Summary

Swan v. Arthur Fleitman — Opinion of the Court

While tariff acts are generally to be construed according to the commercial understanding of the terms employed, language will be presumed to have the same meaning in commerce that it has in ordinary use, unless the contrary is shown. Outside of commerce there can hardly be a doubt that laces, ribbon, galloons, and braids made substantially of silk would be denominated silk goods.
Source: Wikisource

Swan v. Arthur Fleitman — Opinion of the Court

So far as the laces, galloons, and braids are concerned, there was no attempt to do so, and in respect to the ribbons the attempt that was made failed before the jury. We cannot believe that what are bought and sold in the market as dress o piece silks are not in commercial designation silks because they are to some extent adulterated with a cheaper fibre, if the silk so far predominates over the inferior material that it can be said they are made substantially of silk. If that is true of piece silks it certainly must be of laces, ribbons, galloons, and braids.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature