TO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, D. C., July 2, 1877.

The following Decisions of the Department for the month of June, 1877, upon the construction to be given to Acts of Congress, relating to the Tariff, Navigation, and other subjects, are published herewith for the information and guidance of Officers of the Customs.

R. C. MCCORMICK,

Acting Secretary.

(3260.)

Cotton Ties-Duty on.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 1, 1877.

SIR: This Department is in receipt of your letter, dated the 22d ultimo, transmitting a report by the appraiser in reference to an importation of "cotton ties" by Messrs. Warren, Jones & Co., per "China," July 29, 1876.

The appraiser reports that the ties were imported in bundles; that the straps or hoops were of the requisite length for cotton ties, and that each bundle had the same number of locks or buckles strung on one of the straps, as there were straps or hoops in the bundle.

He states further, that he has no doubt that the importation was for use as "cotton ties," and that, since classifying them, he has been informed that the buckle is not intended to be fastened to the strap by riveting, but that the strap is simply passed through one end of the buckle and turned down, the pressure, when the strap is on the bale, being sufficient to hold the tie in place.

In consideration of these facts, you state that duties should have been assessed upon the merchandise at the rate of 35 per cent. ad valorem, in accordance with the decision of July 30, 1868, embodied in Synopsis No. 181, instead of at the rate of 14 cents per pound, the duty actually imposed.

The Department, after due investigation, has ascertained that it is

the practice at the principal ports, other than Boston, at which ties are imported, to classify them, when substantially similar to those above alluded to, as manufactures of iron, whether the buckles are riveted to the straps or otherwise; and it is satisfied that such ties constitute complete "cotton ties" within the meaning of the decision in the case tried in the United States circuit court at New Orleans, referred to in No. 181 of the printed Synopsis of the Decisions of the Department. Future importations of this character will, therefore, be classified accordingly.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 2, 1877.

SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of the 28th ultimo, submitting to the decision of the Department the question asked by Mr. Le Baron, of your city, in a communication which you enclosed, in connection with the Norwegian bark "Henriette," viz:

Can the shipper's manifest be made by any other than the shipper, provided it is sworn to and subscribed, as required, by the party wishing to clear the vessel?

You are informed that the master of this vessel, in order to clear her for a foreign port, cannot subscribe and make oath to the manifest, which the law (sec. 4200 of the Revised Statutes) and the regulations, (arts. 183 and 184,) require to be subscribed and sworn to by the owners, shippers, or consignors of the cargo on board. Before the vessel is cleared, the manifests required of both the master and the consignors must be delivered to you in the proper form and by the proper parties. Very respectfully, By order:

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Pensacola, Fla.

H. F. FRENCH,

Assistant Secretary.

(3262.)

Hawaiian Sugar-When Dutiable under Treaty.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 2, 1877.

SIR: The Department has had under consideration your report of December 2 last, with accompanying documents, in relation to the appeal (2559 e) of the California Sugar Refinery, per C. A. McNulty, attorney, from your assessment of duty on certain 388 kegs sugar imported per bark "R. C. Wylie" from Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, November 14, 1876.

The appellants claim that the sugar in question is entitled to free entry under article 1 of the reciprocity treaty between the United States and the Hawaiian Islands, ratified January 30, 1875, and the act of August 15, 1876, carrying the treaty into effect.

By the terms of that treaty and the law of Congress passed in pursuance thereof, approved August 15, 1876, free entry is accorded to muscovado, brown, and all other unrefined sugar, the growth and manufacture or produce of the Hawaiian Islands, "meaning hereby the grade of sugar heretofore commonly imported from the Hawaiian Islands and now known in the markets of San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, as Sandwich Island sugar."

Three questions are therefore presented for consideration:

First. Is the sugar in question of the growth and manufacture of the Hawaiian Islands?

Second. Is it unrefined sugar?

Third. If so, is it the grade of sugar which was commonly imported from the Hawaiian Islands, and known in the markets of San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, at the date of the adoption of the treaty, as Sandwich Island sugar?

Upon the first point it is conceded that the sugar is the growth and manufacture of the Hawaiian Islands. As to the second point, I have to state that, upon submission of samples of the sugar to the experts of the customs at some of the principal ports, there appears to be a difference of opinion among them as to whether the sugar can properly be regarded as unrefined. It appears to have been manufactured by what is known as the "centrifugal process," and during the process of manufacture a jet of water was introduced so as to more fully clear it of its impurities.

The rate of duty upon imported sugar is based mainly upon its color by the Dutch standard, and Schedule G of the Revised Statutes imposes a duty of four cents per pound ou sugar above No. 20, Dutch

standard in color, and on all refined loaf, lump, crushed, powdered, and granulated sugars.

