United States v. Quimby
71 U.S. 408 (1866)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Quimby, 71 U.S. 4 Wall. 408 408 (1866)

United States v. Quimby

71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 408

CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION OF OPINION BETWEEN THE JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT

COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Syllabus

Split white ash timber, chiefly designed to be used in the manufacture of long shovel handles, the growth and product of the Province of Canada and imported from there into the United States, were not free from duty

Page 71 U. S. 409

under the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854, but were chargeable with a duty of 20 percent ad valorem under the twenty-fourth section of the Act of March 2, 1861.

This suit was brought to recover the duties on "split timbers" imported from Canada into the United States and claimed to be exempt under the Reciprocity Treaty, as in the case just disposed of. The treaty exempts from duty "timber and lumber of all kinds, round, hewed, and sawed, unmanufactured, in whole or in part."

The articles consisted of six hundred and sixteen cords of split white-ash timber, chiefly designed to be used in the manufacture of long shovel handles.

The main question was whether the said timber was liable to duty, or whether it was made free of duty by the Reciprocity Treaty.

Page 71 U. S. 409

MR. JUSTICE NELSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

The case falls within the construction of the treaty in the case of the United States v. Hathaway.

The article, we think, is chargeable with a duty of twenty percentum ad valorem under the twenty-fourth section of the Act of March 2, 1861, which imposes this duty "on all articles manufactured, in whole or in part," not otherwise provided for.

The Court answers the question in the certificate of division of opinion in the affirmative.

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.