Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

producing a barsh, yummy surface on the cloth, it is utterly unfit for use as an alizarin assistant.

The mere fact that an article might be used for a given purpose does not in itself prove its adaptability practically for such use generally

In Oil Seeds Pressing Co. v. United States (114 Fed. Rep., 793) L'nited States District Judge Townsend, passing upon the words “fit only for such use" as applied to olive oil in the tariff act of 1897, said:

The word “fit" seems to be equivalent to “suitable” —the actual, practical, and commercial suitableness of the article for the purpose designated. (See also G. A. 4159, T. D. 21288.)

We are, for the foregoing reasons, forced to conclude from the record that "kromoline," so called, is a grease or oil (not a fish oil) commonly used for stuffing or dressing leather, and fit only for such use. The protest claim for free entry is therefore sustained.

Decision of the collector reversed.

(T. D. 31741.)
Abstreets of lesions of the Brard of General Appraisers.

Board 1–Sharretts, McClelland, and Chamberlain. Board 2–Fischer, Howell, and

Cooper. Board 3—Waite, Somerville, and Hay.

BEFORE BOARD 1, July 6, 1911. No. 26012.- MIRRORS IN CELLULOID FRAMES.- Protests 443312, etc., of George W.

Parker Art ('0. (Minneapolis). SHARRETTS, Cieneral appraiser: The merchandise in dispute is mirrors not exceeding in size 144 square inches, set in circular or oblong frames and folding cases composed of celluloid. The appraiser reports that celluloid is of more value than the mirrors in the completed articles; hence duty was assessed on the merchandise by the collector as entireties, at the rate of 65 cents per pound and 30 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 17 of the tariff act of 1909. No evidence was submitted in behalf of the importers to rebut the correctness of the classifying officer's statement relative to the component material of chief value. We must, therefore, accept that fact as established.

We do not regard the question whether the celluloid frames are or are not of more value than the mirrors as of any consequence in the determination of the issue presented in the case at bar. The question involved is not a new one. This board has held in many cases that the provision for mirrors in frames and cases is more specitie than that for articles wholly or partly finished, composed in chief value of celluloid, and the law as thus interpreted has been followed at all ports, with the consent of the Treasury Department, for upward of 10 years. See G. A. 4843 (T. D. 22744) and T. D. 27296 (Abstract 10922). Many other citations might be given, but it is so well settled that mirrors in celluloid frames or cases are dutiable under paragraph 109 of the present act, which is an exact reproduction of paragraph 112 of the act of 1897, we do not deem it necessary to discuss the case further. The protest is sustained and the decision of the collector reversed.

No. 26013.-FEATHER ARTICLES.- Protest 407307 of Judkins & McCormick Co.

(New York). Opinion by McClelland, G. A. Feather articles classified as “feathers" under paragraph 425, tariff act of 1897, were held dutiable as manufactures in part of metal (par. 193), as claimed by the importers.

No. 26014.-BLEACHERS' BLUE.- Protests 262096, etc., of A. De Ronde & Co. (New

York). Bleachers' blue in liquid form, which was classified as “ blues” either under paragraph 45, tariff act of 1897, or paragraph 43, act of 1909, was claimed to be dutiable as an unenumerated manufactured article (sec. 6, act of 1897, or par. 480, act of 1909).

MCCLELLAND, General Appraiser: The United States Court of Customs Appeals in the case of De Ronde & Co. l'. United States (T. D. 31112) has held that merchandise similar to that in question is dutiable at the rate of 20 per cent ad valorem as an unenumerated manufactured article under section 6 of the tariff act of 1897. Following that decision, the protest claims for duty at 20 per cent ad valorem under said section 6 under the act of 1897, supra, or paragraph 480 of the act of 1909, supra, are sustained as to the merchandise described on the invoices either as “Bleachers' blue” or as "Edge's tint."

