United States v. Morrison
Headline: Court upheld a 60% tariff on imported strung glass beads used as dress trimmings, ruling they are glass manufactures rather than imitations of precious stones, so importers must pay the higher duty.
Holding: The Court ruled that the threaded or strung glass beads were manufactures of glass dutiable at sixty percent under paragraph 108, not imitations of precious stones under paragraph 454, and affirmed the higher duty.
- Importers of strung glass beads must pay the 60% tariff.
- Colors or shapes won't let beads qualify as precious-stone imitations.
- Customs will classify similar ornamental glass beads as manufactures of glass.
Summary
Background
E.A. Morrison & Son and Wolff & Co. imported strings of colored glass beads. Some were made to resemble "cat’s eyes," "tiger’s eyes," pearls, garnet, aquamarine, moonstone, and topaz. Customs treated the goods as manufactures of glass and charged a sixty percent duty under paragraph 108 of the Tariff Act of 1890; the importers said the beads were imitations of precious stones and should instead be dutiable under paragraph 454 at a lower rate. The record includes a stipulation and concessions that the items were beads and were threaded or strung when imported.
Reasoning
The Court framed the core question as whether threaded or strung glass beads are "imitations of precious stones" under paragraph 454 or instead "manufactures of glass" under paragraph 108. It examined prior tariff laws and Treasury decisions showing beads had historically been treated separately and often taxed at higher rates. The 1890 Act did lower duties for loose, unstrung glass beads but did not clearly make strung beads eligible for the imitation-stone rate. The Court found the beads were properly described as glass manufactures used as hat and dress trimmings or ornament for embroidery, and it noted the statute’s rule that, when multiple rates could apply, the highest rate governs. The Court therefore reversed the Circuit Court of Appeals and affirmed the lower court’s higher-duty classification.
Real world impact
Importers and merchants of strung glass beads will be required to pay the sixty percent duty as manufactures of glass rather than the lower imitation-stone rate, making such imports more expensive. The ruling prevents treating colored beads as precious-stone imitations merely to obtain a lower tariff and clarifies how customs must classify similar ornament goods. The decision therefore settles this dispute for the imports at issue and will guide future customs classifications of beads and similar glass ornaments.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Peckham dissented from the Court’s judgment.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?