New-York tribune., 1879-10-25
slrEL BLooNs-now cLAssED.
THE DECISION OF TIE TREASURY DEPARTMENT
-THE LETTER OF JUDGE FRENCH II FULL.
IN LLLLGRAIL 10 TnE r-IRnNE.I

-THE LETTER OF JUDGE FRENCH IN FULL.
Im TELEcEuu 10 rHF uIBuSE.l
WAenlNGroV, Oct. q. - As,istant-Sccreary
French has to-day rendered decision involving
an Interpretation OF the Tariff Act in regard 90 the
Importation of steel blooms. lie cmbodies his de-
cisom in the following letter to the Collector Of
Customs at Philadelphia:
FIR: On iho IOih ultlmo tho Department affirmed
your OF duty at the rdte "i 40 per cent ad
yaIorcn on importation Of steel blooms made 10y T.
stmues & Coz the importers having claimed IN their
appeal from such assessment that me proper rate o
duty thereon 30 percent ad VaOrem. Since
manufacture Of steel blooms In the United states re
Quested review OF the question: and large number OF
nersOus representing domestic manufacturers well
as importers OF this class OF MERCHANDISE were fuily
heard at this Department Alter due consideration OF
the ana arguments then adduced, the Department
The cisssiGcsuon given to steel blooms involved IN
the appeal of L. sanuels Co. was under the fol-
loving provision in schedule OF the revised tar:
Al manufactures OF steel. or OF which steel shall he
component part. not otherwise provided for, snail
duy of A. Der cenium I'D valOrcm. But AL articles OF
steel partially manufactured. Of which steel shall be
component part not otaG ise provided Tor snail pay
the same rate oi duiy ASH Wholly Hlhhllaclurru,"
This decision was based on prior ones OF 1887 ard
a he nearing m question 4 was cuniended by rho do
ncstic mauuisc urets that thc article Is nabie TO the
NJ or the fact that steel blooms are not
spec csy in the tarh. and upon the authority
% = ct'on 2i9S u tine vsed Statutes which declares
that There ia he charged upon each aud every non
material qIalty texture or the use TO which II may bo
apl eG, 0 any article enumerated az chargeabe wiCn
luty, rate Of duty which Is charged
on the enumerated article wblch IL most TO-
seubcd in any of the particulars before mentioned.
that steel blooms not being specifically enumerated IN
Inc tarln law dutabe under the clause In Schedule
81 (which impO-es duty oi 30 ceut ad yalOrem
steel IN any ioin uDt Otherwise provided for
Ingfe yas 10 eeIMesn the parties in In;
1T IN mold aud forms an gOt Ihls ingot Ia re-
nd Ntt H. called bloom.
s,sprs ac.,rlns - the pnrposSs for which
ihct are Intended II inicnded for the manufacIure
snail arcics tools and cutlery the bloom may be
sn ana IL tnen re- eatea nd iurthcr ham
m ed ar cut INTO ieoes Of convenient size fOf hani-
ling. known ~ hilieis Blooms Intended Tor these
aud ysically higher quality than those Intended
Tor railway bars. Tue blooms In question are Known rs
railway blooms and are Of 4 size and dimension ordered
u, tue Importer being usually sufficient single rail
weigh about 900 pounds and being some six or seven
inches square and about four feet long
1t agreed tnat blooms are not ngots or bars in
any commercial but u contended that under
ihe provision OF section 249e Revised statutes these
blooms should BE- bars ngots, to which, II
T. claimed. ihev bear simtude However. blooms
may properly be subjected 10 duty as manufactures
Of steel not especially enumerated or under the pro-
for steel not otherwise provided for the sim
ude provision cannot at Ach 10 this article, because
though 1t bear simitude 20 ngot it 10
non-cuumerated article, boln OF such provisions
beng under the decisions OF the courts sufficient
enumeration To- destroy the operation OF the ade
combinations before presented that blooms cannot be
classified by assimilation with bars OF ingOts
lne only REMAINING question Is wnether they are sub
irct duty Of a5 per cent nd vaOrem, assssed
~ the duty OF 80 par cent as claimed by the import
Steel blooms fOT railway bars and for locomotive
ines made OF given dimensions and weight and
intended for a special purpose, and are not well
suited for other although they might be rolled and
hamme1 for the manufacture OF smaller articles for
which quality OF the metal Is suitable. In this view
it might be held that they railway bars partially
manuiactured and subject TO a duty Of " cents and
cents respectively per ponnd but tnis duty would be
inands OF the law imperatively require u.
The intent Of the law Of 1854 regulating the duties on
iron and STEEL To have been 10 impose duty or
from 80 10 so per cent npOn the cOarser ar
ticles OF tteel. slthourh the reduction ia value OF
steel consequent IN part, upon Improved processes o.!
manufactaTe. has greatly changed the symmetry OF
The orira act The decisions of the Department from
1867 the present have regarded sfce. blooms
-u.dr~t to ne duties Imposed upOn manufactures Of