UNITED STATES v. E. L. GOODSELL CO.

UNITED STATES v. E. L. GOODSELL CO. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. January 5, 1899.) No. 34 Custom s D utitss—Classification—Orangf. Boxks —Reimported. Boxes containing oranges and lemons, the sides, tops, and bottoms of which are in fact of American growth and manufacture, and Which were exported as shooks, cannot be deprived of 1he benefit of the proviso to paragraph 216 of the tariff act of 1894, under which they are entitled to re-entry, when filled, on payment of half-rate duties, merely because proof of such facts Is not made in the particular mode prescribed by the treasury regulations. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The cause comes here upon appeal from the decision of the circuit court, Southern district of New York (84 Fed. 155), affirming decision of the board of general appraisers which reversed decision of the collector of the port of New York touching classification for duty of certain boxes containing oranges and lemons. The question presented arises under paragraph 21 C> of the tariff act of 1894, which provides a duty on oranges, and lemons, and in addition thereto a duty of 30 per cent, upon the boxes or barrels containing them, “provided, that the thin wood so-called comprising the sides, tops and bottoms of orange and' lemon boxes, of the growth and manufacture of the United 'States, exported as orange or lemon box shooks, may be reimported in completed form filled with oranges and lemons, by the payment of duty at one-half the rate imposed on similar boxes of entirely foreign growth and manufacture.” The collector assessed the importation in suit for duty at 30 per cent, because proof as to American origin and exportation as shooks had not ' been made in the manner prescribed in treasury circular No 135, of July 15, 1895. The importer contended that the boxes were in fact of American growth and manufacture, and had been exported as shooks. D. Frank Lloyd, for the United States. Albert Comstock, for appellee. Before WALLACE, LACOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges. [MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.] PER CURIAM. The appellant contends that the record discloses no proof that the articles were of American growth, and none that they had been exported as shooks. The board of appraisers report that such,growth and exportation were “uncontroverted facts,” and it is quite apparent that the point now contended for was not raised before the bofird. In view of that circumstance, and of the letter from the treasury department to the collector, directing an appeal of this cause solely to secure a ruling as to the effect of the circular of July 15, 1895, it may be assumed that whatever defect there may have been in the proof presented to the board was waived by the government, and is not now available to the appellant. We concur with the circuit court and the board of appraisers that boxes which are in fact of American growth and manufacture, and which were exported as shooks, cannot be required to pay the higher rate of duty merely because the importers have not made proof of those facts in some particular mode prescribed by the secretary of the treasury. It seems unnecessary to add anything to the careful and exhaustive opinion filed by the board of general appraisers. Decision affirmed.