Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

further substantiated by the apparent purpose and intention of Congress to regard hemp marline dutiable as cordage for tariff purposes when the present Tariff Act of 1922 was under consideration. This, we think, is borne out by a reference to Tariff Information Surveys, revised edition, 1922, issued by the United States Tariff Commission on the general subject of yarns, threads, and cordage, and transmitted to the Committee on Ways and Means. On page 88 thereof, under the subhead of Court and Treasury Decisions, we quote from one of the paragraphs as follows:

* * Marline used for serving around wire ropes, cables, etc., is dutiable as hemp cordage under this paragraph and not as hemp twine. (Abstract 28429, T. D. 32488, of 1912.)

The paragraph referred to was 268 of the act of 1913. Hence, notwithstanding that the attention of Congress was specially drawn to the fact that marline had been and was being classified as hemp cordage since our said cited decision in 1912, i. e., under the acts of 1909 and 1913, it nevertheless reenacted the same provision in paragraph 1004 of the act of 1922 in substantially the same language as before without in any way excluding hemp marline therefrom or otherwise making special or different provision for same. The conclusion would seem inescapable, therefore, that Congress did not intend to disturb the tariff classification of marline as theretofore made.

For all of the foregoing reasons we sustain the protests claiming the merchandise in question dutiable under paragraph 1005 of said act of 1922, as hemp cordage, at the rate of 21⁄2 cents per pound. Let judgment be entered accordingly.

(T. D. 43463)

Common carrier

Approval of common carrier's bond of William Strong, Juneau, Alaska

TREASURY Department,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,

Washington, D. C., June 28, 1929.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Juneau, Alaska.

SIR: You are informed that the common carrier's bond of William Strong, Juneau, Alaska, dated May 4, 1929, was approved by the bureau June 25, 1929, and is returned for filing in your office.

Operations under this bond shall not begin until Mr. Strong and the surety have properly initialed the interlineation of the word "ten" in lieu of the words "one hundred" in the sixth line of the bond, as required by instruction No. 12 on the back thereof.

Respectfully,
(103233.)

FRANK DOW, Acting Commissioner of Customs

(T. D. 43464)

Bills of health for vessels

Consular bills of health are not required for vessels trading exclusively between ports in the United States and ports in Canada, nor Canadian bills of health in lieu thereof

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
Washington, D. C.

To Collectors of Customs and Others Concerned:
The Surgeon General of the Public Health Service, Treasury
Department, in a letter dated June 10, 1929, calls attention to the
fact that under the act of Congress approved February 7, 1925,
amending section 2 of the act of Congress approved February 15,
1893, as amended by the act of Congress approved February 27, 1921,
consular bills of health are not required for vessels operating exclu-
sively in trade between foreign ports on or near the northern frontier
of the United States and ports in the United States, nor are Canadian
bills of health required in lieu thereof.

Neither American consular bills of health nor Canadian bills of health, therefore, are required for vessels arriving at any port in the United States direct from any port in Canada or Newfoundland. FRANK DOW,

(91310.)

Approved July 2, 1929:

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Secretary of the Treasury.

A. W. MELLON,

(T. D. 43465)

Amendment of article 441, Customs Regulations of 1923

Re.urned vehicles of foreign manufacture taken abroad for touring under certificates of registration may be passed upon the dock if accompanying the owner on his return

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
Washington, D. C.

To Collectors of Customs and Others Concerned:
The second paragraph of article 441, Customs Regulations of 1923
(as amended by T. D. 42278 of June 25, 1927), and the third and
fourth paragraphs of said article 441 are hereby amended to read as
follows:

The article must be submitted to a customs officer for identification prior to departure. After examination, the customs officer will issue to the owner or shipper a certificate of registration on Customs Form 4455.

If accompanying the owner upon his return to the United States, the article may be passed free upon the dock on the passenger's declaration and presentation of the certificate of registration, provided the collector is satisfied that the returned article is the one covered by the certificate of registration and that it has not been advanced in value by alteration or repairs abroad. When not accompanying the owner on his return, formal entry must be made and the certificate of registration filed therewith.

