Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-04-27
F0LGER'S RICE DECISION.
HIS REPLY TO THE APPRAISER
PRINTED IN FULL.

Its Relation to the Duty IMPOSED I'm
der the New Tariff Law-An Admoni-
tion Concerning Other Rice Imports
/ A Photographic Counterfeit of a Bank
Bill Detected,
/ WASHINGTON, April 26.-The decision
/ OF the Secretary of the Treasury as to the
/ duty on certain so-called rice meal or
| granulated rice was formulated today. 1t
is Ill effect, as stated last night, that the
articles submitted is not rice in the COM
mercial sense and is liable to duty of 20
per cent. ad YalOrem. 1t is true that the
decision is technically a construction of
the present tariff, but the question will
arise on the same article of importation
under the new tariff, which goes into
cilect July l. The text in that tariff is
that rice cleaned is dutiable at two and
one-quarter cents per pound, uncleaned
one ana one-halfcents per pound, while rice
hour and rice meal are assessed at 20 per
cent. ad valorem. The Secretary holds
that the article which is the subject of
the present decision is not rice. 1t must
necessarily, therefore, fall under the
Slmllitude clause of the new tariff with
the article of rice flour and rice meal
which it most resembles. 1t will there
fore be liable to 20 per cent. ad yalorem,
even II 1t be not considered TO be the rice
hour and rice meal specified in the new
tariff. The following is the text of the
decision of Secretary Folger, which was
written today:
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, SECRETA-
RVS OFFICE, WASHINGTON, April 26.-
10 me Collector Of Customs, Ne,r York.
SIR-Ihe department duly received your
letter of the 10Th ultimo, submitting the
appeal of A. W. Simonds from your as
sesSment of duty at the rate of 81 cents
pound on a certain so-called rice meal
or granulated rice imported per the Ari-
zOna March 13, 1883. The merchandise in
question is made from the broken and
small grains of rice, which are sifted
from the larger grains in the process of
cleaning rice, is ground into coarse gran
ules, and is devoted mainly to brewers
use in the manufacture of beer.
Inc duty was assessed under the pro-
vision III schedule +. for cleaned rice.
While the importers contended that the
article is dutiable only at the rate of 20
per cent. as non-enumerated manufac-
tured article, not otherwise provided for.
From the papers and samples submitted
the department is convinced that in a
commercial sense the article is not rice
IL Is a product of rice in the
same sense that hominy is product
OF corn. 1t is not enumerated in
the law uor specially provided for. The
slmilitude clause in section 2499, Revised
Statutes, does not apply so as to place it
IN the category with rice, as that clause
is construed by the United States Supreme
Court, in the cases reported in volume IS,
Howard's United States reports, 16O.
1O3; United States reports, 433, and
under the proofs in this case;
hence the article is dutiable at the rate
claimed by the appellants under section
25l6 Revised Statutes. You will readiust
the entry accordingly. This decision will
apply only to this case, and to cases for
Which it may be a fair precedent, and
care will be taken by the appraiSing officers
to see that rice or merchandise contain
ing whole rice is not passed as granulated
rice under this decision. Very respect
fully, JNO. G. New.
Acting Secretary.
A Photographic counterfeit of the new
five dollar national bank note was re-
ceived at the Treasury to-day for redemp-
ton. 1t was upon the First National
Bank of Milwaukee, and reached the
Treasury through the Broadway National
Bank of New York 1t is the first coun-
terfeit discovered of the new notes