bottles. As thus construed, the paragraph would cover plain green or colored as well as colorless glass "jars" of the character prescribed in the paragraph. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that in writing paragraph 218 the Congress changed the language in previous paragraphs on the subject by omitting the words "glass bottles" and "decanters" from the first part of the paragraph, as well as "bottles and bottle glassware" in the latter part. In the case of Scientific Supply Importing Co. v. United States (5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 56; T. D. 34094) this court considered the provisions of paragraph 98 of the tariff act of 1909 and, in an opinion by Barber, J., said: It is apparent that the paragraph embraces two general classes of glassware, the first class being mentioned before the excepting clause and the second class after it. Whatever may be included in the first class, Congress expressly declares that the second class covers "all articles of every description, including bottles and bottle glassware * * *, blown either in a mold or otherwise." This language is comprehensive and specific, clear, and unambiguous, and when an article within its terms is not otherwise specially provided for it must be classified thereunder. The Congress is presumed to have had knowledge of this decision, as well as others holding that decorated and ornamented bottles, decanters, and other glass containers were specifically provided for under the provisions of paragraphs 98 of the act of 1909 and 83 of the act of 1913. Nevertheless, the language of these paragraphs, which brought about the decisions referred to, was entirely omitted from paragraph 218 of the tariff act of 1922. In the case of United States v. Post Fish Co. (13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 155; T. D. 41022), in an opinion by Graham, Presiding Judge, this court said: "This change of language must be given effect, if possible. To hold it meaningless is to ascribe to Congress the doing of an idle and useless thing, and this we may not do." We think that some effect must be given to the change of language in paragraph 218, and that, when the provisions of paragraphs 217 and 218 are read together for the purpose of ascertaining the congressional intent, it must be held that paragraph 217 should be construed as written, and that it was intended to provide for all "flint, lime, or lead glass jars" suitable for use and of the character ordinarily employed for the holding or transportation of merchandise, but not to include any of the articles expressly excluded from the operation of the paragraph. The jars involved in this case are suitable for use and of the character ordinarily employed for the holding and transportation of merchandise talcum powder; and as they are not appliances or implements in chemical or other operations, or bottles for table service, or thermostatic bottles, they are directly covered by the pro visions of paragraph 217, and more specifically provided for therein than in paragraph 218. We have considered all of the cases cited by counsel for the parties and many others, and we find nothing in these decisions which enables us to reach a different conclusion. The judgment is affirmed. (T. D. 42647) Cotton cloth printed with vat dyes Appeal taken from the decision of the United States Customs Court (T. D. 42548) relative to the classification of cotton cloth printed with vat dyes TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, New York. Washington, D. C. SIR: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of the 14th instant, in which you invite attention to the decision of the United States Customs Court (T. D. 42548) holding that the additional rate of 4 per cent ad valorem provided in paragraph 903 of the tariff act of 1922 is not applicable to cotton cloth 50 per cent of the surface area of one side of which is covered with a design printed with vat dyes. Your action in filing a petition for a review of this decision with the United States Court of Customs Appeals is hereby approved. FRANK DOW, Respectfully, Approved March 21, 1928: A. W. MELLON, Acting Commissioner of Customs. Secretary of the Treasury. (T. D. 42648) Beads for electrical insulation and dress purposes Appeal directed from the decision of the United States Customs Court (T. D. 42555) relative to the classification of insulating beads TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, New York. SIR: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of the 14th instant in regard to the decision of the United States Customs Court (T. D. 42555), in which the court held that certain beads used in cable terminals of lamps for electric insulation purposes and also for dress purposes, but not ornamental per se, were held to be dutiable as beads under paragraph 1403 of the tariff act of 1922. In accordance with your recommendation you are hereby requested to file, in the name of the Secretary of the Treasury, an application with the United States Court of Customs Appeals for a review of the 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., March 24, 1928. 