Summary

Lawder v. Stone — Opinion of the Court

When, therefore, it was enacted that in a certain contingency no allowance should be made for 'damage to goods, wares, and merchandise imported into the United States,' it is reasonable to construe this language as not referring to an article, case, or package, which, though in the semblance of merchandise, had become absolutely valueless by reason of natural causes or casualty occurring thereto while the article, case, or package was in transit to the United States.
Source: Wikisource

Lawder v. Stone — Opinion of the Court

In treasury decision No. 3,272, dated July 21, 1877, passing upon a case where an importer, in his application for damage allowance upon 41 barrels of oranges, included as part of the 41 barrels, 20 1/2 barrels of entirely worthless oranges, it was declared that, if the goods had been landed in the United States as any other merchandise, and no damage application had been filed, duty would have accrued thereon; whereas if they had been thrown overboard at sea, no duty would accrue, as there would have been no importation of that quantity.
Source: Wikisource

Lawder v. Stone — Opinion of the Court

The collection of revenue on an article not existing, and never coming into the country, would be an anomaly, a mere fiction of law, and is not to be countenanced where not expressed in acts of Congress, nor required to enforce just rights.
'It is also the quantity actually received here by which alone the importer is benefited. It is all he can sell again to customers. It is all he can consume. It is all he can re-export for drawback.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature