Evening star., 1901-10-17
LONG ,tEGAL BATTLE
THE GOVERNMENT WINS A VICTORY
AFTER EIGHTEEN YEARS.


The ending of adlegal battle which has
been waginse fiercely for the past eighteen
years over the meaning Of the word trim
mings." and (which involved claims against
the government aggregating $50.0Oo.0oO. has
just been effected by the dismissal of what
are known as the chat trimming cases"
by the Supreme Court of the United States.
The dismissal was made on motion OF So
licitor General Richards for the govern
ment, and means victory for the gov
ernment in dollars and cents, although
judgments had been rendered against It
twice by the lower and highest courts OF
the country. Although on the loosing side
In court. the government has effected a
compromise by which the amount Of the
claims win be reduced by 80 per cent.
All OF the claims In these famous cases
originated in the obscurity Of meaning In
paragraph 44S Of the tariff act Of 1888.
This paragraph reads:
Hats, ETC., materials for; braids, plaits,
fats. laces. trimmings, tissues, willow
sheets and squares Used for making or Or
namenting hats, bonnets and hoods. COM
posed of straw, chip, grass, palm leaf.
willow, hair, whalebone or any other sub
stance or material not specially enumer-
ated or provided for in this act, 20 per
centum ad yalorem.'
The Importers Contention.
BY the importers the word trimmings"
in this connection was held to include
silk material which, they claimed. was
used to line mems hats, as well as for
trimming on women's and children's hats.
In another paragraph of the bill the duty
on such silk material was placed at so per
centum ad valorem, or an increase Of 30
per cent The duty collected over which
the litigation arose was the highest rate.
In nearly, II not every, instance where
claim for a rebate was filed the higher rate
had not only been paid by the importer,
but he in turn had recollected the duty in
his selling price of the goods. This made
the cases speculative ventures on the part
Of the claimants.
1t became necessary for the importers to
snow by evidence In. court the "chief use"
OF the goods in question, and the two first
decisions handed down by the Supreme
Court dealt almost exclusively on this
term chief use."
Meaning of "Chief Use.'
In one Of the lower courts the jury had
the duty Of interpreting the following
charge by the judge on the term "chief
use':
But the chief use in itself is a vague
and uncertain term, and consequently still
another question confronts us. How is
chief use to be ascertained? To this final
question | make the reply that the several
deliverances Of the Supreme Court upon
that subject, when considered together and
applied to this case. seem to require, and
that is, that chief use is that which was
commonly, practically and generally DONE
and is not to be oVerthrown by occasional
or exceptional use Tor other purposes, but
that no use: though common, practical and
general, could rightly be regarded as the
chief use, if5in fact there was also any
other use which was not occasional or ex-
ceptional, but was common, practical and
general. If there was an ordinary use and
also an extraordinary use, the former, and
not the latter. was the chief use.'
Soon after the claims were filed Congress
passed a remedial act in which the language
Of the section was made plain.
1t Is stated, at the Treasury Department
that ,O0Ql has already been paid out on
claims under this clause, but the exact
amount of disbursements yet to be made is
not known.