the proper classification, under the Tariff acts, of certain articles of foreign manufacture and production entered at the port of New York, &c., have been sent us by the Secretary of the Treasury for publication :

ALLOWANCE FOR DRAFT.-TEA.

Treasury Department, November 1, 1864.

SIR Messrs. E. D. MORGAN & Co. have appealed (No. 2,343) from your decision in relation to certain Tea imported by them ex steamship "Atalanta," and claim that in adding $1,262 excess of invoice value, and levying thereon the 10 per cent ad valorem duty, amounts to $126 20, you have levied this amount unlawfully, and that our entry should be liquidated without this addition of $126 20. We claim that this excess in value is made up by an apparent excess in weight, which arises from the different mode of weighing by the U. S. weighers, who weigh a large number of packages at one draft, whereas the invoice weight is the aggregate of each package weighed separately, with allowance for draft; and consequently the invoice represents the true and legal ad valorem value for the assessment of the 10 per cent discriminating duty laid on Teas and other articles from east of the Cape of Good Hope, when imported from places west of the Cape of Good Hope."

Under existing laws no allowance is made for "draft,” and the weight returned by the U. S. weighers determines the number of pounds imported. The value is determined by the appraisers.

In the case of E. D. MORGAN & Co., the weighers found the weight of the Tea per steamer "Atalanta" to be in excess of that stated in the invoice, and the appraisers found the value or price per pound as stated in the invoice to be correct; consequently the specific duty on the increased weight, and the 10 per cent on the value of said increase, both attach.

If it be shown that the usage in a foreign country is, on the purchase of 100 lbs. of Tea, to deliver 105 lbs., the answer is that the tariff levies a duty upon the Tea imported, and the gift or concession for good weight or allowance for draft, &c., &c., is as liable to duty as any five pounds purchased; the price per pound being fixed by the invoice, (below which duty cannot be levied,) and the duty must be charged at the actual and not invoice weight. Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENDEN,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To Simeon Draper, Esq.,

Collector, New York.

MANUFACTURES OF CORAL.

Treasury Department, November 2, 1864.

SIR: Messrs. BIGELOW BROTHERS & KENNARD have appealed (No. 2,388) from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 30 per cent ad valorem on certain Manufactures of Coral, imported by them in the steamer "Africa," from Liverpool, August, 1864, and claim that they "should pay a duty of but 25 per cent, being of a similar description of other jewelry set in gold."

Under the 22d section-act March 2, 1861-coral cut or manufactured" is liable to duty at the rate of 30 per cent ad valorem.

The article in question (samples of which have been examined by the experts of this Department) are invoiced and entered as "coral goods," and are com mercially known as such; the fact that they are gold mounted, and are to be used for the adornment of the person-such ornamentation not being sufficiently

material to change their character-do not entitle them to be classified as "jewelry."

Treasury Department, November 5, 1864.

SIR: Messrs. BECKEL & BROTHERS have appealed (No. 2,401) under date of October 25, 1864, from your assessment of duty at the rate of 45 per cent on certain Spectacles imported per steamer" City of Washington," from Liverpool. The appellants claim that the frames of the above articles are manufactured of iron, and are entitled to entry at the rate of 35 per cent.

The experts of the Customs report, after a thorough examination of the article in question, that they are manufactured of steel, and consequently the assessment of duty at 45 per cent was perfectly proper.

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

Treasury Department, November 12, 1864.

SIR: Messrs. H. F. ALBERTI & Co. have appealed (No. 2,400) from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 50 per cent ad valorem, (under the classifi cation of "wooden and all other toys for children," found in the 12th section of the act approved June 30, 1864,) on certain "Common Marbles," "Magic Lanterns," and "Dolls," imported by them, and claim to enter them at 35 per cent ad valorem.

"Common Marbles" are undoubtedly "toys for children," under the above section, if of such size, material, and general character, as would render them suitable for the play or amusement of children only. If of a description and character to indicate their fitness for philosophical purposes, or for the amusement or instruction of grown persons, they should not be classified as "toys for children," but according to the materials of which they are composed; and as glass forms a part of the article, they should be classified as manufactures of which glass is a component material, not otherwise provided for, at 40 per cent ad valorem, under the concluding clause of section 9, act approved June 30, 1864.

