No. 10702.-Protest 359593-G of Gommi & Co., Inc. (New York).

PAINTINGS-REGULATIONS.-A painting classified at 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1449, tariff act of 1922, is claimed free of duty as an original painting under paragraph 1704.

Opinion by WAITE, J. The appraiser reports that upon further investigation he found the painting to be an original. The claim for free entry under paragraph 1704 was therefore sustained, the court saying that compliance with the customs regulations is not a condition precedent to the admission of the merchandise free of duty under paragraph 1704.

No. 10703.-Protest 286462-G of Mailliard & Schmiedell (San Francisco).

CURRENCY VALUE-SAILING DATE.-The question here is the rate of duty at which the currency of the invoice should be converted into United States dollars. Opinion by WAITE, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Dyas v. United States (T. D. 43600) it was held that the date of sailing from Bordeaux should have been taken as the basis for converting the currency of the invoice into United States dollars.

No. 10704.-Protest 142819-G of J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. (Portland, Oreg.).

CURRENCY VALUE-AMENdment of EnTRY.-It is claimed here that an application to amend the entry in question was never transmitted to the appraiser and that there was an error made in converting the currency of the invoice to United States dollars.

Opinion by Waite, J. From the testimony it was gathered that the matter of the amendment of the entry dealt solely with the conversion of the currency. As this was a question for the collector's action it would seem that the plaintiff suffered no injury through the failure of the collector's office to transmit the application for amendment to the appraiser. The collector appears to have

used the date of the certification of the consular invoice for purposes of currency conversion. In the absence of proof as to the exact date the merchandise crossed the border from Germany into Holland the protest was overruled. No. 10705.-Protest 351194-G of Cresca Co., Inc. (New York).

GRENADINE.-Grenadine sirup classified at 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1459, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable under paragraph 501 or 502. Opinion by YOUNG, J. It was held that there was not sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the collector's action. The protest was therefore overruled.

No. 10706.-Protest 343906-G of W. A. Ross & Bro., Inc. (New York).

SEAWEED, PREPARED.-Merchandise invoiced as crude tanning vegetable material reported by the appraiser to be prepared seaweed treated with starch paste, classified at 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1459, tariff act of 1922, is claimed entitled to free entry as gums and resins under paragraph 1584. Opinion by YOUNG, J. On the record presented the protest was overruled. No. 10707.-Protest 347363-G of Dr. R. W. McCully (New York).

LIVE ANIMALS-HORSE.-A horse named "Sopron" classified as a live animal at 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 714, tariff act of 1922, is claimed entitled to free entry as an animal imported for breeding purposes under paragraph 1506.

Opinion by YOUNG, J. The certificate of pure breeding required for free entry under paragraph 1506 not having been filed with the collector of customs, the protest was overruled.

No. 10708.-Protest 348172-G of Fred P. Washburn, Inc. (New York).

AMERICAN GOODS RETURNED.-A box of hat ribbons classified at 55 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1207, tariff act of 1922, is claimed entitled to free entry as American goods returned under paragraph 1514.

Opinion by YOUNG, J. From the record it appeared that the merchandise is a domestic product returned to the person for whose account exportation was made from the United States. The documentary requirements under paragraph 1514 having been complied with, the protest was sustained.

No. 10709.-Protest 342105-G/77492 of John T. Jelke Co. (Chicago).

DRUMS-CONTAINERS.-Cylindrical metal drums classified at 25 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 328, tariff act of 1922, are claimed free of duty under section 503 as the usual and ordinary containers of peanut oil which pays a specific rate of duty.

Opinion by YOUNG, J. On the record presented the protest was overruled.

BEFORE THE FIRST DIVISION, JANUARY 16, 1930

No. 10710.-Protest 314218-G of Mekelberg Specialty Co., Inc. (New York). CIGARETTE CASES-TRICK PISTOLS-BOOKS-TOYS.-Articles classified as toys at 70 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1414, tariff act of 1922, and at 80 per cent under paragraph 1428, are claimed dutiable under paragraph 399, 1313, or 1454.

Opinion by SULLIVAN, J. The official samples consist of articles resembling pistols and books. On pulling the pistol's trigger or opening the book an imitation snake jumps out. On the record presented it was found that these articles were properly classified as toys under paragraph 1414. Metal cigarette cases were held properly classified under paragraph 1428.

No. 10711.-Protests 209005-G, etc., of J. E. Bernard & Co. et al., protests 220924-G, etc., of Bernard, Judae & Co. et al., protests 189650-G, etc., of Happel & McAvoy et al., and protests 168567-G, etc., of A. Steinhardt & Bro. et al. (New York).

BOTTLES. Bottles classified at 55 or 60 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 218, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable at lower rates under paragraph 217. Opinions by SULLIVAN, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel the bottles in question were held dutiable under paragraph 217 as claimed. Hudnut v. United States (T. D. 43037), affirmed in United States v. Hudnut (17 C. C. P. A. 207, T. D. 43649), followed.

