Maxwell v. Griswold

THIS case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

Like the preceding case of Greely v. Thompson and Forman, it was an action brought by the defendants in error against Maxwell, the collector at the port of New York, for the return of duties paid under protest.

In January, 1850, the defendants in error imported into New York, in the ship Matilda, from Manilla, sundry bags of sugar and bales of hemp. The goods were purchased in March and April, 1849, but not shipped until about the 24th of July, 1849, when the market prices had risen very considerably. The assistant appraiser reported upon the value of the articles, meaning by the word value 'the actual market value at the time of shipment to the United States in the principal markets of the country of produce.'

The importers paid the duties under protests, one of which was the following: Protest Notice.

'New York, January 3d, 1850.

'H. MAXWELL, ESQ., Collector:--

'We hereby protest against the duties demanded from us by the collector on this importation of plantain bark, or hemp.

'One objection is, that the duties, contrary to law and justice, are assessed upon a greater value than the cost of the same when purchased for us for shipment to the United States; the true costs and charges, being the value in the foreign market (Manilla), at the time when purchased for shipment, amount to $38,197.95, say thirty-eight thousand one hundred and ninety-seven 95/100 dollars. We are required to pay duties upon an estimated and fictitious value, amounting, with charges, &c., to $47,662.95, and we are compelled to enter the goods at their estimated and fictitious value to save penalties and forfeitures, and to get possession of our property.

'We protest against being committed to any thing by the form of the entry, which we submit to upon compulsion, insisting that they are not according to the truths of the transactions. The sixteenth section of the tariff law of 1842 fixes the date of purchase for shipment as the time in reference to which the value is to be ascertained, except in the case of goods imported into the United States from some country other than that of the growth or manufacture of the imported articles. There is nothing in the eighth section, or any part of the tariff act of 1846, nor in any other law of the United States, inconsistent with the sixteenth section of the act of 1842.

'We give notice that we intend to seek redress by suit at law and otherwise, as we may be advised, for the wrong done to us in respect to the excessive duty imposed upon this importation.

'We rely upon the objection we have made, and upon such other objections founded in law and in fact as belong to the case, and we now offer to specify them to the collector, more particularly if requested so to do.

'The sum of money now illegally extorted from us, over and above the true and honest duties, is $2366.25,

W. G. more or less, being 25 per cent. on the valuation over B. and above actual cost, as specified in the invoice herewith produced.

'True copy.

S. P. R.

'NATH'L L. & GEO. GRISWOLD.'

Upon the trial of the cause a bill of exceptions was taken, which it is not deemed advisable to set forth in extenso, because it contained all the invoices, entries, depositions, and circulars from the Secretary of the Treasury, the whole amounting to nearly thirty printed pages. The following summary of the bill will be sufficient:--

Southern District of New York, ss.

Be it remembered, that on the 13th day of June, in the year 1850, as yet of the stated term of the said court, commencing on the first Monday of April, in the year 1850, held at the City Hall, in the city of New York, in the Southern District of New York, before the Hon. Samuel Nelson, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, sitting in the said Circuit Court, the issue within contained joined between the said Nathaniel L. Griswold, George Griswold, George W. Gray, and George Griswold, junior, plaintiffs, and Hugh Maxwell, defendant, came on to be tried, and the said parties, by their respective attorneys, before the said justice came; and the jurors of the jury in this behalf duly summoned also came; and to say the truth also in this behalf are elected, tried, and sworn.