Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-11-23
THE COURTS
q. S. Court of Customs Appeals.

Vries and Martin.
The following decisions were handed
down yesterday:
No. 642. w. C. Peacock & Co. agt.
ciate judge. The merchandise in question
was Japanese sake, imported from Kobe
to Honolulu under the tariff act of 1891:
part of the importation was lost by leak
age in transit; the collector assessed duty
on the invoice quantity. the importers
claiming that duty should have been as
sessed upon the quantity of sake actual
ly imported. The board of general APP
praisers sustained the collector and the
decision of the board is reversed.
No. 6S7. United States agt. William
Baumgarten & Co.; opinion by Martin
associate judge; the merchandise in this
case was a carved marble vase; it was
assessed upon entry by the collector at
so per cent ad valorem as marble manu-
featured into vases under paragraph IL
of the act of 1909; the importers claimed
that it was properly dutiable at 10 per
cent ad valorem as sculptures WITHIN
act. The board of general appraisers sus,
tanned the protest Of the importers and
the decision of the board is affirmed.
Nos. 13S, 139. 40 and al. Sheldon agt:
United States, F. Cusimano agt. United
States. A. Klipstein & Co. agt. United
States, Kraemer & Foster agt. United
States; opinion by Martin, associate
judge The merchandise involved in these
cases is olive Oil imported under the tarlH
act of 1897. The collector classified the
importations as olive oil not specially
provided for at 40 cents a gallon under
paragraph 40 of that act. The import
ers contended that it was properly dutl-
able as olive oil for manufacturing or
mechanical purposes entitled to free entry
under paragraph 626 thereof. The board
of general appraisers sustained the col
lector and the decision of the board Is
reversed.
No 676 l.. Littauer aat. United States;
opinion by Martin, associate judge. The
merchandise involved in this case con-
sisted of small black beads strung upon
cotton thread; the collector assessed them
for duty at 90 per cent ad Vaiorem as
articles composed in chief value OF BEADS
under paragraph. 421 of the tariff act OF
1909: the importer contended that the
goods were dutiable at ~ per cent az
valorem as manufactures in chief value
of glass paste under paragraph i''
of that act. The board of general APP
prasers sustained the collector and the
decision Of the board is affirmed.
No. $40. b. Illfelder & Co., ct al, agt.
United States; opinion by Martin. asso
ciate Judge The merchandise involved
in this case consisted of lacquered meta
boxes with hinged lids used as containers
for water-color paints and for paint
brushes The collector assessed the
paints contained in the packages at ~
per cent ad valorem under paragraph 10
Oh the act OF I3t.t ana at tnS
assessed duty upon the boxes at cents
per pound and b per cent ad vaiorenh
as metal lacQuered'' under paragraph
1875 thereof. The importers contend that
the boxes were properly subject TO az
valorem duty as part of the value OF the1r
contents under subsection Is of section %
of the act as the usual coverings or con-
tanners of merchandise dutiable at an al
valorem rate. The board of general ap-
praisers overruled the protest of the I'M
Dr,I lnx,iSi of
affirmed.
No. 63S j. d. Irwin & Co. agt United
S .ates; opinion by Martin. associate judge.
The merchandise involved In this case
consists of metal erasers, with flglo
metal blades set into handles of wood
or other materials, imported under the
tariff act of 1909. The collector classined
the articles as 'erasers under para
graph 152 of that act. The importers con-
tended that the eraserS were not properly
dutiable under that paragraph because
they had fixed blades whereas the para
graph was intended to include only such
erasers as have folding blades. The
board of general appraisers sustained the
collector and the decision OF the board Is
affirmed
Nc 1SS. r. F. Downing & Co., agt.
United States; opinion by Smith. associate
judge. The merchandise in question was
certain English goods omitted from IN
voice by the importer. The collector as
sesSed the goods fer the additional duty
prescribed for unuervaluation by section
30 OF the act of July n, 1897. The i'm
porter contended that the goods should
be treated as excess goods omitted IRON
the invoice as prescribed in articles IOf1
and 1G46 of the customs regulations. the
board of general appraisers Overruied the
protest of the importer and the decision
of the board is reversed.
No. 661. hodgart & Co. agt United
States; opinion by Barber associate
judge. The merchandise involved i'll this
case is known as plant packing, used
ii was assessed by the collector at 10 per
cent iii Valorem as manufactured art-
Gle wholly or in chief value of metal.
under paragraph 1:E' of the tariff act of
1HG9. THE importers claim the mer-
chandse to be dltiable as waste at 10
per cent under paragraph 40 of that act.
The board of general appraisers over
ruled the protest of the importers and
the decision OF the board is affirmed.
No. 672. American Express Company.
ct al. agt. United States: opinion by
Barber. associate Judge. The merchan-
disc involved in this case was bayonats.
Some of the importations We're made
under the tariff act of 1897. while others
became operative. The question is
whether the merchandise * dutiable
''sde arms under paragraph La of the
act of 1897 and paragraph 1913 of the act
under paragraph 11l of the act of 1897
and paragraph l.,t; of tho act of 1909. Tire
collector assessed the merchandise as
side arms and the board Of general
appraisers sustained the collector. The
dec sion Of the board is affirmed.
No. 900. 4. T.. Tuska. Son & Co. ct al
agt. United States: opinion by Barber,
associate Judge. The importation in
question consisted of toy or artificial
shamrocks. They were assessed for
duty by the collector at co per cent ad
valorem as artificial leaves under para
graph 43S of the act of 1909. The i'm
porters claimed that the merchandise
was dut'a under paragraph 103 of the
act as manufactures of silk not specially
The board of general appraisers sustain
ed the collector and the decision of the
board is affirmed.
No 724. Sears, Roebuck & Co. agt
the United States: opinion by Martin. as
sociate Judge The merchandise involved
in this case consists of steel hair clippers
They were assessed for duty by the col
lector as manufactures of steel not
specially provided for at IS per cent
under paragraph 1893 of the act Of 1909.
The importers claimed they were proper
Nv dutiable either directly OF by simili-
tlde as machine tools at 20 per cent ad
yalorem under paragraph 1917 of that act.
The board of general appraisers over
ruled the protest of the importers and
No so Edward B. Goodman ct al.
agt. United States: opinion by Mont
gomery, presiding Judge Motion for re-
hearing denied.
No. $40. G. w. Sheldon & Co. agt.
United States; opinion by Montgomery.
presiding judge. This is an appeal from
the decision of the board of general APP