Case Name: UNITED STATES v. GABRIEL et al.
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1899-10-14
Citations: 97 F. 934
Docket Number: 
Parties: UNITED STATES v. GABRIEL et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 97
Pages: 934–935

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES v. GABRIEL et al.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
October 14, 1899.)
Customs Duties — Classification—Lithofonk.
Lithofone, which is a compound composed of 70 per cent, sulphate of bárytes, and 80 per cent, sulphide of zinc, is dutiable, under .paragraph 57 of the tariff act of 1897, as a “white paint or pigment containing zinc, but not containing lead, dry,” snd not as sulphide of zinc.
Appeal from Board of General Appraisers.
This was an appeal by the United States from a decision of the board of general appraisers fixing the classification for duty of certain merchandise imported by Gabriel and Scball.
D. Frank Lloyd, Asst. U. S. Atty.
W. Wickham Smith, for appellees.

Opinion:
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.
It seems unnecessary to add anything to the discussion of the case which will be found in the opinion of the board of general appraisers. The paragraph in the tariff act of 1897 reads as follows:
"57. Zinc, oxide of, and white paint or pigment containing zinc, but not containing lead, dry, one cent per pound; ground in oil, one and three-fourths cents per pound; sulphide of zinc white, or white sulphide of zinc, one and one-fourth cents per pound'; chloride of zinc and sulphate of zinc, one cent pes pound."
Certainly the article here imported (lithoiione) is not chemically sulphide of zinc, since it is conceded to be a compound oí 70 per cent, of sulphate of barytes, and only 80 per cent, of sulphide of ¡zinc. The government undertook to convince the board that it was commercially known as "sulphide of zinc." The evidence presented to the board upon that point was conflicting, and the board found that it was "not so commercially known," and there is no further evidence on that question before this court. It is not disputed that it is a "white paint or pigment containing zinc, but not containing lead, dry," and is therefore dutiable at one cent per pound. The decision of the board is affirmed.