Repairs incidental to use will not be subject to duty, but accessories, alterations, and repairs in excess of such as are incidental to use abroad will be subject to duty.

(92819-441.)

Approved July 3, 1929:

A. W. MELLON,

FRANK DOW,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Secretary of the Treasury.

(T. D. 43466)

Foreign currencies-Rates of exchange

Rates of exchange certified to the Secretary of the Treasury by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York under the provisions of section 522 (c), tariff act of 1922

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,

Washington, D. C., July 6, 1929.

To Collectors of Customs and Others Concerned:

The appended table of the values of certain foreign currencies as certified to the Secretary of the Treasury by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York under the provisions of section 522 (c) of the tariff act of 1922, during the period from June 27 to July 3, 1929, inclusive, is published for the information of collectors of customs and others concerned.

(103512.)

J. D. NEVIUS,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Values of foreign currencies as certified to the Secretary of the Treasury by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York under the provisions of section 522 (c), tariff act of 1922

PERIOD JUNE 27 TO JULY 3, 1929, INCLUSIVE

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Values of foreign currencies, etc.-Continued
PERIOD JUNE 27 TO JULY 3, 1929, INCLUSIVE-Continued

[blocks in formation]

Drawback-Marking of bags

T. D. 43396 modified

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,

Washington, D. C.

To Collectors of Customs and Others Concerned: Representations having been made to the department that the use of 2-inch letters in marking bags for drawback is objected to by the buyers, as the large letters detract from the appearance of the brands, said decision is hereby modified and amended so as to permit the use of letters not less than 1 inch in height and of proportionate width

This amendment is effective as of the date when T. D. 43396 becomes effective.

(103697.)

Approved July 5, 1929:

A. W. MELLON,

J. D. NEVIUS,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Secretary of the Treasury.

(T. D. 43468)

Duress certificates-Section 489, interpretation

FRANK P. Dow Co. (Inc.) v. UNITED STATES

Congress granted a privilege in allowing the importer under section 489 of the act of 1922 to enter his merchandise under so-called "duress" pending the determination of the dutiable value of similar merchandise by the courts on appeal, and where a privilege is granted by Congress, any, doubt in the interpretation or construction of the statute should be resolved in favor of the Government.

A notation indorsed upon the invoice stating that the "importer adds under duress for export duty the sum of * * * $- can not be held to act as a substitute for a statement of the particular facts required by the statute. In other words, the exception whereby the collector can take duty upon less than the entered value is only in force when the importer certifies at the time of entry that the entered value is higher than the value as defined in the act of 1922, and certifies that the goods are so entered in order to meet advances by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal for reappraisement or re-reappraisement, and when it shall appear that the action of the importer on entry was so taken in good faith, after due diligence and inquiry on his part.

United States Customs Court, Third Division

Protest 226158-G against the decision of the collector of customs at the port of Seattle

[Affirmed.]

(Decided July 2, 1929)

Richard Neville (Martin T. Baldwin of counsel) for the plaintiff.

Charles D. Lawrence, Assistant Attorney General (James R. Ryan, special attorney), for the United States.

Before Waite, Young, and Cline, Justices

YOUNG, Justice: This is a suit against the United States brought at the port of Seattle to recover certain customs duties alleged to have been improperly exacted by reason of the failure of the collector to make allowance of duty for certain export tax items in accordance with the decision of the United States Customs Court on reappraisement.

Duty was assessed upon the value of the merchandise including the export-tax items at various rates. The liquidation so made is claimed to be incorrect by the plaintiff in that the items of export. tax should have been passed as nondutiable.

The collector made the following statement in his answer to protest:

The merchandise covered by the above-numbered entries was classified at various rates of duty, the claim being made in the protest that entry was under duress at a higher rate than the importer paid for the merchandise, or a higher rate than the foreign market value, in that he was compelled to enter with the inclusion of an export tax in each instance, and that under a decision by the

« AnteriorContinuar »