The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-01-27
CUSTOMS DECISIONS.

Duty is nxed at the rate Of 90 per cent.
ad v%slorem on imported silk lamp shades,
trimmed with gold braid. In a decision
overrulss a claim OF the importers, Mort
mura Bros. OF this city. FOR duty at th'
paragraph ais as manufacturers Of six.
The opinion of the court afnrms a recent
decision by the Board of United states
General Appraisers ciassifying these lamp
made in par OF braid.
The importers are unsuccessful in an
other opinion by the customs court involv-
Ing the correct classification. under tn"
present tarin law. of madras muslin cur
tains and madras muslin curtain piece
goods. The court finds tina, this merch1u-
disc was correctly classified by the Gus
toms officials under the provision FOR
jacquard figured upholstered goods" In
80 per cent ad valorem. In a test case
In the name OF SHOWS United States Sam.
pie Express Company. the importers con.
tended that lte curtains should he taxed
for duty at the rate Of 30 per cent. al
valorem, under the provision In the same
paragraph for other Jacquard figured
piece goods should he assessed FOR duty a.
the appropriate rates under the provisions
70, "%cotion cloth IN PARAGRAPHS ?52 and
reNe-ses a decision by tho General Ap.
pfalsers. which was rendered In favor OF
the protes'ants
The Board OF General Appraisers dc.
clded Yesterday that Turkish towels. wash
rags, bath mats and sheets, i'm portei by
I.9n He'd ICED s Co. r. i Macy Z CO.
were incorrectly assessed For duty as pile
fabrics at the rate Of: 90 per cent ed
ya.orem nnter paragraph ~ OF the tsrin
should hav. been levied on these articles
az the rate OF but. ?i per vent al valorem
under paragraph 2s1 Of the existing tarir
Judg. Howell decides. that elastic braid.
In portei bv Geors. Rorr'eldt 4 Co. of
this city were properly classified under
paragraph s5s * the ta-ia act Of 1919
Wi'h duty at the rate Of co per cent al
valorem. Protests OF the importers for q
lover dutv are oVerrulNd.
In disn!ssirs a protest ~ tn. StiS -Rs-r.
Fu'Ier Dry Goods Company OF -. Iouii
'rs, sr1lnst the assessment OF duty on
certain dresses. the prot"stantS aiming
nat the merchandise was second hand
ari o. '.ss value than that upon Incl
dYty was dssess"l A. the hearing coun
-. for me Government moved 10 dismiss
he protest upon the ground 'ha' - raise
This motion NiS trs ~ ell until The ma
I%"olSior ~ TIE case L. hring appar'n'
from the record .h., the importer has uo'
compiled With the provisions Of plrIgrapi
Il. - ton 3. tariff &C; Of 1918. the mo.
lion is granted ari The rrotes; Il her %,
dismissed"
Sr,e-a. protests ., riwin wass.- a..
sustained by tn. Genera Appfais"rs ~ q
decision involving the correct classification
% inquired cotton c,o'h. wnirh Nas rrtIru".
~ 'he customs appraiser as "l'cqiAr'
figured manuftctures - ro'tou." with 'i4''
a, 'h- rat" - 80 pc. cont al ,al'r"m un
dor rarar-a's -rS ~ 'h- 'arin act Of lsl3
n nm opinion rendered hy Judge "oope|
the holri reaches III" conclusion that M
cotton cloth ~ question should have beet
ass.s~ei ~ duty a. the APPROPRIATE rtt'
according 20 Ne average number ~ M
van under paraCruph 90
Gsoree R9rFt'i1t 4 90. i' successful T.
which Ce~: tin ai4h Stcr lumr- and bow.