submitted in the case it appears they are known commercially as "knit goods." It would, therefore, seem to us immaterial whether silk was or was not the component material of chief value.

Paragraph 362 provides for "all manufactures of wool of every description made wholly or in part of wool valued at above eighty cents per pound, thirty

#

five cents per pound and in addition thereto forty per centum ad valorem."

Paragraph 363 reads: "Flannels, blankets, hats of wool knit goods, and all goods made on knitting-frames valued at above eighty cents per pound, thirty

*

five cents per pound and in addition thereto forty per centum ad valorem."

So far as the component parts, silk and wool, are concerned, the term "of which silk is the component material of chief value" is no more specific than "composed in part of wool," and the rates applicable to the two materials would be equally operative, but the words "knit goods" are more descriptive of the knit underwear in question than either of the former terms and controls the classification.

The merchandise upon appeal being valued at over 80 cents per pound, the assessment of duty upon the same at 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem was, in our opinion, correct, and is affirmed. (10552.—G. A. 202.)

NEW YORK, December 16, 1890.

WOOL KNIT CAPS.-The importers claim that the goods in dispute are "Scotch bonnets, caps, or hoods,” dutiable at 30 per cent ad valorem, under the provisions of paragraph 400 of the act of March 3, 1883, or, if they are not bonnets or hoods, they are properly dutiable as such under the similitude clause of section 2499 of the Revised Statutes of the United States.

As heretofore ruled by this Board, the law of assimilation can not be applied to goods enumerated or provided for in the act either denominatively or as a material, and we shall not give consideration to this portion of the appellants' claim, but confine ourselves to the question: Does the merchandise upon appeal consist of bonnets, hats, or hoods within the meaning of the law?

The articles are described in the invoice as "Tam O'Shanters," "Brights," "Windsors," "Belmonts," etc. The testimony of the appraising officer relative to them is to the effect that they are not commercially known as bonnets or hoods, but as caps; also that they are knitted goods, manufactured from worsted.

It is true that caps, like bonnets and hoods, are head coverings, but this is not sufficient to make them dutiable at the same rate as long as they are known commercially as separate articles. So well established is this point that further argument relative thereto is not deemed necessary by us.

It is contended, however, that paragraph 400, which specified bonnets, hats, and hoods," intended to include all manner of head-wear. In the absence of any ambiguity in the language of this paragraph the intent of the framers thereof can not be considered. In our opinion, there is no ambiguity in paragraph 400. Bonnets, hats, hoods, and caps are separate and distinct articles of trade and commerce in the United States, and, caps not having been provided for by name either in paragraph 400 or elsewhere in the act, the claim of the appellants is rejected.

The assessment of duty upon them in accordance with their weight and value, under the provision in T. I., 363, for wool knit goods, is therefore affirmed. (10562. —G. A. 212.)

NEW YORK, December 17, 1890.

FELT HATS VARNISHED.-It appears from the evidence submitted, that the merchandise in dispute consists of felted wool hats varnished, valued at over 80 cents per pound, which were returned for duty at the rate of 35 cents per pound and 40

per cent ad valorem, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 363 of the act of 1883.

The importers, in their notice of dissatisfaction, claim that, inasmuch as hats are specially enumerated and provided for in paragraph 400, duty should have been assessed upon them at 30 per cent ad valorem, in conformity with the provisions thereof.

It is true, as alleged by the appellants, that 'hats" are specially provided for in paragraph 400, but we find that "hats of wool" are also provided for eo nomine in paragraph 363. Hats, bonnets, and hoods represent a certain class of merchandise, while the term "hats of wool" describes a particular variety of that class, and is consequently the more specific enumeration of the two. This opinion is in keeping with the long established ruling of the Treasury Department, the correctness of which we presume is not questioned in the present case. The real contention on the part of the appellants is, that the hats in dispute being varnished have lost their commercial identity as "hats of wool," and are, for all intents and purposes, subject to no special provision other than that contained in paragraph 400, and we are of the opinion that this claim of the importers is not tenable. It is not an imperative rule that hats of wool shall be so commercially known; they may be designated by the ordinary trade name “Derby" and still be more specifically enumerated as hats of wool than other hats. The varnished ones upon appeal have had their identity impaired by the varnishing process, but in substance they remain unchanged, and are still "hats of wool;" they are certainly not hats of varnish.

For the reasons stated, the assessment of duty upon them at 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem was, in our opinion, correct, and is affirmed. (10565.— G. A. 215.)

NEW YORK, December 20, 1890.

DRESS GOODS, SILK-WARP HENRIETTAS.-The appraiser returns the goods as "silkwarp Henrietta," composed of wool or worsted in part, and silk in part, in the lower grades of which silk is the component material of chief value, and in the higher grades the wool is of chief value. They are invoiced as "dress goods, silk warps, and Henriettas," and are stated to consist of women's and children's dress goods composed of silk in the warp and worsted in the weft. The goods were classified by the collector under paragraph 365 of the tariff law of 1883, and assessed accordingly.

