Case Name: UNITED STATES v. LEHN et al.
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1902-03-13
Citations: 113 F. 1005
Docket Number: No. 2,741
Parties: UNITED STATES v. LEHN et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 113
Pages: 1005–1005

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES v. LEHN et al.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
March 13, 1902.)
No. 2,741.
Customs Duties — Dulcin—Chemical Compound.
Dulciu, being a chemical compound, is dutiable as such under Tariff Act 1897, par. 3, and not as saccharine, under paragraph 211, it being a distinct article, and of a different chemical composition, though similar to saccharine in character and use.
Appeal by the United States from a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
Charles D. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty.
Albert Comstock, for the importers.

Opinion:
COXE, District Judge
(orally). The decision of the board of general appraisers is affirmed upon the opinion delivered by General Appraiser Wilkinson, which is as follows:
"The merchandise is dulcin. It was assessed for duty as saccharine at $1.50 per pound and 10 per cent, ad valorem under para graph 211 of the act of July, 1897, and is claimed to be dutiable as a chemical compound at 25 por cent, under paragraph 3. Saccharine and dulcin are both derived from coal tar, and are similar in appearance, character, and use; but each is a, distinct article, manufactured under a specific patent and of a different chemical composition. Saccharine is anliydro-ortho-sulphamin-benzoic acid, while dulcin is para-phenetol-carbamid. Dulcin might bo classified by similitude as saccharine but for its enumeration as a chemical compound. We find that it is a chemical compound, and sustain the protest. Reference is made to Arthur v. Lahey, 96 U. S. 112, 24 L. Ed. 766."