CAUSTIC SODA.

17

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 2, 1858. SIR-The Department has had under consideration an appeal by Messrs. Pickering, Winslow & Co., from the decision of the collector at Boston, as to the rate of duty to be assessed on an article imported by them in the ship" W. F. Stover," from Liverpool, and described in the invoice as " caustic soda." The collector assessed duty on the article in question at the rate of 15 per cent, in pursuance of the provisions of the 1st section of the tariff act of 31 March, 1857, it not being enumerated in any schedule of that tariff. The appellants concede that "caustic soda" is an unenumerated article, but they claim its entry at the rate of 4 per cent, the duty imposed on "soda ash," designated in schedule H of the tariff of 1857, by applying the provisions of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842, it being assimilated, in their opinion, by the uses to which it is applied, to “soda ash," and by force of that provision should be subjected to duty at the same rate. The tariff act of 1857 prescribes expressly the rates of duty to be levied on soda in several of its forms and combinations"carbonate of soda," "nitrate of soda, refined or partially refined," and "natron or mineral soda," in schedule G, and "soda ash" and "nitrate of soda, crude," in schedule H. Caustic soda" is not specified in any schedule of the tariff under that name, nor is it embraced in any of the combinations or forms of soda expressly designated in that act. The appellants allege that "caustic soda" is applied to the same uses as "soda ash," and ought, as an unenumerated article, by force of the provisions of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842, to be subject to the duty specially imposed on the latter. It is represented that "caustic soda" and "soda ash are both used in the manufacture of soaps and for bleaching purposes; but "soda ash," it is understood, is not applicable to those purposes until it has been converted into "caustic soda." Soda ash," therefore, in the condition in which it is imported and known in commerce, and to which, under that designation, the law imposing the duty upon it must be presumed to have reference, is not applicable to the uses to which the article imported and known in commerce as " caustic soda" is applied, and cannot, therefore, be brought under the same duty by force of the provisions of the 20th section of the act of 1842, by reason of a similitude in the uses to which they may be applied. The decision of the collector assessing duty on the article in question at 15 per cent, as unenumerated, in pursuance of the provisions of the 1st section of the tariff act of 3d March, 1857, is affirmed. I am, very respectfully,

A. W. AUSTIN, Esq., Collector, Boston, Mass.

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

CHLORURE D'OXIDE DE SODIUM.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 3, 1858. SIR-The Department has had under consideration appeals of Messrs. Carnes and Haskell, and Edward Gaudelet, from the decision of the collector at New York, assessing a duty of 24 per cent on an article known as "chlorure d'oxide de sodium," or liqueur disinfectante de labarraque," as a "medicinal preparation, not otherwise provided for," in schedule C of the tariff of 1857. The applicants contend that the article in question is not a medicinal but a chemical preparation, used chiefly as a disinfecting agent, and claim to enter it as an unenumerated article dutiable under the 1st section of the tariff act of 3d March, 1857, at the rate of 15 per cent. The article in question is no doubt susceptible of a medicinal use, but not to an extent that would authorize it to be treated as embraced within the classification of "medicinal preparations" in schedule C of the tariff of 1857. It is a chemical preparation not specially named nor embraced in any general designation in any schedule of the tariff of 1857. As an unenumerated article it is chargeable with duty at the rate of 15 per cent, under the 1st section of the tariff act of the 3d March, 1857. It cannot be placed, as an unenumerated article, in any schedule of the tariff, by assimilation to any designated article, by force of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842. Chloride of lime, which it resembles in its quality as a disinfectant, is used principally in

the arts, and is enumerated in schedule H of the tariff as "bleaching powder or chloride of lime,” a use to which there is no allegation that the “chlorure d'oxide de sodium" is applied. The decision of the collector is therefore overruled, and the article in question is entitled to entry as an unenumerated article at a duty of 15 per cent. Very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

AUGUSTUS SCHELL, Esq., Collector of the Customs, New York.

