Majority — NELSON J.
p. 408United States v. Quimby.
Syllabus
Split white-ash timber, chiefly designed to be used in the manufacturo 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
p. 409
under the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854; but were chargeable with a duty of 20 per cent, ad valorem, under the twenty-fourth section of the act of March 2d, 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 11 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.
Same counsel as in the United States v. Hathaway, just preceding.
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 per centum ad valorem, under the twenty-fourth section of the act of March 2d, 1861, which imposes this duty “ on all articles manufactured, in whole or in part,” not otherwise provided for.
The court answer the question, in the certificate of division of opinion,
In the aeeiRMAtive.