ARTHUR v. SUSSFIELD


96 U.S. 128 (1877)

ARTHUR v. SUSSFIELD.

Supreme Court of United States.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Assistant-Attorney-General Smith for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. Edward Hartley, contra.


MR. JUSTICE HUNT delivered the opinion of the court.

The question in this case is as to the proper duty to be imposed.

On the part of the government, it is now insisted that the third and the ninth sections of the act of June 30, 1864, give a partial description of the articles taxed; but that neither is so complete as to exclude the other, and therefore neither description can be applicable: hence it is argued that spectacles must be treated as a non-enumerated...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases