Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-12-01
IMPORT DUTY on TOBACCO.
Appraisers Decide Against Treasury.
Bale Made the Unit.

New York Times, November 3Jth)
A decision adverse to the present policy
OF the Treasury Department regarding
importations of tobacco was handed down
by the Board OF United States General
| Appraisers yesterday. The opinion was
written by eX-Judge Someryille. and It
| directly affects every tobacco importer
| in this country by determining that the
| commercial bale of leaf tobacco is !he
| unit for dutiable purposes. This decision
was based on the protest Of Rothschild
| a Brother. Of New York, against the
customs authorities classification of four
| bales Of unstemmed leaf tobacco imported
from san Domingo last September. The
issue involved related TO the proper CLASH
hcation of this importation under The
tariff act Of 1897. There was no con-
troversy as TO the regularity Of the gov
eminent examiners action in ascertaining
the quality and character Of the to-
bacco.
Under the provisions Of the existing
tariff, filler" tobacco IS dutiable AT -
cents per pound and wrapper" tobacco
at $l5 per pound. The problem that The
customs officers have had to contend
with Is the introduction of considerable
quantities Of wrapper leaf in bales duly |
entered for importation as "fller' to- |
'''NND' tOi'NAblo anu appraisers at TINS !
ana other United States ports are, under |
instructions from the Treasury Depart |
ment, practically picking the bales apart. |
ana separately classifying even the small
est percentages of wrapper leaf found in
filler" bales.
The testimony taken at the General APP
praisers' hearing in the Rothschild's case
corroborated the official report made by
the local appraiser as 10 the relative per-
Of Or Cob, |
bacco contained in the four bales under
consideration. These percentages ranged
from l-5 10 2-S Thus 1t appeared that
no one OF the four bales contained as
much as per cent. of wrapper tobacco,
the remainder In each bale being fller |
tobacco. Several witnesses testified that
unless a bale of filler tobacco contained
10 or II per cent. Of wrapper leaf IL would |
not pay manufacturer to separate the
two. He would simply let it all 90 as
filler.
A BALE is THE UNIT.
The General Appraisers now decide that
tobacco in mixed bales containing va
'ious percentages of wrapper tobacco.
less than 10 per cent. to each bale. ana
he remainder all filler tobacco. is dutia-
Die at 30 cents per pound as filler TO-
)acco not specially provided for" The
BOARD holds that the two grades Of to- !
)accO cannot be cCnstructivoly separated q
IND assessed for duty as part wrapper
md part filler. but each bale must be Z
lassified as an entirety In support or
his decision the General Appraisers say:
The courts have held that under nara v
raphs 246 and 247 Of the tariff act OF 1885 r
ne unit OF leaf tobacco, for dutiable pur- II
oses as wrapper or filler was the II
bale, which had been pro-
erly packed in the usual way with no
Of grades, without fraud. or
ttempt 10 evade the customs laws or
his country" ~
1t has been decided by the Circuit Court ii
Appeals that the Collector cannot con- h.
Iructively separate wrappers and filler re
'bacco in commercial bale by men
lily grouping all the higher grade to- a,
lcco into one lot and all the lower ~
'ade tobacco into another, and treating In
10 entire Importation as If IL had come | >,
to the port Of entry I'm packages. some o.
which contained 100 per cent. of one ,.
'ade, some 100 per cent. of the other. -,
nd none of which contained any admix- "a,
ire of both grades" ~
1T is our opinion" adds the Court. -
hat the statute does not authorize any ~
ch method of classification" The gene uil
l appraisers decide that this reasoning Al
the Court applies with full force TO the -
Instruction OF paragraphs 2i3 and PA OF ga
G present tarin act of 1897. The classifi ia
ton of leaf tobacco for dutiable pur- its
SEES is OF three descriptions-vIz. "m
rapper tobacco. C2) filler tobacco when ir'
xed or packed with more than Il per ma
ntum OF wrapper tobacco; CD all filler Inc
Iacco not specially provided for I'm this al
l." According TO the general apprais- ye'
! view OF the matter. filler tobacco in tui
xed bales. which contain less than Is DE
: cent, IL not specially provided for. joi
q must, therefore. fall into the third the
ch-al clause above cited. "a "hller fou
'acco not specially provided for" 1856
he protest OF Rothschild q Brother is
stained and the Collector OF the port d
instructed TO liquidate the entry ac- OF
dinghy. This decision OF the board is one