Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/520

506 fEDSIiAL BBPOSTEB. �Now, if "tin plates" be a manufacture of metals, and were intenàed to be classified and taxed as such, they must corne under this expression of ail manufactures of metals, unless found among the excepted articles. But they are not fouud among the excepted articles, nor are they taxed, nor were they intended to be taxed by congress under thisheadof ail "manu- factures of metals," because they are taxed elsewhere, under a subsequent section of the same act, (section 4,) and at a different rate, as "tin plates," eo nomine. �Here is an unbroken legislation by congress from 1789 to 1879, a period of 90 years, in which "tin plates" have not been included in "manufactures of tin or iron," and so taxed, but have generally been designated as "tin plates," and the 'duties laid on them as such specifically, and at a different rate. We find the same course to be pursued in the Eevised Statutes, and if "tin plates" are not included either in "metals not herein otherwise provided for," nor among "manufactures of metals," they are not entitled to the reduction of the duty claimed by the plaintiff, and the assessment by the defendant was correct. �The case of Dodge v. Arthur, tried in the southern district of New York, before Judge Shipman, and reported in 22 Int, Eev. Eec. 402, is relied upon by the plaintiffs as an authority in support of their construction of the law on the question ; and it is so. But, upon the examination of the charge to the jury in that case, it is unsatisfactory. It proceeds entirely upon the ground that the Eevised Statutes have altered the law as it stood in the act of June 6, 1872. It concedes that by the act of 1872 "tin plates" were not included in the words "in ail metals not herein otherwise provided for, and in ail manufactures of metals of which either of them is the com- ponent part of ohief value, except in percussion-caps," etc., but maintains that these precise words in the Eevised Stat- utes, if the case is correotly understood, do include "tin plates." But by what process of expansion or inclusion this is done is not explained, and it can hardly be conceded that the charge of the court in that case was correct, especially as "tin plates" are otherwise provided for in the Eevised Stat- ����