Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/133

 SAXONVILLE MILLS V. KUSSELL. 125 �t �lated by, or directed to be estimated or based upon, the value of the square yard, or any specified quantity or parcel of such goods, wares or marchandise," and is not repealed by any provision of the act of 1867. Indeed, it would seem to be directly applicable to the provision of the act of 1867, in regard to vs^ool, in this, that the rate of duty in each of the grades of wool in the several classes is determined by the value of the wool at the lime and place of exportation, exclu- sive of the charges of the port. "But," then adds the pro- viso, "the duty shall not be assessed upon an amount legs than the invoice or entered value, any act of congress to the contrary notwithstanding." This view of the statutes of 1865 and 1867 is much strengthened by an examination of the act of June 30, 1864, entitled "An act to increase duties on im- ports, and for other purposes." The fourth section of the act (13 St. at Large, 206) imposes a duty on wool, of the de- scription of the wool in controversy, almost precisely the same as the duty in this case, to-wit: "On ail wool unmanufac- tured, and ail hair of the alpaea goat, and other like animais, the value whereof at the last port or place from whence exported to the United States, exclusive of charges in such ports, shall he: 12 cents or less per pound, three cents per pound; exceeding 12 cents, and not exceeding 2e cents per pound, six cents per pound." Then, in the twenty-third section, providing for the appraisement of goods, wares and merchandise, follows the proviso "that the duty shall not be assesed upon an amount less than the invoice or entered value, any law of congress to the contrary notwithstanding." �The case of Kimhall v. The CoUector, 10 Wall. 436, is in point. That case, in some of its features, closely resembles the one under consideration. The question was whether the value of the wool was more than 20 cents per pound, or 20 cents or less. If valued at more than 20 cents per pound, the h'ooI was liable to duty; if at 20 cents per pound, or less, it was free of duty. The invoice value of the wool when bought was more than 20 cents per pound, but before it was shipped the priee of wool had fallen, and at the date of shipment it was less than 20 cents per pound. The court held the invoic<> ��� �