Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-04-24
cry and Associate Judges Smith, Bar
Der. De Vries and Martin.
The following decisions were handed

per. De Nrtes and Martin.
The following decisions were handed
No. 40s. a. L. Tuska & Co.. appel
lants. agt. the United States: opinion
by Smith. associate Judge. The mer-
chandise was bags and baskets import
ed at New York and assessed by the
collector at 3j per cent as n1anufac-
lures Of wood. The importers claimed
that the articles were manufactures OF
chip, grass and weeds. and were duti-
eral appraisers sustained the collector.
The decision Of the board Is affirmed as
to those articles made of wistarta and
rattan. and is reversed S to those mace
of bamboo.
No. APO w H. Lent & Co. appel
lants. agt. the United States: opinion
by Smith. associate Judge. The mer-
chandis was buttons imported at New
York and assessed by the collector
dress buttons. The importer claimed
that it was dutiable as ordinary but
tons. The board OF general appraisers
sustained the collector. and me DECISION
Of the board ia affirmed.
No. 49, Thomas Prosser 4 Son, appel
lants, agt. the United States: opinion by
Smith. associate judge. The merchandise
was steel cranks. shafts. crank pins
crank aNles, connecting rods. piston rods
and crossheads, imported at New York
They were assessed for duty 10y the col
ieCtor as manufactures of metal at II per
cent. The importer claimed that they were
dutiable as forsings at ~ ner cent. or as
steel in all forms and shapes not spe-
cording to value. The board of general ap-
praisers allowed the claim OF the I'M
porter that the merchandise was dutiable
as forgings at 35 per cent. The circuit
court at New York reversed the board
and sustained the collector. The Judgment
Of the circuit court is affirmed EXCEPT as
to piston rods. and these are held to be
dutiable as forgirss a: b per cent.
No. 49,. 4. W. Fenton. appellant. agt.
the United States: opinion by Barber, as
sociate judge. The merchandise was cork
floats imported a Cleveland and assessed
for duty by the collector as fishing tackle
or parts thereof at II per. cent. The inl-
porter claimed that they We're dutiable as
board of general appraisers sustained the
collector. The decision of the board is re-
versed
No. :35. Frank IT. shallus, appellant.
agt the United States; opinion by Bar
ber associate judge. The merchandise
was cotton cloth which had been sub
jected to special coat of paint, giving 1t
an appearance similar to oilcloth. 1t
was known to the trade as Lancaster
window blind cloth. 1t was assessed by
and 20 per cent. The importer claimed
that the merchandise was dutiable under
the countable clauses of the cotton
schedule. The board of general apprats-
ers sustained the collector and the de-
c1siOn OF the board is affirmed
No. 2H. Unitedt States agt. Michelin
Tire Company: opinion by De Vries. as
sociate Judge The merchandise was re-
claimed or recovered rubber. The col
lector assessed duty on part Of the mer-
lures of rubber not specially provided
and part at 20 per cent as manufactured
articles not specially provided for. The
first classification was subsequently
abandoned and the second adopted at
the direction of the Treasury Depart-
ment under a decision of the board OF
general appraisers. The importer claim
ed the merchandise to be free as scrap
Or refuse India rubber. fit only for
remanufacture. The decision of the
affirmed.
Nos, 90 and 2ss. The United States
agt Obcrle & Henry. The United States
agt b. Illfelder & Co.: opinion by De-
was very small mirrors. The question be-
fore the board OF general appraisers was
whether they were dutiablc as toys or as
mirrors. In the decision of these protests.
the general appraiser of his own motion
consolidated the testimony taken in two
other cases involving similar merchandise
and issues. The government contends
that If the records were consolidated the
government was without notice OF it. The
board of general appraisers held the
the decision of the board is reversed with
directions that after due notice new trials
be had in each case.
No. 416. The United States agt. Rich
ards. Atkinson & Haserick ct al: opinion
by De Vries, associate judge. The mer-
chandise was leather imported at Boston.
The collector assessed duty at Is per
cent as leather not specially provided
for The importer contended the mer-
chandise was dutiable at ) per cent as
band bend or betting leather. The board
of general appraisers allowed the claim
OF the importer and the decision of the
board is affirmed.
No 45S William II. stiner & Son ct
al. appellants. aSt. United States. Opin-
ion by. Martin, associate judge. The
merchandise was dressed and finished
lambskins which were imported during
the months of August and October, 1888.
The collector assessed them for duty at
20 per cent as glove leather. The i'm
porter claimed that such of the importa
ton as had entered before October
was dutiable at - per cent as lamb
skins. dressed and finished. and that such
as had entered after October l were
dutiable at ~ per, cent as grain leather.
The board Of general appraisers sus-
tanned the collector and the decision OF
the board is affirmed