The wool, whether taken from American or foreign sheep in Barbados, is, as such, of foreign production, and when imported is not entitled to free entry as claimed by the appellants or otherwise.

Your decision is affirmed. (7067.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, August 24, 1885, CARDED GOAT'S HAIR. The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 3d instant, transmitting the appeal (90197) of Messrs. Dingelstedt & Co. from your assessment of duty at the rate of 20 cents per pound on certain so-called wool waste imported, per Alaska, February 10, 1885, and returned by the appraiser at your port as "carded goat's hair, class 2, valued under 30 cents in the unwashed condition, dutiable under T. I., new, 358," and that, having been selected and then manipulated in the carding machine, it becomes liable under T. I., new, 356, to twice the duty to which it would be otherwise subject.

The merchandise consists of China Cashmere goat's hair, from which the long hairs have been combed, and which has apparently been carded.

Reports from the appraisers at your port and at Boston, agree that the article is not wool waste, but the claim that it has been manipulated for the purpose of evading duty does not seem to be substantiated by the report from the latter officer, who states that similar merchandise has been imported at that port and is commercially known as Cashmere noils, and has been passed for duty at the rate of 10 or 12 cents per pound, according to cost.

The Department is of the opinion, therefore, that while the article is not wool waste, but is hair of the Cashmere goat, dutiable under T. I., new, 358, according to cost, yet the evidence of its having been imported in other than ordinary condition or of its having been manipulated for the purpose of evading duty, is not suf ficient to warrant the imposition of double duty, under T. I., new, 356. You are authorized to reliquidate the entry accordingly. (7081.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, August 29, 1885.

HAIR YARN.—The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, submitting the appeal (670 m) of Schofield, Mason & Co., from your assessment of duty at the rate of 10 cents per pound and 35 per cent ad valorem on certain black cattlehair yarn imported by them, per Lord Gough, July 16, 1885, and classified as "worsted yarn under 30 cents," or "manufactures of hair of 'other animals,"" under the provision therefor in the act of March 3, 1883 (T. I., new 363.)

The appraiser reports that the yarn is a manufacture of hair, whether of the goat or other animal he is unable to determine, but in either case dutiable at the rate assessed.

The appellants claim that it is manufactured wholly from cattle hair, and is entitled to entry at the rate of 30 per cent ad valorem, under the provision in the act above cited (T. I., new, 445), for "hair-cloth, known as 'crinoline-cloth,' and all other manufactures of hair not specially enumerated or provided for."

Under date of September 5, 1874 (synopsis, 1940), the Department decided that the provision of law then in force, which is reproduced in paragraph 445 of the act of March 3, 1883, related wholly to manufactures associated with the terms given in said paragraph, viz, crinoline cloth or manufactures of the same material.

The yarn in question, not being associated with, or similar to, crinoline cloth, the claim of the appellants is rejected. (7093.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, August 29, 1885.

WOOLEN GOODS-MOQUETTE.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, submitting the appeal (667 m) of D. & J. C. Noblit & Co. from your assessment of duty at the rate of 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem on certain moquette imported by them, per British Princess, June 24, 1885.

The appellants claim that the goods in question, which are manufactured of worsted and cotton, are made of the same materials, and by the same process as patent velvet carpets, and by assimilation are entited to entry at same rate of duty, on the ground that they are similar in quality, texture, and use as such carpets.

The article in question, although similar in appearance to velvet carpet, is not carpet, and is never used for the same purposes, but is used for covering seats in railroad cars, barber chairs, etc.

The Department decides that the goods are properly dutiable at the rate assessed, under the provision in the act of March 3, 1883 (T. I., new, 363), for "all manufactures of every description composed wholly or in part of worsted," and your assessment of duty thereon is hereby affirmed. (7094.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, September 29, 1885. GOATSKINS WITH HAIR OR WOOL ON.-I transmit herewith a letter, dated the 17th instant, with two inclosures, from Mr. G. Amsinck, president, in which, in behalf of the importers of goatskins at your port and at Philadelphia, complaint is made of your action in assessing duty on the hair of common goatskins, imported for manufacture into morocco, it being alleged that the hair is unfit for commercial purposes, the same having to be removed from the skin by the use of lime, which renders it almost valueless.

From the statements contained in such communication, and also from those made to me personally by the committee there mentioned, it seems that it has been the practice heretofore to admit such skins free of duty, under the special provision in the free list (T. I., new, 709), for "goatskins, raw," and that it is only recently that they have been subjected to duty.

