United States v. Windmuller

42 F. 292, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2156
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedApril 29, 1890
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 42 F. 292 (United States v. Windmuller) 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
United States v. Windmuller, 42 F. 292, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2156 (circtsdny 1890).

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The provisions of Schedule D of the tariff act of March 3, 1883, in prescribing rates of duty to be collected upon wood and wooden wares, make a plain discrimination between articles that are hewn and sawed, or sawed only, and those that are planed on one or both sides. Unless gun blocks are “rough-hewn or sawed only,” they fall within the classification of “manufactures of wood not specifically enumerated or provided for,” and are subject to an ad valorem duty of 35 per centum. The gun blocks imported by the defendants in error were made from planks first sawed to get the proper thickness of lumber, and then passed under a planing-machine, after which they were cut from the' planks in the form of the design marked out in pencil on the planed surfaces of the planks. Thus, when imported, they were planed on both sides, and were a manufactured article in a crude form. The court below erred in instructing the jury to find a verdict for the defendants. Such an instruction could only have been warranted by evidence showing that the- gun blocks were rough-hewn or sawed only, and the testimony was all the other way. The judgment is reversed, and the case remanded to the district court for a new trial; costs of this court to be paid by the defendants in error.

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

Related

United States v. Rochester Last Works
11 Ct. Cust. 457 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 F. 292, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-windmuller-circtsdny-1890.