Selbach v. United States

78 F. 803, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2505
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedFebruary 18, 1897
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 78 F. 803 (Selbach 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
Selbach v. United States, 78 F. 803, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2505 (circtsdny 1897).

Opinion

TOWNSEND, District Judge

(orally). The merchandise In question is anthracene or alizarine yellow, claimed to be free, as alizarine, [804]*804natural or artificial, under paragraph 595 of the tariff act of March 3, 1885, hut assessed for duty under paragraph 82 of said act as a coal-tar color or dye, by whatever name known, not specially provided for. That this article is not chemically alizarine seems to be immaterial. The evidence is undisputed that it responds to the alizarine tests, and was commercially known and dealt in as “aliz-arine” or “alizarine yellow” at the time of the passage of said act. The decision of the board of general appraisers affirming the action of the collector is reversed.

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

Related

Farbenfabriken of Elberfeld Co. v. United States
99 F. 554 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1900)
United States v. Sehlbach
90 F. 798 (Second Circuit, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 F. 803, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/selbach-v-united-states-circtsdny-1897.