Case Name: J. H. THORPE & CO. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1892-01-09
Citations: 154 F. 864
Docket Number: No. 266
Parties: J. H. THORPE & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 154
Pages: 864–865

Head Matter:
J. H. THORPE & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
January 9, 1892.)
No. 266.
Customs Duties — Presumption oe Correct Classification — Doubtful Question of Pact.
The presumption of correctness of a decision of a collector of customs is not rebutted by testimony of the officer making the classification that he was in much doulit as to whether he had not erred in his finding of fact on which the classification was based.
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
For decision below, see G. A. 248 (T. D. 10,664), affirming the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York.
The ease relates to goods classified as composed in chief value of wool, which, the importers contended were composed chiefly of silk. This contention was overruled by the board on the ground that there was “no evidence * * * to sustain the assertion made in the protests, and it is unsustained by any fact in the record,” and that therefore “the collector’s decision must stand as presumptively correct.” The importers introduced further evidence in the circuit court.
Comstock & Brown (Everit Brown, of counsel), for importers.
Charles Duane Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty.

Opinion:
WHEELER, District Judge.
In this case the question was as to whether the material of chief value was silk. That is a pretty doubtftxl thing. There is but one witness who testifies anything about it, and he is the man who classified it; and he does not want to say exactly, but says that he would rather see it analyzed. He is rather inclined to think that the chief material is silk, but is not sure. I do not think that a classification made by calling a man and having him rather fade out a little on his classification is very controlling. It is said that he is an adverse witness. That is true; and he hung back a little, but hanging back does not prove anything. If you had some witness the other way, and then he hung back, we would not dispute that so much; but, as there is but one witness, we must see how much is really proved by him. tie classified it one way, and afterwards he thought it might be the other way; but still he says: "I will not say any more than that is my impression. I would rather see it analyzed." There is a way to take that right apart and have some one who knows state what it is, and how much of each material there is in it, without any question. That is not done.
I think that decision should be affirmed.