Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-05-24
THE COURTS.
q. S. Court of Customs Appeals.

Present: Presiding Judge Montgomery
and Associate Judges Smith, Barber. De
Vrles and Martin.
No. 1851. Finman agt. United States:
opinion by Montgomery, presiding judge.
This case relates to an importation OF
furniture which was assessed for duty as
from duty under the last clause Of para
graph III of the tariff act OF 1909 as
works OF art produced more than 100
years prior to the date OF importation
pass upon the merits of the case as shown
by the testimony. but overruled the pro-
test on the ground that the regulations
OF the Secretary OF the Treasury hao
not been complied with. This decision
of the board was erroneous and the de-
cision Is reversed and the case remanded
to the board for further proceedings.
No. 1851. c. B. Richard g. Co. agt.
United States: opinion by Montgomery.
presiding Judge. The merchandise in
posed of leather and metal. leather being
the component material of chief value.
1t was assessed at 10 per cent under
paragraph 40. tariff act Of 1909. for
leather The importers claim assessment
under paragraphs 16O and 161. covering
specified kinds Of wrought iron and steel
nails. The board Of general appraisers
the decision OF the board IL affirmed.
No. 1880. Universal Shipping Company
agt. United States: opinion by Montgom-
cry, presiding Judge. The importa ton in
merchandise cut from aluminium sheets.
1t was assessed for duty under paragraph
172 as sheets Of aluminium The importers
claim the articles should have been as
composed of aluminium partly or wholly
manufactured at As per cent The board
Of general appraisers overruled the pro-
test OF the importers al the decision OF
the board Is reversed.
No. 1129. United States agt. Eytinge
& Co.: opinion by Martin. associate
judge. The merchandise in this case con-
sists OF tubes OF various lengths and
different diameters composed Of plain
white china. and was returned for duty
by the collector under paragraph "a. act
Of 1909. The importers claimed the mer-
chandise to be dutiable at 85 per cent as
articles composed Of earthly substances
board OF general appraisers sustained the
protest Of the importer and the decision
Of the board is reversed.
No. 1850. Austin, Nichols & Co. agt.
United States: opinion by Martin. asso-
ciate Judge. The merchandise in ques-
ton consisted OF capers put UP In vine
gar and imported in bottles and casks.
The importation was returned by the ap-
prepared vegetables dutiable at 10 per
cent under paragraph 252. act OF 1909
The importers claimed assessment for
the merchandise a. d nun-enumerated ar.
ticle under paragraph 40 Of the act. At
praisers the government withdrew its
claim under paragraph $50. but contended
that the articles were pickles under para
graph 253 OF the act. and therefore du-
upon them. This claim was sustained by
the board and the decision OF the board
Is affirmed.
No. 1112. United States AIT. wyman q
Co. nnfnfnn Inv Martin e. f,,a-
tice. This appeal relates to the assess
ment Of certain merchandise which was
entered for consumption by the import
ers upon q duly certified invoice under
the correct rate Of duty upon the en-
tered value Of the importation. The I'm
porters claim that through clerical error
an item OF commission which was nom
dutiable was included in the entered
value and thus made subject to duty.
The board Of general appraisers sus-
tanned the protest Of the importers and
lie decision OF the board IL reversed.
No. 992. Steinman agt. United States:
opinion by Martin. associate Judge. The
merchandise involved in this case con-
| sisted Of paper intended for use as COW
ers Of books and pamphlets. Duty was
assessed upon the importation at ~
cents per pound under paragraph AL.
sessment under the proviso to paragraph
| AS OF the act as paper embossed. The
| board of general appraisers overruled the
protest Of the importer and the decision
Of the board Is affirmed.
No. $50. Dunlop Brothers ct al agt
United States; opinion by Martin. asso-
| ciate judge. In this case the importers
appeal from an order OF the board OF
general appraisers denying an applica-
| ton OF the importers to resume consider
fused the application on the ground OF
laches on the part Of the importers. the
decision OF the board In this behalf ID
affirmed and tho appeal dismissed.
No. 1920. Woolworth & Co. agt. United
States; opinion by De vres. associate
judge. The importation was Of small
lacquereu metal boxes and was classi-
fed for dutfable purposes by the collec-
tor under paragraph 1885, act OF 1909 the
importers claimed assessment for the
merchandise under paragraph 100 OF the
act as manufactures OF metal not espe-
cially provided for. or in the alternative
| under paragraph 43i OF that act as toys.
The board Of general appraisers over
the decision Of the board is reversed.
No 1863 Lauricella ct al. agt. United
States; opinion by De vries, associate
| Judge. This appeal concerns an importa-
| ton Of fruit. The importers claimed
| allowance for a shortage or non-fmporta-
ton by reason Of decay or rot under sub
section 20 of section rs. act OF 1909. The
board Of general appraisers overruled
| the claim of the importers and the decf-
sion Of the board is reversed.
Decision OF the board. abstract 30352.
T. D. $1,000. likewise covered by this
| appeal is affirmed by consent.
| No. 1887. Howard Houlder & Partners
agt. United States: opinion by De vries.
associate Judge. The importation was OF
dates. of which 906 boxes were condemned
by the board Of health and destroyed
and an allowance to that extent IL claim
ed by the importers as for nonimpor-
tation The board of general appraisers
| overruled the protest OF the importers on
the ground that the regulations of the
complied with and the decision of the
board is affirmed.
Nos. go, $50. 979 United States agt.
Fluid; United States agt. Kronfeld. Eaun-
| ders & CO.. and Kronfeld. Saunders &
Co. agt. United States; opinion by De
vries. associate Judge. This record con-
tains three appeals from a single deci-
sion of the board Of general appraisers.
The importation was OF post cards print
sessed by the collector for duty under
the proviso to paragraph AS, act of
1909 as embossed paper articles or en-
bossed printed matter. The importers
claimed assessment under paragraph 416
for printed matter not specially provided
FOR, or under paragraph Alp for embossed
articles of paper The board sustained the
first claim only, overruling all others. and
both parties appealed. The decision of
the board is affirmed.
District Supreme Court.
EQUITY COURT NO. 1-Justice Barnard.
National Savings and Trust Company
agt German; final decree to sell GER