"Products of petroleum." - The provision in this paragraph for " products of crude petroleum does not include articles not composed in chief value of petroleum, even though the petroleum predominates in quantity. U. S. v. Downing, (C. C. A. 1906) 146 Fed. 56, reversing (1905) 139 Fed. 58.

Refined cocoanut oil. Cocoanut oil of the melting point of 70° to 75° F., which has been purified and rendered suitable for culinary purposes and the manufacture of highgrade soaps, and which is not susceptible of

the same uses as cocoa-butter, is not subject to duty as cocoa-butterine," under paragraph 282, but is free of duty under paragraph 626, as cocoanut oil. U. S. v. Oriental American Co., (1904) 129 Fed. 249; Fuerst v. U. S., (1909) 176 Fed. 95, 100 C. C. A. 25, reversing (1908) 166 Fed. 1014.

Albolene. See under this title, vol. 2, p. 478, par. 448.

Ichthyol sodium. - See under this title, vol. 2, p. 400, par. 68.

the meaning of paragraph 267, but is free of duty under paragraph 627. Causse Mfg. Co. v. U. S., (1906) 150 Fed. 419.

Waste containing wool. Certain waste of an inferior quality, fit only for paper stock, consisting of mill sweepings, which contain not more than one per cent. of wool, that is not of sufficient fibre for commercial purposes, and is not separable from the material

Vol. II, p. 494, par. 633.

with which it is mixed, is not dutiable as waste in part of wool, under paragraph 362, but is within the provision for " paper stock fit only to be converted into paper," in paragraph 632. In re Downing, (1905) 139 Fed. 590.

Vol. II, p. 494, par. 638.

Museum or preparation jars are admissible free of duty. Hempstead v. U. S., (1903) 122 Fed. 752.

Reagent bottles are admissible free of duty. Hempstead v. U. S., (1903) 122 Fed. 752.

Surgical scissors are admissible free of duty. Hempstead v. U. S., (1903) 122 Fed. 752.

Treasury regulations. — In Eimer v. U. S., (1906) 146 Fed. 144, it appeared that certain scientific apparatus, etc., imported for educational institutions was claimed to be subject to paragraph 638, exempting such arti

Vol. II, p. 496, par. 647.

ment, and therefore euquinine, which is such a preparation, though not chemically a salt. is within said provision. U. S. v. Merck, (C. C. A. 1909) 168 Fed. 244.

stock. Train-Smith Co. v. U. S., (1905) 140
Fed. 113.
Selected pieces of second-hand jute bagging.
See under this title, vol. 2. p. 481. par.

463.

Vol. II, p. 496, par. 649.

Casts of sculpture. The omission from paragraph 638 of the provision of prior tariff acts for the free entry of casts was not intended to prevent the free entry of such casts as also come within the designation of "casts of sculpture," which, under paragraph 649, are entitled to free entry where specially imported, in good faith, for the use and by the order of any society incorporated or established solely for religious, philosophical, scientific, educational, or literary purposes. Benziger v. U. S., (1904) 192 U. S. 38, 24 S. Ct. 189, 48 U. S. (L. ed.) 331, reversing (1902) 113 Fed. 1016, 51 C. C. A. 587.

Plaster casts of clay models, though painted and gilded and produced in unlimited quantities, are "casts of sculpture," which, under paragraph 649, are entitled to free entry where specially imported, in good faith, for the use and by the order of any society incorporated or established solely for religious, philosophical, scientific, educational, or lit

Vol. II, p. 497, par. 655.

erary purposes.

Benziger v. U. S., (1904) 192 U. S. 38, 24 S. Ct. 189, 48 U. S. (L. ed.) 331, reversing (1902) 113 Fed. 1016, 51 C. C. A. 587.

Production of proof. Proof that certain imported regalia was entitled to admission under this paragraph was not produced at the time of entry as required by the customs regulations, but was offered the collector before he had liquidated the entry. It was held that free entry should have been allowed by the collector. Siegman v. U. S., (1905) 141 Fed. 491.

A marble statue is a specimen of sculpture, within the meaning of this paragraph. Sibbel v. U. S., (1900) 124 Fed. 105.

Authority of Secretary of Treasury. - The Secretary of the Treasury is not empowered to abridge the right of free entry of the articles covered by this paragraph, relating to regalia, etc. Siegman v. Ū. S., (1905) 141 Fed. 491.

Vol. II, p. 497, par. 664.

A growth on skins of mocha sheep imported from Arabia, which is commercially known, designated, and dealt in as mocha hair, having none of the characteristics of wool, and which would not be accepted by dealers therein as a good delivery of wool, is not dutiable under paragraph 360, as wool on the skin, but is entitled to free entry under paragraph 664, placing on the free list "skins of all kinds, raw (except sheepskins with the wool on) and hides not specially provided for in this Act." Goat, etc., Import Co. v. U. S., (1907) 206 U. S. 194, 27 S. Ct. 634, 51 U. S. (L. ed.) 1022, reversing (1906) 145 Fed. 1022, 74 C. C. A. 82.

66

Cabretta skins are sheepskins," within the meaning of the provision in this paragraph relating to raw skins "except sheepskins with the wool on," and the growth thereon is subject to duty, as provided in paragraph 360 for "wools on the skin." Lawrence v. U. S., (1903) 124 Fed. 1000; Johnson v. U. S., (1905) 140 Fed. 116, affirmed (C. C. A. 1906) 145 Fed. 1022.

Evidence to distinguish skins from hides.

Vol. II, p. 497, par. 667.

Pepper shells. — Shells of pepper, which, when ground, make a low grade of black pepper, are within the provision for the entry free of duty of “ pepper black or white, when unground," in this paragraph. r. Leggett, (1899) 124 Fed. 1015.

U. S.

Where importations of hides and skins, mixed together, were sorted by experienced men, who determined whether they were under or over twelve pounds, the dividing line between hides and skins, by handling alone, except with doubtful pieces on which they used the scales, and it appeared that the pieces considered by them to be skins were treated as such, being sold on that basis, it was held that the evidence of these facts justified a finding that such pieces were actually skins, and not hides. Helmrath v. U. S., (1904) 135 Fed. 912, affirmed. (C. C. A. 1906) 145 Fed. 36.

Long-haired Russian calfskins were held to be free of duty under this paragraph. Weil v. U. S., (1900) 124 Fed. 1006.

Vol. II, p. 499, par. 692.

66

A

"Anthrax vaccine" or "blackleg." preparation known as anthrax vaccine," or blackleg," which is used for the prevention of anthrax or blackleg, a disease of cattle, is included within this paragraph, and is there

Vol. II, p. 499, par. 695.

Carnauba wax substitute, which is compounded of carnauba wax (vegetable wax) and paraffin (mineral wax), and which is to all appearance a waxy substance used for the same purpose as other waxes, is covered by the provision for " wax, vegetable or mineral," in this paragraph. U. S. v. Morningstar, (C. C. A. 1909) 168 Fed. 541.

Vol. II, p. 499, par. 696.

Vol. II, p. 499, par. 697.

Classification according to citizenship. - To the same effect as the original note see U. S. v. Bernays, (1908) 158 Fed. 792, 86 C. C. A. 52.

Construction of proviso. The proviso in this paragraph limits the articles, which may be brought into this country free of duty by residents returning from abroad, to all the wearing apparel and other personal effects originally taken by them out of the United States without regard to their value, and to other articles of wearing apparel, and similar personal effects which may have been purchased abroad by them not exceeding in value the sum of $100. U. S. v. Bernays, (1908) 158 Fed. 792, 86 C. C. A. 52.

Duty of making entry of exempted articles. - In construing the provision in this paragraph the court held that it was the passenger's duty to enter and declare the value of

Vol. II, p. 500, par. 699.

Rossed pulp wood. Pulp wood subjected to the rossing process, by which the bark and excrescences are mechanically removed, in order to prepare it for use, is not, by reason of this treatment, to be excluded from the provision in this paragraph for "logs and round unmanufactured timber, including pulp woods, not specially provided

for." U. S. v. Pierce. (1905) 140 Fed. 962, affirmed (C. C. A. 1906) 147 Fed. 199.

Sandalwood. In Lueders r. U. S., (1904) 131 Fed. 655, it was held that sandalwood,

Vol. II, p. 500, par. 700.

Bamboo dyers' sticks, rounded at the ends and smoothed off at the joints, are covered by the enumeration of bamboo in this paragraph rather than by the provision for wood, unmanufactured, in paragraph 198. U. S. v.

Vol. II, p. 500, par. 701.

Instrument for reproduction of artists' models, statuary, etc. An instrument designed for the reproduction of artists' models, statuary, and decorative architecture, imported for the purpose of being temporarily exhibited as a philosophical or scientific ap

Vol. II, p. 500, par. 702.

Picture frames, containing oil paintings which are imported into this country for exhibition purposes, are not to be treated as

such articles, whether they cost more than $100 or not, and that when not so declared they were subject to forfeiture under R. S. sec. 2802, 2 Fed. Stat. Annot. 645. Dodge v. U. S., (1904) 131 Fed. 849, 65 C. C. A. 603.

Not applicable where improper entry. — The provision in this paragraph, exempting $100 in value of dutiable articles in the baggage of returning residents of the United States, is not applicable in proceedings under R. S. sec. 2802, 2 Fed. Stat. Annot. 645, for the forfeiture of, and the collection of penal duty on, dutiable articles not mentioned on the entry of the baggage. It applies only when a proper entry has been made of the articles entitled to such exemption, and not otherwise. U. S. v. Harts, (1904) 131 Fed. 886, affirmed (C. C. A. 1905) 140 Fed. 843.

Vol. II, p. 501, par. 703.

A native Porto Rican, an artist by profession, although temporarily living in France on the 11th day of April, 1899, is, under section 7 of the Act of April 12, 1900, 31 Stat. L. 79, 5 Fed. Stat. Annot. 765, a citizen of Porto Rico, and, as such, is an American artist, whose paintings upon importation into the United States are entitled to the privi leges provided in paragraph 703. (1902) 24 Op. Atty. Gen. 40.

Church altar.-In U. S. v. Ecclesiastical Art Works, (1904) 139 Fed. 798, affirmed (C. C. A. 1905) 142 Fed. 1038, it was held that the provision in this paragraph for "works of art" intended for presentation to religious societies, included certain marble

Vol. II, p. 501, par. 704.

Pueraria roots.-The provision for "yams" includes the pueraria root, which, though not scientifically known as a yam, has always been so called in the trade that deals in it,

Vol. II, p. 501, sec. 3.

Right to reduce duty. In order to be entitled to the benefits of the reciprocal commercial agreements negotiated with foreign countries, under this section, importers must furnish satisfactory evidence that their importations were both produced in and exported from the country with which the agreement was made. Migliavacca Wine Co. v. U. S., (1905) 148 Fed. 142.

Scope of agreements. Reciprocal commercial agreements made with foreign countries under the authority of this section cannot legally extend the scope of said section. U. S. v. Wile, (C. C. A. 1904) 130 Fed. 331, affirming (1903) 124 Fed. 1023.

Place of exportation not conclusive.

- In U.

S. v. Luyties, (C. C. A. 1904) 130 Fed. 333, affirming (1903) 124 Fed. 977, it appeared that a bill of lading for certain merchandise was made out in Switzerland, but that the invoice was certified by a United States consul in France, and the evidence showed France to have been the country of production, and from which the merchandise was exported. It was held that the importation was within the reciprocal commercial agreement with France and the United States (May 30, 1898, 30 Stat. L. 1774, 7 Fed. Stat. Annot. 556) negotiated under the authority

of section 3.

Evidence of origin of goods. With respect to merchandise alleged to be within the reciprocal commercial agreement with France, as having been both produced in and exported from that country, it was held that evidence of those facts should be furnished by a witness who knows them, or from his position may be presumed to know them, and that a deposition by an importer to the effect that he had ordered the goods through a New York agency and that they were consigned to him direct by the exporting establishment in France, but which did not show that he

altars imported for presentation to a church, which were carved by a professional sculptor and were of a value of $1,800.

--

Fashion-plate drawings. The provision in this paragraph for "works of art does not include fashion-plate drawings, which, though possessing artistic merit, are for purely practical and utilitarian purposes. Harper v. U. S., (1909) 172 Fed. 289.

Pen and ink drawings of an artistic character, of a proposed building, produced by an architect, are within this paragraph relating to "works of art, the production of American artists," and not dutiable under paragraph 454. Young v. Bohn, (1905) 141 Fed. 471.

66

Liqueurs. Merchandise known as liqueurs " is included in this agreement. Nicholas v. U. S., (1900) 122 Fed. 892.

Chartreuse. So the cordial known as "Chartreuse," imported from France, is a liqueur, and is included in the provision for a reduced rate of duty on "brandies, or other spirits," in the reciprocal commercial agreement between the United States and France. Nicholas v. U. S., (1900) 122 Fed. 892.

Alcohol in preserved fruits. - The reciprocal commercial agreement with France was held to supersede the provision of a different rate by paragraph 263 on the alcohol in excess of ten per cent. found in fruit preserved in spirits. La Manna v. U. S., (C. C. A. 1906) 144 Fed. 683.

Absinthe is a liqueur within the French reciprocity agreement. U. S. r. Luyties, (1903) 124 Fed. 977, affirmed (C. C. A. 1904) 130 Fed. 333.

Question whether or not Algeria is a part of France.-U. S. v. Tartar Chemical Co., (1903) 127 Fed. 944, 62 C. C. A. 576, affirming (1902) 116 Fed. 726, set out in the original note.

Reciprocal agreement with Germany. - The reciprocal commercial agreement with Germany (July 13, 1900, 31 Stat. L. 1978, 7 Fed. Stat. Annot. 562), negotiated under section 3, which allows a reduction of duty on