The national Republican., 1867-02-22
THD COURTS.
SUPREME CoURr OF THE United STATES
TurpanAY HsbFuarv 9l 1917

THURSDAY, February R, 1857.
On motion Of Mr.. C6rwine, LIE Grande Marvin,
Esq., Of the State Of New York, was admitted an
attorney and counsellor Of this court.
On motion Of Mr.. Ashton, Assistant Attorney
General, James Lynd, Esq, Of Pennsylvania, was
admitted an attorney and counsellor at this court.
No. 14l. The Illinois Central Railroad Company,
plaintiffs In error, vs.. William Barron. The nrgu.
ment Of this cause was continued by Mr.. Tracy, Of
counsel for the plaintiffs In error and by Mr. Clark,
Of counsel for the deendantjn error and concluded
by Mr. Tracy of counsel for plaintiffs in error.
No. l42. Robert II, Pearson, appellant, VS..
Charles P. Duane. The argument Of this cause
was commenced by Mr.. Lyon, Of counsel for appel
liant.
No. II3. Benjamin D. Godfrey. plaintiff in error,
vs. Charles 7. Eames. In error to the Circuit
Court Of tho United States for the district Of Mas
sachusetts. This writ Of was dismissed pur-
suant to the 18th rule Of this court
No. IA Joseph Mock, appellant, Va. The United
States. Appeal from the Court Of Claims. This
appeal was dismissed for tho want OF Jurisdiction.
No. 146. John Myers ct al appellants, vs. viii.
liam Fem This cause was submitted to the con.
sideration Of the court on printed arguments by
Mr.. Smith, Of counsel for the appellants, and by
Mr.. Van Arman, of counsel for the appellee.
No. l47. Horace seaver ct al, appellants, vs..
John A. Bigelow and
No. l4s. Richard Field ct al, appellants, vs. John
| A. 4 II. W. Bgelow. These cases were submitted
to the consideration Of the court on printed argu
ments by Mr.. Smith, Of counsel for appellants and
| by Mr. Hayne, oil counsel tOr npnellees
No. l49. James X. Bentley ct al, claimants Of
| the bark Newsboy, appellants vs. Hugh Coyne,
owner of tho schooner White Cloud and
| No $50. Same vs.. Same. These causes were
submitted TO the consideration Of the court on
| printed arguments by Mr.. Hibbard, Of counsel for
appellants, and by Mr.. Newberry, Of COUNSEL for
| nppellees
Adjourned until tomorrow at II o'clock.
78s Rersnue LaWs-A1er Entry Of Goods tciH
Damage they may haze Suffered At Sea BE- AROtoed
Arthur w. dustin, Collector, Sc.-This was IN
action of nssumpsit brought by the plaintiffs to
cover Of the defendant, as collector Of the port Of
Boston, certain duties which, as they alege he un-
lawfully exncted Of them, aud which they paid un-
der protest. According to the agreed statement Of
facts II appears that the duties were exaeted and
paid a cargo Of molasSes imported into the port
Of Boston from Cuba When the article was ex-
ported, at Matanzns, 1t was sound and sweet, but
on its arrival hero II found that II had become
sour, and the case shows that "tho souring took
place during the voyage"
1t does not appear that the plaintiffs knew that
the molasses had soured at tho dato Of arrival but
the record shows that they made the entry in the
oustom-houso at the full value Of sweet molaSses,
and then demanded to have the damage Rscertained
computation of tho duties This demand was &c
ceded to, and the defendant caused the damage 10
be appraised, but afterwards refused under the in
structions Of the Department, to allow the deduc.
acted and paid on the invoice valuation. Protest
was made on the ground that the molasses having
received damage the plaintiffs entitled TO have
the rate or percentage thereof deducted from the
original amount subject to duty.
On the trial. in the Circuit Court for the District
of Massachusetts,, the court held that Whenever th,
invoice value Of importations is too low, the i'm
porter is allowed by law to make whatever add
tons on the entry ho may think proper, so as L
bring up the entered value to the requirements o.
