United States v. Jaffray

Second Circuit

United States v. Jaffray

77 F. 868, 23 C.C.A. 497, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 1647

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 13, 1897

StatusPublished

This text of 77 F. 868 (United States v. Jaffray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Jaffray, 77 F. 868, 23 C.C.A. 497, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 1647 (2d Cir. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon the evidence in the record, we are of the opinion that the importations in controversy — velvet ribbons — are not “velvets, plushes, or other pile fabrics,” within the meaning of paragraph 411 of the tariff act of October 1, 1890. Velvet ribbons are without a selvedge, and, according to the commercial understanding which prevailed at the date of the passage of the act, were excluded, for that reason, from the category of the paragraph. They were therefore dutiable under paragraph 414, as “manufactures of silk, or of which silk is the component material of chief value, not specially provided for in this act.” The adjudication of the circuit court is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon the evidence in the record, we are of the opinion that the importations in controversy — velvet ribbons — are not “velvets, plushes, or other pile fabrics,” within the meaning of paragraph 411 of the tariff act of October 1, 1890. Velvet ribbons are without a selvedge, and, according to the commercial understanding which prevailed at the date of the passage of the act, were excluded, for that reason, from the category of the paragraph. They were therefore dutiable under paragraph 414, as “manufactures of silk, or of which silk is the component material of chief value, not specially provided for in this act.” The adjudication of the circuit court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 F. 868, 23 C.C.A. 497, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 1647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jaffray-ca2-1897.