Case ID: us_182/html/0221-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Brown,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GOETZE v. UNITED STATES. CROSSMAN v. UNITED STATES.
    APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
    No. 340 No. 515
    was argued December 17, 18, 19, 20, 1900;
    was argued January 14, 15, 1901.
    The two were decided together May 27, 1901.
    
      De Lima v. Bidwell, ante, 1, followed by reversing the action of the general appraisers.
    These were petitions for a review of two decisions of the board of general appraisers, holding subject to duty certain merchandise, imported, in one case from Porto Eico, and in the other, from Honolulu, in the Hawaiian Islands. The action of the board of general appraisers in each case was affirmed.
    
      Mr. Edward C. Perkins and Mr. Everit Brown for appellant in No. 340. Mr. J. B. Henderson also filed a brief for same. Mr. E. Ham, Mr. Alexander Porter Morse and Mr. Charles F. Manderson filed a brief in this case on behalf of industrial interests in the States.
    
      Mr. Attorney General for the United States.
    
      Mr. W. Wickham Smith for appellants in No. 515. Mr. Charles Curie was on his brief.
    
      Mr. Solicitor General for the United States.
   Mr. Justice Brown,

after making the above statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

As the sole question presented by the record in these case's was whether Porto Eico and the Hawaiian Islands were foreign countries within the meaning of the tariff laws, we must hold, for the reasons stated in De Lima v. Bidwell, just decided, that the board of general appraisers had no jurisdiction of the cases.

The judgments of the Circuit Court are therefore reversed, and the cases remanded to that .court with instructions to reverse the action of the hoard of general appraisers.