WHAT IS HOSIERY.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5446, 10 September 1878, Page 3

WHAT IS HOSIERY.

(From the Australasian of 31st August.)

The dispute between the Melbourne softgoods men and the Customs Department as to what constitutes hosiery within the meaning of the Customs Duties Act, came before the Supreme Court bn Monday, when Messrs. Sargood and Co, sued the Queen for £132 for duties exacted upon such articles as“ operettes,” “fichus,” “cheat-protectors,” “wool shawls,” and other knitted works, which the plaintiffs claim to be “ hosiery,” nud therefore exempt, from duty under the present Act. The Crown, on the other hand, claim that by “ hosiery” is merely meant “stockings,” the dictionary definition of the term, and object to any evidence being given as to what the trade consider it to he. It is contended for the Crown that the goods specified above come within the terra “apparel,” aud are liable to 20 per cent, duty. The plaintiffs say that under the old Act, when apparel paid 20 per cent, and hosiery 10 per cent., the articles now said to be “apparel” were admitted - at the lower -duty of 10 per cent. It is also said, 1 for the plaintiffs, that while on tho one hand tho landing waiters charge 20 per cent, on the goods as apparel, another branch of the department refuses to allow a drawback, on the ground that they are “fancy hosiery,” and therefore not dutiable. The action was concluded on Wednesday. The jury found that the goods were hosiery, and gave a verdict for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed,' as overpaid duties. In the same action, the plaintiffs had claimed £lO Bs. for drawbacks on the same goods, and the jury assessed the damages on the drawbacks‘at that amount, contingently on Rs being held by the Full Court that the plaintiffs are not entitled' to the other amount. A nonsuit point has been reserved for the Full ’Court, that the C»own cannot be sued for these duties, but that an action should have been brought against the Collector of Customs, as provided by the Customs Act. As to the drawbacks, it is contended that an action will, not lie for them unless the Collector of Customs has approved of their being allowed. This point also is reserved. There are some half-dozen other actions on the list involving the same points, lathe course of the Case yesterday, Mr. Justice Barry suggested that a dccision ou one should rule all tho others ; but Mr. Billing, Q.C., who appeared for the Crown, said he was instructed uot to assent to that. . , ‘