The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-12-21

duties sed BY the on an Inn
tion OF rocoa the plaintiff claiming it to be vegetable
suostsIcs used for dyepg and removed to this court
by crttrdf1 On the 9th December 1ssb, the plaintiff
made entry at the Custom twenty nine cashs Of
rocoa imported from Bordeaux and claimed the right to
OF free OF duty under arcls g. section OF the
tariff act Of 1872 Statates at Large SOL falling
within the denomination Of {" berries nuts and vegets-
bks used principally in dysing composing dyes" The
def ndant caused duty Of twenty per cent to be imposed
it, under section g. article of the same act d Sta
tutss at Large 65al as being "aanatto.n Toe proofs
showed that both articles were derived from thu seed OF
vegetable grown In south America rocos being the pro
duct OF the seed In crushed state and natto
fac from tee seed In rn only to the
Dave and mixed with other substances and that the ar
tces are known in trade and commerce BY distinct pame
ano are Seyoted TO osrtnt uses except that annatto
employed in dyeng whilst that 10 the only use to which
roooA put Held that the article was properly rated
anBatto II the Custom Houfs and subjected to duties In
that name, becauAs 1t had acquired In commerce the
name ofrocoa and was bought and sold in trade under
that alone before passage of the Of ls42
Held further that the plaintiff was not entitled to enter
the article as Free under the name of being
"be les or vegetables used principally in dysing
vegetables their native state and not after they
transmitted, by manufacture to substance which takes
ss ds . denomination in trade and commerce But
act Of 1872 and subject to duty under section TO- and
that duty being twenty per cent the same charged
upon this article, the plaintiff cannot maintain this
on, than the legal duty to which oect
having been sxacted BY the Judgment for the
George Gray " Coymeliu, W. Lamenos-This was N 40
ton to back Of duties sxaoed by the
desndent several invoices of Irish nens consigned BY
the plaintiff to Bird, GillDand Co.. his agents, and
tered by them The invoices carried out the prices Of the
linens in gross with credit under srttsn deduct dis
sou mt allowed for cash per cent" and the plaintiff
less that discount, being their true market value
abroad The col ector in obedience circular instruo
tons Of the Secretary Of the Treasury OF October 20
lS47, and August 1S4s, directing 'that discount
allowed Invoices Of Irish linen beyond az per cent
refused allow reba temsnt hey ond az per cent and
mar IA ha daduc
from the invoices discount The consgnees protested
in writing agsiI st that exaction, with only az per
cent OIL, claiming that under existing laws they
entitled to enter the same with TX per cent Of The
Court found, that the proofs the invoice prices
with the allowance Of ~ per cent rebasment, the
true market value of the goods 1t furthermore found
that the appraisers noted the invoice made out to
correct in tle judgment, And that the valua ion
ported by them in obedience to the order
the Secretary OF the ury not upon an appraisal
OF The linens according to the judgment OF the appraisers
of ~. tr.ds to shs M was 70 % tne usage
age rate Of prices, Tin effect nominal) and reduce
those to the true market value by discount or rebate
gross must be regarded representing the real
voice price value It further held that the Secre
Judgment Of the in goods or In adding
to or fubacting from the invoices for the purpose of
tern lining market values, and that the ncre of the
invoices i've cent In the amount reported for such
pose, WAS Without authority Of law The defendant OBJ
ected to the srcency Of the protest. because not signed
e. ls45 Is Statutes Large 727 requiring the protest
to be made in writing and signed the claimant Held
that an entry or protest made BY agent in law mace
the principal and the Of 1845 does necessarily
impugn that general principle Mason al agt Kane.
Thi Cirouit Court, April 1851, TAnsy, Chief Justiss
charged upon the five cent added to the Invoices
with interest 1t per cent from time payment
Eight other cases against the defendant and
against Cornelius W. Lawrence for duties levied
on Irish linens involving substar italy the facts and
the questons Of law argued with the above
cause and by agreement OF counsel were to be subect
to the same Judgment not. is Alec with the clerk,
marking the distinctions by the court In some OF
them but on the merits judgment was rendered In AL
Auguse Belmont rs. Cornelius w. Lamence.-This suit
was commenced In the Supreme Court Of the State and
removed into this court by ceinGri. The plaintiff in
lS46. imported 500 bottles of quicksilver in
voiced London, September IA, lS4o 1T 49, 6d per h.
