The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-06-01
CUSTOMS DECISIONS.

TRAWL ~NETS-Trawl nets used by Ash
ing vessels are not to be regarded as parts
duty Under subsection 6 Of paragraph j
tariff act Of 1918, according TO a decision
handed down yesterday by the tnl'"d
states Court of Customs Appeals This
rulinG aNirms a recent decision by the
-'o'rr OF General Appraisers and over.
! Scntcd the Ray state Fishing Company Of
Boston Tn" importers in ohieciing to the
assessment Of the regular duty on these
mat the goods were articles II foreign
p-nIuct!on r"'dci for the. repair OF v"s-
romcry. In ovcrrultLE this contention,
writes: The office OF ,h,s ,ravi net is to
n =. sea ann ash, 1t nn ns' in to .n ss dTsgn"ry sens m.
: no more essential to III. use OF ,the
and similar articles. We are of the opin-
he" a ,m = p ,hat 81 ,hs r.. . .auipm men: a" are tho ,s
Il follows tina, tn. decision. of the hoard
OF c IsPfra! NHHPpFIh,spo., .h.u ns e ,. "ri,m used
IN making wine were successful before the
yes,erday' Th... surran,., taxed Tor Hep duty
by the customs officials at the rate OF ~
Ssp.rrs pss r.! R;Gsn" ID N, S.d ;rr,m me &C., p1 re ,d On
".currants, .Zante. or other" are. held by
the court 20 be properly dutisble at The
section Of paragraph Eli rroviding for
fruits, Including berries, when dried. de-.
man nann 20. ''TTbbS e astim or p ssnnc ,hnn, any
currants at Issue are run through n ma
chine similar to a coffee min and by grind
making wine. Judge De vries holds that
The currants los, their identity as such
%fscture and that they should have heen
classified as "prepared herries" The
Tfo General r Npp.a rsy'r ws,cS : s1M by the
easement or duty as made by the Collector.
The test case was nied In the name OF
PoiIcEMES's observation-disclosures
whistles were the subject ~ a decision
r%mdsreh ycst.rday by the United states
officials levied duty on these whistles al
The rate o. so per cent, ad yalorem under
over 90 cents per dozen pieces. composed
be carried ON or about tho "" per "Ss'S"ea 10
United states General Appraiser by
Srhoverling, DAILY & Gales and tho II &
y Folsom Arms Company claim was made
for duty on these whistles at the rate
81 metal not specially provided for. The
General Appraisers oyeIrn,ed this claim
e cnnr, IN" cr 'Tm 1ns,pm ,Spriss the ', ,Sa to the
rendered yesterday he boards nndinEs are
reversed and the claim or the Importers
'0T PA ,hs 'Ggsr rR.y !Rhs'd United stat.
Court OF Customs. Appeals sustained yes.
''Tuay a 'lalm OF the American Express
Company, acting for Pathe Freres Of this
city and Parts. for a lower rate Of duty
that that assessed by the customs Officials
on merchandise described In the invoices
as 'Pathescopes' Collector Malone hold
that these articles were properly duiiable
at the rate Of 80 per cent. al valoren
under paragraph % Of the tariff act OF
1918 as frames and mountings for optical
Instruments, The importers objected to
this ella ssincation and made various claims
for n lower duty than that levied. In the
decision by. the customs court, which az
firms a ruling by the General Appraisers,
the frames In question are held properly
dutlable az frames for projection lenses AT
the rate OF % per cent al valorem under
paragraph %. The Government contendei
that the moving picture machine Of which
should he classified az an optical instru.
ment and that It Is something more than
a projection lens. II was further argued
that a projection lens mounted on "A
frame. with. the appliances necessary to
make Il ready for use, ceases to he \ pro.
lection lens and becomes "A moving p%lctur.
! machine, which, n was claimed, il an
optical Lnstrument This view ts not an
proved by the court and the contention
for the lower duty II sustained. Judge
Thnddeus !. shsrretts represented the In.
| porters before the General Appraisers and
Court ~ Customs Appeals.