The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-12-10
CUSTOMS DECISIONS.

Pathe Freres won before the Board OF
United States General Appraisers yester-
day In a claim for low duty on imported
moving picture machines known as pathe-
scopes. These machines were imported
without the projection lens. lamp and
lamp house, and reels. and assessed for
duty by Collector Malone at the rate OF
IS per cent. ad valoren. under paragraph
80 OF the tar!r act OF 1918, providing for
optical instruments and frames and
moun,ings for the same not specially
provided for. In Il test case brought be-
fore the customs tribunal by Thaddeus s.
Sharretts It was contended that duty
should have been assessed at the rate OF
but rs per cent. ad valorem. under para
araph -, covering photographs and
protection lenses, and frames and mount
that to call these moving picture machines
optical instruments" within the derni-
ton Of that term. as understood by men
optical instrument that may be used not
only to aid sight or for viewing objects.
s SSs 10, the purpS.. Of mssn,ay,nr Ss'e ru
poses. or for rejecting pictures on a
known as crows foot intended not only
to give strength and frmnes: to the
ments women's garments as well, Ia held
in a decision by tho general appraisers. 10
constitute embroidery. thereby bringing
S %eo''S Within SGH'. n. ,"p ppoV,s,o ny e ., T pHrssrspS
ass, with duty at tho rate of so per cent.
ad valorein. Judge Howell. in overruling
rate of but IS per cent, ad valorem. under
paragraph 2sl. holds that the p~rotestants
failed to Introduce any evidences to show
that tho ornanentation appearing on tho
coats did not In fact constitute EN-
broidery.
The testimony Of two witnesses, each
named lpneR. failed 10 convince the
customs board that a shortage of 200
yards Of embroidery existed In a certain
Co. OF Chicago. Duty was assessed on the
full cargo. while tho importers claimed
that allowance should be made for the
h"csS in THE case. Al one of tho hear
inEs a Mr.. ~ Jones testified and at the
ned, The testimony Of both these Wit
nesses Is stated hy Judge Hay to have
been very unsa,isfse'ory Ths general
there was SOM" confusion in the initials
and that the second Mr., Jones was the
sHme as the witness who ,eS'iaed at the
the testimony a, the second hearing
was given by a different Jones, then there
tho question as to VINO opened the case,
for H. certainly. was NOT opened by both
the Joneses" u 4. nnaily decided by the
ing any OF the legal questions involved in
this case, without reference 10 the manner
OF PROOF or tho manner or examination,
tho protest Is overruled for the reason that
the contention, Of the importer Is not
clearly established by the testimony,
In another decision by the general APP
praisers, IL Is held that wool hoods
trimmed with a fringe OF artificial silk, I'm
ported by Carson. Pirts. Scott g. Co. of
Chicago. were Improperly assessed for
duty by the customs officials at tho rate
OF so per cent. ad vaiorsm under par a.
graph 35s OF the tariff act of 1919. The
board hnds that the hoods are not EN-.
hroiderod or made In part of lace snd
that the trimming does not cover the
whole surface, but only the edge OF the
hood. Duty is fixed on these articles at
the rate Of 3S per cent. ad yalorem as
wool wearing apparel. under para
graph eel.
Automobile wells, imported by voss 4
Stern, were the subject OF q ruling In
which the board decided that these arti-
clss were properly assessed for duty at
the rate of GO per cent. ad vaiorem. under
paragraph ass of the tarin act OF 1918.
The Importers unsuccessfully attempted TO
prove before the general appraisers that
veiis' and chiffon .carfs' are known
wells" Judge Howell writes that the
testimony offered failed TO establish that
fact,