This suit was brought to recover the duties on 'split timbers' imported from Canada into the United States, and claimed to be exempt under the Reciprocity Treaty, as in the case just disposed of. The treaty exempts from duty 'timber and lumber of all kinds, round, hewed, and sawed, unmanufactured, in whole or in part.'

The articles consisted of six hundred and sixteen cords of split white-ash timber, chiefly designed to be used in the manufacture of long shovel handles.

The main question was whether the said timber was liable to duty, or whether it was made free of duty by the Reciprocity Treaty.

Same counsel as in the United States v. Hathaway, just preceding.

Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court.