In the case of Barlow, claimant of 85 hogsheads of sugar, (appellant against the United States, 7 Peters, page 404,) it was held by the Supreme Court of the United States that the term "refined sugar" is to be construed as exclusively limited to such as has assumed at some time the form of white refined loaf or lump sugar.

Applying that rule to the present case, it would clearly appear that. the sugar in question is to be regarded as unrefined within the meaning of the treaty and of the act of Congress before mentioned.

Upon the 3d question, as to whether this grade of sugar was at the time of the adoption of the treaty commonly imported into San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, and there known as Sandwich Island sugar, you report that the appraiser states that sugar of the grade in question was not, prior to the adoption of the treaty, commonly imported, although there had been a few importations of it made into your port prior to the adoption of the treaty. As opposed to this, is the statement of twenty-one merchants and dealers in such sugar at San Francisco to the effect that the sugar in question is of the grade commonly imported from the Sandwich Islands, and that at the time of the treaty it was known in the markets of San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, as Sandwich Island sugar. They fail to show, however, that sugar of as high a grade as the present was commonly imported into San Francisco from the Hawaiian Islands at the time of, or before the adoption of the treaty.

The papers in the case were referred to the collector of customs at Portland, Oregon, for report upon this question, and he states that sugar of the grade embraced in this appeal—that is, sugar above No. 20, Dutch standard—was not commonly imported into Portland prior to the adoption of the treaty.

The reports of the appraiser at your port and the collector of customs at Portland, Oregon, are therefore accepted as conclusive upon the question of fact as to the grade of the sugar imported prior to the adoption of the treaty, and as these reports show that sugar of the grade embraced in this appeal was not commonly imported into those ports at that time, it follows that it is to be regarded as not admissi ble, free of duty, under the treaty.

Your assessment of duty having been made by the standard of the Dutch color, in accordance with Schedule G of the Revised Statutes, your decision is hereby affirmed.

*

Respectfully,

JOHN SHERMAN,

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco, Cal.

Secretary.

(3263)

Importations by Post

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 6, 1877.

The following copy of a letter addressed to the collector of customs at New York, the 4th instant, is published for the information of all concerned:

"SIR: I am in receipt of your letter dated the 9th ultimo, in reference to the circular of this Department of the 3d instant, relating to the seizure of articles imported through the mail.

"You invite attention to the fact that the postal conventions with the Governments of the following-named countries contain authority for exceptions similar to that made in the circular in favor of Canada, to wit: Belgium, Great Britain, Brazil, Italy, Netherlands, North German Union, Switzerland, and Venezuela.

"In reply, you are informed that

"1. Of those countries, all except Venezuela have agreed by Article XXV of the detailed regulations concerning the General Postal Union, concluded at Berne, October 9, 1875, (since the date of the conventions to which you refer,) that there shall not be admitted for conveyance by post any gold or silver money, jewels, precious articles, or any articles whatever liable to customs duty.

"The agreement as to Brazil will take effect the 1st proximo; and Japan has been included therein since the 1st instant.

"2. Pamphlets, magazines, books, maps, plans, engravings, drawings, photographs, lithographs, sheets of music, and patterns and samples of merchandise, including grains and seed, may be imported by post from Canada, as mentioned in the circular above referred to; newspapers and prints of all kinds in sheets, in pamphlets, and in books, sheets of music, engravings, photographs, lithographs, drawings, maps, and plans, from Ecuador and Venezuela, may be imported through the mail as mentioned in the convention with those nations, on page 1109 of volume 16 and page 879 of volume 17 of the United States Statutes at Large; and special provision is made for such importations of newspapers, unsealed circulars, periodicals, pamphlets, books, and other kinds of printed matter, from Guatemala and Salvador, under Article 3 and Article 4, respectively, of the postal conventions with those countries; of newspapers and printed matter of every kind, from the Hawaiian Kingdom and New Zealand, under Article 1 of the conventions with those countries; of newspapers and printed matter of every kind, and patterns or samples of merchandise, from New South Wales and Queensland, under Article 1 of the conventions with those countries; of newspapers, reviews, or other periodical publications, printed pamphlets, or other printed matter, from Mexico, under Article 1 of the convention with that country; and of newspapers, books, printed matter of every kind, and patterns or samples of merchandise, from Newfoundland, under Article 1 of the convention with that country.

"3. The Department's instructions in said circular will not be held to interfere with the present practice, allowing the importation through the mail, free of duties, of single copies of newspapers, pamphlets, sheets of music, magazines, and reviews, from any foreign country, for