AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING CO. V. UNITED STATES, 211 U. S. 155 (1908)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 211 U. S. 155
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/211/155/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/211/155/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
American Sugar Refining Co. v. United States, 211 U.S. 155 (1908)
American Sugar Refining Company v. United States
No. 3
Argued November 11, 1908
Decided November 30, 1908
211 U.S. 155
Syllabus
A direct appeal from the Circuit Court will not lie where the only real substantial point is whether or not an officer of the United States has misconstrued a statute.
The claim that the Secretary of the Treasury has exercised legislative power in promulgating, pursuant to § 251, Revised Statutes, regulations concerning the collection of duties under the tariff law does not constitute a real and substantial dispute or controversy concerning the construction or application of the Constitution upon which the result depends, and a direct appeal will not lie to this Court under § 5 of the Act of March 3, 1891, c. 517, 26 Stat. 826, 828.
The regulations of 1897, promulgated by the Secretary of the Treasury, in regard to polariscopic tests of sugar to determine the duty payable thereon, as provided in § 1, Schedule E, par. 209, of the Tariff Act of July 24, 1897, c. 11, 30 Stat. 168, could have been enacted in terms by Congress without violating any provision of the Constitution of the United States, and prior decisions have determined that the Secretary properly construed the statute.
The facts are stated in the opinion.