Case Name: LUEDERS v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1905-11-03
Citations: 143 F. 918
Docket Number: No. 4,008
Parties: LUEDERS v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 143
Pages: 918–918

Head Matter:
LUEDERS v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
November 3, 1905.)
No. 4,008.
Customs Duties—Classification—Fortified Enfleurage Pomade.
So-called muguet pomade, produced by the combination of several kinds of enfleurage grease, to which is added about one-half of 1 per cent, of various essential oils to fortify and combine the article, thus producing an odor like that of the lily of the valley, held free of duty, under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 2, Free List, par. 626, 30 Stat 199 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685], as enfleurage grease.
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
For decision below, see G. A. 6,024 (T. D. 26,310), which affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York on merchandise imported by George Lueders & Co.
This merchandise consisted of so-called muguet pomade, or lily of the valley pomade. It was classified by the collector as dutiable under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule A, par. 3, 30 Stat. 151 [U. S. Comp. St 1901, p. 1627], relating to combinations of essential oils. The importers claimed that it was free of duty, under the provision' for enfleurage grease in paragraph 626 (Free List, § 2, 30 Stat. 199 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685]). The evidence taken before the Board of General Appraisers and the Circuit Court showed the article to be made by the combination of several different enfiuerage pomades or greases, completed by the addition of two or three essential oils, amounting to about one-half of 1 per cent., to fortify and combine the resultant odor, which is similar to that of the lily of the valley, or “muguet,” as it is known in French.
Hatch, Keener & Clute (J.. Stuart Tompkins, of counsel), for importer.
Charles Duane Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty.

Opinion:
HAZEL, District Judge.
Decision reversed, on the authority of U. S. v. Dodge (C. C.) 94 Fed. 481.