No. 26015.-PROTESTS OVERRULED.-Protests 411275, etc., of H. F. Livermore Co.

et al. (Boston), protest 500310–37277 of Bernard, Judae & Co., protest 48946436594 of A. & F. Pears, protests 488947–36000 of Sears, Roebuck & Co., and protests 338090–28300, etc., and 422577–33054, etc., of G. W. Sheldon & Co. et al. (Chicago), protest 497513 of T. J. Woodside (El Paso), protests 417510, etc., of Gross, Engel & Co. et al., protests 468776, etc., of A. Hauptman et al., protests 347865, etc., of C. D. Jackson & Co. et al., protests 439253, etc., of J. M. Martin et al., protests 473020 and 473025 of William Scharrath, protests 464684, etc., of l'nkart, Travis & Co., and protests 402956, etc., of A. A. Zeimer (New York), protests 462098, etc., of Garringer & Schwartz et al. (Plattsburg), and protest

460306 of T. Nagashima (San Francisco). Opinions by McClelland, G. A. Protests overruled for want of merit.

BEFORE BOARD 3, JULY 6, 1911. No. 26016.-PROTESTS OVERRULED. — Protests 473151, etc., of Chong Lung et al.

(New York), and protests 481337, etc., of Gom Hong Co. et al. (Port Townsend).

Opinions by Waite, G. A.
Protests overruled for want of merit.

No. 26017.-Rotten PEANUTS-DAMAGE. -- Protest 469518 of A. W. Field Co.

(New York). SOMERVILLE, General Appraiser: The importation consists of shelled peanuts, which were assessed for duty under paragraph 282 of the tariff act of 1909 at 1 cent per pound on the net weight of the merchandise, which was ascertained by the United States weigher to be 38,820 pounds. The importers claim that a certain portion of the merchandise at the time of arrival in this country was rotten, unmerchantable, and worthless. The collector declined to make any deduction of duties on the ground that the importers bad failed to comply with the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury published in T. D. 30023, made pursuant to subsection 22 of section 28 of said act. The importers claim the regulations in question have no application to this merchandise, on the ground that the peanuts are not a "perishable article'? within the meaning of said regulations.

7680-VOL 21-11-22

It is shown by the evidence that peanuts are usually granted warehouse privileges as a nonperishable species of merchandise, and that they will keep two, three, or four years in dry places. It is further shown that the sound portion of this importation at the time of arrival amounted to 24,604 pounds.

Following the board decision In re Fried & Son, G. A. 7228 (T. D. 31650), we find that the importers are entitled to a deduction of duty on 14,216 pounds, being the amount of said merchandise found to be worthless and unmerchantable at the time of arrival. The protest to this extent is sustained and the collector's decision reversed, with instructions to reliquidate the entry accordingly.

No. 26018.—GAUGE OF OLIVE OIL in Tins.- Protests 257271, etc., of Mitchell,

Fletcher & Co. et al. (Philadelphia). Opinion by Somerville, G. A.
Protests sustained as to gauge of olive oil in tins. G. A. 6575 (T. D. 28072) followed.

No. 26019.-PROTESTS OVERRULED.-Protests 436882, etc., of Robert B. Ways

(Baltimore), protests 461694, etc., of W. N. Proctor Co. (Boston), protests 172840–20137, etc., of Wakem & McLaughlin (Chicago), protests 451159, etc , of Wilfred Schade & Co. (Newport News), protest 494910 of C. F. Hubbs & Co., and protests 474390, etc., of J. C. Hunt et al. (New York), protest 474551 of (). G. Hempstead Son, protests 447862, etc., of A. H. Post & Co. et al., and protests 471205, etc., of F. B. Vandegrift & Co. (Philadelphia), protests 443728, etc., of W. White (Port Huron), and protest 456845 of W. S. McNamara (San Francisco).

Opinions by Somerville, G. A. Protests overruled for want of merit.

No. 26020.—Moss WREATHS.-- Protest 450168 of P. H. Petry Co. (New York).

