TOPLITZ V. HEDDEN, 146 U. S. 252 (1892)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 146 U. S. 252

U.S. Supreme Court

Toplitz v. Hedden, 146 U.S. 252 (1892)

Toplitz v. Hedden

No. 45

Argued November 16, 1892

Decided November 28, 1892

146 U.S. 252


Imported articles, used as head-coverings for men, invoiced as "Scotch bonnets," and entered, some as "worsted knit bonnets," and others as " worsted caps," and made of wool, knitted on frames, were liable to duty as "knit goods made on knitting frames," under "Schedule K, Wool and Woolens," of § 2502 of the Revised Statutes, as enacted by § 6 of the Act of March 3, 1883, c. 21, 22 Stat. 509, and not under "Schedule N, Sundries," of the same section, § 2502, p. 511, as "bonnets, hats and hoods for men, women and children."

Testimony held competent, on the cross-examination of a witness, as affecting his credibility, in view of contradictory statements which he had made.

An exception to a copy of a paper is unavailing where both sides treated it as a copy and no ground of objection to it as evidence is set forth.

It was proper, in an action brought by the importer against the collector to recover duties paid under protest, for the defendant to show that the articles were not known, on or immediately before March 3, 1883, in trade and commerce as "bonnets for men."

It was right on the evidence for the court to direct a verdict for the defendant, especially as the plaintiff refused to go to the jury on the question as to whether, on March 3, 1883, the word "bonnet" had in this country a well known technical, commercial designation such as would cover the goods in question.

The case is stated in the opinion.

ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review :

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line :