"Dolls" are specifically provided for by name in the 13th section of the act of July 14, 1862, in this connection: "dolls and toys of all kinds ;" and I am of the opinion that the language in the 12th section of the act approved June 30, 1864, viz.: “On wooden and all other toys for children," cannot be held to include "Dolls;" and that they are consequently liable to duty under the 13th section of the act of July 14, 1862, at the rate of 35 per cent ad valorem.

You are hereby instructed to adjust the entries of Messrs. H. F. ALBERTI &

Co. accordingly, provided the requirements of the 14th section of the act approved June 30, 1864, have been complied with.

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENDEN,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To H. W. Hoffman, Esq.,

Collector, Baltimore, Md.

DAMAGE ON IRON AND STEEL.

Treasury Department, November 18, 1864. SIR: Messrs. PETER Wright & SONS have appealed (No. 2,415) from your decision assessing duty upon certain Iron and Steel recovered from the wreck of the ship James Smith," wrecked in Delaware Bay, and claim that, although under the law no allowance for damage to Steel and Iron can be made when such articles are damaged by salt water while in ordinary transit, the law should be construed so as not to apply in cases where a ship is actually stranded, and heavy expenses are incurred by the owners in recovering the goods.

The 3d section of the act of July 14, 1862, provides "that no allowance or reduction of duties for partial loss or damage shall be hereafter made in conse quence of rust of iron or steel, or upon the manufactures of iron or steel, except on polished Russia sheet iron."

The provision of law is unconditional, and consequently, the assessment of duty on the Iron and Steel in question was perfectly proper; and your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENDEN,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To Wm. B. Thomas, Esq.,

Collector, Philadelphia, Pa.

WOOL.-ALLeged misrePRESENTATION OF QUALITY IN THE INVOICE.

Treasury Department, November 19, 1864.

SIR: Messrs. FITZGERALD, BOOTH & Co. have appealed (No. 2,411) from your decision assessing a duty of six cents per pound on certain Wool imported by them, claiming that "it was found, after a careful examination by experts and wool brokers and merchants, to be of inferior quality, and under a correct and true valuation, that it should only pay the duty of 3 cents per pound."

An examination of the facts in the case discloses that Messrs. FITZGERALD, BOOTH & Co. imported, on or about July 8, 1864, per barque " George & Henry," a quantity of Wool, in bulk; that subsequently an entry was made as per invoice, and the duty finally adjusted and paid, and the Wool passed into the possession of the importers.

Messrs. FITZGERALD, BOOTH, & Co. now allege that a further examination of the Wool proved a less quantity of Wool, upon which a duty of six cents per pound had been paid, was received, and a greater quantity of a commoner grade, upon which three cents per pound had been paid, and claim to have the difference of duty returned to them.

I am of the opinion that the Wool in question, having passed out of the pos session of the officers of the Government, thereby rendering an identification of it impossible, coupled with the fact, that the entry was adjusted on the basis of the invoice values, no return of an alleged excess can be made.

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENDEN,

To H. W. Hoffman, Esq.,

Collector, Baltimore, Md.

Secretary of the Treasury.

CROCHET NEEDLES.

Treasury Department, November 22, 1864.

SIR: KOHLSAAT, BROTHERS have appealed (No. 2,426) from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 45 per cent ad valorem on certain" Crochet Needles" imported by them, and claim that the article is liable to 25 per cent ad valorem only.

Under the 13th section of act July 14, 1862, "Needles, sewing, darning, knitting, and all other descriptions," were liable to 25 per cent ad valorem duty. Under section 3 of the act approved June 30, 1864, a duty of one dollar per thousand, and, in addition thereto, 35 per centum ad valorem, is imposed on "Needles for knitting or sewing machines."

It thus appears that needles for knitting machines, and needles for sewing machines, are the only description of needles provided for in the act approved June 30, 1864, and I am of the opinion that the "Crochet Needles" imported by Messrs. KOHLSAAT, BROTHERS, being unfit for use in knitting machines, are sufficiently designated in the term “ all other descriptions" in the 13th section of act July 14, 1862, and are liable to duty at the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem. I am, very respectfully,

To Simeon Draper, Esq.,
Collector, New York.