GENEVA ENAMELED PAINTING.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 3, 1858. SIR-I acknowledge the receipt of your report under date of the 19th of January last, in regard to the appeal of Messrs. Mulford, Wendell & Co., from your decision charging a duty of 24 per cent on an article called a "Geneva enameled painting," as embraced either in the classification of schedule C of "manufactures, articles, vessels, and wares, not otherwise provided for, of brass, copper, gold, iron, lead, pewter, platina, silver, tin. or other metals, or of which either of those metals, or any other metal, shall be the component material of chief value,” or in that of "jewelry, real or imitation," in the same schedule; the importers claiming to enter it free of duty under the classification in schedule I of "paintings and statuary." The article, in the form in which it is imported, is not a brooch, breastpin, or other personal ornament, or fitted for such, without further manufacture. It is merely an enameled painting on a metallic base, to be converted by further manufacture into ornaments for the person. In that view, it cannot be regarded as in the classification of schedule C of the tariff of 1857, of manufactures of metal or jewelry. Nor can it be held to be a "painting on glass," specified in that schedule. The paintings under consideration are on an article not known in commerce as glass, and are exclusively used in the manufacture of personal ornaments, while " paintings on glass" are paintings executed in the ordinary mode on common plate or sheet glass and used for shades, windows, and other like purposes. Nor can the article in question be entered free of duty, as the importers claim, under the classification of “ paintings and statuary " in schedule I of the tariff of 1857. "Paintings," as defined under the tariff of 1846, are works known as objects of taste, not intended as merchandise. The act of 1857 merely relieves them from that restriction, admitting them to free entry for whatever purpose imported. Thus defined, they are clearly distinguishable from the articles in question, which are intended not as mere objects of taste but as personal ornaments, and are not known commercially or otherwise as "paintings." Your decision is therefore overruled, and the articles in question are entitled to entry at a duty of 15 per cent, under the provisions of the first section of the tariff act approved March 3, 1857. Very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

AUGUSTUS SCHELL, Esq., Collector of the Customs, New York.

MARROW FOR TOILET SOAP.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 3, 1858.

SIR-A question as to the rate of duty chargeable, under the tariff act of 1857, on an article described in the invoice as marrow for toilet soap," has been brought by appeal before this Department from the decision of the collector at New York, by Messrs. R. & G. A. Wright, of Philadelphia, the importers. It is claimed by the importers that the article is entitled to entry at the rate of 8 per cent, under the classification "tallow, marrow, and all other grease and soap stock and soap stuffs, not otherwise provided for," the collector assessing duty at the rate of 24 per cent, under the classification in schedule C of balsams, cosmetics, essences, extracts, pastes, perfumes, and tinctures, used either for the toilet or for medicinal purposes." The collector was, in the opinion of this Department, clearly right in assigning this article to the above named classification in schedule C, and in assessing the duty at 24 per cent. The article is not imported in its natural condition, but has been highly perfumed, and, perhaps by other process also, fitted for the use of the toilet, and does not differ, it is believed, in any essential respect, from an article sold in the

shops as a pommade. Being thus provided for in schedule C, it must be held to be excluded from the classification of" tallow, marrow, grease, soap stock, and soap stuffs, not otherwise provided for" in schedule G, although it may be used also to some extent in the preparation of toilet soaps. The decision of the collector is affirmed. I am, very respectfully,

AUGUSTUS SCHELL, Esq., Collector, New York.

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

ROOFING FELT.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 1, 1858. The Department has had under consideration an appeal of Messrs. Edmiston Brothers from the decision of the collector at New York assessing duty at the rate of 15 per cent as unenumerated in the tariff act of March 3, 1857, on an article invoiced and known in the trade as "roofing felt," the importers claiming to enter it free of duty as "sheathing felt." The article in question is understood to be composed of several materials, and is known in commerce under the distinctive designation of "roofing felt." It cannot be regarded in any just sense as identical with the article described in schedule I of the tariff of 1857, as" felt, adhesive, for sheathing vessels." The fact that it is intended and used for another purpose, is a decisive objection to the claim of the importers. The law exempts from duty "felt, adhesive, for sheathing vessels," and not “felt, adhesive," for roofing purposes. The article in question must be regarded as unenumerated in the tariff of 1857, and as such is subject to a duty at the rate of 15 per cent, under the 1st section of that act. I am, very respectfully, HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

TO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS.

