This office holds that a stamp once affixed to an instrument, paper, or document requiring such stamp, and canceled, can not lawfully be removed therefrom and affixed to another instrument, paper, or document requiring a stamp. In cases where stamps have been affixed to instruments not requiring them, or where by error a stamp of a higher denomination than that required by law has been used upon an instrument requiring a stamp, the amount paid in error for said stamps may be refunded upon claims made therefor on Form 46 accompanied by the stamps, and where practicable by the instruments or copies thereof, to which the stamps have been erroneously attached. This ruling as to refunding will also apply to cases where an instrument requiring a stamp is duly stamped and is accidentally injured or found to be defective and a substitute is prepared and duly stamped. It is not, however, extended to cases where the instrument (not defective) would have required the stamp had it been delivered or accepted. Insurance companies should instruct their agents to attach and cancel the stamps upon delivery and acceptance of the policies, thus avoiding the loss in question. Please inform Mr. Pepper as above. Respectfully, yours, N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner. Mr. L. J. SOUER, Collector Internal Revenue, New Orleans, La. (20126.) Special tax--Tivoli table. A tivoli table which is materially different from a billiard or pool table, even though the ball used thereon is propelled by a cue, is not subject to special tax under the ninth paragraph of section 2 of the act of June 13, 1898 ; former ruling modified accordingly. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Washington, D. C., October 4, 1898. Sir: Your letter of the 1st ultimo, referring to an answer given by this office to a former letter of yours, relating to the question of the special-tax liability of the proprietor of a tivoli table, has been received. You submit a cut of the table in question, and say: MM' and NN' are grooves at the side, up which the ball is propelled. This may be done by a cue or thrown from the hand. B is a ball resting near the top of the inclined surface of the table, which, if struck, counts the player a certain number of points. The ball, propelled by the cue or hand, then rolls down the incline, bounding from nail to nail. On the way it may chance to fall into the trap X, thus counting 200; or into the trap Y or Z, thus counting 125; or into the trap R, counting 250. If the ball reaches the bottom, it passes into one or the other of the pockets numbered 55, 45, etc. From the cut and the description which you thus give of this table, this office coincides with you in the opinion that it is materially different from a billiard or pool table. It is, therefore, held that special tax is not required to be paid thereon under the ninth paragraph of section 2 of the act of June 13, 1898, even when the cue is used instead of the hand in propelling the ball. The former ruling of this office with regard to a tivoli table is hereby modified accordingly. Respectfully, yours, N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner. Mr. H. C. GRENNER, Collector First District, St. Louis, Mo. DECISIONS BY THE BOARD OF GENERAL APPRAISERS. (20127-G. A. 4281.) Tiles. Boch tiles dutiable as flint under paragraph 88, act of July 24, 1897, at 8 cents per square foot. Before the U. S. General Appraisers at New York, September 29, 1898. In the matter of the protest, 266598-9509, of John F. Heyne, against the decision of the collector of customs at New York, N. Y., as to the rate and amount of duties chargeable on certain merchandise, imported per Westernland, and entered August 12, 1897. Opinion by WILKINSON, General Appraiser. The goods are Boch tiles about six inches square. The body of the tile is of a light-buff color, but the front is of a brick red, superadded before firing. The surface is plain and not glazed. They were returned by the appraiser as encaustic tiles, and were assessed for duty at 8 cents a square foot under paragraph 88, act of July 24, 1897. It is claimed that they are dutiable at 4 cents a square foot under the same paragraph. Paragraph 88 reads: Tiles, plain unglazed, one color, exceeding two square inches in size, four cents per square foot; glazed, encaustic, ceramic mosaic, vitrified, semi-vitrified, flint, spar, embossed, enameled, ornamental, hand painted, gold decorated, and all other earthenware tiles, valued at not exceeding forty cents per square foot, eight cents per square foot; exceeding forty cents per square foot, ten cents per square foot and twenty-five per centum ad valorem. The Board found in G. A. 2128 that certain English tiles, although not vitreous in character, were commercially known as vitrified tiles, but in G. A. 2199 it was held that French flint or Boch tiles, which were substantially similar to the tiles covered by G. A. 2128, not beiug in fact vitrified tiles, or so commercially known, were not dutiable at the bigher rate. It may be that in consequence of that decision the phraseology of the corresponding provision of the act of 1897 was made to include flint