W. P. FESSENDEN,

Secretary of the Treasury.

WORSTEDS.-IN WAREHOUSE JULY 1, 1864.

Treasury Department, November 22, 1864.

Gentlemen: Your appeal (No. 2,428) from the decision of the Collector at New York, assessing duty under the provisions of the act approved June 30, 1864, on certain Worsteds, imported by you per steamer "Persia." in April, 1864, and withdrawn from warehouse November 14, 1864, is received.

You claim that the additional duty cannot be levied legally upon merchandise imported prior to the passage of the act levying it." &c.

The 19th section of the act approved June 30, 1864, is as follows: "And be it further enacted, That all goods, wares, and merchandise which may be in the public stores or bonded warehouses on the day and year this act shall take effect, shall be subjected to no other duty upon the entry thereof for consumption than if the same were imported respectively after that day," &c. You will perceive that the action of the Collector was strictly in accordance with the above section, and his decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENden,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To Messrs. D. H. & M. Arnold,

New York.

ANILINE COLORS.-PENAL DUTY.

Treasury Department, November 29, 1864. Gentlemen: Your appeal (No. 2,411) is received from the decision of the Collector at New York, assessing certain duty on five cases Aniline Colors imported by you in September last.

The Collector at New York reports "that the U. S. Appraisers of this district advanced the invoice value of the goods in question more than 10 per cent, to make market value; and that an appeal was taken by the importers to reappraisers as provided by law; and that the re-appraisers advanced the invoice

value 30 per cent to make market value. The additional duty and penalty complained of by your appellants were exacted accordingly."

An appraisement thus determined is final under the law, and consequently the action of the Collector is hereby affirmed.

Treasury Department, November 30, 1864.

SIR: Messrs. WALMSLEY BROTHERS have appealed (No. 2,418) from your de cision assessing duty at the rate of 50, 45, and 40 per cent on certain silk, steel, and other "Buttons," respectively.

By the 22d section of act of March, 1861, " buttons of all kinds" are provided for at 30 per cent ad valorem. By the 2d section of act August, 1861, it is provided that "silk" Buttons shall pay 40 per cent ad valorem.

The subsequent acts of July. 1862, and June 30, 1864, make no other or dif ferent provision for Buttons of any description; the claim of the appellants to be allowed to enter the silk Buttons at 40 per cent., and all other kind of Buttons at 30 per cent is consequently in accordance with the law and the ruling of this Department.

You are respectfully requested to adjust the entry in conformity herewith. I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENden,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To Luther Haven, Esq.,

Collector, Chicago, Ill.

green tow yarn, (so-styled.) ́

Treasury Department, December 2, 1864. SIR R. H. BOLSTER, Esq., in behalf of Messrs. J. E. TODHUNTER & Co. has appealed (No. 2,4174) from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 40 per cent ad valorem on eighteen bales of "Green Tow Yarn," imported by them from Dublin per ship"Tonawanda," and claims that two bales thereof, being "No. 8 lea," and valued less than 24 cents per lb., are subject to a duty of only 30 per cent ad valorem, and the other sixteen bales which exceed "No. 8 lea," and also valued at less than 24 cents per lb., are subject to a duty of 35 per cent

ad valorem.

Your report corroborates the statement of the appellants as to the character of the Yarn in question, and your opinion is expressed that the claim to enter the two bales "No. 8 lea" at 30 per cent is perfectly proper, that being the rate imposed on such Yarn, for carpets, by the 1st sub-division sec. 7, act June 30,

1864.

You are therefore directed to adjust the entry of the two bales accordingly. The sixteen bales were properly assessed at 40 per cent. as provided in same section, in the clause "all other manufactures of flax or of which flax shall be the chief value, not otherwise provided for."

I am, very respectfully,

W. P. FESSENDEN,

Secretary of the Treasury.

To Wm. B. Thomas, Esq.,

Collector, Philadelphia, Pa.