Opinion by Hay, G. A. Wreaths made of natural rock moss, dyed and prepared, which were classified as nonenumerated manufactured articles under paragraph 480, tariff act of 1909, were held dutiable as

manufactured or dyed” (par. 78), as claimed by the importers. Abstract 23535 (T. D. 30710) followed.

*

*

*

moss

BEFORE BOARD 1, JULY 8, 1911.

No. 26021.-PROTESTS OVERRULED.- Protests 477847, etc., of B. Altman & Co. et

al., protests 473772, etc., of American Bead Co. et al., protests 478543, etc., of William A. Brown & Co. et al., protests 476222, etc., of Stern Bros. et al., and protests 477800, etc., of G. M. Thurnauer & Bro. et al. (New York). Opinions

by Sharretts, G. A. Protests overruled for want of merit.

No. 26022.- Willow BASKETS- - HAMPERS. Protest 451443 of Robert B. Ways

(Baltimore), protests 489465-36733, etc., of Raedlein Basket Co. et al. (CH cago), protest 470008 of Hawley & Letzerich (Galveston), protests 463061-3670, 463062– 3674, and 476653-3695 of George W. Rueff (New Orleans), protest 481054 of G. M. Thurnaner & Bro. (New York), and protests 409506, etc., of William Larzelere &

Co. (Philadelphia). Opinions by McClelland, G. A. Baskets and hampers of willow, classified as manufactures of willow or willow furniture, under paragraph 212, tariff act of 1909, were held dutiable as baskets

* of * wood” (par. 214), as claimed by the importers. Brody v. United States (T. D. 31573) and Krauss 2. United States (T. D. 31574) followed.

* *

*

*

[ocr errors]

No. 26023.-Split-BAMBOO BASKETS. - Protest 379031 of Kwong Yuen Shing (New

York). Opinion by McClelland, G. A. Baskets of split bamboo, which were classified as manufactures of wood under paragraph 208, tariff act of 1897, were held dutiable as manufactures of chip (par. H9). Protest sustained on the authority of Tuska v. United States (T. D. 31547).

No. 26024.-SHIDA BASKETS.- Protests 459238–34876, etc., of Butler Bros. (Chi

cago). McCLELLAND, General Appraiser: The special reports of the appraiser on these protests state that the merchandise consists of shida baskets and colored wood baskets.

It would appear that the shida baskets are dutiable at 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 212 by virtue of the similitude clause of paragraph 481, tariff act of 1909, in harmony with the decision of the board in Abstract 19175 (T. D. 29099), and that the colored wood baskets are dutiable at 40 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 214 of said act (Thomsen r. United States, T. D. 31590); and it further appearing that duty was assessed on the merchandise at the respective rates above named, the protests are overruled.

No. 26025.–BARK BASKETS. - Protest 482176 of Decorative Plant Co. (New York).

Opinion by McClelland, G, A. Fern baskets or boxes made of bark and classified as manufactures of wood under paragraph 208, tariff act of 1897, were held dutiable as unenumerated manufactured articles (sec. 6), as claimed by the importers. Abstract 18580 (T. D. 28910) followed.

No. 26026.-Silk-LINED BASKETS. - Protest 440118 of Stern Bros. (New York).

Opinion by McClelland, G. A. Protest sustained as to silk-lined baskets. G. A. 7221 (T. D. 31587) followed.

No. 26027.-FUR WASTE.—Protest 429805, etc., of Hatters' Fur Exchange (New

York). Opinion by McClelland, G. A. Protests sustained as to fur waste on the authority of United States 1. Hatters' Fur Exchange (T. D. 31237).