4 3D. h. as the true value Of he Article in the Lon
don market. An additional duty and penalty amount
Ing to $e 73 were paid November 49, 1sls under pro
test tbat the value stated in the invoice is the true
Spanish market value of the goods witness n the
trial testified that the quicksilver the produce Of
Spain, but evidence exists in the case that the fact
was made known to the appraisers to the collector,
a hough it may be reasonably inferred from the test
mony Of the appraiser Carne that they understood ths
dence show what the market value OF the article 10
Spain Held that this court cannot look beyond the
Of the parties The invoice gives inmA ton that the
article the produce Of Spain does the plaintiff
show he poyed to be such to the appraisers offered
to make such proof before them the collector He
bound to show that fact within their Knowledge
that they refused to receive evidence Of it, before they
be charged with having illegally appraised the goods
and assessed the duties Had been proved that the
goods the produce Of Spain the valuation would
have been erroneous ard the i'm ;osition duties
rustifabe But held that there proof before the
court impeachng the business Of the appraisal the
authority OF the collector to i'm collect the ad
ditional duties the plaintiff is entitled to relief it
must be had by application Treasury Department
Judgment for the defendant
Thomas Fielden james Fietten, VIM PicleYsgiH. and
DANIEL Campbell Cornelius ". Laurence -Tsis suit was
brought to back penalties and increased duties
imposed on impora'ions OF IRON from Liverpool, upon
which various entries made, the additional duties
ting to 1872 and the peDaltes to $2264 CO. The
portatons were in ls47 and the appraisal made
under 16 Of ths act OF 1s42 rs Statutes At Large
entries-October 18th and November 18TH lS47-ad
dressed to the Collector the following notice. varied only
entry:-'sir The custom house appraisers having sp
praised = bunces, &c. iroa, at e, thereby subject
ing the iron to increased duty we'll penalty
70 per which We are required to ORDER to
ter and obtain sion o. the goods hereby protest
agains the fad increased apprasemen and against the
king to ourselves concern
the receive the same back by action otherwise
&c. u was proved that when the protest made,
sired appraement BY merchant appraisers pursuant to
the act and he answered. he did not did ask
The points taken for the plaintiffs the argument
were that the eter notice. within the meaning Of
the act Of their dssafsctioD whersupon became the
duty Of the collector to order without
prsisa was urb void fer the reason that it was
made upon the market value Of the iron at the time Of
exlotaton and not At the time Of purchase Held that
if the protest might amount to notice Of classification
with the apprasement within the meaning Of IL OF
the act Of 1872 had the letter been delivered without
qualification yet eat the assertion Of the plaintiff At the
fame time, to the collector, that he did not ap
praifement, took from 1t that effect Held, that ap
praissmeDt being 1T the expense Of the importer the
plaintiff was bouud to offer the apprass fees, &C. In
order to put the collector in the wrong for ordering
one and that the plaintiff not taking legal to
title him,ef to appraisal the made by the Off
n. nrlu m alma
Held fur her. that tbs protest not comply with the
require ments Of the act of February &c. 1S4 because 1t
does not set forth distinctly ard specifically the oms
zion of the collector to order APpraemens that
the appraisers valued the iron At the time Of the ship
men and rot At the time q purchase grounds Of OBJ
IGNITION TO the payment Of the duties imposed and
oort ipgy he is entitled to raise these objections
Judgment for the defendant.
Charles Ao7lot Cornelius w. Laurence This action
brought in the Supreme Court the State
back e1cets OF duties and nates imposed by the de
entant invoice OF fifteen OF woolen goods i'm
ported by the plaintiff and removed to tn court BY
:ertiorar The invoice dated Paris June H. 1886
Ar the entry made at the Custom House July 81
is45 On apprasemsnt the goods valued At an