The morning call., 1891-12-25
NOT IN GOOD FAITH.
That Importation of Sumatra
Filters" Scored.
Liebes Brothers Co.'s Appeal Decided by the
Board Of General Appraisers-They
Both Win and Lcss.

While the designs of Liebes Brothers &
Co., manufacturers and dealers in cigars at
70 and Is Battery street, in their mode of
making the entry of the much talked-of
Sumatra leaf consignment, are not guessed
at by the Board of General Appraisers in
their decision, received by Collector Phelps
yesterday, still the touching upon ''pecul-
larltleS, unique features" and the opinion
on the part of the board that no Sumatra
tobacco is imported in good faith" leaves
much for that firm to explain.
The history of the importation, entry, ap-
pralsement, or examination, increased as
sessment appear. and the dongs of the
Board of General Appraisers is best set
forth in the decision received yesterday,
which. is briefly as follows: On September
10th last there arrived by the Southern Pa
cific AIS bales of Sumatra unstemmed leaf
tobacco. OF these 146 bales were inn
mediately entered as Sumatra filler, and on
the 23d Appraiser Levy passed that part of
the consignment. imposing a duty of IS
cents pound
NEVER DONE BEFORE.
The importation of Sumatra leaf as filters
had never been done before and caused a
general protest on the part of several tobac-
conlsts. This resulted in a REORGANIZATION
by Appraiser Levy. who made report to
Collector Phelps that the 146 bales con-
tanned leaf tobacco unstemmed suitable
for cigar wrappers" Collector Phelps then
assessed a duty at 81 a pound. In the
meantime the importers entered the remain
ing So bales as filters and they had been
assessed at 50 cents The Collector also I'M
posed the increased duty on the second lot.
The importers then appealed to the Board
OF General Appraisers, and samples from
each bale were sent by Collector Phelps and
Appraiser Levy,
Two hearings were given by the board to
the Sumatra case, at which the submitted
samples were examined by many experts.
Two OF these, both of whom are tobacco
examiners in New York City, testified that
the samples Of the irst-entered lot were not
ut for wrappers and that, as taken from the
bales, they could not have been suitable for
such use. Iais evidence was couObUrated
by two New ork importers of Sumatra
tobacco, no selected samples from ninety
one bales, which, they said, are never sulta-
Die Tor wrappers owing 10 the Shortness of
The leaf. As TO the other tifty-fve bales of
tie same lot they expressed a doubt.
THE DECISION.
We" the decision reads find that the
146 bales are not suitable for cigar wrap
pers, and the claim that they are dutiable
at 35 cents is hereby sustained. We find
that in the S32 bales IL contain no tobacco
suitable for cigar wrappers. The protest as
TO the II bales Is sustained. As to the 300
remaining, the assessment of 81 a pound
duty by the Collector is hereby affirmed"
The report then ends in this remarkable
language, which IS duly signed by General
Appraisers J. B. Wilkinson Jr., George ii,
Sharpe and Wilbur F. Lunt:
The decision in this case rests as TO fact
1t would be irrelevant to the deci-
sion TO touch upon the peculiarities OF the
case OF TO inquire into the designs of tile
importers. But under the provisions of the
act imposing upon US the responsibility of
securing uniformity in classification at the
several ports, 1t becomes our duty to call
attention to several unique features in
the present case, so that customs officers
may realize that, in passing upon similar
ImportaHons, should any occur, it Is incum-
oent upon Them 10 exercise the greatest
vigilance and most careful scrutiny.
HOW THEY WERE INvoICED.
The l46 bales were invoiced at Ham
burg. The invoice was made out in United
States currency at so cents per pound
American, and the sum total was converted
into marks.
The S32 bales were invoiced per kilo-
gram, IN francs or marks, as calculated in
this Office was as follows:
From AmsteIdam-l43 bales, at ~ cents per
pound.
Fiom Bremen-2o bales, at so cents per pound.
sc bales, at 90 cents Der pound; % bales at 60
cents per pound; 7S bales, at 90 cents per pound.
The lot of 1i6 bales was. in fact, as
claimed by the importer, inferior filler to-
bacco. More than so per cent of the lot of
$50 bales was good wrapper tobacco. Is it
not singular that the invoice for the inferior
tobacco was made out at a price so much
higher Than that of the better grades?
Mr.. Liebes claimed that the tobacco was
imported for filters and binders. All other
witnesses testified that they never knew of
any Sumatra tobacco except cuttings from
wrappers, being used as filters, and there
was no testimony to the effect that such TO-
baccO is or ever has been used as binders.
Various tobaccO-dealers stated that the price
In this country of hller tobacco, equal or su-
peror TO the best Sumatra filler, is from five
10 thirty cents q pound. 1t appears, there
fore, incredible that Sumatra tobacco should
be imported for any such purpose.
ANOTHER POPULARITY.
''In the entry of the tobacco there was
also a regularity open to unfavorable crti-
cism. The importation of AIS bales arrived
in San Francisco September 10Th. Prompt
entry was made of lot Of purely filler TO-
bacc0. When this was returned by the Ap-
prsiser as filler tobacco. the remaining 332
bales, containing more than so per cent of
wrappers, was entered as filters.
The board is of the opinion that no Su-
matra tobacco is imported in good faith as
filters, and every bale of such tobacco so en-
tered should be rigidly scrutinized."