BEFORE THE SECOND DIVISION, JANUARY 16, 1930

No. 10712.-Protests 51891-G, etc., of Aitken Son & Co., protests 140255-G, etc., of W. T. Grant Co., protests 18417-G, etc., of Gunzendorfer Bros., protest 165151-G of Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher (Inc.), protests 109788-G, etc., of J. G. Johnson & Co., protests 36248-G, etc., of Henry A. Lange & Co., protests 140278-G, etc., of Stern & Stern et al., and protests 76245-G and 129419-G of Syndicate Trading Co. (New York).

ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS.-Merchandise classified at 90 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1430, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable as artificial flowers at 60 per cent under paragraph 1419.

Opinions by TILSON, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel and on the authority of Robinson-Goodman v. United States (17 C. C. P. A. 149, T. D. 43473) the merchandise in question was held dutiable as artificial flowers under paragraph 1419 as claimed.

No. 10713.-Protests 168450-G, etc., of James McCutcheon & Co. (New York). EMBROIDERED ARTICLES.-Table covers, napkins, and similar articles classified at 90 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1430, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable as embroidered articles at only 75 per cent under the same paragraph.

Opinion by TILSON, J. On the authority of Glemby's Sons v. United States (13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 533, T. D. 41397) the merchandise in question was held dutiable as embroidered articles at 75 per cent under paragraph 1430.

BEFORE THE FIRST DIVISION, JANUARY 17, 1930

No. 10714.-Protest 250317-G of Terada Shoten (Honolulu).

KAMABOKO-FISH IN TINS.-Kamaboko classified as pudding composed of fish and vegetables at 35 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 773, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable as fish; preserved, at 25 per cent under paragraph 720, or as fish paste at 30 per cent under paragraph 721.

Opinion by BROWN, J. It was stipulated that the kamaboko in question consists of prepared fish, not shellfish, and contains no vegetables. The claim at 25 per cent under paragraph 720 was therefore sustained.

No. 10715.-Protest 358539-G of Quong Wo Chong & Co. (New York).

CLAMS IN TINS.-Clams in tins are claimed entitled to free entry under paragraph 1662, tariff act of 1922.

Opinion by BROWN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 9683 the clams in question were held free of duty under paragraph 1662.

No. 10716.-Protest 378462-G of Wm. A. Brown & Co. (New York).

GINSENG. In this case ginseng is claimed entitled to free entry under paragraph 1567, tariff act of 1922.

Opinion by BROWN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 6437 ginseng was held free of duty under paragraph 1567. No. 10717.-Protest 381255-G of Breslin Bros. Co., Inc. (New York).

ANATOLIAN MATS.-Anatolian and other mats classified at 55 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1116, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable at 30 per cent under paragraph 1117.

Opinion by BROWN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of G. A. 9044 (T. D. 41143), affirmed in United States v. Telfeyan (14 Ct. Cust. Appls. 128, T. D. 41648) certain Anatolian and other mats were held dutiable at 30 per cent under paragraph 1117.

No. 10718.-Protest 354172-G of Leo Frenkel (New York).

WOOL AND COTTON CLOTH.-Wool and cotton cloth is claimed dutiable at 40 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 921, tariff act of 1922.

Opinion by BROWN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 10327 certain items of wool and cotton cloth were held dutiable at 40 per cent under paragraph 921 as claimed.

BEFORE THE SECOND DIVISION, JANUARY 17, 1930

No. 10719.-Protests 172442-G, etc., of Aitken Son & Co., and protests 147795-G, etc., of Astor Flower Corp. et al. (New York).

ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS.-Merchandise classified at 90 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1430, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable as artificial flowers at 60 per cent under paragraph 1419.

Opinions by TILSON, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as artificial flowers at 60 per cent under paragraph 1419 on the authority of Robinson-Goodman Co. v. United States (17 C. C. P. A. 149, T. D. 43473).

BEFORE THE FIRST DIVISION, JANUARY 20, 1930

No. 10720.-Protest 383469-G of B. Altman & Co. (Ltd.), protests 345131-G' etc., of L. D. Bloch & Co. et al., protests 248204-G, etc., of Fritzsche Bros. (Inc.), protests 376706-G, etc., of Guerlain Perfumery Co. et al., and protests 166905-G, etc., of H. Wolff & Co. et al. (New York).

BOTTLES.-These protests relate to bottles classified under paragraph 218, tariff act of 1922, and claimed dutiable at the appropriate rates under paragraph 217.

Opinions by SULLIVAN, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel and on the authority of United States v. Hudnut (17 C. C. P. A. 207, T. D. 43649) certain of the bottles in question were held dutiable under paragraph 217 as claimed.

No. 10721.-Protests 328069-G, etc., of B. Illfelder & Co. (New York).

GLASS CONTAINERS FILLED WITH LIQUID IMITATING PERFUMERY.-Glass containers of fanciful shape filled with a liquid imitating perfumery, classified at 75 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 62, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable as blown and gilded glass articles at 55 per cent under paragraph 218.