as well as vitrified tiles. We find that the goods in question are not encaustic tiles, but that they are flint tiles. We hold that they are dutiable, as assessed, under paragraph 88, and the protest is overruled accordingly. (20128-G. A. 4282.) Mushroom spawn. Mushroom spawn dutiable as seeds at 30 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 254, act of 1897. Before the U. S. General Appraisers at New York, September 29, 1898. In the matter of the protests, 352026, 358356, 365916, and 36991 6, of H. T. Mitchell and 0. G. Hemp stead & Son, Against the decision of the collector of customs at Philadelphia, Pa , as to the rate and amount of duties chargeable on certain merchandise, imported per Maine, Missouri, and Maine, and entered July 30, September 21, November 1, and December 6, 1897. Opinion by WILKINSON, General Appraiser. The goods are the spawn of the fungus known as the mushroom. They were assessed for duty as seeds at 30 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 254, act of July 24, 1897, and are claimed to be dutiable at 10 per cent ad valorem or 20 per cent ad valorem under section 6, or to be entitled to free admission as a crude vegetable substance under paragraph 617. According to the evidence, it would appear that mushroom spawn are not technically seed. The seed are microscopic, and floating through the air, some settle upon suitable soil and germinate into spawn mycelium or thread-like tubes containing proroplasm, comparable physiologically to the root system of higher plants. For propagation, a culture is prepared by making manure into pressed bricks. The spawn is placed in a hole in the brick, and under the proper temperature the spores multiply and permeate the bricks. These bricks, which preserve the plant life, are broken into pieces and planted and produce the mushrooms. This is the only form of germ which produces the cultivated mushroom, and it is known in trade and listed in catalogues as seed. Leading seedsmen testified at the hearing of the case that without official suggestion or constraint they had always entered their imported mushroom spawn as seed because they thought such was the proper classification. We find upon the evidence that, commercially, mushroom spawn are seeds, and the assessment of duty at 30 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 254 is affirmed. (20129–G. A. 4283.) Internal revenue stamps. The action of a collector of customs in requiring that an internal revenue stamp be affixed to an entry of imported merchandise does not raise a question cognizable by the Board of Classification of United States General Appraisers under their jurisdiction to review protests against the decision of the collector "as to all fees and exactions,” noder section 14 of the act of June 10, 1890. Before the U. S. General Appraisers at New York, September 29, 1898. In the matter of the protest, 38388 6-711, of Baldwin Bros. & Co., against the action of the col lector of customs at Boston, Mass., in requiring the placing of an internal revenue stamp upon an entry of merchandise imported per Philadelphian, and entered August 17, 1898. Opinion by SOMERVILLE, General Appraiser. The protest in this case is directed against the action of the collector at the port of Boston in requiring the importer to affix a 25-cent revenue stamp to a certain entry of imported merchandise. This stamp seems to have been required under the provisions of the act of Congress of June 13, 1898, entitled, “ An Act to provide ways and means to meet war expenditures, and for other purposes." Section 6 of that act provides for an adhesive stamp upon all “documents, instruments, matters, and things mentioned and described in Schedule A” of said act. schedule enumerates, among other things, the following: Entry of any goods, wares, or merchandise, at any custom-house, either for consumption or warehousing, not exceeding one hundred dollars in value, twenty-five cents. It is our opinion that the Board has no jurisdiction of the subjectmatter in this case, which is one purely of internal revenue, and has no relation to the rate and amount of duties chargeable upon imported merchandise, or any costs, charges, fees, or exactions, of the kind described in section 14 of the Customs Administrative Act of June 10, 1890, which is the only basis of the jurisdiction conferred by Congress upon the Board of United States General Appraisers relating to customs matters. This Board has no jurisdiction of mere questions of internal revenue. A separate tribunal has been created by law for the decision of all such questions, as will appear from the following statutes and court decisions, constituting a Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and defining his duties: Rev. Stat., sec. 3220, 3226; The Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, etc., v. Buckner, 48 Fed. Rep., 533; Stotesbury v. United States, 146 U. S., 196 (13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1); United States v. Klingenberg, 153 U. S., 93. Note, also, Regulations of Secretary of Treasury, August 22, 1898, Synopsis 19935. The protest is accordingly dismissed for want of jurisdiction. |