Phair v. United States

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Phair v. United States

105 F. 508, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4878

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided May 24, 1900·No. Nos. 2,923, 2,950, and 2,922·Published

Opinion

TOWNSEND, District Judge

(orally). The articles in question are chloral hydrate and salol, and were assessed for duty under paragraph 67 of the act of 1897 at 55 cents a pound, as “medicinal preparations, in the preparation of which alcohol is used, not specially provided for.” The importers claimed in their protests that they were dutiable at 25 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 68 of said act, as “medicinal preparations, in the preparation of which alcohol is not used, not specially provided for.” In view of the decisions in U. S. v. Battle, 4 C. C. A. 249, 54 Fed. 141, Schering v. U. S. (No. 2,137), and Engelhorn v. Same (No. 1,237), I feel obliged to reverse the decision of the board of general appraisers.

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

TOWNSEND, District Judge

(orally). The articles in question are chloral hydrate and salol, and were assessed for duty under paragraph 67 of the act of 1897 at 55 cents a pound, as “medicinal preparations, in the preparation of which alcohol is used, not specially provided for.” The importers claimed in their protests that they were dutiable at 25 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 68 of said act, as “medicinal preparations, in the preparation of which alcohol is not used, not specially provided for.” In view of the decisions in U. S. v. Battle, 4 C. C. A. 249, 54 Fed. 141, Schering v. U. S. (No. 2,137), and Engelhorn v. Same (No. 1,237), I feel obliged to reverse the decision of the board of general appraisers.

Phair v. United States, 105 F. 508, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4878 (circtsdny 1900).

Pincite

105 F. 508 (Phair v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related