United States v. Crucible Steel Co.
United States v. Crucible Steel Co.
Opinion of the Court
The merchandise is strip steel, which has been cold-rolled, from four to five inches wide, 13/iooo of an inch thick, and from 200 to 250 feet in length, valued above three cents and not above four cents per pound, and which, after being tempered by the importer, is used for making car-seat springs. The importation was under the tariff act of July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule C, 30 Stat. 160 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1638], which contains the following paragraphs:
“Par. 133. Sheets of iron or steel, polished, planished or glanced, by whatever name designated two cents per pound: provided, that plates or sheets of iron or steel by whatever name designated, other' than the polished, planished, or glanced herein provided for, which have been pickled or cleaned by acid, or by any other material or process, or which are cold-rolled, smoothed only, not polished, shall pay two-tenths of one cent per pound more than the corresponding gauges of common or black sheet iron or steel.”
It is conceded by both sides that the merchandise is not within this section because it is not “sheets of steel,” steel strips or strips of steel being commercially a different article.
“Par. 135. Steel ingots, cogged ingots, blooms hnd slabs by whatever process made, * * * sheets and plates and steel in all forms and shapes*385 not specially provided for in this act, * *. * valued above 8 cents per pound, and not above 4 cents per pound, l2/io cents per pound.”
Both sides concede that the merchandise is covered by this paragraph.
“Par. 141. * * * On all strips, plates, or sheets of iron or steel of whatever shape, other than the polished, planished, or glanced sheet-iron or sheet-steel hereinbefore provided for, which are cold-rolled, cold-hammered, blued, brightened, tempered, or polished by any process to such perfected surface finish, or polish better than the grade of cold-rolled, smoothed only, herein-before provided for, there shall be paid one cent per pound in addition to the rates provided in this act upon plates, strips, or sheets of iron or steel of common or black finish.” 30 Stat. 162 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1640].
The sole question in the case is whether the importations should pay the additional duty required by paragraph 141. To decide this question it is necessary, first, to construe the paragraph, and then to apply its provisions to the facts. The Circuit Judge interpreted the paragraph as requiring that the “better” surface finish or polish must be one produced by some process other than cold-rolling. We are unable to concur in this conclusion. It does not seem to be warranted by the language used, which provides that when the steel strips—by cold-rolling, by cold-hammering, by bluing, by brightening, by tempering, or by polishing by any process—are brought to such perfected surface finish or polish as is better than the grade specified in the section they shall pay the additional duty. This seems to be the natural construction. It is strictly grammatical, it is simple and sensible, it calls for no fine-drawn distinctions, it leads to no'absurdity. Moreover, when it is adopted much of the ingenious argument which has been presented by both sides becomes immaterial.
The strips in question have not been subjected to* any process other than cold-rolling. They have, it is true, been pickled—put in lime bath and annealed, it may be more than once; but the evidence shows that these manipulations are always steps in the process of cold-rolling to so small a gauge as this. Cold-rolling, however, affects the surface. Cold-rolled steel has a better or poorer surface, according to the number of times it has gone through the cold-rolls. The strips in question have been through the rolls several times to secure the required thinness, and undoubtedly are, as the witnesses call it, “whiter” or brighter than strips which have not been through the cold-rolls so often. The point to be determined is whether such betterment of the surface has reached a stage where the strip is to be classed as above the standard fixed bv Congress as “cold-rolled, smoothed only.”
What is that standard? For a reply one naturally turns, first, to the trade witnesses to ascertain the commercial meaning of the words. But no solution of the question is to be found there. The evidence before the Board of General Appraisers abundantly sustains their finding that there is no trade understanding which includes “cold-rolled, smoothed only”; and, so far as steel strips are concerned, there is nothing in the testimony taken in the Circuit Court to modify this finding. The phrase in paragraph 141 is “bet
The case is a difficult one. On the one side it might be said that when a hot-rolled rod—such as illustrative Exhibit A 10998 H—has been passed once through cold-rolls, it may fairly be described as smoothed. But, on the other hand, the word “smooth” is relative, and there are roughnesses and irregularities of surface in that exhibit greater than are apparent even in those (A, B, C) the government refers-to as the standard. Under these circumstances, it-would seem that a more satisfactory solution of .-the question can be found by reference to the tariff history of this provision for addi
The decision of the Circuit Court is affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES v. CRUCIBLE STEEL CO. OF AMERICA
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Customs Duties—Classification—Steel Strips Cold-Rolled, Smoothed Only. .The provision in paragraph 141, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule C, 30 Stat. 162 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1640], for steel strips brought to a ‘‘perfected surface finish or polish better than the grade of cold-rolled, smoothed only,” does not require that such “better” finish or polish must be produced by some process other than cold-rolling; but it does not include certain steel strips of a thickness of 13Aooo of one inch, which have been subjected to no other process than the cold-rolling (with incidental annealing, pickling, etc.) necessary to produce so small a gauge; for, a precisely similar provision in the tariff act of 1.890 having received the same construction, it is presumed that Congress, by re-~nacting it, intended it to have the same effect, especially in the- absence of proof of a general, well-recognized meaning for the words quoted that would include such articles.