claimed to have been unlawfully exacted as customs duties at the port of New York on an importation of peat moss shipped from Germany to this country. The collector of customs assessed duty at 50 cents per ton under the provisions of paragraph 1548 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The importer claims that the merchandise is entitled to be entered free of duty under the provisions of paragraph 1685 of the same act. We quote the provisions of the statute involved herewith.

Pab. 1548.' Peat moss, 50 cents per ton.
Free List
Pab. 1685. Guano, basic slag (ground or unground), manures, and (notwithstanding any other provision of this Act) those grades of all other substances used chiefly for fertilizers, or chiefly as an ingredient in the manufacture of fertilizers.

It was held by the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals in the case of Wilbur-Ellis Co. et al v. United States, 18 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 472, T. D. 44762, at page 479, as follows:

While the common or commercial meaning of an eo nomine designation in a tariff act must be determined as of the effective date of that act, we think that where it is provided that an article shall be classified under a particular provision of a tariff law if chiefly used for a specified purpose, a different rule should prevail. In such case, if there be an eo nomine designation, the common meaning thereof must be determined as of the date of the enactment of the tariff act, but if it is further provided that the thing designated shall be classified under a given provision only if chiefly used for a specified purpose, the question of use should be determined, not as of the effective date of the tariff act but as of the date of the importation of the particular merchandise involved or immediately prior thereto.

It must be conceded that tbe principle announced in the above ruling will apply in this case.. The Government in its brief states what it conceives to be the burden placed on the importer as follows:

Because of the peculiar language of paragraph 1685 the instant case is somewhat different from the ordinary classification case. Plaintiff could not, of course, deny that this article is peat moss and ordinarily dutiable under paragraph 1548 which provides eo nomine for peat moss. However, paragraph 1685 provides that notwithstanding any other provision of the Tariff Act, if an importer brings its commodity within the language of that paragraph then of course its claim [183]*183should be upheld. It is incumbent on the plaintiff, therefore, to prove that the instant peat moss is within the language “those grades of all other substances used chiefly for fertilizers, or chiefly as an ingredient in the manufacture of fertilizers.” So far as the latter part of paragraph 1685 is concerned, it is respectfully submitted that there is no proof in this record that peat moss is chiefly used as an ingredient in the manufacture of fertilizers, nor does the plaintiff argue that claim in its brief. The issue, therefore, is whether or not peat moss is a substance used chiefly for fertilizers.

Although the provision in paragraph 1548, supra, is an eo nomine designation without qualifying words, nevertheless Congress has inserted language in the fertilizer paragraph (1685) which shows an express intention that in the case of those grades of all substances other than those specifically enumerated, free entry shall be granted “notwithstanding any other provision of this Act.”

Peat moss is defined in Webster’s New International Dictionary as follows:

Any moss from which peat has formed; specif., sphagnum moss.

We also quote from the Encyclopaedia Britannica 14th edition, Yol. 9, page 190, from the article on fertilizers as follows:

Fertilizers. The words fertilizer and manure denote any substance that increases the productiveness of the soil, but in scientific agricultural literature the word fertilizer is confined to materials prepared artifieally that supply nutrients to the plant, the word manure being more generally applied to substances like farmyard manure and lime that improve the soil in other ways besides supplying nutrients.

The New International Encyclopaedia, in Vol. 18, page 238, gives the following information in regard to peat:

Peat was formerly used extensively as a fertilizer, particularly in the form of compost (q. v.), but its use has declined since the general introduction of the more convenient and efficient commercial fertilizers. (See Manures and Manuring.) * * * Its fertilizing value is not so high as its percentage of nitrogen would indicate, because this nitrogen is in a very unavailable form. Dried peat, and especially peat moss, is an excellent absorbent and is used to a considerable extent as a litter in stables with very satisfactory results. * * * It is also used to some extent (4800 tons in 1913) in the United States (as already stated) and to a considerable extent abroad in the manufacture of so-called peat molasses, a cattle food prepared by mixing the crude molasses from sugar factories with dried ground peat.

Under the heading “Organic Manures” the Encyclopaedia Britannica, at page 196 of Vol. 9, mentions straw, peat, moss, and bracken being used for litter and further states that such litter on decomposition adds valuable fertilizing material to the manure.

At the trial of the case a sample of the imported commodity was received in evidence and marked as Exhibit 1. It was designated by the different witnesses as horticultural peat moss. Two other samples were admitted in evidence as Illustrative Exhibits A and B. Ulus-[184]*184trative Exhibit A is a grade known as poultry peat moss because it is a type that is generally used to spread under chicken roosts in hen houses. Illustrative Exhibit B was designated as stable peat moss because of its claimed use as a bedding material in stables.

The first witness called by the plaintiff was the vice president of the Peat Import Corporation who, because of his long experience in the importation, sale, and distribution of peat moss, was able to testify to the chief commercial use made of the imported commodity. According to his testimony there were imported into the United States during the year 1938, 62,032 long tons of peat moss and his firm imported 32,422 long tons. In other words, its importations constituted 52.3 per centum of all the imports of this commodity made during that year. Further he testified that of his total imports 50.18 per centum was made up of horticultural peat moss like Exhibit 1 and that the remaining portion was either poultry peat or stable peat, which he stated was the trade designation for the two coarser grades. He also stated that he had seen grades of peat moss used; that he had made sales thereof throughout the United States, and that the usual sales were in carload lots made up of two grades, horticultural and poultry; and that there was very little of the stable peat moss used. He also testified that he had seen the horticultural grade used many times over the entire United States. The witness in answer to questions gave the following testimony:

Q. * * * Now, have you actually seen the peat moss of the what you call horticultural grade used? — A.

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

Related

Foreign Products Corp. v. United States
34 Cust. Ct. 67 (U.S. Customs Court, 1955)
Stone v. United States
22 Cust. Ct. 302 (U.S. Customs Court, 1949)
Premier Peat Moss Corp. v. United States
21 Cust. Ct. 196 (U.S. Customs Court, 1948)
Peat Products Corp. v. United States
17 Cust. Ct. 133 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Protests 50792-K (A) of Bremermann
10 Cust. Ct. 375 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protest 51830-K of Bremermann
10 Cust. Ct. 364 (U.S. Customs Court, 1942)
Half Moon Manufacturing & Trading Co. v. United States
9 Cust. Ct. 37 (U.S. Customs Court, 1942)
Protest 832277-G of Sigmond Rothschild Co.
8 Cust. Ct. 517 (U.S. Customs Court, 1942)
Protest 50064-K of C. H. Powell Co.
8 Cust. Ct. 495 (U.S. Customs Court, 1942)
Protest 992948-G of Peat Import Corp.
7 Cust. Ct. 335 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protests 24689-K of Armacost & Royston, Inc.
7 Cust. Ct. 263 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protest 53551-K of Peat Import Corp.
6 Cust. Ct. 638 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protest 43148-K of Sevin Vincent Seed Co.
6 Cust. Ct. 613 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protest 23375-K of Consumers Import Co.
6 Cust. Ct. 595 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protest 38935-K of Premier Peat Moss Corp.
6 Cust. Ct. 595 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protest 43591-K of Peat Import Corp.
6 Cust. Ct. 582 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protests 47887-K of Allen Forwarding Co.
6 Cust. Ct. 582 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protests 23622-K of Wilbur-Ellis Co.
6 Cust. Ct. 529 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protests 486453-G of Wm. J. Hauser, Inc.
6 Cust. Ct. 524 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)
Protests 818431-G of Herrmann
6 Cust. Ct. 526 (U.S. Customs Court, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Cust. Ct. 181, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peat-import-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1940.