SULPHATE OF AMMONIA.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 2, 1858. Messrs. Rosengarten & Sons, of Philadelphia, have appealed to this Department from the decision of the collector at that port assessing duty at the rate of 15 per cent on an article imported by them, and known in commerce as the "sulphate of ammonia." The collector assessed duty on the article in question as a chemical salt, under the classification in schedule E of the tariff act of 1857, of salts, Epsom, Glauber, Rochelle, and all other salts, and preparations of salts, not otherwise provided for." The importers claim entry of the article in question at the rate of 8 per cent, as a crude ammonia, under schedule G of the tariff of 1857. The only provisions of schedule G affecting ammonia, or any of its combinations, are the designations " ammonia” and “salammonia." The latter is the "muriate or chlorate of ammonia," and the courts of the United States have decided that the carbonate of ammonia" is the "ammonia" of commerce, and the Department has acquiesced in that decision, so that the "sulphate of ammonia" does not come within any classification in schedule G, as claimed by the importers. The sulphate of ammonia was decided by the Department to be embraced in schedule E of the tariff of 1846, as a "preparation of salts." The tariff of 1857 makes no change in that classification. The duty of 15 per cent was, in the opinion of this Department, rightfully exacted under the classification in schedule E, to which the article was assigned by the collector. The decision of the collector is therefore affirmed. I am, very respectfully,

TO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS.

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

COCOA MATTING.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 8, 1858. SIR-The Department has had under consideration the appeal of Messrs. Samuel Price & Co., of San Francisco, from the decision of the collector at that port assessing a duty of 19 per cent on an importation of "cocoa matting," under the classification in schedule D of "matting, China, and other floor matting and mats, made of flags, jute, or grass," the importers claiming to enter the article

as unenumerated at a duty of 15 per cent. It being understood that the article in question is a manufacture of the fibers of the outer covering of cocoa-nut sheil, unmixed with other material, it cannot fall within the classification in schedule D, to which it was referred by the collector, but must be treated as unenumerated, and subject, under the 1st section of the tariff act of March 3, 1857, to duty at the rate of 15 per cent. I am, very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

TO BENJ. F. WASHINGTON, Esq., Collector of the Customs, San Francisco, California.

GUITAR STRINGS.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 5, 1858.

"man

SIR-This Department has had under consideration the appeal of W. Boucher, Jr., from the decision of the collector at Baltimore as to the rate of duty chargeable on an article invoiced as "guitar strings," and entered on the 23d of November last. The article in question is composed of metal and silk. The collector is of opinion that it is chargeable with duty at the rate of 24 per cent, under the classification in schedule C of the tariff of 1857, of ufactures, articles, vessels, and wares, not otherwise provided for, of brass, copper, gold, iron, lead, pewter, platina, silver, tin, or other metal, or of which either of those metals, or any other metal, shall be the component material of chief value." The applicant claims entry at a duty of 15 per cent, under the classification in schedule E of the tariff of 1857, of "musical instruments of all kinds, and strings for musical instruments, of whip gut or cat gut, and all other strings of the same material." The article in question not being composed of whip gut or cat gut, cannot of course fall within that classification in schedule E, but being composed of metal and silk, the metal being the component material of chief value, it is liable to duty at the rate of 24 per cent, under the classification in schedule C, to which it is referred by the collector, whose decision is hereby affirmed. I am, very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

JOHN THOMSON MASON, Esq., Collector, Baltimore, Md.

