United States v. Legg

Decision Date08 January 1901
Docket Number55.
Citation105 F. 930
PartiesUNITED STATES v. LEGG.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Henry C. Platt, for the United States.

Everit Brown, for appellee.

Before WALLACE, LACOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges.

LACOMBE Circuit Judge.

The only question presented is whether the importation is subject to the duty imposed by the tariff act of 1894, or to that imposed by the tariff act of 1897. The latter act provided that (except where otherwise specified) the new rates of duty should be levied, collected, and paid 'on and after the passage of this act. ' Its final section (34), providing for the repeal of inconsistent legislation, contained the usual provision that the same shall not affect any act done or any right accruing or accrued. The thirty-third section reads as follows, being in the form usual in such acts:

'Sec 33. That on and after the day when this act shall go into effect all goods, wares, and merchandise previously imported, for which entry has been made, and all goods wares, and merchandise previously entered without payment of duty and under bond for warehousing, transportation, or any other purpose, for which no permit of delivery to the importer or his agent has been issued, shall be subjected to the duties imposed by this act and to no other duty upon the entry or the withdrawal thereof,' etc.

Manifestly that part of the section beginning, 'and all goods,' etc., 'previously entered,' deals only with goods entered for warehouse, and need not further be considered, since the importation at bar was entered for consumption. The facts, about which there is no dispute, are as follows: It is conceded that by the president's signature the new tariff act did not take effect until 4:06 p.m. on Saturday, July 24, 1897. The official and actual business hours of the custom house ended at 4 p.m. of that day. The goods in question were on the steamship La Touraine. She arrived in the port of New York prior to 11:50 a.m. July 24th, and, in accordance with the usual practice, her arrival was at that hour posted in the custom house. Thus advised of the arrival of his goods, the importer, before 4 p.m. on that day, presented himself at the proper place, with all the necessary papers, and with the money to pay the duties, and offered to make a consumption entry for the merchandise and pay duties. The entry was refused by the collector on the ground that the vessel had not made entry in accordance with the law and regulations. On the following Monday the merchandise was entered for consumption, and duties were assessed thereon under the new act.

Section 2774, Rev. St. U.S., provides that within 24 hours after the arrival of any vessel from a foreign port the master shall repair to the office of the chief officer of customs and make report of the arrival, and shall thereupon or thereafter file a manifest, etc. This court has held that section 33, above quoted, does not, by the use of the word 'entry,' refer to this 'entry of the vessel.' In re Gardiner, 4 C.C.A. 155, 53 F. 1013. Section 2785, Rev. St. U.S., reads as follows:

'The owner or consignee of any merchandise on board of any vessel, or, in case of his absence or sickness, his known agent or factor in his name, shall, within fifteen days after the report of the master to the collector of the district for which such merchandise shall be destined, make entry thereof in writing with the collector, and shall in such entry specify the name of the vessel and of her master, in which, and the port or place from which such merchandise was imported, the particular marks, numbers, denominations, and prime cost, including charges of each particular package or parcel whereof the entry shall consist, or, if in bulk, the quantity, quality and prime cost, including charges thereof, particularly specifying the species of money in which the invoices thereof are made out. Such entry shall be subscribed by the person making it, if the owner or consignee, in his own name, or, if another person, in his name as agent or factor, for the owner or consignee. The person making such entry shall also produce to the collector and naval officer, if any, the original invoices of the merchandise, or other documents received in lieu thereof, or concerning the same, in the same state in which they were received, with the bills of lading for the same; which invoices shall be signed by the persons in
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Heike v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • October 10, 1911
    ...of the original entries on basis of the false weights and a refund of the consequent difference in duties. This court, in U.S. v. Legg, 105 F. 930, 45 C.C.A. 134, pointed out 'The term 'entry' in the acts of Congress is used in two senses. In many of the acts it refers to the bill of entry,......
  • Titanium Metals Corp. v. US, Slip Op. 95-153. Court No. 94-04-00236.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of International Trade
    • August 30, 1995
    ...but a transaction, — a series of acts which are necessary to ... the entering of the goods." Id. at 59 (quoting United States v. Legg, 105 F. 930, 933 (2d Cir.1901)). The court stated that "Congress intended to connote by the phrase `entered for consumption' a series of acts which are neces......
  • United States v. Edwin S. Hartwell Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • October 3, 1905
    ...at the time has the legal right to cancel his obligation and his adversary is under the legal duty to accept performance. In U.S. v. Legg, 105 F. 930, 45 C.C.A. 134, it decided that, after an importation of goods was complete, a tender of entry before the Dingley act went into force was equ......
  • Cassel v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • January 30, 1906
    ... ... original liquidation of the duty. This view, apparently, ... finds supports in the following cases: United States v ... Frazer, 10 Ben. 347, Fed. Cas. No. 15,161; United ... States v. Seidenberg (C.C.) 17 F. 227; United States ... v. Legg, 105 F. 930, 45 C.C.A. 134; Mosle v. Bidwell ... (C.C.) 119 F. 480; United States v. Leng (D.C.) ... 18 F. 15; Beard v. Porter, 124 U.S. 437, 8 Sup.Ct ... 556, 31 L.Ed. 492; Gandolfi v. United States, 74 F ... 549, 20 C.C.A. 652. These adjudications firmly settle the ... point under ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT