The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-01-13
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

Tho Importation OF Lumber and Timber from
Canada Under the Late Recipr~cisy Treaty
Manufactured and Unmnuufacsurcd Arr
ticies-What Extent Of ''Nlanufacture" will
Exclude from Exemption from Duty!
The Tnst<d States !. s. Quinby and other case
This action brought 10 OF the defendants Tor
duties alleged 70 be due upon certain lumber imported by
them from Canada, which Is described as ''splt white
ash TIMBER designed mostly 20 De used In the manufac
ture OF the long shovel handle They described
straight square Of timber Of and three fourths
inches In thickness and fourteen feet long, and made
into shovel handles by being turned In q lathe. Ihe
only process OF manufacture through which they had
sed that OF being split Into tho size and shape de-
The defence set up is that the property rs made free
Of duty by article Of the Reciprocity Treaty and the
acts of Congress giving 1t effect That treaty exomps
from duty the growth and ucduct OF the British colo
mics" and among other artSies specifically mentioned
unmanufactared timber and uabsr Of ali kinds roand
The splitting OF the timber imported, II IN argued,
part Of the manufacture o. the shovel handles but
mode adopted 20 reduce the sze and weight Of the
timber for convenence In removing from tho place or
It's growth The splitting Is done by hand, wale tne
machinery. They therefore CLAIMED 10 be the raw
material Of tho shovel handle.
Upon the trial below, In The Circuit Court for the
Eastern District OF Michigan, there vas division ~
opinion and the following aucskiens certified b.
this court for dcterminstion:--
Whether tho timber described in the declaration and
proof was liable 20 duty whether the free
OF duty by the Reciprocity treaty and the laws and acts Of
Congress relative theTetof
Whether they importahIc free of duty under tue
treaty o. September Q, 1854, with Great Britain?
Whether under the said treaty and the acts of Con.
gress passed carry the into effect timber
other than such round hewed sawed made free
Of dutyS
The government contends that the timber liz not fra OF
duty because IL In part manufactured by b'ng split
Into the fern and shape Of the shovel handle 10 ne ono
case and into the and shape Of the siaye 10 the
other. That any process that put the timber INTO that
shape required for the manuactrre OF any arucr, no
that could net be gold timber capable OF heng
used for purpose whatever but only Tor me parcu
lar purpose for which intended, was such m sp
pcat!on OF the nandlworh OF as made the timber
more than mere lumber. because u became ntnufec
turcd TO such an extent that was rendered unit for any
other use than that 10 which It bad DO sdnped Tho pro-
cess there fore Of necessity MANUFACTURES This timber
IA not comprehended by the treaty, unless ~ appears
frst tha IL is timber Or lumber; second that is either
round hewed sawed; third that u has not been sub
tacted IN Manufacture The second and third condl
tons arc evidently not funled-the articles are not
round hewed or sawed, but fpt timber; and they are
also manufactured articles, because shaped into The
form required for certain uses by design purpcss
rho defendants submit, that however much, or in
whatever form, BY whatever labor hes besn
expended upon the crude material II u has not through
such labor commenced aud taken the form Of par
ticuar article as distinguished from all other articles
into which as crude material II IL capnbe OF being
fact While this timber IL formed In certain manner
by splitting, lie still timber capable Of beng nanufac.
tured into general usc But he words s'round, bowed
aud sawed used, must be taken 70 b. nm enumera.
tion Of certain az The particulars intended be in
cl1ded In the preceulpg general words climber and up.
those general words
Henry Stanbciy, Attorney General, and j. Huay ASH
toni Assistant ATTORNEY General for the government
John y. Nswbcrry FOR defendant