Case Name: A. J. WOODRUFF & CO. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1905-02-15
Citations: 138 F. 946
Docket Number: Nos. 3,462, 3,463
Parties: A. J. WOODRUFF & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 138
Pages: 946–947

Head Matter:
A. J. WOODRUFF & CO. v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
February 15, 1905.)
Nos. 3,462, 3,463.
Customs Duties — Classification—Surgical Needles;
- The provision in Tai-ifC Act July 24, 1897, e. 11, § 2, Free List, par. 620, 30 Stat. 199 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685], for “Band sewing” needles, relates to sucb as are used by persons generally wbo use needles, and does not include surgical needles.
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers.
The decision irt question G. A. 5,481, T. D. 24,795, affirméd the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New Yórk on merchandise imported by A. J. Woodruff & Co. The opinion'of the Board of General Appraisers reads as follows;
FÍSCHER, General Appraiser. The merchandise in question consists of ¡surgical needles of various shapes and sizes contained in leather cases. Duty was assessed thereon at the rate of 25 per cent, ad valorem, under the provisions of the act of July 24, 1897, e. 11, § 1, Schedule C, par. 165, 30 Stat. ■lé5 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1643], which reads as follows:
“Needles for knitting or sewing machines, including latch needles, one dollar pér thousand and twenty-five per centum ad valorem; crochet needles and tape needles, knitting and all other needles, not specially provided for in this act, and bodkins of metal, twenty-five per centum ad valorem.”
The importers claim that the articles are entitled to free entry under the provisions of paragraph 620 of said act (chapter 11, § 2, Free List, 30 Stat. 199 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685]), which reads as follows: “Needles, hand sewing and darning.” The testimony of the importers’ witness shows that the term “hand sewing needles” is not a trade-name. Regarding this as true, we must determine the classification of the merchandise according to common understanding. Beyond all question, the term “hand sewing needles,” as commonly Understood, included only that species of needle which is used by tailors, seamstresses, sail-makers, and other artisans for sewing fabrics or other material by hand. ■ Surgical needles are always understood and recognized as a distinct class by the name “surgical needles.” The Century Dictionary defines a “needle” as follows; “A small, slender, pointed'instrument, usually of tempered steel, containing an eye to carry thread through a fabric in sewing. Any instrument shaped like or used as a needle'; as, a surgeon’s needle. Needles used in surgery are named frequently from the object they are used upon; as, a cataract needle, fistula needle, hare-lip needle, ligature needle, suture needle.” And the same authority defines a sewing needle as “any ordinary needle for hand sewing.”
In G. A. 582, T. D. 11,223, which arose under the act of 1890, this board, in passing upon similar articles, said: “Stitching together portions of the human anatomy is not commercially known as ‘hand sewing,’ and we do not think surgical needles can properly be classified as hand sewing or darning needles.”
In G. A. 4,147, T. D. 19,356, which arose under the act of 1894, this board also held to the same effect, sustaining the importer’s claim that surgeons’ needles in leather cases were dutiable under the provision for needles of all kinds, and that the leather cases were usual coverings.
The illustrative samples introduced by the importers do not sustain their contention; for while it is true that some varieties of hand sewing needles are somewhat shaped like surgical needles, that fact is not conclusive of their designation. Very many articles of commerce resemble each other in general appearance, yet differ in essential features. All sewing needles are slender, pointed instruments, and have eyes to carry thread, and so have surgical needles, but they are not dutiable alike by virtue of the tariff provisions.
The protests are overruled, and the decisions of the collector affirmed.
W. Wickham Smith, for appellant.
Chas. D. Baker, Asst. U. S. Atty.

Opinion:
WHEELER, District Judge.
These are surgical needles, and have been assessed as needles not otherwise provided for, under paragraph 165 of act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule C, 30 Stat. 165 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1643], against a protest that they are free as "hand sewing" needles under paragraph 620 of the Act of 1897, c. 11, § 2, Free List, 30 Stat. 199 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685]. No testimony has been taken and there is nothing by which to change the classification. Hand sewing needles would seem to be such as are used by persons generally who use needles, and not such as are used only by professional persons in surgical operations to which they are specially adapted.
Decision affirmed.