Case Name: WILLIAM CRAMP & SONS SHIP & ENGINE BLDG. CO. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1905-06-26
Citations: 139 F. 303
Docket Number: No. 40
Parties: WILLIAM CRAMP & SONS SHIP & ENGINE BLDG. CO. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 139
Pages: 303–304

Head Matter:
WILLIAM CRAMP & SONS SHIP & ENGINE BLDG. CO. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
June 26, 1905.)
No. 40.
Customs Duties — Classification—Bronze Hardener — Unweought Metal.
As to an alloy used chiefly as a hardener in the manufacture of manganese bronze, which in its present condition is of no use except to he melted and mixed with other metals to produce such effect as it is capable of producing, held, that it is dutiable as a metal unwrought under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule C, 30 Stat. 166 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1645], and not as an article of metal, not specially provided for, under paragraph 193, 30 Stat. 167 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1645], nor either directly or by similitude, as ferro-manganese, under paragraph 122, 30 Stat. 159 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1636].
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
The decision in question affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of Philadelphia. Compare United States v. Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Company (C. C. A.) 137 Fed. 770.
Hatch, Keener & Clute, for importers.
Wm. M. Stewart, Jr., and J. Whitaker Thompson, for the United States.

Opinion:
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
The merchandise in question is an alloy of metal, composed of 62 per cent, of iron, 32 per cent, of tin, and 6 per cent, of manganese. It is chiefly used as a hardener in the manufacture of manganese bronze, although it is capable of being used for some other purposes. The board of appraisers classified it under-paragraph 172 of the tariff act of July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule C, 30 Stat. 165 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1643], as an alloy of which aluminum is the component material of chief value; but this is conceded to have been a mistake. The question for decision now is whether the material should be classified under paragraph 183 (30 Stat. 166 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1645]), as a metallic mineral substance in a crude state, or a metal unwrought; or under paragraph 122 (30 Stat. 159 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1636]), either directly or by similitude, as ferro-manganese; or under paragraph 193 (30 Stat. 167 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1645]), as an article or ware of metal, either partially or wholly manufactured, not specially provided for. The testimony leaves the answer in some doubt, but I have finally come to the conclusion that paragraph 183 is more nearly applicable than either of the other two. The alloy is of no use in its present condition. It must be melted and mixed with other metals to produce such effect as it is capable of producing, and the process it has already undergone is so obviously a mere preliminary that it seems to me to be properly described as a metal unwrought. Inspection of the sample tends to confirm this conclusion.
The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed, with instructions to classify the merchandise under paragraph 183.