Schoellkopf v. United States

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

Schoellkopf v. United States

124 F. 89, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4679

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

DecidedApril 29, 1901

DocketNo. 2,912

StatusPublished

This text of 124 F. 89 (Schoellkopf v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schoellkopf v. United States, 124 F. 89, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4679 (circtsdny 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

TOWNSEND, District Judge.

This appeal covers several importations of a substance known as “soluble creosote,” produced by various additional processes and ingredients from coal-tar dead oil, which by such additions it has ceased to be. Some was imported under the tariff act of 1894, and thereunder assessed at 25 per cent, ad valorem (paragraph 60), as a chemical compound. Other was imported under the present tariff act, and thereunder assessed at 20 per cent, under the provisions of paragraph 15, Schedule A, § 1, c. 11, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, 30 Stat. 152 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1627), for “products or preparations of coal tar, not colors or dyes, and not medicinal, not specially provided for.” The decision of the Board of Appraisers speaks only of the latter importations, and, as to those, affirms the assessment of duty by the collector, which the importer now concedes to be correct, in accordance with the recently decided case of United States v. Lehn, 124 Fed. 87, on lysol. But a provision similarly worded in the act of 1894 as to coal-tar preparations having been in the free list (paragraph 443, Free List, § 2, c. 349, Tariff [90]*90Act Aug. 27, 1894, 28 Stat. 539), it follows that, if the assessment at 20 per cent, under this classification is correct in the new law, the goods should have been passed free under paragraph 443 of the act of 1894. To that extent, therefore, the decision of the board is reversed, and as to the importations under the act of 1897 is affirmed.

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

TOWNSEND, District Judge.

This appeal covers several importations of a substance known as “soluble creosote,” produced by various additional processes and ingredients from coal-tar dead oil, which by such additions it has ceased to be. Some was imported under the tariff act of 1894, and thereunder assessed at 25 per cent, ad valorem (paragraph 60), as a chemical compound. Other was imported under the present tariff act, and thereunder assessed at 20 per cent, under the provisions of paragraph 15, Schedule A, § 1, c. 11, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, 30 Stat. 152 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1627), for “products or preparations of coal tar, not colors or dyes, and not medicinal, not specially provided for.” The decision of the Board of Appraisers speaks only of the latter importations, and, as to those, affirms the assessment of duty by the collector, which the importer now concedes to be correct, in accordance with the recently decided case of United States v. Lehn, 124 Fed. 87, on lysol. But a provision similarly worded in the act of 1894 as to coal-tar preparations having been in the free list (paragraph 443, Free List, § 2, c. 349, Tariff [90]*90Act Aug. 27, 1894, 28 Stat. 539), it follows that, if the assessment at 20 per cent, under this classification is correct in the new law, the goods should have been passed free under paragraph 443 of the act of 1894. To that extent, therefore, the decision of the board is reversed, and as to the importations under the act of 1897 is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 F. 89, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schoellkopf-v-united-states-circtsdny-1901.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack