Melville Fuller

Name: Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court
Author: Melville Fuller

Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Melville Fuller. It explores elements such as protest, collector and payment.

Quotes from Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court (Melville Fuller)

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ The importer cannot at that time know whether there has been any loss by leakage, nor can he know, after it has been ascertained by the weigher and gauger, whether the collector will exact duties upon the amount stated in the invoice. The protest is legally made when the duties are finally determined and the amount assessed by the collector, and a protest before or at that time is sufficient notice, as it warns the collector, before he renders his account to the treasury department, that he will be held personally responsible. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ The contention of the government is that, if the actual transfer of the money on April 20th constituted its payment, payment was not made under protest, and that if the actual payment is to be regarded as having been made when the entry was liquidated, or the excess was repaid, then it was not made under duress, as Rickard had already got his goods.
Actions against collectors for money had and received depended originally on common-law principles. The money was regarded as paid under duress, in order to obtain possession of the merchandise detained by the collector ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ No. 2,052. Plaintiffs paid the estimated duties in cash on certain importations of sugar at the port of Baltimore in 1847, which were thereupon landed, and examined by the weighers and gaugers, which examination disclosed that the goods had suffered from leakage. Suit was 'brought to recover back so much of the money as was paid for duties upon that portion of the cargo which was lost on the voyage by leakage.' Plaintiffs did not protest until after the occurrences above mentioned, and prior to the final liquidation of the duties. Judgment was unquestionably correctly given for plaintiffs. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ Among the goods imported were certain plain bareges and grenadines, each composed of a silk warp and worsted weft. No samples of these imports, or any similar goods imported by Rickard, were put in evidence. A sample was shown to one of the witnesses, (and other similar evidence was adduced, not differing from that of this witness) , who testified that it 'was known in this country in 1861 as a 'grenadine' or a 'barege." This was objected to because 'in no way connected with any goods in suit,' but was admitted as Exhibit 44, and defendant excepted. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ Fiedler, 2 Black, 461, 478, and the court said: 'The law never implies a promise to pay unless some duty creates such an obligation, and, more especially, it never implies a promise to do an act contrary to duty or contrary to law. Collectors, under the act referred to, were required to pay all moneys received for unascertained duties, or for duties paid under protest, into the treasury of the United States ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ There was no evidencea dduced of the loss or destruction by Rickard of the samples, nor did the lapse of time raise any presumption of such loss or destruction. The protest, for purposes of suit, was made not long after the importations, and the action was commenced in 1866 by the same attorney who was spared to try the case nearly a quarter of a century afterwards. The goods were not perishable in nature, and no reason was given why the necessary samples were not preserved. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ Besides, as, when the protest came to be made, the importer claimed that the rate should have been 35 per cent. ad valorem, the statement may have been inserted as establishing that 30 per cent. ad valorem plus 2 cents per square yard exceeded 35 per cent. ad valorem.
The question arises then whether, when the duties were estimated, and the amount delivered by Rickard to the collector, he should not then have protested, if he desired to contest the legality of the exaction. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court

“ Justice Stephens: 'A fact which renders the existence or nonexistence of any fact in issue probable, by reason of its general resemblance thereto, and not by reason of its being connected therewith, * * * is deemed not to be relevant to such fact. * * *' Dig. Ev. art. ”

Melville Fuller

Summary

Quotes from Barney v. Rickard — Opinion of the Court (Melville Fuller)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature