HERRMAN V. UNITED STATES.
to the obligation by which the parties have bound themselves, and Is, of course, quite unauthorized, as well as liable to great practical injustice In the application."
These observations, here so pertinent, commend themselves to our judgment. Applying, then, to this case, the principles sanctioned by the foregoing authorities, we are constrained to hold that the above-quoted instructions, of which complaint is here made, were unwarranted and erroneous. To the suggestion that during the first year the contract was in force the defendant's mines were kept running without any serious interruption, it is enough to say that no determining effect is to be given to that fact, the language of the plaintiff's stipulation being clear. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial.
HERRMAN v. UNITED STATES. (CIrcuit Court, S. D. New York. June 29, 1894.)
CUSTons DUTIES-PLATE GLASS SILVERED AND BEVEI,ED.
Certain cast polished plate glass, silvered and beveled, from whIch looking glasses are made, JICld dutiable at 6 cents a square foot, and also to an additional duty of 10 per cent. ad valorem, under paragraphs 116. and 118 of the tariff act of October 1, 18UO, and not dutiable under paragraph 116 only, as "looking glass plates."
Appeal by Importer from Decision of Board of United States General Appraisers. Decision affirmed.
The collector of customs assessed duty upon this merchandise, imported by H. Herrman in March, 1891, under the following paragraphs of the act of October 1, 1890: "Par. 116. Cast polished plate glass, silvered, and looking glass plates not exceeding sixteen by twenty-four inches square, six cents per square foot; above that, and not exceeding twenty-four by thirty Inches square, ten cents per square foot; above that, and not exceedIng twenty-four by sixty inches square, thirty-five cents per square foot; all above that, sixty cents per square foot." "Par. 118. Cast polished plate glass, silvered or unsilvered, and cylinder, crown, or common window glass, when ground, obscured, frosted, sanded, enameled, beveled, etched, embossed, engraved, stained, colored or otherwise ornamented or decorated, shall be subject to a duty of ten per cent. ad valorem in addition to the rates otherwise chargeable thereon." The claIm of the importer was that It was dutiable only under paragraph 116; .that it was shaped and used for making looking glasses, and was specifically covered by the term "looking glass plates" in paragraph 116. The board of United States general appraisers affirmed the decision of the collector.
Curie, Smith & Mackie, for importer. Henry C. Platt, U. S. Atty. TOWNSEND, District Judge. Certain plate glass was classified for duty under paragraph 116 of the tariff act of 1890. To this classificationno objection is made. But it was also classified, under paragraph 118 of said act, as "cast polished plate glass silvered and bev·eled." The importer protests against this classification, on the
ground tbat, wbile paragraph 116 in ter:m.s covers looking-glass plates,_ p!:lragraph 118 does not refer to them.' The evidence shows that;the glasses in question are used for making looking glasses. It is not denied that they are "cast polished plate glass," and there is no evidence that such glasses are commercially known as "looking' glass plates." As congreSs has recognized ''looking glass plates" as di-sdnctfrom "cast polished plate glass silvered," and as the articles in question are clearly embraced within the latter class, the> decision of the board of general appraisers is affirmed.
In re IRWIN et aI. (Circuit Court, S. D. New York. June 22, 1894.) 1.
white powder known to the trade as "l'efined bauxite," which is· manufactured from bauxite by removing from the crude ore the impurities of iron, silica, and titanic acid, is not bauxite, within the meaning of paragraph 501 of the free list of the tariff of October 1, 1890.
The white powder known to the trade as "refined bl!-uxIte" or "hydrate of alumina" is made by heating in a furnace a mixture of crude baUXite, groundfi1}e,and soda ash, until the carbonic acid of the latter is expelled. Tbe l1lixture is then cooled and treated. with water, which dissolves the resulting aluminate of soda, leaving behind the sillca, iron, and titanic acid Of the bauxite; and the sOlution Is treated with gaseous carbonic acid. which converts the soda into a carbonate, and allows the precipjtation of the alumina. From this precipitate, when washed and dried, results the pOWder question. Held. tllat this is alumina. within the meaning of paragraph 9 of the tariff act of October 1, 1890, and is dutiable as such at six-tenths of a cent a pound.
was. a protest by Thomas Jrwin & Sons, before the United S:tates board of appraisers, against the decision of the co} lector as to the rate of duty to be paid on certain imported merchandise. The board sustained the contention of the importer, and the collectOl'appeals. James T. Van Renssell1.er, Asst. U. S. Atty., for collector. Stephen G. Clarke and Henry A. Wyman, for importers.
COXE, District Judge. Tbe collector classified the merchandise· in question under paragrapb 9 of the act of October 1, 1890, which is as follows:
"Alumina,' 'alum, alum cake, patent alum, sulphate of alumina, and aluminous cake, and alum in. crystals or ground. six-tenths of one cent per pound."
The importers protested, insisting that it should have been admitted free under paragraph 501 of the free list as "Bauxite, or beauxite." 'l'be board found the following facts:
"First. The merchandise under consideration is a white mineral powder, resembling alum in appearance. second. It is, chemically considered, hydrate of alumina, or alumina and water combined. Third. It Is known and dealt with in trade under the name of 'refined bauxite,' and dif· fers from Cl'Ude bauxite only in the fact that it has gone through a process of manufacture by which the impurities ot ,ron and silica. have been mechanically removed trom.the crude article. Fourth. It is used for the same pur-··