The only contention presented by the importer in his protest is that silk is the component material of chief value, and that the merchandise should be assessed at 50 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 383, which levies that rate of duty on "all goods, wares, and merchandise, not specially enumerated or provided for in this act, made of silk, or of which silk is the component material of chief value."

Admitting the truth of the fact claimed as to the relative value of the silk material in these dress goods, they can not properly be classified under T. I., 383, because they are specially provided for by the more particular designation of "women's and children's dress goods composed in part of wool, worsted," etc., under T. I., 365. This fact takes the goods out of the operation of the other paragraph describing them only by the chief value of the component material of silk. This view was taken by the Treasury Department as far back as October, 1883, as will appear by Synopsis of Treasury Decisions No. 5953, and the uniform customs practice has been in accordance with that ruling.

The collector's decision must be affirmed. (10571.-G. A. 221.)

NEW YORK, December 20, 1890.

WOOL KNIT GOODS, SILK CHIEF VALUE.-The goods are stated to be composed of silk and wool, and are commercially known as "ladies' vests, knit goods." They were

classified as worsted "knit goods” under paragraph 363 of the tariff act of 1883, Schedule K, relating to "wool and woolens." That paragraph enumerates "flannels, blankets, hats of wool, knit goods, and all goods made on knitting frames, balmorals, woolen and worsted yarns, and all manufactures of every description, composed wholly or in part of worsted, the hair of the alpaca, goat, or other animals (except such as are composed in part of wool), not specially enumerated or provided for in this act," meaning the act of March 3, 1883.

"Knit goods" by that designation are also excepted from the provision made for "wearing apparel of every description" by paragraph 366.

The contention of the importers is that silk enters into these goods as the component material of chief value, and for this reason they should be classified under paragraph 383 of said act.

Commercial designation is the first and most important inquiry, and when this fails resort must next be had to common designation. (Robertson v. Solomon, 130 U. S., 412.)

The phrase "knit goods," whether one of commercial or common designation, is more minute in description than a description of the material from which an article is manufactured, or of the component material of chief value. Although, therefore, the goods are made in part of silk, and silk be conceded to be the component material of chief value, they do not come within the scope of paragraph 383, because they are provided for otherwise in paragraph 363 under the more specific description "knit goods" composed in part of worsted.

The decision of the collector is affirmed. (10572.-G. A. 222.)

NEW YORK, January 14, 1891.

WOOL, SILK, AND COTTON UPHOLSTERY GOODS.-We find the merchandise in question to be, as returned by the appraiser, a manufacture of wool, silk, and cotton, commercially known as "upholstery goods," in which wool is the component of chief value, costing over 80 cents per pound.

The goods were assessed under paragraph 362 of the tariff law of 1883 at 35 cents per pound, and in addition thereto 40 per cent ad valorem.

The sole contention in the protests is that the merchandise should have been assessed, under paragraph 383, at 50 per cent ad valorem, because it is not specially provided for in said law, and that silk is the component material of chief value entering into the manufacture.

The collector's decision must stand as presumptively correct unless this contention is sustained. No evidence is produced or offered before the board, after fair opportunity given, to sustain the assertion made in the protests, and it is unsustained by any fact in the record.

The decision of the collector is accordingly affirmed in each of said cases. (10664G. A. 248.)

NEW YORK, January 14, 1891.

SHOES OF WOOL AND LEATHER.-The merchandise in question consists of ladies' kid shoes with woolen cloth quarters. It is in evidence that the leather in them forms the component material of chief value. Inasmuch, however, as wool enters into the composition of the articles, they were returned for duty as part wool wearing apparel at 494 cents per pound and 60 per cent ad valorem, under the provisions of paragraph 396.

The collector, in his letter of transmittal, states that upon a review of the subject, and an examination of the samples, he is convinced that the merchandise should have been rated for duty at 25 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 456.

The term "shoes made of leather" implies shoes manufactured chiefly of leather

This condition is fulfilled in the present case, as the quantity of wool is insignificant in comparison with the leather. Having established the fact that the articles are shoes made of leather, it is not deemed necessary to consider whether they are wearing apparel or not. The claim of the appellants, therefore, that duty should have been assessed upon the merchandise at 25 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 456, is sustained. (10665-G A. 249.)

NEW YORK, January 21, 1891.

TABLE-COVERS COMPOSED IN PART OF METAL.-The merchandise comprises tablecovers composed of cotton and metal; jute, cotton, and metal; and cotton, wool, and metal, in all of which cotton is the component material of chief value, and metal an appreciable part and distinct feature. With respect to that portion of the goods, the classification of which is dependent upon that point, the importers admit that metal constitutes from 8 to 10 per cent of the value of the whole, and the articles are invoiced as "cotton and metal table-covers."

The importers claim that the appraisers erred in returning the merchandise covered by quality numbers 420 and 421 as part wool, but this allegation was negatived as to quality 420 by a statement of the shipper thereof that wool entered into their composition to an appreciable extent.

