BELCHER V. UNITED STATES.
quent proceedings were taken in accordance with the provisions of the statute in such case made and provided. The transcripts offered as evidence in the court below do not show in a legal and proper manner that any of these requirements were complied with, and they are therefore fatally defective. Shivers v. Witson, 5 Har.& J. 132; Owings v. Worthington, 10 Gill & J. 293; Clark v. Bryan, 16 Md. 176; Fahey v. Mottu, 67 Md. 250, 10 At!. 68; Kane v. State, 70 Md. 546, 17 At!. 557. The signature of the justice to the different papers, so of· fered as evidence, should have been authenticated, in the same way as the law requires that signatures to papers in general shall be proven; and, as there was no such testimony offered, the ruling of the court below was clearly proper. It may be well to note that the secretary of state of Maryland is only authorized to certify equally with the clerks of the several circuit courts of the counties, and of the superior court of Baltimore city, to the character and qualification of certain officers who have been reo ported to him by said clerks as having qualified by taking the oath of office. Said clerks, when required so to do, must give a certificate, under the seal of their office, of the qualification Qf any public officer who has taken and subscribed the oaths of office before them, or whose oath of office is recorded in the office of the clerk so certifying. No· where is there authority given by statute, either to the secretary of state or to any of said clerks, to certify to the genuineness of the signature of any of the officials who may have thus qualified before them, or whose oaths of office are of record in their respective offices·. The judgment rendered by the court below is without error, and the same is affirmed.
BELOHER v. UNITED STATES. (Circuit Court, S. D. New York. December 17, 1898.) No. 2,467. 1.
CUSTOMS DUTIES ERS. REVIEW 011' DECISION 011' BOARD 011' GENERAL ApPRAIS-
Findings of fact by the bOllrd of general appraisers, based upon 'conflicting testimony, as to the (;llmmercial designation of certain articles, cannot be reviewed by the courts.
2. SAME-CLASSIFICATION-STEEl, IN STIUPS.
Cold-rolled, untempered steel, from llA, to 4% inches wide, and from 500 to 1,500 feet long, which is largely used for making band saws, but not shown to be unfitted in its composition for other uses, was dutiable under paragraph 124 of the act of 1894, as "sheet steel in strips," and not under paragraph 116, as "band steel not otherwise provided for,". or under paragraph 122, as "saw plates." 1
A strip of high-grade steel, 50 feet long by 8 inches wide, fitted by its 'composition to be used only for making saws, and which is commercially known as a "saw plate," was dutiable as such under paragraph 122 of the act of 1894, and not under paragraph 116, as "band steel," or under paragraph 124, as "sheet steel in strips."
1 For interpretation of commercial and trade terms, see note to Dennison Mfg. Co. v. U. S., 18 C. C. A. 545.
91 FEDlllItAL 'ItEPOItTEIt·
.,' This ;wUi'ftD application by one ,Belcher for a review ala decision, of the, board appraiseltsiin respe<}t to the classidcationfor duty of certaiF'strips of cold-rolled, untempered steel. StlC>phen' G., Clarke, for J. T. Vannefisselaer, Asst.U.S.A.tty. TOWNSEND, District Judge. The merchandise in question com· prises varioushmgtbs ofcold·roUed,. uhtempered steel; the chief con· long by 8 inches wide, im· tention beihgas,to, the exhibitq50 .ported asl'ba;nd·saw ,steel." The importer, :testifies that they are made from 1i to 4i inches wide, and from ,500 to 1,560 feet ·long. There: i$,al$'o, an exhibit, referl'ed,to in the ,evidence, 3·¥ inches wide by 27feet,long.These articles:were classified for duty as band steel, except as otherwise provided, fOJ,"'t!under the provisions of paragraph llfi,of the, act of 1894. The importer protested, claiming that they should have been classified as" saw plates, under paragraph 122 of said act. '1'he' board of gener3l1appraisers overruled the protest, and 'heldthatthemerc:p.andise under the provisions of paragraph 124 of said act as "sheet.tee! in strips/'It is unnecessary to determine,whether, upon all the,;evidence,this court','would have reached the same .conclusion as:that reached by the board, because it appearS,RstoaU the exhibitsiexcept the one 50 feat long by 8 