49, NaET l. ARlA uwatl NlaNu a
tional charge but that there Is no corresponding
provision authorizing the merchant to make AM
deduction from the invoice valuation on any 40
+ count whatever. and judgment was for defendant.
} Tho plaintiffs appeal to this court, contendin1
that under the fifty second section Of the act o
1899 the deduction was allowable. That section
reads as follows: THAT oil goods, wares and mer
chandise Of which entry shall have been made in
| complete or without the specification Of particu
lars, either from the want Of tho original invoice
invoices, or for any other cause, or which shall
have received damage during the voyage, to bo as
certained by the proper officers Of the port or dis
trict in which the goods, &c shall arrive shall b'
: conveyed to some warehouse to be designated b,
the collector in the parcels packages containing
Q tho same, there to remain with due and reasonable
f caro-, at the expense and risk Of the owner or
signee, under the care Of somo proper officer unit
the particulars, cost, or value as the case may 70
= quiro, shall have been ascertnned, either by tn,
exhibition Of the original invoice or invoices there
d Of or by appraisement at the option of the owner
Q importer, or cOnsignee, in manner hereafter pro
yided, and until the duties thereon shall have beol
paid or secured to bc paid, and permit granted b.
e the collector for the delivery thereof" The sec
't ton then provides for the manner Of appraisemen
l. Of cost, value, damage, &c.
The Government insists that the customs rev
= eDue are in part Nateyia, and especially in thi
case, an extended context is requisite for correc
o understanding of the foregoing provision All th
J. laws the subject therefore cited aud IL Is or
IS gued thGt, on tho whole legislation, goods whicl
have been completely entered, under whatever cir
cumStances such entry is made, not entitled t.
any allowance for damage, from whatever cause
, unless proof of such damage has been furnishe
l. ten days after the landing Of the goods, and othe
action had. But any provision of the act Of 1909
l. favorable to tho plaintiffs, repealed by the &C
% of 1923, and consequently the judgment was cor
J. rect Whenever, in fact, the invoice has been tn
basis Of an entry at the custom house, complete
n incomplete, whenever an entry has been mad
# with specific valuation, there is power to re
d duce the corresponding assessment Of duties
d Henry stanbery and J. II. Ashton for the Gov
), ernmenti NJ. Andros for plaintiffs in error.
II ReHdeHeeS Of M5 Judges Of lie Supreme Court 0
$ tie United States.
Mr.. Chief Justice Chase, + street north, corn,
Q of Sixth street west.
Q Mr.. Justice Wayne, No. 2 Franklin Place,
street
e Mr.. Justice Nelson, National Hotel
Mr.. Justice Grier, No north street, Capitc
IS Hill
Mr.. Justice Clifford, National Hotel
:. Mr.. Justice Swayne, Willard's Hotel.
|. Mr.. Justice Miller, National Hotel
|. Mr.. Justice Davis, National Hotel.
Mr.. Justice Field, Wilards Hotel.
John W. Wallace, reporter, National llotel.
\ D. W. Middleton, clerk, No. sos New JcTse
y avenue.
David S. GOOdng, U, S, Marshal, 4s1 L street,
IS CRIMINAL Court Judge FiSher-Th
case Of Sergeant VIM Walters, of the marine corpi
)f charged with the manslaughter Of James L. Streets
was resumed, and the testimony of witnesses cor
@ cluded at half-past eleven o'clock. The following
a a brief recapitulation of the circumstances of th
y homicide: On tho 25th of January last squad
% twenty-six marines, under the command Of tn
l. prisoner Rni Sergeant schwenk, were ordered
e proceed to the river for the purpose of obtaining
supply of ice. The prisoner, Sergeant Walters
n was in the immediate command of the squad, an
n in order to prevent his from leaving the rank
= to enter the numerous groggeres on the street
y Eleventh east,) commanded them to march in th
IT middle of the street instead of the Sidewalk
Il Although it appears from the evidence that ther
l. was considerable dissatisfaction among the men o
> receiving this order 1t was obeyed by oil but th