New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-02-16
TIFF1NY'S WINS POINT.
Leare to 1ppIy for Writ of Man
damus in Pearl Duty Case Granted.

Tiffany z, Co gained A point yesterday in their
efforts 10 compel the Collector of the Port -
receive Ss1 .022 ad yalorem duties on pearls i'm
ported in 1902. when Judge Martin. of Vermont,
sitting in the Urrted States Circuit Court
granted Arthur NJ King. ex-Assistant United
States District Attorney. an order which gives
Tiffany & Co. forty days within which to apply
for writ Of mandamus TO compel the Collector
of the Port 10 receive the duties and forward
all the papers I'm the case to the United States
Board or General Appraisers. The result Of the
case is being anxiousy awaited by all importers,
it viii settle point in the tariff act relative
10 the Importation of jewelry which has long
been a source Of wrangling. The case in ques-
ton has been dragging through the federal
courts for several years.
In 1902 Tiffany Co. imported from their
Paris house several packages of unassorted
pearls which were said TO have been selected
by Morris Guggenhem. who bought them after
they were made into a necklace. The pearls
went to the custom house and were declared
dutiable at 10 per cent ad valOrem. Mr.. King,
who is assisted by d. Macon Webster. said yes
ferday that the duty was paid. There Is a
clause in the Tariff Act, however, which give
the government the right to reliquidate within
year after an appraisal.
About ten months later Mr. King said yes
teTday, the Collector Of the Port reliquidate ed
the duty at 60 per cent ad valorem: holding that
the lower rate applied TO drilled pearls or pearls
in their natural state. The higher being that
necklace.
THE Tiffany firm protested against this re-
liquidation, bur did not pay the added duty. on
the ground that the tariff act set time limit
within which payment should be made There
upon the government sued TO recover SS1, 022
duty imposed. The case was taken 10 the
United States Circuit Court. and a jury there
gave a verdict in favor Of the importer. holding
mat he was not liable for the higher rate of
duty The government took the case to the
United states Circuit Court of Appeals. where
Judges Wallace, Lacombe and Coke reversed
fsfCfg. rafT 2,
stance. that where importer is dissatisfied
with the action Of collector he must both pro-
Test and pay the duties, wheTeupon the collector
must, under the tariff law, send a protest to the
United States Board Of General Appraisers for
determination. and that the question Of classi-
ncaton of merchandise cannot he submitted 10
a jury
Tiffany & Co." continued Mr.. King made
q tender OF the duty imposed to the Collector.
ana asked that he send their protest to the gen
eral board. The Collector declined to receive the
duty without Instructions from the Secretary of
the Treasury and that official refused to direct
the Collector 10 do so, taking the position that
the importer mad lost his remedy by declining
10 pay duty and defending a suit for recovery.
He said the case had gone too far for depart
mental relief, and that the only way out was to
pay a judgment which might be rendered in a
new trial
THE importer applied to the United States
Court or Appeals for relief, and that court hand
ed down a memorandum which in the opinion
OF The counsel Of Tiffany q Co, clearly points
out the course to be followed by the Circuit
Court. In part this memorandum said that the
Circuit Court WAS empowered TO grant such re-
lief and to suspend the trial until the importer.
ny payment OF duty assessed. may put itself i'm a
position TO try the question as to the classical
ton before the board Of general appraisers"