George Latimer v. United States
| Decision Date | 19 February 1912 |
| Docket Number | No. 151,151 |
| Citation | 32 S.Ct. 242,223 U.S. 501,56 L.Ed. 526 |
| Parties | GEORGE S. LATIMER, Appt., v. UNITED STATES |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Walter F. Welch and Edward S. Hatch for appellant.
[Argument from pages 501-503 intentionally omitted] Assistant Attorney General Wemple for appellee.
In the process of manufacturing and handling tobacco small pieces are broken from the brittle leaves and fall to the floor of the warehouse or factory. These scraps are not treated as worthless, but are swept up, and, when cleaned, are used in the manufacture of a cheap grade of cigarettes and stogies.
The appellant shipped to Porto Rico a quantity of these sweepings, and the question arose as to whether the shipment was dutiable at 10 per cent ad valorem as 'waste not specially provided for in this act,' under ¶463 of the tariff act of 1897, or at 55 cents a pound, as 'tobacco, manufactured or unmanufactured,' under ¶215 of the same statute. 30 Stat. at L. 194, 169, chap. 11, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, pp. 1679, 1648. The customs officer classed it as 'unmanufactured tobacco,' and required the payment of a duty of 55 cents a pound. The importer protested and a case was made to test the question. On appeal, the General Board sustained the collector. It was affirmed by the district court of Porto Rico, and to reverse that judgment the importer has brought the case here.
There has been some difference of opinion as to the proper classification of scrap tobacco under the various tariff acts. In United States v. Schroeder, 35 C. C. A. 376, 93 Fed. 448, a higher grade of scrap was held to be 'waste' within the meaning of the tariff act of 1890. [26 Stat. at L. 567, chap. 1244]. In Seeberger v. Castro, 153 U. S. 32, 38 L. ed. 624, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 766, it was decided that the clippings from the ends of cigars were dutiable as unmanufactured tobacco under the tariff act of 1883 [22 Stat. at L. 488, chap. 121, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 2247].
The plaintiff claims that this decision has no application here, because it related to clippings which were of a higher grade than scrap, and for the further reason that, as the importer there made no claim that it should be taxed as waste, the court did not pass on that question. But it did definitely decide that such material, by whatever name called, was 'unmanufactured tobacco.'
The words, having received such a construction under the act of 1883, must be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Bevins
...it should be made. Carey v. State of South Dakota, 250 U. S. 118, 39 S. Ct. 403, 63 L. Ed. 886. See, also, Latimer v. United States, 223 U. S. 501, 32 S. Ct. 242, 56 L. Ed. 526; 6 R. C. L. p. 132, § 131. The general principle of construction now under consideration has been many times used ......
-
State v. Bevins
...of the legislature, it should be made. Carey v. State of South Dakota, 250 U.S. 118, 63 L.Ed. 886, 39 S.Ct. 403. See, also, Latimer v. United States, 223 U.S. 501; Ruling Case Law 132, 56 L.Ed. 526, 32 S.Ct. 242, Section 131. The general principle of construction now under consideration has......
-
United States v. Zenith Radio Corp.
...53 S.Ct. 74, 77 L.Ed. 199 (1932); Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144, 153, 44 S.Ct. 462, 68 L.Ed. 949 (1924); Latimer v. United States, 223 U.S. 501, 504, 32 S.Ct. 242, 56 L.Ed. 526 (1912); Sessions v. Romadka, 145 U.S. 29, 42, 12 S.Ct. 799, 36 L.Ed. 609 (1892). As will be more fully developed l......
-
Meer v. United States
...448, decided January 5, 1914. 6 Bridges v. United States, 346 U.S. 209, 221, 73 S.Ct. 1055, 97 L.Ed. 1557; Latimer v. United States, 223 U.S. 501, 504, 32 S.Ct. 242, 56 L.Ed. 526; Hecht v. Malley, 265 U.S. 144, 153, 44 S.Ct. 462, 68 L.Ed. 949; United States v. Ryan, 284 U.S. 167, 175, 52 S.......