National Republican., 1884-04-08
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
The Work or the Court of Inst Appeal
Yesterday.

The worls or the Court of Inst Appeal
Yesterday.
question of considerable interest TO trav-
elors returning from abroad, namely, what
constitutes wearing apparel in actual use.
which by the law is exempted from duty,
was decided by tho supreme court Of the
| United States yesterday in the case of VIM.
Astor, plaintiff in error, w. Edwin \, Merritt,
collector, IN error to the United States circuit
court for the southern district of New York,
! The plaintiff in error, citi1on of tho United
States arrived home from n visit to Europe
| in tho ond of September with his family by
vessel and brought with him wearing apparel
| bought there for his aud thoir use, to be worn
| here during the season then approaching, not
excessive in quantity, for persons of tEeir
/ means, habits, aud station in life, and their
ordinary outfit for tho winter a part Of tho
articles had not been worn, and duties wcro
eXactcd on all those articles.
This court holds thnt under section 2505 Of
the revised statutes eXempting from duty
I wearing apparel in actual use and other
| personal effects not merchandise the proper
/ ruo to be applied was to exempt from duty
such articles as fulfilled tho following cOndi-
tions; First, wearing apparel owned by tho
passenger aud in condition to be worn at
once without further manufacture; second,
brought with him as passenger and intended
for the uso or wear of himself or his family,
I WHO accompanied Hlul 10 piShbuBbT, anu HOb
for sale or purchased or imported for other
persons or to be given away; third, suitable
for the season of the year which was immedi-
ately approaching at the tmo of arrival, and
fourth, not exceeding in quantity, quality, or
/ valuo what the passenger was in the habit OF
ordinarily providing for himself and his
| family at that time and keeping on hand for
his and their reasonable wants in view of
their means, habits, and station in life, even
though such articles had not beon actually
worn. The Judgment of the circuit court is
therefore reversed, and remanded with in
structions to award u new trial. Opinion by
Justice Blatchford.
The othor decisions were as follows:
No, 2s3. Augustus II. Bprley, receiver
&C. plaintiff in error, VS., tho German Ameri-
can bank. In error to the circuit court of
the United States for tho southern district of
New York. Judgment affirmed with costs
Opinion by Mr.. Justice BlatChford.
No. 80 William Drury, appellant, VS..
Annie L. Hayden. Appeal from the circuit
court of the United States for the northern
district of Illinois Decree reversed, with
costs, and cause romanded, with directions to
dismiss the bill. Opinion by Mr.. Justice
Gray
No 1853. Robert Hayes, minor by George
c. Fry, his next friend, plaintiff in error, vs.
tho Michigan Central Railroad company. In
error to the circuit court of the United States
for tho northern district Of Illinois. Judg-
] menu TeNprSeu, WIN COSTS anu CduSb re-
manded, with directions to award new trial
Opinion by Mr.. Justice Matthews
No. $50. joseph Teal, plaintiff in error,
VS.. James ID. Walker. In error to the circuit
court of the United States for the district of
Oregon. judgment reversed with costs, aud
cause remanded for further proceedings to be
had therein, in conformity with the opinion
Of this court Opinion by Mr.. Justice
Woods.
No. l7s Christian Bors, plaintiff in error,
vs.. William J. Preston. In error to the cir
cult court of the United States for the south
ern district of New York. Judgment re-
versed, with costs, and cause remanded for
further proceedings to be had therein, not
inconsistent with the opinion Of this court.
Opinion by Mr.. Justice Harlan.
No. "a. James W. Lowell ct al, appellants,
VS.. The ST. Louis Mutual Life Insurance
Company ct al. Appeal from the circuit
court of tho United States for the middle dis
trict of Tennessee. Decree reversed, with
costs and cause remanded for further pro-
coedings therein, in conformity with the
opinion of this court. Opinion by Mr..
Justice Bradley.
No. 26l. Henry NJ. Rector, appellant, VS..
Y. y. Gibhon ct al. Appeal from the circuit
court of the United States for tho eastern
district of Arkansas. Decree reversed with
costs, aud cause remanded with directions To
overrule tho demurrer, and to take further
proceedings in accordance with the opinion
OF this court; tne nlhlhtln TO nave iehVe 10
+ amend his bill, and the defendants to answer
it when amended. Opinion by Mr.. Justice
Field. Dissenting Mr. Chief Justice Waite
and Justices Harlan, Woods, and Batchford
The other proceedings were as follows;
Charles W. Hoffman, of Frederick, Md;
, Joseph r. Webster, of Lincoln, Neh.; Carleton
Hunt of New Orleans La, and David b.
, Kmball, of Salem, Mas, were admitted to
practice
Tho chief Justice announced that the court
would adjourn the term on May 5, and would
not hear arguments in any cases after the
twenty fifth instant. and also that the court
; would not sit on Friday next.
, No. 629. The Union Pacific Railway COM
pany, plaintiff in error, VS.. Abram Myers.
5 Advanced pursuant to thiNy-second rule.
No. sO7. Franklin d. Richards, appellant
A VS.. James NJ. Kimball. Appeal from supreme
!, court of Utah. Dismissed Costs to be paid
by appellant per stipulation.
No. 800. A. S. Badger, collector, &C.. plain
4 tiff in error, vs. Frank Gutierrez Submitted
I No. 1855. w. H. Robb, plaintiff in error, VS.
, p. Connolly. Submitted.
= No. 235. Allen Campbell Macarthur ct al.
: appellants, VS.. David A. Scott, administrator
, &c, ct al. Reargument commenced Ad
, | innrnad