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 March 15 to 21, 1928, inclusive, is published for the information of collectors of customs and others concerned. (103512.) FRANK DOW, 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 China... Asia-Continued. Tientsin or Peiyang $0.456458 $0.457291 $0.456875 $0.459166 $0.459166 $0.459583 dollar. Stipulation of the facts agreed upon between Government counsel and the attorney for the owner-claimant, and the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in connection with the forfeiture of the gas screw Wanderer, her tackle, apparel, etc., under section 9 of the shipping act of 1916 as amended by section 18 of the merchant marine act of 1920 and also section 41 of the shipping act of 1916 TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, Washington, D. C., March 12, 1928. To Collectors of Customs and Others Concerned: The following decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in the case of United States v. Gas Screw Wanderer, Her Tackle, Apparel, etc., is published for the information and guidance of customs officers and others concerned. Respectfully, FRANK DOW, Acting Commissioner of Customs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA, NEW ORLEANS DIVISION (No. 18,706) United States v. Gas Screw "Wanderer," Her Tackle, Apparel, etc. STIPULATION It is stipulated and agreed by and between Wayne G. Borah, United States Attorney, and T. M. Logan Bruns, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for libelant, and Gordon Boswell and Carl Marshall, attorneys for Louis S. Martinez, owner-claimant, that if evidence was introduced in this case it would establish the fact that the authority to sell the gas screw Wanderer, an American vessel bearing official number 80951, to Ivan C. Fergusson, of Grenada, British West Indies, a British subject, and the permission granted to transfer said vessel to British registry was obtained from the United States Shipping Board through false and fraudulent statements contained in the application made to said board on Form 7171 (for said authority and permission) and especially those statements made by the alleged purchaser and British subject, Ivan C. Fergusson, and that said vessel was and is subject to forfeiture for being sold to said British subject and transferred to British registry without lawful authority or permission being granted therefor under section 9 of the shipping act of 1916 as amended and/or in the alternative section forty-one (41) of the shipping act of 1916 for being used in the importation of intoxicating liquor on or about July 18, 1926. It is further stipulated and agreed that the evidence in this case would establish the fact that there was reasonable and probable cause for the seizure by the United States of America, through its proper officers, of the cargo of intoxicating liquors on board the said gas screw Wanderer, but that said evidence would not be and is not sufficient to justify a forfeiture of the said cargo. CERTIFICAte of proBABLE CAUSE This is to certify that this honorable court, considering the stipulation filed herein by and between libelant and claimant, finds that there was reasonable and probable cause, under circumstances warranting suspicion, for the seizure by the United States of America, through its proper officers, of the cargo of intoxicating liquors on board the gas screw Wanderer at the time and place thereof as alleged in said libel of information, even though not established by evidence sufficient to justify the forfeiture of the same, and the court now and here does hereby issue its certificate of probable and reasonable cause for the seizure of said cargo of the gas screw Wanderer consisting of eight hundred and twelve (812) sacks of assorted whisky and three (3) cases of liquors, more or less, by the United States, and to all of its and their servants, agents, and employees acting under and by virtue of its authority, or color thereof, and that said seizure was made and maintained under circumstances warranting suspicion by said officers, and in good faith, even though there be insufficient evidence which would justify a condemnation and forfeiture of said cargo of intoxicating liquors, and that any or all of said officers, servants, agents, or employees of the United States, or acting under or by virtue of the authority or color thereof, be, and they are hereby, fully authorized and empowered to apply at any time, now, or whenever desired or may be necessary in the future, to this court and receive from its clerk this their certificate of complete exoneration, good faith, probable and reasonable cause, for the seizure, initial or otherwise, of said cargo of intoxicating liquors, though not otherwise maintained or herein decreed. DECREE L. H. BURNS, Judge. Considering the stipulation filed herein this day between counsel for libelant. United States of America, and counsel for owner-claimant, Louis S. Martinez: It is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the gas screw Wanderer, her tackle, apparel, and equipment be and the same is hereby condemned as forfeited to the United States of America and that the United States marshal for the Eastern District of Louisiana shall sell the gas screw Wanderer, her tackle, apparel, and equipment, and that after deducting the costs and the expenses of the sale, that the proceeds thereof shall be disposed of according to law. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the cargo of the said gas screw Wanderer, consisting of eight hundred and twelve (812) sacks of assorted whisky and three (3) cases of liquors, more or less, seized herein, be released by the United States marshal and delivered by him to the said Louis S. Martinez or his agents or attorneys, and that the said Martinez or his agents be allowed to transport said cargo out of the United States and until it reaches a point beyond 12 miles from the coast thereof. L. H. BURNS, Judge. |