With regard to quality 421, concerning which the importers claim that it is dutiable as a manufacture of cotton at 35 per cent or 40 per cent ad valorem, we find, from the evidence, that metal formed an appreciable portion of the value of the same. This fact is fatal to the contention of the importers, and leaves the rate of duty assessed upon the goods final and conclusive against them. Duty was assessed upon the metal and cotton covers at 45 per cent ad valorem, under the provisions of paragraph 216, and upon the wool, cotton, and metal covers, valued at not over 80 cents per pound, at 35 cents per pound and 35 per cent, under paragraph 362. The exaction of the specified rates was, in our opinion, correct, for the reason that the several terms "manufactures of cotton," "made wholly or in part of wool," and "made wholly or in part of metal," are equally specific, and, according to the provisions of section 2499, Revised Statutes, the highest rate applicable to either of the materials mentioned must be imposed upon articles manufactured from two or more of them in combination.

The decision of the collector is accordingly affirmed. (10672–G. A. 256.)

NEW YORK, January 23, 1891. COTTON, WOOL AND SILK SHIRTINGS.-We find the facts in this case to be as reported by the surveyor. The merchandise consists of cotton, wool, and silk shirtings. They were classified under paragraph 395 of the act of October 1, 1890, at 12 cents per square yard and 50 per cent ad valorem. Appellants claim that they are entitled to entry under paragraph 394 of said act, on the ground that the warp thereof is composed wholly of vegetable material, whereas it is composed of cotton and silk, and silk is not a vegetable material.

The decision of the surveyor is sustained. (10682-G. A. 266.)

NEW YORK, January 27, 1891. TRAVELING RUGS.-The articles subject of protest in this case are invoiced as "rugs." But the appraiser reports that they are square robes, used for protection against cold, and that they are commercially known as "lap robes." The samples submitted support this statement; one is a plush about 34 feet wide by 54 feet long, with plain edges; the other a checked cloth, about 4 feet wide by 6 feet long, with

plain edges on the sides and fringed ends. They were returned by the appraiser as "wool shawls," and so classified for duty by the collector as manufactures of wool, under paragraphs 362 and 363 of the act of March 3, 1883, respectively, at 35 cents per pound and 35 per cent ad valorem, and 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem. Appellants claim that they are traveling or carriage rugs, and, indirectly, that they are dutiable at 40 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 378 of said act. No doubt they are used by travelers both in carriages and railway coaches for the protection of the person, and they are perhaps commercially and commonly known in England and on the continent of Europe as "rugs." But in this country they are commercially and commonly known as " lap robes." The rug known to the tariff seems to be an article for the floor, in the nature of a carpet. It is provided for in the act of 1883, not in the wearing apparel or the cloth paragraphs, but in one of the carpet paragraphs, 378, namely, "and mats, rugs, screens," etc.; and the same association is maintained in the present law, paragraph 408, "mats, rugs, screens, covers, hassocks," etc., "shall be subjected to the rate of duty herein imposed on carpets,"

etc.

The articles subject of appeal are not known as rugs to the trade and commerce of this country, nor do they appear to have been known to the legislative mind in the enactment of the law of 1883. They are therefore not specially provided for, but fall under paragraph 362 of said act, where they are placed for classification. The decision of the collector is affirmed.

(10722–G. A. 275.)

NEW YORK, January 28, 1891.

WOOL FLANNELS.-The merchandise in this case consists of flannel shirtings. It was so invoiced, and was entered as flannels. The appraiser's special report states that it was returned for duty as "woolen cloths," whereas it should have been returned as wool flannel. It was assessed for duty as "wool flannel costing over 80 cents per pound," at 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 363 of the act of March 3, 1883. Appellants protest against this classification on the ground that silk is the component material of chief value thereof, and hence that it is entitled to entry at 50 per cent ad valorem, under paragraph 383 of said act. The merchandise is represented by samples. An expert witness describes it as follows: "It is a manufacture composed of wool, silk, and cotton, of which wool is the component material of chief value. It is commercially known and dealt in as 'flannel.' The chain is composed principally of cotton with a few threads of colored silk to form fancy stripes, and the filling is wholly of fine wool."

This testimony effectually disposes of the contention of appellants. By reason both of its commercial designation and its component materials it falls under paragraph 363.

The decision of the collector is affirmed. (10726-G. A. 279.)

NEW YORK, January 28, 1891.

COMMON GOAT HAIR.-The merchandise in question is invoiced as goat hair, and the evidence shows that it is the hair of the common goat, and is unfit for combing purposes.

The article was classified by the collector as goat hair under paragraph 377, Schedule K, of the new tariff act of October 1, 1890, and was assessed at 12 cents per pound under paragraph 384.

The importers contend that the article is free under the provisions of paragraph 604 of the free list, which reads as follows: “ Hair of horse, cattle, and other animals, cleaned or uncleaned, drawn or undrawn, but unmanufactured, not specially provided for in this act * *"

*