Ringk, United States v.; 4 Ct. Cust. Appls., 2,49 354, 449 Strauss, United States v.; 5 Ct. Cust. Appls., 140 69 136 112 349 Salomon v. United States; 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., The Conqueror; 166 U. S., 133. 194 101,248 187,408,495 69 Woodruff v. United States; 168 Fed., 452.... 329 Woolworth v. United States; 1 Ct. Cust. 183, 420 Worthington v. Robbins; 139 U. S., 337...... 481 Wyman, United States v.; 4 Ct. Cust. Appls., 264. 46,53, 71, 100, 127 Zinn, United States v.; 2Ct. Cust. Appls., 419. Zucker v. Magone; 37 Fed., 776... Zuricaldy, United States v.; 71 Fed., 955..... Appls., 120.. 329 263 55 CASES ADJUDGED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS APPEALS. UNITED STATES v. HOGAN (No. 1013).1 WOODEN SPOOLS WITH SILK YARN THEREON. So far as the record here discloses, the facts in this case were taken below to be the same with the facts in United States v. Ringk (4 Ct. Cust. Appls., 349; T. D. 33530). The collector's classification must stand on the record here. United States Court of Customs Appeals, December 15, 1913. APPEAL from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 29589 (T. D. 32780). [Reversed.] William L. Wemple, Assistant Attorney General (Frank L. Lawrence, special attorney, on the brief), for the United States. Submitted on record by appellee. Before MONTGOMERY, SMITH, BARBER, DE VRIES, and MARTIN, Judges. MARTIN, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: The merchandise involved in this case was returned by the appraiser as manufactures of wood, dutiable under paragraph 215 of the tariff act of 1909, and the collector assessed duty thereon in accordance with this return. The importer filed his protest against the assessment, claiming that the merchandise covered by the entry consists of artificial silk yarn wound upon forms or spools; that the silk yarn is subject to a specific rate of duty; that the spools are articles or forms necessary for the proper preparation of the yarn for transportation and are not intended for use otherwise than for the bona fide transportation of the merchandise; and that they are entitled to entry free of duty as usual articles or forms for holding merchandise subject to a specific duty. The protest was submitted to the Board of General Appraisers without testimony. The board sustained the protest, stating in its decision that the merchandise involved in the case is identical with that in Ringk's case, which had already been decided by the board in Abstract 29613 (T. D. 32780). From this decision of the board the Government now appeals. 1 Reported in T. D. 34001 (25 Treas. Dec., 657). 31694-VOL 5-15-1 1 |