William Marriott, Plaintiff In Error v. Frederick Brune, John Brune, and William Brune, Copartners Trading Under the Firm of Brune Sons
Decision Date | 01 January 1850 |
Citation | 9 How. 619,50 U.S. 619,13 L.Ed. 282 |
Parties | WILLIAM H. MARRIOTT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. FREDERICK W. BRUNE, JOHN C. BRUNE, AND WILLIAM H. BRUNE, COPARTNERS, TRADING UNDER THE FIRM OF F. W. BRUNE & SONS |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
'We would further respectfully ask whether you do not think the duty upon sugar (especially Muscovado, which from its nature is subject to a considerable loss on the voyage) should be estimated in the same manner as that on molasses; namely, calculating thirty cents ad valorem on the cost of the weight landed here, not on the weight shipped; thus making an allowance for an unavoidable drainage, or rather only charging duty on the pounds of sugar actually brought into the country and into consumption.
'Hoping you will favor us with an answer to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Washington Intern. Ins. Co. v. US
...because "the duty demanded was paid under protest, stating specially the ground of objection." 54 U.S. at 496. Marriott v. Brune, 50 U.S. (9 How.) 619, 13 L.Ed. 282 (1850), similarly was an action in assumpsit brought against the collector of the port of Baltimore to recover excess duties p......
-
Porto Rico Brokerage Co. v. United States
...have a "necessary correlation," and relate only to commerce between the United States and foreign countries. Marriott v. Brune et al., 9 How. (50 U. S.) 619, 631, 13 L. Ed. 282; Woodruff v. Parham, 8 Wall. (75 U. S.) 123, 136, 19 L. Ed. 382; Brown v. Houston, 114 U. S. 622, 5 S. Ct. 1091, 2......
-
Sturges v. Clark D. Pease, Inc.
...limits of the port of New York. American Sugar Ref. Co. v. United States, 181 U. S. 610, 21 S. Ct. 830, 45 L. Ed. 1024; Marriott v. Brune, 9 How. 619, 13 L. Ed. 282; United States v. Southmayd, 9 How. page 637, 13 L. Ed. 290. By such importation it became, under section 526 (b), "subject to......
-
Burnet v. Chicago Portrait Co
...pp. 14-18. 3 See Dicey, Conflict of Laws (4th Ed.) pp. 59, 60. 4 Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. 1, 29, 6 L. Ed. 253; Marriott v. Brune, 9 How. 619, 635, 636, 13 L. Ed. 282; American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister, 207 U. S. 284, 293, 28 S. Ct. 72, 52 L. Ed. 208, 12 Ann. Cas. 595; United States ......