United States v. Dudley, 174 U.S. 670 (1899)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 174 U.S. 639, click here.

United States v. Dudley

No. 108

Argued April 19, 1899
Decided May, 22, 1899
174 U.S. 670

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT

OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

Syllabus

Sawed boards and plank, planed on one side and grooved, or tongued and grooved, should be classified under the Tariff Act of August 28, 1894, 28 Stat. 608, as dressed lumber, and admitted free of duty.

This case originated in a petition filed in the Circuit Court of the Unites states for the District of Vermont for the review of a decision of the Board of General Appraisers to the effect that certain imports made by the petitioner into the port of Newport, of "sawed boards and plank, planed on one side, tongued and grooved," and entered as "dressed lumber," were not entitled to be admitted free of duty as "sawed boards, plank, deals and other lumber, rough or dressed," under the Tariff Act of August 28, 1894.

In June, 1895, Dudley imported from Canada eight carloads of boards and plank, planed on one side and grooved, or tongued and grooved. The collector imposed a duty of twenty-five percent upon this lumber, as a "manufacture of wood" under paragraph 181 of the Tariff Act of August 28, 1894, c. 349, 28 Stat. 509, 521, which reads as follows:

House or cabinet furniture, of wood, wholly or partly finished, manufactures of wood or of which wood is the component material of chief value, not specially provided for in this act, twenty-five percentum ad valorem.

The importer protested, claiming that they should have been imported free of duty, as "dressed lumber," under paragraph 676.

The Board of General Appraisers sustained the action of the collector, and the importer filed this petition for review in the circuit court, which reversed the decision of the board. On appeal by the United States to the circuit court of appeals, where the cause was heard by two judges, who were divided in opinion, the judgment of the circuit court was affirmed.

Whereupon the United States applied for, and were granted, a writ of certiorari from this Court.