Case ID: f_65/html/0494-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WHEELER, District Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

TIFFANY v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    January 15, 1895.)
    Customs Duties — Classification—-Bronze Statuary — Act of October 1, 1890..
    Statuary cast from bronze, and touched up by band, and made expressive after casting, under the supervision of the sculptor, is not “such statuary as is cut, carved, or otherwise wrought by hand from a solid block or mass of marble, stone, or alabaster, or from metal,” within the provisions of paragraph 405 of the tariff act of October 1, 1890, and is therefore not dutiable at 15 per cent, ad valorem under said paragraph, but is dutiable as a manufacture of metal, at 45 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 215 of said act.
    At Law. Appeal by importer under act of June 10,1890, from decision of board of United States general appraisers.
    The imported merchandise consisted of bronze statuary, assessed by the collector for duty at 45 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 215,' and claimed by the importer to be dutiable at 15 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 465, as statuary. It appeared by the testimony that bronze statuary was sometimes wholly made or wrought by hand by beating, but that the statuary in suit was made in a foundry by casting, and afterwards touched up, and the rough edges filed or smoothed off, under the supervision of the sculptor' who had originally designed the clay model thereof. It also ,appeared that the statues in controversy were the first or original copies cast from the clay models of the sculptor, under his personal supervision and direction, and were works of art.
    The assistant United States district attorney maintained that no bronze statuary was dutiable at 15 per cent, ad valorem, under the act of 1890. unless “wrought by hand”; that the act of 1890 changed and restricted the prior law in that respect (paragraph 470, Act March 3, 1883), and that only hand-made statuary was entitled to entry at that rate; that the statues of bronze made by “beating” are the only bronze statues wrought by hand; that the articles in suit were made or wrought by casting in molds, and not by hand; that, while the clay models of the statues were wrought by hand, the clay models were not imported, but the cast statues were, and merchandise paid duty according to its condition when imported.
    The importer's counsel contended that as the clay models were wrought by band, and the cast statues were finished by hand, under the supervision of the artist, they were wrought by band, within the meaning of paragraph 465.
    Win. I?. Cough try, for importer.
    Wallace U. 8. Atty., and Henry C. Platt, Asst. U. S. Atty.
   WHEELER, District Judge

(after stating the facts). These are small statues cast front bronze, and touched up and made expressive by the hands of sculptors. The. tariff act of 1890 put a lower duty than was assessed on these statues on ‘‘such statuary as is cut, carved, or otherwise wrought by hand from a solid block or mass of marble, stone, or alabaster, or from metal, and is the professional production of a statuary or sculptor only.” These are claimed to be such statuary, because they are wrought somewhat by professional hands. But. the requirement that they should be wrought from metal by hand is very strict, and these statutes are wrought so slightly by hand that they do not now appear lo fairly come within it. The decision of the board of United States general appraisers is affirmed.