Case Name: F. W. MYERS & CO. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1906-05-22
Citations: 147 F. 204
Docket Number: No. 144 (1,670)
Parties: F. W. MYERS & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 147
Pages: 204–206

Head Matter:
F. W. MYERS & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
May 22, 1906.)
No. 144 (1,670).
Customs Duties — Classification—Ftkeprooj?bd Lumber.
Lumber which 'has ben subjected to a fireproofing process that largely increases its value, but which can still be applied to the ordinary uses of sawed lumber, is not dutiable as manufactures of wood, not specially provided for, under paragraph 208, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule D, 30 Stat. 168 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1646], but as “sawed lumber,’’ under paragraph 195, 30 Stat. 167 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1646J.
Wallace, Circuit Judge, dissenting.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
Dor decision below, see 139 Fed. 344, which reversed decisions of the Board of United States General Appraisers, which had reversed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of Plattsburg. Note G. A. 5,827 (T. D. 25,715).
Comstock & Washburn (Albert H. Washburn, of counsel), for importers.
George B. Curtiss, U. S. Atty.
Before WALLACE, LACOMBE, and TOWNSEND, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This cause involves customs duties on "fire proofed lumber." It is reported below in 139 Ded. 344. In the opinion of a majority of the court the decision of the United States Supreme Court in U. S. v. Dudley, 174 U. S. 670, 19 Sup. Ct. 801, 43 L. Ed. 1129, is controlling.
The decision of the circuit court is therefore reversed, and that of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.