"One of the chemists, on whose report they rely who assail the genuineness of the imported water, concedes that the quantity of iron ever in it is so small that the presence thereof in, or absence thereof from, the water will make no difference in the quality of it, and the conclusions of other chemists agree with his. Besides, the report of the special agent, Tichenor, is that, as a matter of fact, the iron ever in it is not taken from it. This allegation against the water is not sus tained. "It is said that there is added to it salt. The quantity added is not great; some is added. The question is, does it change the properties and character of the water? Is it added for that purpose; or, is it added to preserve the water in the state in which it is bottled or jugged, and without the purpose or effect to change its character or properties? "I must say that the facts of the case show that, by the addition of the salt, the taste of it is not changed; that the properties and character of it are not changed from what they were in the spring, and that it is not the purpose to make any change by putting in the salt; and that the purpose is the same as that of putting the water in airtight vessels, viz., to keep it in the state in which it is procured from the earth for a length of time, long enough to permit transportation to other countries. "It is claimed that there is put into it carbonic-acid gas in greater proportion than that gas exists in it by nature. I do not think that this is maintained. The allegation depends much upon speculation. When it leaves speculation, it depends upon whence the water is got with which to make analysis. It may be conceded that, if the water is taken from the lip of the spring, there is to be found in it on analysis less of that gas than is found in it when taken from the bottles or jugs. But the water that is put into the bottles or jugs is not taken from the lip of the spring. It is taken from down in the spring fifty feet or so. The facts show that at that depth there may be, and doubtless is, as much of that gas in the water, while it is in the spring, as is found in the water from the bottles or jugs. "But it is claimed that the water of nature is the water just where nature hands it to man, that is, at the brink of the spring. I cannot agree to that. If "Is not water at the bottom of a well sixty feet deep as much natural water as water in a creek but a few inches deep? Coal, or other mineral, taken from the depths of the earth, is a production of nature. the water is drawn from the depths of the spring into the vessels, it is natural water, though it have in it more of one ingredient than is found in it when taken from the surface of the spring. "The more serious question arises from the manner of manipulation of the water and the gas. The water is taken from the spring by one means; the gas separately by another, though not unlike, means; and the two ingredients are afterwards combined. It is claimed that more of the gas is put into the water when it is bottled that ever was in it at any depth of the spring. This is not sustained, and the only question is, whether, with no greater proportion of an ingredient than existed in the water at some depth of the spring, the separation of the ingredients first, and the combination of them after, in the original proportions, is the creation of an artificial water? "The effect of the decision in Recknagle vs. Murphy (102 U. S. Rep., p. 198) is, that where the identity of a subject is not lost by the process it has undergone before importation, it does not cease to be the original article. "The question then becomes one of fact-was the identity of the water lost by the separation first of the water and the gas, and by the combination of them afterwards? If the subsequent combination made again the same article that existed before separation, the identity of that article is not lost. The blade and handle of a saber may be disconnected, and then one is a blade and the other is a handle. If afterwards they, unaltered, are joined together, the two become again one thing, and that thing is a saber, the same saber. "Were it possible to disintegrate coal, and separate the gases in it from the tangible substance, and then again to reunite them in the same proportions and distribution, the result would again be coal, and the same coal. Now, the reports in this case show that such is the result of what is done with this water. "It is claimed that the gas is collected not only from the spring itself, but from the space about and outside of it. I do not find that this allegation is sustained. "It appears to me from the papers that no more is taken and stored, and afterwards recombined with the water, than is the natural product of the spring, evolved from the surface of it; so that if all that is thus caught is put back into a quantity of water no greater and no less than that from which the gas escaped in the rise of the water to the air, and is put back with equal distribution through the water, it follows that there is the same thing reproduced that before existed as a natural flow from the depths of the earth. And that this is so, seems to me to be the result of the investigations of the agents. "I conclude, therefore, that the water imported under the name of Apollinaris water is an article which is produced by nature, and is not the handiwork of man; that it is a natural and not an artificial water. "I will therefore adhere to the former decisions of this Department, that that water be admitted free of duty." In all cases a duty of 30 per cent. ad valorem will be assessed on the bottles, under decision (No. 3970) of March 7, 1879. You will cause your future practice to conform hereto. Very respectfully, CHAS. J. FOLGER, Secretary. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York. (5116.) Glove-buttons—Duty on. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 6, 1882. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 2d instant, in which you state that, under its instructions of August 23, 1881 (Synopsis 4972), you have readjusted the entries of certain glovebuttons, imported by Messrs. V. Joannard & Co., at your port. The buttons in question it appears were made of brass, with a spiral shank, the heads being about one-fourth inch in diameter, and were to be fastened to the gloves by the shank being screwed in at the wrist and pressed together by a machine adapted for the purpose. They are used as buttons in connection with button-holes on the other side of the wrist. The buttons were originally classified as manufactures of brass, but were subsequently reclassified under the provision in Schedule M, Revised Statutes, for "buttons and button-moulds not otherwise provided for." Your action is approved. Very respectfully, H. F. FRENCH, Assistant Secretary. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York. (5117.) Woolen shawls. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 6, 1882. SIR: On the 17th of November last, the Department advised you of the trial of the case of Friedman vs. Arthur, involving a question as to what class of merchandise is to be considered as embraced within the provision of the tariff for "woolen shawls." The case arose on an importation of Broché shawls, made of wool and worsted (wool being the component material of chief value), which the collector had excluded from the classification of woolen shawls, dutiable at 50 cents per pound and 35 per cent. ad valorem, and placed under the provision in Schedule L for wearing apparel composed wholly or in part of wool, worsted, the hair of the alpaca goat, or other like animals, at a duty of 50 cents a pound and 40 per cent. ad valorem. The principle established by the decision in this case is that shawls, made partly of wool and partly of worsted, or other materials, but of which wool is the component of chief value, or which were known commercially as woolen shawls, when the act of 1867 was passed, which regulated the duties on manufactures of woolen and worsted, are to be classified as woolen shawls. The Attorney-General has advised an acquiescence in this view as a rule of action, and the Department decides to concur therein. You will therefore conform your action to such rule; and where duties have been paid in excess of the proper rate, and the parties have taken the proper steps to protect their legal rights, certified statements will be forwarded for a refund of the excess of duty exacted. Where suits are pending, they will be required to be discontinued before the statement is forwarded, and in such cases the usual allowance for costs incurred will be made. Very respectfully, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York. H. F. FRENCH, Assistant Secretary. (5118.) Marine documents-Collection of marine-hospital dues. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 7, 1882. When a new document is issued to a vessel, the customs officer to whom her old papers are surrendered will indorse on the new document the amount of hospital-money paid at the time of surrender, the period for which a collection was made, and the total number of the officers and crew paid for. TO CUSTOMS OFFICERS. (5119.) CHAS. J. FOLGER, Secretary. Drawback-Rate upon flour from imported wheat. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 9, 1882. On the exportation of flour wholly manufactured from imported wheat, drawback will be allowed at the rate of 89 cents per barrel, less the legal retention of 10 per cent. The rate heretofore prescribed of 75 cents per barrel is hereby superseded. The collectors of customs will see that proper arrangements are adopted by the mills within their respective districts, where flour may be prepared for exportation with benefit of drawback, to prevent any admixture of domestic grain to the imported wheat, at any stage of the process of conversion into flour. H. F. FRENCH, (5120.) Alpaca wool-Discriminating duty on. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 9, 1882. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 11th ultimo, transmitting the appeal (8700 g) of Beardsley & Craven from your decision assessing the discriminating duty of 10 per cent. ad valorem on certain so-called alpaca wool imported into your port, per "British Queen," June 27, and "Lord Clive," July 15, 1881, from Liverpool. It appears that the discriminating duty was assessed because the appraiser was of opinion that the merchandise is "the production of a country lying east of the Cape of Good Hope." The appellants, however, claim (1) that the merchandise is produced in European Turkey, and that as such country is not, in the contemplation of the statute, a country east of the Cape of Good Hope, the discriminating duty does not accrue, and (2) that as the merchandise is classified as wool it is specially exempt from such discriminating duty by the provisions of section 2501, Revised Statutes. In regard to the last-mentioned claim of the appellants, it need only be said that under the decision of June 29, 1880 (Synopsis 4591), it has been held that hair of the alpaca goat and like other animals which, under the tariff, is made dutiable as wool of a certain class, is not exempt, when the product of a country east of the Cape of Good Hope and imported from a place west of such cape, from such discriminating duty. The other claim, however, seems to be well founded, inasmuch as it is understood that the merchandise consists of "mohair" or "Angora goat's hair," and which the appraiser at New York reports is the product of Angora, in Asiatic Turkey, the outlet from which, for exports to western countries, being by way of the Black Sea to Constantinople, or else across the country to Smyrna. The merchandise, under Department's ruling of April 17, 1879 (Synopsis 3981), is consequently not the product of a country east of the Cape of Good Hope, within the contemplation of the statute imposing discriminating duties. You are therefore directed to reliquidate the entries without the said discriminating duty, and, if necessary, to forward a certified statement for refund. In this connection it may be mentioned that the Department is informed that "alpaca wool" is an entirely different article from mohair, it being the product of Peru, South America, and grown upon the alpaca or llama, a distinct species from the goat. Very respectfully, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Philadelphia, Pa. H. F. FRENCH, Assistant Secretary. |