Summary

Portrait of Howell Edmunds Jackson Howell Edmunds Jackson Hedden v. Robertson — Opinion of the Court

We have no authority, where the duty is thus specifically declared, to make an exception, based upon something that might be added to the cloth in the way of figures or patterns placed upon the groundwork of the fabric. The groundwork being cotton cloth, within the terms and provisions of the statute, and the threads thereof being countable, the goods were dutiable, by the express language of the statute, at the rate which was exacted by the collector from the defendant in error.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Howell Edmunds Jackson Howell Edmunds Jackson Hedden v. Robertson — Opinion of the Court

The threads forming the weft or filling, furnished by the Jacquard attachment,-used entirely for the figures or patterns,-loosely connected the figures in a horizontal line, and were raised above the smooth surface of the groundwork. In order to bring out the figure or pattern more distinctly, the whole fabric was run through a clipping machine two or more times, and the loose threads, together with the raised parts of the pattern, were cut off, so as to make the fabric smooth and even.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature