Swan Finch Company v. United States
Decision Date | 18 May 1903 |
Docket Number | No. 258,258 |
Citation | 47 L.Ed. 984,23 S.Ct. 702,190 U.S. 143 |
Parties | SWAN & FINCH COMPANY, Appt. , v. UNITED STATES |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Section 22 of the act of August 27, 1894 (28 Stat. at L. 551, chap. 349), re-enacted as § 30 of the act of July 24, 1897 (30 Stat. at L. 211, chap. 11, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 1991), is as follows:
During the years 1895, 1896, 1897, the appellant, a corporation engaged in business as importer, manufacturer, and exporter of oils at New York city and elsewhere in the United States, having used in the manufacture of certain kinds of lubricating oils imported rape seed oil on which duties had been paid, placed on board of vessels bound for foreign ports, lubricating oils so manufactured, and claimed a drawback of the duties paid on the imported rape seed oil used therein. The Treasury Department allowed and paid the drawback on such manufactured oils as were shipped to foreign countries and there relanded, but refused to pay any on such as were placed on board for use and consumed in use on the vessels. The appellant brought this suit in the court of claims to recover the drawbacks on the last-named oils. That court decided against it (37 Ct. Cl. 101),
Messrs. William B. King and George A. King for appellant.
Assistant Attorney General Pradt for appellee.
The statute allows the drawback 'on the exportation,' and the question is whether goods placed on board a vessel bound for a foreign port, to be used and consumed on board the vessel during its voyage, and in fact so used and consumed, are exported.
The careful opinion of the court of claims, which, in general, we approve and to which we refer, relieves us from the necessity of an extended discussion. Whatever primary meaning be indicated by its derivation, the word 'export,' as used in the Constitution and laws of the United States, generally means the transportation of goods from this to a foreign country. 'As the legal notion of emigration is a going abroad with an intention of not returning, so that of exportation is a severance of goods from the mass of things belonging to this country with an intention of uniting them to the mass of things belonging to some foreign country or other.' 17 Ops. Atty. Gen. 583.
True, the context may sometimes give to the word a narrower meaning, and in the execution of the administrative affairs of government it may have been applied to cases in which there was not in the full sense of the term an exportation, yet these are exceptions and do not destroy its general signification. It cannot mean simply a carrying out of the country, for no one would speak of goods shipped by water from San Francisco to San Diego as 'exported,' although in the voyage they are carried out of the country. Nor would the mere fact that there was no purpose of return justify the use of the word 'export.' Coal placed on a steamer in San Francisco to be consumed in propelling that steamer to San Diego would never be so designated. Another country or state as the intended destination of the goods is essential to the idea of exportation.
Counsel for appellant, after quoting from several dictionaries, say:
'These definitions show that...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Shell Oil Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization
...of the oil were not entitled to a refund of import duties paid upon the importation of the oil (Swan & Finch Co. v. United States (1903) 190 U.S. 143, 23 S.Ct. 702, 47 L.Ed. 984.) The court declared that '(w)hatever primary meaning may be indicated by its derivation, The word 'export' as us......
-
Rice Growers' Association of California v. County of Yolo
...with an intention of uniting them to the mass of things belonging to some foreign country or other. (Swan & Finch Co. v. United States (1903) 190 U.S. 143, 145, 23 S.Ct. 702, 47 L.Ed. 984.) The Empresa case was subsequent to the California case of Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board (1946) 3......
-
Distributed v. U.S. Dep't of State
...the transit of goods from one country to another for the purpose of trade.” Id. See also Swan v. Finch Co. v. United States , 190 U.S. 143, 145, 23 S.Ct. 702, 47 L.Ed. 984 (1903) (the “legal notion...of exportation is a severance of goods from the mass of things belonging to this country wi......
-
Shell Oil Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization
...goods placed on a foreign-bound vessel to be consumed on board during the voyage are not exports. (Swan & Finch Co. v. United States, 190 U.S. 143, 144-145, 23 S.Ct. 702, 47 L.Ed. 984 (1903); West India Oil Co. v. Sancho, 1 Cir., 108 F.2d 144, 147 (1939), aff'd on other grounds in West Indi......