Case ID: f_171/html/0906-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LOWELL, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WING SING LUNG et al. v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.
    June 18, 1909.)
    No. 122 (1,801.)
    Customs Duties (§ 38) — Classification—“Bologna Sausages.”
    The provision for “sausages, Bologna,” in Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 2, Free List, par. 605, 30 Stat. 201 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1687), does not include all sausages in casings; and Chinese sausages in casings, which are not shown to be commercially known as “Bologna sausages,” are not classifiable as such.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Customs Duties, Dec. Dig.- § 38.*]
    On Application for Review of a Decision by the Board of United States General Appraisers.
    The decision below, which is reported as G. A. 6,250 (T. D. 26,-965), affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of Boston. The Board’s opinion reads as follows:
    WAITE, General Appraiser. The commodity involved in this case is sausage imported from .China, invoiced variously as “sausages,” “cured sausage,” “dried sausage,” etc., etc. It consists, as -testified to by -a witness produced by the Importers, of pork chopped up and mixed with salt and sauce and very little spice. An inspection of the commodity shows it to he a sausage in casing of from one-half to three-quarters of an inch in diameter, consisting of chunks of fat and lean meat in rather 'coarse condition. It was assessed as prepared meat, at 25 per cent, ad valorem, under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, e. 11, § 1, Schedule G, par. 275, 30 Stat. 172 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1652), and is claimed to he exempt from duty as Bologna sausage under section. 2, Free List, par. 655, 30 Stat. 201 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1687). The case is presented by the importer on the theory that all chopped meat put up in casings in the form of sausage is subject to entry as Bologna sausage. There is no testimony to show that this commodity was commercially designated as Bologna sausage at .the time of the passage of the act, or anything that satisfies us that it is generally known as Bologna sausage in the trade. There is a well-known commodity called Bologna sáusage, which has been the subject of consideration by the department and Boa'rd in a number of decisions; hut those are clearly distinguishable from this. We do not think that all sausage in casings is Bologna sausage. Such a construction would put the well-known fresh pork sausages in casings on the free list. There is nothing in the record to overcome the presumption attending the finding of the collector that this article is prepared meat.
    We therefore overrule the protests and affirm the collector’s decision.
    Searle & Pillsbury (Guy Ham, of counsel), for importers.
    William H. Garland, Asst. U. S. Atty.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   LOWELL, Circuit Judge.

The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.