Case Name: WERTHEIMER et al. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1895-05-09
Citations: 68 F. 186
Docket Number: 
Parties: WERTHEIMER et al. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 68
Pages: 186–186

Head Matter:
WERTHEIMER et al. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
May 9, 1895.)
Customs Duties — Embroidered Gloves — Act Oct. 1, 1890.
Ladies’ kid gloves, embroidered with more than three single strands or cords, are liable to a duty of 50 cents per dozen pairs,’under the provision of paragraph 458 of the act of 1890, in addition to the other applicable rates therein specified, although such gloves may be commercially known as “three row embroidered” gloves. The words “with more than three single strands or cords,” in paragraph 458, refer to the actual number of single strands or cords upon the glove, and not to any commercial designation thereof.
At Law.
Appeal by importers from decision of the board of United States general appraisers affirming the decision .of the collector of customs at the port of New York in the classification for duty of certain ladies’ kid gloves, embroidered, upon which the collector assessed an additional duty of 50 cents per dozen pairs, under the provisions of paragraph 458 of the act of 1890, and under the particular clause thereof reading: “On all embroidered gloves with more than three single strands or cords, fifty cents per dozen pairs.”
The,protest of Wertheimer & Co., importers, claimed that, while the gloves were embroidered, they were not embroidered with “more than three single strands'or cords,” and were not subject to such additional duty of 50 cents per dozen pairs: The evidence tended to show that gloves of this character were known in trade as “three row embroidered gloves.” As a matter of fact, however, there were actually more than three single strands or cords on said gloves, although there were but three rows of embroidery thereon. Each of said rows of embroidery contained more than one single strand or cord.
On behalf of the United States, it was contended that this was a designation of the articles by specific and particular description, and referred only to their actual condition, and not to any commercial designation thereof, and, while these gloves might be known in trade as “three row embroidered gloves,” as a matter of fact they had upon them nine single strands or cords, or three single strands in each row of embroidery.
W. Wickham Smith, for importers.
Henry C. Platt, Asst. U. S. Atty., for the United States.

Opinion:
TOWNSEND, District Judge
(orally). It appears that the hoard of general appraisers classified the gloves in question for duty according to the actual number of single strands or cords on each glove. It has not been proved that there is any established commercial designation by which such gloves are known which conflicts with such classification; and the decision of the board of general appraisers is therefore affirmed