The Hawaiian gazette., 1905-09-08
DECISIONS
ON TARIFF

Sake. Japan's national stimulant, has
been tudicially rated as a nondescript
among the alcoholic beverages of the
world. Judge Dole yesterday decided
together two appeals by Collector
Stackable from decisions OF the Board
OF General Appraisers, New York city.
One protest against the collectors rul-
ing, in the first instance. was by Con-
salves a. Co., Ltd, and the other by
s. Kimura & Co. Ltd
Directly. the decision forblds the as
sessment of duty on sake that had
leaked out of its tubs in Transports
ton, and, incidentally. makes a lower
rate of duty chargeable upon the bev-
erage that arrives intact than the coll
lector assessed. Harry Johnston, GUS
tom house broker. fought the cases
on behalf of the importers. A large
amount of duties paid under protest Is
involved In the cases.
This is the collectors case in his petit
ton:
THE said merchandise was classified
and assessed for duty as still wine
containing more than fourteen per
cent absolute alcohol, under and pur-
suant to the provisions of paragraph
296 of the Tariff Act OF July gath, 1897,
and the duty was assessed and collect
ed thereon at the rate of fifty cents
per gallon: and also under the proviso
contained in said paragraph 296 of said
Tariff Act, providing that there shall
be no constructive or other allowance
for breakage, leakage. or damage, on
liquors. cordials or distilled SPIRITS"
And these are the grounds of the i'm
porters appeal from the collectors rul-
ing:
First, that sake is a beer or similar
| thereto, or q malt liquor or similar
thereto, and is without the terms OF
said prohibition contained in said
paragraph 900. Second, that sake is
not still wine or otherwise. Third,
that sake Is not a liquor within the
meaning of said proviso of said para
graph 200, because the term liquor,
when used in n special sense, does not
include beer or malt liquors. Fourth.
that sake is not cordial Fifth, that
sake is not distilled spirit"
The Board of General Appraisers re-
versed the classification and rate of
duty fixed by the collector and decided
that sake was not within the proviso
of paragraph 296 above quoted, not be-
ing wine, liquor cordial or distilled
spirits. under the authority of Hol-
| lander VS.. Magone. 149 u. s. $780, and
| Sarll VS.. U. s, 1852 Id, $40.
Judge Dole says ",rhis court IL
bound by the authority of Hollander VS..
Magone, supra. and accordingly finds
that the proviso referred to does not
apply to sake.
On the day before the Board of Gen.
eral Appraisers made its decision, in
which 1t referred to the Hackfeld case
where it was held that sake by simili-
tude should be assessed as still wine,
the Circuit Court of the Southern Dis
| trict of New York filed n decision I'm
the case of Nishimiya VS.. u. s., hold
ing that sake is not sufficiently similar
to still wine to warrant its assessment
FOR duty under paragraph 296 OF the
act; and because OF the high percent
age OF alcohol therein, the absence OF
effervescence, and its quality, taste and
use, as aforesaid, II does not seem to
be sufficiently like beer or ale to per-
NIT of its inclusion under paragraph
291. The conclusion reached Is that II
is so radically different from the articles
covered by both of said paragraphs
that 1t should have been classified for
duty as nonenumerated manufac-
tured article under section 6 OF said
act"
This ruling" Judge Dole concludes,
rather strengthens the decision of the
Board of General Appraisers, sake be-
ing fermented article but not n wine
nor a cordial. This being the case,
there is no statute to interfere with
the common sense view that the tubs
In question having arrived within the
United States empty, there was no
merchandise to classify or upon which
any duty could be charged.
THE decision of the Board OF Cen
eral Appraisers Is therefore affirmed"
In another decision yesterday, Judge
Dole sustained the Board of General
Appraisers under an appeal by Collec-
tor Stackable from its ruling, with re-
gard to japanese dainty called Mi
suzanne. In the syllabus the court says:
"Misuame as a product of a certain
treatment of malt millet and rice,
compared with cane sugar as the prod
uct of sugar cane or beets. and held
not to be confectionery"