Magone v. RosensteinAnnotate this Case
142 U.S. 604 (1892)
U.S. Supreme Court
Magone v. Rosenstein, 142 U.S. 604 (1892)
Magone v. Rosenstein
Argued January 7-8, 1892
Decided January 11, 1892
142 U.S. 604
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Soft wood boxes, imported from Sweden, containing parlor matches or safety matches, are not subject to duty under the Act of March 3, 1883, 22 Stat. c. 121, p. 488, § 7, p. 523.
Oberteuffer v. Robertson,116 U. S. 499, affirmed and applied.
The defendant in error imported into the port of New York from Sweden 301 cases of matches known as parlor matches and ten cases of matches known as safety matches. The boxes contained about seventy matches each, and were made of very thin pieces of soft wood covered with paper and so constructed that the receptacle containing the matches fitted snugly into the cover like a drawer and could be slid out of the cover at either end for the purpose of withdrawing the contents.
The defendant, as collector, classified the soft wood boxes for duty separately from the matches, and liquidated the duties on the boxes at the rate of 100 percent ad valorem, the cost of packing not being included therein. The duty so levied on the parlor match boxes amounted to $315.43, and on the safety match boxes to $69.57.
The importer duly protested and brought this action to recover back the duties on the boxes paid in obedience to said assessment.
It was admitted by the counsel for the plaintiff in error that the undoubted effect of the testimony was to show that the
surface on each box for producing ignition had for its sole object to facilitate the consumer's use of the contents of the box, and had no particular utility as a covering or protection for such contents.
The verdict was for the plaintiff. The defendant sued out this writ of error.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The judgment is affirmed upon the authority of Oberteuffer v. Robertson,116 U. S. 499.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.