Opinion by SULLIVAN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Borgfeldt v. United States (T. D. 43629) the glass containers in question were held dutiable under paragraph 218 as claimed. No. 10722.-Protests 357291-G, etc., and 376689-G, etc., of Morris Goldberg's Sons et al., and protest 378385-G of Portenoy Co., Inc. (New York). BEADS.-Beads classified at 45 per cent ad valorem are claimed dutiable at only 35 per cent under the provisions of paragraph 1403, tariff act of 1922. Opinions by BROWN, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel beads loosely strung were held dutiable at 35 per cent under paragraph 1403. No. 10723.-Protests 382176-G, etc., of New York Merchandise Co. (Inc.) et al. (New York).

BEADS-JEWELRY.-Merchandise classified as jewelry at 80 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1428, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable as beads under paragraph 1403.

Opinion by SULLIVAN, J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel imitation pearl beads loosely strung were held dutiable at 60 per cent, beads temporarily strung in imitation of precious or semiprecious stones at 45 per cent, and beads loosely strung not in imitation of precious or semiprecious stones and not of ivory or imitation pearl at 35 per cent under the provisions of paragraph 1403. No. 10724.-Protest 381824-G of A. N. Khouri & Bros. (New York).

LAMP BASES.-Urn-shaped lamp bases composed of blown and colored glass and prisms for candelabra classified as illuminating glassware at 60 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 218, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable at 55 per cent under the same paragraph.

Opinion by SULLIVAN, J. In accordance with the amended report of the appraiser the urn-shaped lamp bases were held dutiable at 55 per cent under paragraph 218 on the authority of United States v. Koons (15 Ct. Cust. Appls. 352, T. D. 42512). On the record presented the protest was overruled as to the prisms for candelabra.

No. 10725.-Protests 381272-G, etc., of Geo. Borgfeldt & Co. et al. (New York). RUBBER BALLS-TOYS.-Merchandise classified as toys at 70 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1414, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable at various lower rates.

Opinion by SULLIVAN, J. On the records presented the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) Colored hollow rubber balls at 30 per cent under paragraph 1402, United States v. Woolworth (16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 421, T. D. 43136) cited; (2) accordions capable of producing a tune at 40 per cent under paragraph 1443, United States v. Bernard (13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 306, T. D. 41230) cited; and (3) costume bells at 40 per cent under paragraph 399, Abstract 5643 cited.

BEFORE THE SECOND DIVISION, JANUARY 20, 1930

No. 10726.-Protests 340615-G, etc., of F. Blumenthal & Co. et al., protest 188194-G of Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher (Inc.), protests 282327-G, etc., of Marrow Import Corp., protests 16809-G, etc., of S. Stern et al., and protests 185491-G, etc., of Zucker & Josephy (Inc.) et al. (New York), and protest 76461-G of James R. Hopkins, Inc. (St. Louis).

ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS.-Merchandise classified at 90 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1430, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable as artificial flowers at 60 per cent under paragraph 1419.

Opinions by TILSON, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as artificial flowers at 60 per cent under paragraph 1419. Robinson-Goodman Co. v. United States (17 C. C. P. A. 149, T. D. 43473) followed.

BEFORE THE FIRST DIVISION, JANUARY 21, 1930

No. 10727.-Protest 384879-G of Schall & Co., and protest 380263-G of Carl Silverman (New York).

ARTIFICIAL CHRISTMAS TREES.-Artificial Christmas trees classified at 60 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 1419, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable at 33% per cent under paragraph 410.

Opinions by MCCLELLAND, J. In accordance with stipulations of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 6205 the artificial Christmas trees in question were held dutiable under paragraph 410 as claimed.

No. 10728.-Protest 384275-G of Saks & Co. (New York).

BRUSHES MIRRORS.-The appraiser reports that the merchandise consists of dressing-table sets comprising mirrors, brushes, and other articles, classified as entireties at 60 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 399, tariff act of 1922. The brushes are claimed dutiable separately at 45 per cent under paragraph 1407 and the mirrors at 50 per cent under paragraph 230.

Opinion by McCLELLAND, J. In accordance with the amended report of the appraiser the brushes were held dutiable under paragraph 1407 and the mirrors under paragraph 230 as claimed.

No. 10729.-Protest 354334-G of Keystone Bros. (San Francisco).

SOAP.-Soap classified at 25 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 13, tariff act of 1922, is claimed dutiable at 15 per cent under paragraph 82.

Opinion by MCCLELLAND, J. From the testimony it appeared that the merchandise consists of "Properts saddle soap," chiefly used for washing harness. The claim at 15 per cent under paragraph 82 was sustained.

No. 10730.-Protests 243065-G, etc., of F. W. Woolworth Co. (San Francisco). PARASOLS-BAMBOO ARTICLES.-Parasols or sunshades with bamboo frames and handles covered with paper, classified at 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 407, tariff act of 1922, are claimed dutiable at 40 per cent under paragraph