No. 26028.-PROTESTS OVERRULED.—Protests 439451-33755, etc., of Butler Bros. et

al. (Chicago), protests 402215, etc., of Jacob Adler & Co. et al., and protests 431587, etc., of Morris Hess & Co. (New York), and protests 414724, etc., of

0. G. Hempstead & Son (Philadelphia). Opinions by McClelland, G. A. Protests overruled for want of merit.

No. 26029.-PRISMATIC GLASSES.—Protests 368438, etc., of Ashcroft Manufacturing

Co. (Bridgeport). Opinion by Chamberlain, G. A. Prismatic gauge glasses, classified as articles of ground glass under paragraph 100, tariff act of 1897, were held dutiable as “strips of glass * ground to a * prismatic form” (par. 110), as claimed by the importers. United States r. Ashcroft (176 Fed. Rep., 736; T. D. 30384) followed.

*

*

*

*

*

No. 26030.-PROTESTS OVERRULED.- Protest 497550 of T. P. Joughin & Co. (Gal

reston). Opinion by Chamberlain, G. A. Protest overruled for want of merit.

BEFORE Board) 2, JULY 8, 1911.
No. 26031.-Writing SETS. - Protest 401377 of Thomas Meadows & Co. (New

York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A.
Sets made up of an envelope rack, a small stamp box, a blotter tablet and a blotter,
which were classified as fancy paper boxes under paragraph 405, iariff act of 1897,
were held dutiable as manufactures of paper (par. 407), as claimed by the importers.

No. 26032.-METAL-THREAD EMBROIDERIES.- Protest 441436 of Schefer, Schramm

& Vogel (New York).
Merchandise classified as metal-thread embroideries under paragraph 179, tariff
act of 1909, was claimed to be in chief value of cotton and, therefore, dutiable as
cotton embroideries (par. 319).

FISCHER, General Appraiser: The samples admitted in evidence were submitted to
the textile analyst at the port of New York, and it appears from the results of his
analyses that the embroideries are in chief value of cotton. Though this is true, it
is just as evident that the goods are embroidered with metal threads. Whether the
embroideries are or are not in chief value of metal threads is of minor importance.
If in chief value of metal threads paragraph 179 applies directly, and if the embroi-
dered fabric is in chief value of cotton and the material of which the embroidery is
composed is metal thread, it falls within paragraph 179 by virtue of the last proviso
to paragraph 319. Shoninger case (T. D. 31661). The protest is overruled and the
assessment in question affirmed.
No. 26033.- Watch Dials-PARTS OF WATCHES.- Protest 449430 of Leon Hirsch

(New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A.
Metal watch dials, classified as manufactures of metal under paragraph 199, tariff
act of 1909, were held dutiable as “parts of watches” (par. 192), as claimed by the
importer.
No. 26034.-SUPERCALENDERED AND EMBOSSED GREASE-PROOF PAPER.- Protests

482623, etc., of Japan Paper Co. et al. (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A.
Protests sustained as to supercalendered and embossed grease-proof paper. G. A.
7136 (T. D. 31133) followed.

No. 26035.-Rough-TRIMMED MICA.-Protests 500054, etc., of A. (). Schoonmaker

(New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A.
Protests sustained as to rough-trimmed mica on the authority of United States l'.
Myers (T. D. 31301).

No. 26036.-PUBLICATIONS FOR GRATUITOUS CIRCULATION.- Protest 500411 of E. H.

Burr (New York). Opinion by Fischer, G. A.
Protest 'sustained as to publications for gratuitous private circulation. Abstract
24598 (T. D. 31207) followed.

[ocr errors]

No. 26037.-PARTS OF STEAM ENGINE-WASTE-JUNK.- Protest 424207 of L. M.

Hutchinson (Los Angeles).
FISCHER, General Appraiser: The merchandise is invoiced as locomotive parts, 58
pieces in number, and was assessed with duty at 30 per cent ad valorem under para-
graph 197, tariff act of 1909, as "steam engines.” The protest is worded as follows:

The merchandise in question should not have been classified under paragraph 197
and assessed at 30 per cent, but should have been classitied as junk under paragraph
600, tariff law of August 5, 1909; second, or at 10 per cent under paragraph 479 as
waste n. s. p. f.

The proof offered would show that during transfer of the merchandise to the ship
certain parts of the locomotive, or steam engine, were lost. The saved parts are said

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »