(Act of August 27, 1894.) 551. Medals of gold, silver, or copper, and other metallic articles manufactured as trophies or prizes, and actually received or bestowed and accepted as honorary distinctions.

(Act of July 24, 1897.) 612. Medals of gold, silver, or copper, and other metallic articles actually bestowed as trophies or prizes, and received and accepted as honorary distinctions.

Paragraph 624 of the act of August 5, 1909, which governs the present case, is identical with paragraph 612 of the act of 1897, last above copied.

As appears from the foregoing statement, prior to the act of October 1, 1890, the present subject was covered by a provision for the free entry of medals of gold, silver, or copper. By the act of October 1, 1890, the foregoing provision was repeated, modified, however, by the phrase “such as trophies or prizes." And by the act of August 27, 1894, the classification was enlarged, on the one hand, by the addition of the terms "and other metallic articles manufactured as trophies or prizes," and, on the other hand, was restricted by the concluding provision, "and actually received or bestowed and accepted as honorary distinctions."

It becomes important to consider some of the questions which presented themselves under the earlier acts, and their decision by the department, the board, and the courts, in order that the changes finally effected by the act of 1894 may be the better understood, One of these may be best set out by copying an opinion which was issued by the Treasury Department in a matter arising under the act of 1883.

(6566.)

Free entry-Trophies.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, September 20, 1884. SIR: Application has been made to this department for the free admission of a cup won at the Ascot races, in England, by the horse "Foxhall," then belonging to James R. Keene, the cup in question being the property of that gentleman, and which, it is understood, is now in your custody. The application was referred to the Attorney General, and this department is in receipt of an opinion from Hon. S. F. Phillips, Acting Attorney General, in which he expresses the opinion that the article in question, having a similitude in material, quality, and texture, and the use to which it may be applied, to a medal made of the same material, viz, gold or silver, is free of duty under sections 2499 and 2502 of the act of March 3, 1883. He states that the purpose of the cup, like that of a medal, is to commemorate a particular event, and that substantially it is a trophy and has no other value except in point of material, and that is free of duty.

You will deliver the cup in question without payment of duties, in accordance with the opinion thus given.

Very respectfully,

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York.

CHAS. E. COON, Acting Secretary.

By the foregoing ruling of the department a cup made of gold and silver, won at the Ascot races in England, was held to be entitled to free entry under the provision for medals of gold or silver, because its purpose, like that of a medal, was to commemorate a particular

event, and because, like a medal, it was substantially a trophy. The word trophy did not appear in the governing paragraph at the date of this ruling by the department, but at the next revision of the tariff, viz, October 1, 1890, the phrase "such as trophies or prizes" was added thereto. It is reasonable to believe that this language was added for the purpose of enacting into law the principle upon which the foregoing opinion rested.

However, notwithstanding the published opinion of the department and the corresponding legislative modification of the relevant paragraph, a similar question arose, and was decided otherwise by the board, under the tariff act of 1890, as will appear from the following copy:

(13358-G. A. 1738.)
Silver prize cup.

Before the United States General Appraisers at New York, September 10, 1892. In the matter of the protest 22463a-6386 of R. H. Derby against the decision of the collector of customs at New York as to the rate and amount of duties chargeable on a certain silver cup, imported per Adriatic January 21, 1892.

Opinion by SHARRETTS, General Appraiser.

We find the facts in this case to be as follows:

The appellant imported into the port of New York a silver cup, intended to commemorate a particular event in connection with a dog show at Madison Square Garden.

The collector classified the article as a manufacture of metal and assessed duty thereon at 45 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 215, N. T.

The appellant claims that the cup is a trophy, entitled to free entry by reason of similitude in material, quality, and texture, and the use to which it may be applied, to silver medals, provided for in paragraph 648, N. T. In support of his claim the appellant refers to T. D. 6566, dated September 20, 1884. The similitude clause of section 5, act of October 1, 1890, which is relied upon by the appellant, applies only to nonenumerated articles similar in material, quality, texture or the use to which they may be applied, to any article that is enumerated and classified with duty. A silver cup is enumerated and provided for as a manufacture of metal; at any rate it can not be assimilated to a silver medal, which is not chargeable with duty. It follows that the claim of the appellant is not well founded.

The protest is overruled and the collector's decision is affirmed.

As appears from the decision just copied, the board decided upon the act of 1890 that a silver cup which had been imported as a trophy was nevertheless dutiable as a manufacture of metal, and was not granted free entry by virtue of the term, "such as trophies or prizes," which had been added to the paragraph at the last preceding tariff revision. Thereupon, at the revision of the tariff next following the foregoing decision, Congress again enlarged the provision of the paragraph for the free entry of prizes and trophies by adding thereto the class of "other metallic articles manufactured as trophies or prizes," prescribing however, as a condition precedent, that they be actually bestowed as such, and received and accepted as honorary distinctions.

It seems clear from the foregoing recital that the provision in question was enlarged by the act of 1894 for the express purpose of granting free entry to metallic articles which were manufactured as trophies or prizes and actually bestowed and accepted as honorary distinctions, and that Congress intended to constitute them a separate class independent of the preceding classification of medals, so as to relieve the subject of all questions of similitude. In a sense, therefore, the legislation was really aimed at the construction of noscitur a sociis; that is, it was intended to form a new class by direct provision rather than by association with the class of medals already established. The corresponding paragraph of the act of July 24, 1897, did not differ in substance from paragraph 551 of the act of August 27, 1894. Under the act of 1897, the board in a given case held that a metal cup which was awarded as a prize at a horse show was free of duty, as a prize or trophy. Case of Geo. M. Webb, April 21, 1910, Abstract 23147 (T. D. 30572). This ruling implies that the provision for "other metallic articles actually bestowed as trophies or prizes" is not limited to such as are ejusdem generis with medals. And this conclusion commends itself as correct, and the first argument of the Government is accordingly overruled by the court.

In respect to the second argument of the Government, the court again inclines to the contention of the appellants. It appears without question that Mr. Hodgman contested in the tournament with a view to winning the shotgun as a trophy or prize; it also appears that he was successful and that the award was made in his favor; it furthermore appears that he furnished the particulars for the finishing of the article, and thereupon awaited its delivery to him in fulfillment of the conditions of the tournament. It is well within proper limits to conclude that these facts establish an acceptance of the article by him as an honorary distinction. It is not necessary that actual manual tradition of the article should be made abroad as a condition precedent to its free importation into this country under the provisions in question.

The case of United States v. McSorley (65 Fed., 492) is cited by the Government and was relied upon as authority by the board; but that decision is not in line with the present case. In that case certain articles had been imported which were thereafter to be offered as prizes to school children in this country. They were not trophies or prizes when imported, but they were suitable for that purpose, and it was intended and expected that they should ultimately be so used. It was held by the court that those facts did not entitle the articles to free entry under paragraph 648 of the act of 1890, above copied, because of the fact that their character as prizes or trophies had not become fixed at entry. It is apparent from the later enactments that this litigation caused an amendment to the pertinent provisions so as to cover that subject with greater distinctness.

The Government suggests, at least inferentially, that this interpretation of paragraph 624 may result in abuses, such as free importation of valuable metallic articles nominally as prizes, but virtually as features of commercial transactions. However, this possibility was foreseen and foreclosed by the provision that prizes or trophies shall be admitted free only when actually bestowed, received, and accepted as honorary distinctions.

The case at bar is within this rule. The entire transaction was extra-commercial, and the article was actually bestowed upon the recipient as an honorary distinction.

The court therefore holds that the importation was entitled to free entry, and the decision of the board is reversed.

(T. D. 33126.)

Hat wire or ribbon wire.

Hat wire or ribbon wire in chief value of metal to be assessed with duty at the rate of 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 199, tariff act of 1909.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 27, 1913.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th instant in regard to the classification of hat wires or ribbon wires, which you state consist of flat strips of cotton containing three round metal wires, one in each edge and the other in the middle of the strip.

It appears that it had been the practice at your port since the enactment of the present tariff law to assess duty upon merchandise of this character at the rate of 35 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 135 of the tariff act, but that recently duty has been assessed under the same paragraph at the rate of 40 per cent ad valorem. You express the opinion, however, that as this wire is not provided for eo nomine in paragraph 135 it is properly dutiable as an article in part of metal at the rate of 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 199 of the said act. The first part of this paragraph provides specifically for round iron and steel wire, the rate of duty depending upon the gauge and value of the wire. The paragraph does not, however, provide a rate of duty upon flat wires, wires covered with silk, cotton, or other material, or wires composed of metal other than round iron or steel, the paragraph providing merely that such wires shall be subject to duty at not less than 35 per cent ad valorem.

The Board of United States General Appraisers held in G. A. 7352 (T. D. 32421) that collar supporters manufactured from wire covered with silk, silk being the element of chief value, were dutiable under paragraph 403 of the tariff act, which decision on appeal was affirmed by the Court of Customs Appeals (T. D. 33038). The board's decision was based upon the fact that as there is no primary

duty provided for covered wire in paragraph 135, the collar supporters were properly dutiable according to the component material of chief value.

Following this decision, which in the opinion of the department correctly construes the law, the hat wires or ribbon wires under consideration, which it appears are in chief value of metal, are properly dutiable at the rate of 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 199 of the tariff act, and you are accordingly directed to assess this rate of duty upon the merchandise thirty days from the date hereof. Respectfully, JAMES F. CURTIS, (94184.) Assistant Secretary.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York.

(T. D. 33127.)

White phosphorus matches.

Form of foreign certificate of inspection required under the regulations in T. D. 32975 of August 31, 1912.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 27, 1913.

SIR: I have the honor to inform you that I am in receipt, from the minister of Norway, of a copy of a memorandum submitted by him to your department in which he inquires whether a form of certificate of official inspection of matches which he has drafted meets the requirements of the act of April 9, 1912, and the regulations thereunder in T. D. 32975.

Referring to that memorandum I have to state that a certificate in the following form would be regarded by me as meeting the requirements of the said act and regulations:

CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL INSPECTION OF MATCHES.

I,

(name), do hereby certify that I am the

(official title); that

in the manufacture of the following-described matches no poisonous white or yellow phosphorus was used, and that, therefore, they are not white phosphorus matches, as defined in the act of the Congress of the United States of America approved April 9, 1912: