New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-04-18
LAW LVI'ELLIGENCE.
.. o. CIRCUIT COZ

x.xsrput1IoS oF TIE 1IRHF-IsDIA RUBtEk AND
oUTTA PLRcHA Liable TO TIE sAA c. III l..
John O. and Boker sgt Heman j. keone'' VIZ
This csse was referred 10 on Ss'urday' ins'' ""'
IN error in the report in regard 70 tno nnoins VI ~"
Jary. They found for the p'aonn OF 40 sUs."
perehs, and for the defendant on tne ofau'y' 'Hu'
s;a,o The .pprsisement of the brandy TO be regular
-. nerchs and India rubber are liable TO
he sane deity.
7, v,, Of the importance Of tee questions raised 10
a., ..ss e give the Judges charge in full as follows;
cr,rIryys OF THE JURY; Toe plaintiff or PLAIN
,;os In This case some time sgo paid certain amount
Of money for duties upon az importation OF OrShoy
and aso for duties upon an importation ., gsano
Of gutts perchs. grestsr valuation was put, upon
The brandy ct the Custom House thsn was contalnou
in the invoice and the duties assessed upon tnet IN
creased valuation Of the brandy, were pali W vac
nIsnts The claim upon the part OF the paintlils ls
that that iDcTeassd veoston was not made according
4, au tbst re money received BY he Collector rom them wi"
~. esn 90 far Ie,srds sutts PeIehs Is that Il wa
By liable 20 duty Of only ten per esn. tn "a ~
,soy,r b.i flo The Cec that additions. duty Of ten
PEI en- wO ,sS ysa1 sron to iS- question arising upon
te duties p.io The brandy Where an
made SpoD increased vsn,ton from tos pa 10 me
Che ss provides The appraiser snail view the PR
the s' ,.a 20 n, ~ pS%ty witSou yewiss ,ss
pioprty potter bss right 20 complain Aoa ne PsJ'
sss eoy w. TIM. provision Of law il for the
benefit OF the importer. tLd % Tar o osneht 70 DIN us
III
ts.. The not been compiled with 10
this rpe f.' s the e.nay y concerned nss
vsIusoD sod tse duties on the iocIesea yssston 70 e
prImed y that The property wSs not oy toe az
tsssr onb,s be be, made protest 70 t me- .ne.t
tou sin The ia porter npan sbout 1t unless he ME a.
the time psyuer before the payment the Pioe';
wrS. setting forth osinety specifically the ground Of
s6ssnGp 70 Ss nIos IN his c.e is not hat TIE spOr.er
fd he brandy bat the specific objection Is that ne ora
And one essk in ten wss exsmined oy
sls before IN, % tso IN Ss particular csse~ that to5i
plsee then the importer cannot recover pace nne j
sSs. before ttS spprsssmsrt made, hi. brandy
was examined BY samples, at e1t one ;I , 0 If
duty tsoosb have been tleg,y exscel me aw
that os @pGrI Shouts Ain inc .ps and
the reasons his protest tbat he oid not eIsmue ~
% o .mus f. then there can Dc no recovery
snount paid Whether the appraiser has or has not sna'
ron be siu the witnesses from the Custom House.
T,s ob,T Items are fo an excess Of duties paid the i'm
poTtaon Of gna peIcbs BY thee several imPoons You
need OF trouble yourselves about the protest 30 lar a. re-
spsct the ,utG per a 1.-THE Collector lad right 70 impose
,S,s dv han 10 per mt be did impose cent
upon It, that the plaintiff. would have nsn. 70
so & What rate Of duty wa. this ss percha liable o
Wbsa the TsIih law o. 1910 YES psI'sS ,; @ 20 be- p.dI
that S. articles known 70 them India Iao
they iDPO'sd duty Of ten per cent 9at
Prcbs and It's use. seIs no; to 6e at INA q med Se
soy,dss in The Act Of i2 that certain enumerated
sseSS' 10 rule hich laid down in that Act Of Con
lsa Gutis perch. vas not Introduced IN lni S,
sSs similar e aUy s Ct. to o sU Sose Of 5 Of n
1' per esn But sD scoofdns to this provision the
Az. q Congress Of 1914, provided that '1e Hs
every non.enumcrsted article which bear. !. Multitude,
either in material quality or texture or the use % MIA atv s
ssms .ts Of DUTY which levied and on the
ucs which 4 st IS. s"s.on M Whether thcfs within
meaning this simitude between mus bsS
sI 'Si d G anal within he
then Is follow that p.n Hs ps.SSa Ss
no, S Ia both G use pd a. T taSse and s sleha
nom the gum o. ZAP GS s5s applied
% Similar uses they are coats and other articles
After they hardened by the vusnzus process they are
ssme. and everything Of tht lrd to which hardened do
adapted This law Of COnges. old not
bear mitude TO an enumerated .ce Inc Jaw Il, tna
th. be levied collected and paid on each and every %
article which bears .%li:ude either 10 I,sIs
q Or the We 70 Which may may be sPP , 70 SSy
which levied and charged on the enumerated article ~oh
S . .S%s sIs 40 .s sHS nde the same duts. are a.
Grated articles are assessed on au enge
ssd attic which they resemble THERE'S no evidence
Ia this o,se that there 10 any smi:ode between sutts
Psrcha in the to which sPPss and any 70
dsterpSe whether this gatts percha hA. su6.tsn iAl
s.s ~ e sn .y be srpes 10 indis rubber and has
wi ooE that subject only to duty OF 10 per .eh''
s-Svsd BY s sOr he authorized TO
You need trouble younelves with the amount WIN M
struot YOU attention to quettion FIRST whether
nader The given you mo for the plain
importation Of the brandy or for the deiendsnt sna
Then YOU whether hud for the pAnth
defendant the claim made for the OF DUTY paid on
pcrhS- IL find for the plaintiffs either Of these
claims the amounts be sscerADed by references, &c
SUPREME COURT-CHAMBrRs-APRILl A-Before Judge
INeRAHaN.-DEcnfoNS.
James Corbett agt. Darwin +. Hill and al.-Css'
settled
Before Judge STRONG.
George Fisher agt Joseph Z. fsher.-Upon The
whole evidence think the allowance made by the reefee a,t
and opinion Of The ptOus are wed taken 10
eepps OyeIrad AID motion to confirm report granted WIZ
go eos.A