PULU.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 5, 1858. SIR-I acknowledge the receipt of your report of the 4th December last, and accompanying papers, in regard to the appeal of Thos. E. Lindenberger from your decision, assessing a duty of 15 per cent on an article called "pulu," imported from Honolulu. The article in question is prepared from the fibers of a plant found on the Hawaiian Islands, and is principally, if not exclusively, used for beds, mattresses, and cushions. Not being specially named in any schedof the tariff of 1857, the collector levied duty upon it at the rate of 15 per cent, under the classification of “ hair, curled, moss, seaweed. and all other vegetable substances used for beds or mattresses" in schedule E of that tariff. The importer claims a free entry of the article under schedule I, alleging that it is applied to the same uses as "cotton," which is placed in that schedule, and to which he assimilates it by force of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842. The provision of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842, classifying unenumerated articles by similitude to articles enumerated, being applicable only to dutiable articles, does not authorize the transfer of non-enumerated articles to the free list. The Department concurs in opinion with the collector in this case, and his decision in confirmed. I am, very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

B. F. WASHINGTON, Esq., Collector, San Francisco, Cal.

PAPER STOCK.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 6, 1858. SIR-I acknowledge the receipt of your report, under date of the 2d instant, and accompanying papers, in relation to the appeal of Mr. R. B. Storer from your decision assessing duty on an article imported in the ship "Augustus," from

Archangle, Russia, described as rags or "white rope," a manufacture of hemp reduced to pulp, and intended for the manufacture of paper. The claim of the importer to enter the article as exempt from duty under the classification of "rags of whatever material composed, except wool," or as "old junk," in schedule “I,” is clearly inadmissible. The original material, whatever it may have been, has been subjected to a process of manufacture which has changed its character. Nor does it appear to the Department that it should be classified as a "manufacture of paper" by force of the 20th section of the tariff act of 1842, not having been sufficiently advanced in manufacture to be regarded as a "paper in the language of the trade, nor is it believed to be applicable, without further manufacture, to the uses to which any of the manufactures of paper are applied. The article in question not being specially designated, nor embraced in any general classification in any schedule of the tariff of 1857, must be regarded as unenumerated, and liable, under the 1st section of that act, to a duty of 15 per cent. I am, very respectfully,

A. W. AUSTIN, Esq., Collector, Boston, Mass.

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

VEGETABLE OIL, ETC.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 21, 1858. SIR-Messrs. Edwards & Bailey, of San Francisco, California, have appealed from the decision of the collector at that port as to the rate of duty to be imposed, under the tariff act of 1857, on an article described as a " vegetable oil, used for burning, and supposed to be made of tea leaves." The collector assessed duty at the rate of 24 per cent, under the classification in schedule C of the tariff of 1857, of “oils, volatile, essential or expressed, and not otherwise provided for." The appellants claim entry at the rate of 15 per cent as an unenumerated article, by force of the provisions of the 1st section of the tariff act of March 3, 1857. Oil of this description is not specially named in any schedule of the tariff of 1857, but is embraced under the general classification in schedule C to which it has been referred by the collector, whose decision, imposing a duty of 24 per cent, under that schedule, is hereby affirmed. I am, very respectfully,

HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

B. F. WASHINGTON, Esq., Collector, San Francisco, Cal.

CANARY SEED.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 21, 1858. SIR-I have examined your report, under date of the 22d ultimo, and accompanying papers, on the appeal of Messrs. Hosmer & Sprague from your de cision assessing duty on an importation of "canary seed," in the brig" Pico," from Gibraltar, at the rate of 15 per cent, under the 1st section of the tariff act of 3d March, 1857, the importers claiming entry free of duty under schedule I of that act. The article in question is not specially named in any schedule of the tariff of 1857. In schedule I of the tariff of 1846. the classification of “garden seeds and all other seeds, not otherwise provided for," was held to embrace"canary seeds;" but the provision for seeds in schedule I of the tariff of 1857 is materially different, and confines the exemption from duty to the " den seeds and all other seeds for agricultural, horticultural, medicinal, and manufacturing purposes, not otherwise provided for." Seeds, therefore, not used for some one of the purposes thus specified, are liable to duty. "Canary seeds," it is understood, are used to a very limited extent, if at all, for agricultural, horticultural, medicinal, or manufacturing purposes." They are used as food for birds. They cannot, therefore, be held to be free of duty under the tariff act of 1857; and being unenumerated, were properly charged by you with duty at the rate of 15 per cent, under the 1st section of that act. Very respectfully, HOWELL COBB, Secretary of the Treasury.

A. W. AUSTIN, Esq., Collector of the Customs, Boston, Mass.

gar