¶11. Customs Duties — Protests—Procedure on Appeal.
¶2Certain importers appeared before the board of general appraisers in support of llieir prótesis against the decision of the collector, but as to one of s.-nd protests they offered no evidence before tho board. Held, that they had' a right to appeal to the circuit court, and that the right to bring new evidence was co-extensive with the right to appeal.
¶32. Same — Classification—Curtains, Tidies, and Siiams.
¶4Curia ins, tidies, and shams made up from cotton laces, and known commercially by tlieir respective names, were dutiable, under paragraph 821 of the act of 18,88, as manufactures of cotton not otherwise provided for, and not, under paragraph 325, as cotton laces.
¶5Tills was an application to review a decision of tlie board of general appraisers aiilnuuig a decision of the collector of the port of Yew York (classifying certain merchandise for duties as “laces,” under paragraph 325 of the act of 1833) except in so far as related to the items invoiced as “tidies” and “shams,” which the board found to be manufactures of cotton not otherwise provided for, under paragraph 321. There were two protests from the collector’s decision, as to one' of which no evidence was submitted before the general appraisers.
¶6Edward Hartley, for plaintiff.
¶7Henry D. Sedgwick, Jr., Asst. IT. S. Atty.
¶9The importers appeared before the board of general appraisers in support of this protest, and had a right to appeal to this court; and the right to bring new evidence was co-extensive with the right to appeal. The goods in question appear to be curtains, tidies, and shams made up from cotton laces into new articles, known commercially by their respective names, and thus to be taken out of what are known as “cotton laces.” They should be assessed where» they, as such articles, would fall, which is, as they were not specifically named, among manufactures of cotton not otherwise provided for, according- to the protest. Decision as to these items reversed.