Case ID: f_148/html/0512-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PRATT, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

A. STEINHARDT & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    December 15, 1903.)
    No. 3,170.
    Customs Duties — Classification—Ornamented Purses — Jewelry.
    Chatelaine purses of metal, gilded or plated in imitation of gold and silver, and set with imitation precious stones, which range in value from 34 marks per gross to 30 marks per dozen, are not within the provision in paragraph 434, Schedule N, § 1, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, e. 11, 30 Stat. 192 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1676], for “articles commonly known as jewelry.”
    On Application for Review; of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
    This case relates to merchandise imported at the port of New York, which the collector of customs assessed with duty under the provision in jiaragrapli 434, Schedule N, § 1, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, 30 Stat. 192 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1676], for “articles commonly known as jewelry,” and which the importers contended was dutiable under the provision in paragraph 193, Schedule C, § 1, 30 Stat. 167 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1645], for articles composed in part of metal. The goods in controversy, which were invoiced at values ranging from 34 marks per gross to 30 marks per dozen, were described in the opinion of the Board of General Appraisers as consisting “of chatelaine brooches composed of gilded or plated metal in imitation of gold and silver, set with imitation precious stones, and depending from which is a chain purse with a round top, similar in material and design to tbp chatelaine brooches, and are entirely worn by women, suspended from their girdles.” The board found that these articles were commonly known as jewelry, and affirmed the assessment of duty.
    Albert Comstock, for Importers.
    Charles D. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty.
   PRATT, District Judge.

The decision of the Board of General'Appraisers is reversed.