Case ID: f_50/html/0067-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lacombe, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Wertheimer et al.
    
    
      (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    
    April 20, 1892.)
    1. Customs Duties — Men’s Leather Groves.
    Men’s leather pique or prick seam gloves held to bo dutiable at 30 per cent, ad valorem, with an additional duty of one dollar per dozen pairs.
    
      2. Same — Paragraph 458, Sciiedui.l’ N, Tarii'e Act Oct. 1, 1890.
    The additional duties provided for in the said paragr aph held to be alternative, and not cumulative.
    
      . At Law. Appeal from decision of board of United States general appraisers.
    The merchandise in suit consisted of men’s leather pique or prick seam gloves, imported by Wertheimer & Co. on October 15,1890, upon which the collector of customs at the port of New York assessed a duty of 50 per cent, ad valorem, and also an additional duty of one dollar per dozen pairs as “men’s gloves,” and also an additional duty of 50 cents per dozen pairs as “pique or prick seam gloves,” (making a total additional duty of $1.50 per dozen pairs,) under the provisions of Schedule N, par. 458, of the act of October 1, 1890, viz.:
    “458. Gloves o£ all descriptions, composed wholly or in part of kid or other-leather, and whether wholly or partly manufactured, shall pay duty at the rates fixed in connection with the following specified kinds thereof, fourteen inches in extreme length when stretched to the full extent, being in each case hereby fixed as the standard, and one dozen pairs as the basis, namely: ‘ Ladies’ and children’s schmaschen of said length or under, one dollar and seventy-five cents per dozen; ladies’ and children’s lamb of said length or under, two dollars and twenty-five cents per dozen; ladies’ and children’s kid of said length or under, three dollars and twenty-five cents per dozen; ladies’ and children’s suedes of said length or under, fifty per centum ad valorem; all other ladies’ and children’s leather gloves, and all men’s leather gloves, of said length or under, fifty per cent, ad valorem; all leather gloves over fourteen inches in length, fifty per centum ad valorem; and, in addition to the above rates, there shall be paid on all men’s gloves, one dollar per dozen; on all lined gloves, one dollar per dozen; on all pique or prick seam gloves, fifty cents per dozen; on all embroidered gloves, with more than three single strands or cords, fifty cents per dozen pairs: provided, that all gloves represented to be of a kind or grade below their actual kind or grade shall pay an additional duty of five dollars per dozen pairs: provided, further, that none of the articles named in this paragraph shall pay a less rate of duty than fifty per cent, ad valorem.”
    The importers duly protested, claiming the gloves to be dutiable, under said paragraph, at 50 per cent, ad valorem, with an additional duty of 50 cents per dozen pairs only, as “pique or prick seam gloves.” The board of general appraisers affirmed the decision of the collector, and held the additional duties to be cumulative, and, as the goods were con-cededly men’s gloves, and also pique or prick seam gloves, the additional duties for both of said classes of gloves were properly assessed thereon. Appeal was duly taken by the importers to the United States circuit court, under the provisions of the act of June 10, 1890.
    
      Edward Mitchell, U.- S. Atty., and Henry Q. Platt, Asst. U. S. Atty.
    
      Curie, Smith & Mackie, for importers.
   Lacombe, Circuit Judge.

The case is hardly susceptible of argument unless upon the question of what -the intent of congress was. That would involve going back of the face of the statute, which does not seem ambiguous, and entering upon a consideration of the relative rates of duty fixed upon different kinds of goods, and the reasonableness of such rates, — a speculation which, possibly, the modern doctrine as to statutory construction may require, but which I do not feel warranted in embarking on in ibis case, where there is not apparent uncertainty to call for special construction. I am satisfied to take the paragraph as it reads, and interpret it according to the language which congress has used. In the first part of the section there are certain rates of duty fixed on different kinds and varieties of kid gloves; then there is a rate,of duty of a dollar per dozen on all men’s gloves assessable in addition to the rate of duty enumerated in the first part of the section, the language being, “in addition to the above rates.” If it happens that the goods are pique or prick seam gloves, there is a duty of 50 cents a dozen assessable in addition to the rates specified in the first part of the section, but there is nothing in the paragraph to indicate that it is to be additional to any one of the fates named in the latter part of the section. I cannot see, therefore, that the phraseology following the words, “in addition to' the above rates,” contemplates a cumulative series of duties. They are alternative. Under whichever one or the other of the four classes the gloves may fall, they are to pay the duty prescribed for that class, in addition to the rate of duty which was fixed in the earlier part of the section. If they fall equally under two or more of the classes named in the latter part of the section, then they shall pay the rate of duty of the highest class within which they may properly be included. Section 5. These are concededly men’s gloves. As men’s gloves they are to pay one dollar a dozen extra. As pique gloves they would pay only fifty cents a dozen extra. They should therefore pay the larger of the two additional rates, viz., one dollar a"dozen. The finding of the board of appraisers is reversed, and the goods will be classified at the regular rate specified by paragraph 458, with the additional rate of one dollar per dozen, prescribed for all men’s gloves.