Robinson v. United States

122 F. 970, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4941
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided January 22, 1900·No. No. 2,948·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

WHEEEER, District Judge.

The subject of these protests are all-silk mourning crapes, of 4/4 and 6/4 widths, dyed in the piece, and weighing more than one-third and less than one and one-third ounces [971] per square yard. The narrow goods have been assessed as “woven fabrics in the piece not specially provided for,” at $3.25 per pound, under paragraph 387 of the tariff act of July 24, 1897 (30 Stat. 186, c. 11 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1669]), and the wide as “veilings,” at 60 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 390 (30 Stat. 187 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1670]); where the narrow are claimed to be trimmings. Both were in lengths, and neither was marked for cutting up. The wide seems to have been found to be veilings, from the suitability and known use of the fabric for cutting up into short lengths for veils; and the narrow adjudged not to be trimmings, because it would have to be cut up less regularly into pieces for use as such. The assessment of the narrow only is appealed from.

The evidence before the board was not contradicted, and has not been; and it seems to be clear that the narrow is as well known, by the material, to be for trimmings, as the wide is for veils, and neither seems to belong with the dress goods of paragraph 387. The decision does not seem to be a finding upon contradictory evidence, to be followed, but a conclusion of law.

Decision as to 4/4 reversed.

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

Robinson v. United States, 122 F. 970, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4941 (circtsdny 1900).

122 F. 970 (Robinson v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ramsey v. United States
31 Cust. Ct. 201 (U.S. Customs Court, 1953)
C. S. Allen Corp. v. United States
24 Cust. Ct. 389 (U.S. Customs Court, 1950)
Caplan v. United States
14 Ct. Cust. 247 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1926)
Auffmordt v. United States
7 Ct. Cust. 56 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1916)
United States v. Buss & Co.
5 Ct. Cust. 110 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1914)