The question as to the classification of raw goatskins was the subject of Department's ruling of February 14, 1877 (synopsis, 3112), and it was thereby held that while Angora goatskins were liable to duty for the wool contained thereon, the skins of goats containing but a small "degree of Angora blood," and of the common Cape goats, were entitled to free entry, under such special provision in the law. No good reason is perceived at this time for making any change in the practice which followed such decision, and if the skins now imported, and which are the subject of the inclosed communication, are of the character mentioned in such ruling, you are directed to continue such practice and to be governed by the decision. (7147.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, October 27, 1885.

WOOL AND RUBBER WATERPROOF CLOAKS.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 22d instant, transmitting the appeal (4996 m) of John Wanamaker from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 45 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem on certain wool and rubber waterproof cloaks imported into your port, per Lord Clive, March 31, 1885, which the appellant claims to be dutiable at the rate of 30 per cent ad valorem, as manufactures of India rubber.

The cloaks in question being, as the appraiser reports, manufactured in part of wool, are dutiable at the rate assessed by you, under the special provision in Schedule K, T. I., new, 367, for "cloaks" "composed wholly or in part of wool." Your decision is affirmed. (7184.)

H. Mis. 94-10

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, October 31, 1885. HAIR ON RAW GOATSKINS.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 19th inst, transmitting an appeal (4672 m) of Wight & Harper from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 10 cents per pound on certain so-called "hair on raw goatskins" imported by them, per Persian Monarch, on the 24th ultimo, which the appellants claim to be exempt from duty under the provision in the free list (T. I., new, 709) for "goatskins, raw."

It appears from the report of the appraiser that the skins in question from which the hair or wool in question was taken are Angora goatskins, which are only exempt from duty when imported without the wool (free list, T. I., new, 719), and that the hair or wool in question, which was taken therefrom is a fine quality of combing wool, and of the same if not a better class than the wool or hair of the Angora goat, which is usually imported, and which is combed by the largest combers in the United States for use, in connection with other wools, in the manufacture of ladies' dress goods,

An inspection of a sample of the importation in question, when compared with samples of the ordinary Angora goat wool of hair, satisfies the Department that it is a very fine article of combing wool, containing a large percentage of Angora blood. The merchandise is dutiable, under Schedule K. T. I., new, 358, being valued at 30 cents or less per pound, at 10 cents per pound, and your decision is affirmed. (7194.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 11, 1885.

"ANGORA GOATSKINS."-Referring to Department's letter to you of the 4th instant and previous correspondence, in relation to Angora goatskins with the wool on, imported from the Cape of Good Hope, you are informed that the matter has been carefully investigated and considered, and that the Department has arrived at the following conclusions:

That these Angora skins, the product of the Cape of Good Hope, are not the real Angora goatskins of commerce, but skins of a bastard or cross-blood goat of partial Angora blood, and that while some of the skins show such blood in but a small degree, others are of superior quality and show strong traces thereof.

That the wool or hair on these last-mentioned skins, as has been lately ascertained upon an actual importation at Philadelphia, consists of a very fine quality of combing wool of the same, if not superior class to the wool or hair of the Angora goat as usually imported, which latter is combed by the largest combers in the United States, for use in connection with other wools in the manufacture of ladies' dress goods.

That the hair or wool on skins of this superior character is liable to duty, as has been heretofore held by the Department, as well as by its ruling of February 14, 1877 (Synopsis, 3112 a), as several times since, and that the Department is consequently unable under the law to grant your request for passing them free of duty under the provision for goat-skins, raw. To admit such Angora skins of superior quality free of duty would open the door to fraud on the revenue.

A sufficient examination of the bales can be made to determine the number of superior skins without destroying their identity, and without causing delay or embarrassment to the importer. (7206a.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 13, 1885.

INK BLOTTERS IN PART OF WOOL.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 10th instant, submitting the appeal (6255 m) of Mr. C. F. Rumpp from your

a See No. 7147.

assessment of duty at the rate of 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem on certain shell blotters imported by him, per Rugia, September 11, 1885.

The articles in question, it appears, are ink blotters, made of paper and woolen cloth, surmounted by a shell, which serves as a handle for the blotters, and the appellant claims that duty should be assessed thereon either at the rate of 15 per cent ad valorem, as "manufactures of paper," or 25 per cent ad valorem, as "manufactures of shell," or that the appropriate duty should be levied on the several parts. The several parts of the blotters being securely glued together, the Department's decision of July 25, 1877 (synopsis 3319), which applies only to machinery, or similar articles composed of different materials, which are easily separable for purposes of classification, is not applicable.

The woolen cloth, it appears, forms a material and appreciable element in the formation of the blotters, so as to be taken into account in their classification, and the Department is of opinion that they were properly classified under the provisions of section 2499, act of March 3, 1883, and its decision of November 21, 1884 (synopsis, 6653), on cloaks composed in part of wool.

Your assessment of duty is therefore affirmed. (7208.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 20, 1885.

TWEED CAPS.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 22d ultimo, submitting the appeal (5014 m) of D. P. Ilsley & Co. from your assessment of duty at the rate of 40 cents per pound and 35 per cent ad valorem on certain tweed caps imported by them, per Missouri, September 26, 1885.

The appellants claim that the caps in question are dutiable at the rate of 30 per cent ad valorem, under the provision in paragraph 400, act of March 3, 1883, for "hats for men, women, and children."

From an examination of the samples submitted, it is found that the articles in question are caps made of tweed cloth, some being without visors, others having a single visor in front, and still others two visors, one in front and one behind.

Under date of November 26, 1883 (synopsis, 6044), the Department decided that caps are not hats within the meaning of the law, and as the articles in question are caps in fact, and known commercially by that name, the claim of the appellants is rejected.

*

The Department is of opinion that they were properly classified under the provision in paragraph 366 of said act for "wearing apparel of every description composed wholly or in part of wool, worsted, the hair of the alpaca, goat, or other animal," and your assessment of duty thereon is hereby affirmed. (7214.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 21, 1885. WOOL TOPS.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 18th instant, transmitting the appeal (6914 m) of Messrs. Stoddard, Lovering & Co. from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 60 cents per pound on certain "wool tops" imported by them, per Iberian, on the 4th instant, which the appellants claim to be dutiable at the rate of 18 cents per pound and 35 per cent ad valorem, under the provision in Schedule K (T. I., new, 363) for manufactures of worsted, valued at above 4 cents and not exceeding 60 cents per pound.

These wool tops, as appears from the special report of the appraiser and an inspection of samples, are the combings or cardings of fine Australian (clothing) wool, and are produced by scouring the wool and then passing it, in the usual manner, through the combing or carding machine.

The claim of the appellants that wool tops are dutiable under the provision for manufactures of worsted was disposed of by Department's ruling of February 17,

1881 (synopsis, 4777), wherein it was held that wool tops were in no sense manufactures of wool or worsted, but come within the category of unmanufactured wools, subject to the duties prescribed therefor, according to condition, class, etc.

In this case the wool tops come from clothing wools, which, the appraiser states, are valued in the unwashed condition under 30 cents per pound, and, if imported in that condition, would have been dutiable at the rate of 10 cents per pound; but, having been scoured, they become dutiable, under the provision of said schedule (T. I., new, 356) at three times the rate prescribed for wool in the unwashed condition, making 30 cents per pound; and, furthermore, inasmuch as wool tops constitute a condition of wool other than the ordinary one in which wool is imported, this importation becomes liable to double the last rate, or twice the duty to which it would be otherwise subject.

The wool, therefore, being scoured, and also being imported in an extraordinary condition, is dutiable at the rate of 60 cents per pound, and your decision is hereby affirmed. (7217).

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 23, 1885.

FELT SHOES.-Referring to your letter of the 26th ultimo, concerning the classification for duty of imported felt shoes, I have to state that upon due consideration the Department is of the opinion that the classification as "wearing apparel," at the rate of 40 cents per pound and 35 per cent ad valorem, under T. I., new, 366, as followed at the port of New York, should be adopted as the correct classification under the tariff acts.

The provisions of T. I., new, 367, for cloaks, etc., and other "outside garments," can hardly be considered applicable, as shoes do not assimilate to cloaks or any of the articles therein specifically mentioned, nor would they be considered as "outside garments" in the ordinary acceptation of the term.

This view does not conflict with that expressed in Department's decision of November 23, 1876 (synopsis, 3023), on woolen overboots, inasmuch as the articles covered by T. I., new, 366 and 367, were all included in one paragraph (247) under the old tariff.

You will be governed accordingly. (7218.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 3, 1885. REPACKING OF WOOL IN WAREHOUSE.-The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 23d ultimo, relative to the application of Mr. D. A. Hollister for permission to repack in bonded warehouse certain 6,082 pounds of wool intended to be withdrawn for exportation in bond by way of San Francisco.

It appears that the wool is packed in nineteen bales, not pressed, but merely filled by hand, and that it is desired to repack it into a smaller number of pressed bales, for convenience in transportation, the original bales being unwieldy.

In the absence of any provision of law or regulations to authorize repacking of merchandise in bond, other than drugs and chemicals, except when repacking is necessary for preservation of the goods, the application must be denied. (See article 679 of the General Regulations.) (7232.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 16, 1885. WOOL IMPORTED.-The Department duly received your letter of the 21st ultimo, in which you submitted a question as to whether imported wool (which under the statute pays duty according to its value per pound), when advanced in value on