wide, that the findings10fifact of the board were based upon ·conflicting··testimony before·it" as ,to whether' these articles'are commercially known as "saw The merchandise is confessedly sheet steel in strips. The long strips cannot be termed "plates," in the ordinary acceptation of ,the, term. It is not shown that their . composition is such as to fit them for use for saw plates only, ana the board was clearly its finding' that such articles are known as "saw . plates," llnless it appears that by not reason of their i composition they' are unfit for other purposes. There is much testimony to show that, the. commercial designation "saw either to a flat, «;:ircuJar plate for saws, or plates". to sarli 'Strip bf' high-grade is illustrated by said exhibit, 00 teet ,IoJi\1gby, 8 .inches wide. ,',2aid exhibit is·not the, sheet steel in strips'>includedunder the wiie,paragraph 124 of said act' A careful analysis of all the competent testiJ.nony as to' this particular exhibit suc)l sold' and used foi',other pur· not then be "saw plates/' yetthat when, length, width,and gauge as to as in'lthisease,it is of such !nto a band .not to any other purpbi!e, lit· is unIversally as .steel" or "band-saw blades or plates." AS to the smgle exlnblt, 3lmches ijy (eet long, I havebeenJ unable to find any testimony as to whethedtwas intended to be used for oneeaw or for more than 'one ·saw. I t<fthe'otper testifie.s"th.l:t,t, they are sdfd'irithese'lengths, s6 that'rite saw manufacturer Jnay take ,any numherof feet inlengthwhich he may require for a saw. The testimQ;I:lY·,of W'qHl', Terry show thatthe.se strips, in narrower widths and longer lengths, are not, commeroially known as
(Isaw plates"; and, if not saw plates, they are not plates nor sheets not speciaIl,Y,' provided for. The preponderance of the testimony is to the effect that even if they are not sheet steel, and not commercially known as "sheet steel, in strips," yet in common speech they are "steel strips," especially in view of the decision in Magone v. Vom Cleff, 17 C. C. A. 549, 70 Fed. 980. The decision of the board of ge,heral appraisers is reversed as to the goods represented by the exhitlit 50 feet long and 8.inches wide, and is affirmed as to the other exhibits.
UNITED STATES v. VA:\' BLANKENSl'EYN et aI.
(Oircuit OQurt, S. D. New York. December 17, 1898.) No. 2,838.
OUSTOMS PUTJKS-COMME:RCIAT. DESIGNATIONS-LACES.
The commercial designations "laces" and "lace" are not confined to lace which is sold by the yard only, but may include articles made of lace. 1
Tidies, made of flax, and known commercially as "Renaissance lace tidIes;" or "Renaissance, tidies," made of tape, thread, and rings, were dutiable under paragraph 276 of the act of 1894, as laces or articles made wholly OJ' In part of lace composed of flax, and not under paragrapb277. as manufactures of fiax ,not specially prOVided for.
This was an application by the United States f()r a review of a the action of decision of the board of general appraisers the collector in respect to the classification for duty of certain articles made of tla:¥:lace, im,ported by Van Blankensteyn & Hennings. Asst. U. S. Atty., James'T. Van Everit Brown, for importers. TOWNSEND, District Judge. The merchandise in question is tidies made' of fiax, Which are ct)mmerciallyknown as IlReri:ltissance lace tidies," or "Renaissance tidies." The materials of which it is tape, thread,and rings." When. the. completed article composed is made up, either in the form of tidies or in straight pieces, so as to be sold by the yard, it is commonly known as "Renaissance lac(l," or "Renaissance laces," and comes term "laces," in the ordinary ,acceptation., of, the term. The found,. ,that the merchandi!:3e was fiaxlace tidies,and therefore dutiable under paragraph 276 of the act of 1894, at 50 per cent. ad valorem, as "laces * * · or articles made wholly or in part of' lace * * * composed of flax." , The importers, protested that they were dutiable under paragraph 277 of said. act,at 35 as "manufactures of fiax * * * hot specially provided for." The board of general appraisers sustained the protest, and Counsel for the importer admits that these artIcles, made of tape, thread, and rings, are laces when made by the yard, and that articles
1 For InterPretation of commercilll and trade, terms, see note to Dennison ' ' ,,' Mfg. Co. v. U. S., 18 C. C. A. 545. 91F.-6Z