Case Name: VEIL et al. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1902-03-11
Citations: 113 F. 856
Docket Number: No. 3,036
Parties: VEIL et al. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 113
Pages: 856–856

Head Matter:
VEIL et al. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
March 11, 1902.)
No. 3,036.
Customs Duties — Woolen'Bands.
Woolen bands intended for the use of veterinary surgeons, to be applied to lame legs, are properly assessed under Act 1897, par. 366, as manufactures of wool, and not under paragraph 447, which provides for “harness, saddles and saddlery.”
Appeal by the Importers from a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
Howard T. Walden, for the importers.
W. Usher Parsons, Asst. U. S. Atty.

Opinion:
COXE, District Judge
(orally). It is not disputed that the article in question is a woolen, band. It was assessed by the collector under paragraph 366 of the act of 1897 as a manufacture of wool. The importer insists that it is better described by paragraph 447 of the same act, which provides for "harness, saddles and saddlery, or parts of either, in sets or in parts." I do' not think it can be contended that "saddlery" is limited to articles of leather, because it appears that there is a saddle cloth and I suppose the court may take judicial notice that the surcingle is made of canvas. On the other hand I think the word "saddlery" should not be expanded to apply to these articles in suit, which belong more properly to the veterinary department. Saddlery, whatever else it may or may not mean, ought to be applied to the trappings of a well horse, a "going" horse, and not a sick one. This band is intended for the use of the veterinary surgeon to be applied to a lame leg, as a plaster might be applied to a bruise. Its use is analogous to a contrivance made to hold up a horse that has broken his leg. I do not think that it can be included within the word "saddlery."
As the importer has not succeeded in showing that the article in question can be properly classified under the term "saddlery" or parts thereof it follows that the decision of the board of appraisers must be affirmed.