KRAUT v. UNITED STATES

KRAUT v. UNITED STATES. (Circuit Court, S. D. New York. October 27, 1904.) No. 3,520. 1. Customs Duties — Classification—Paper Bags — Printed Matter. Paper bags elaborately printed with advertising matter relating to the goods intended to be packed and sold within them are not “printed matter” within the meaning of paragraph 403, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule M, 30 Stat. 189 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1673], but are dutiable as manufactures of paper not specially provided for, under paragraph 407 of said act, 30 Stat. 189 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1673], On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of General Appraisers. See 130 Fed. 393. This case relates to paper bags imported at the port of New York by Adolf Kraut, which were elaborately printed with advertising matter relating to the goods intended to be packed and sold In the bags. They were classified as manufactures of paper, under paragraph 407, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule M, 30 Stat. 189 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1673], and were claimed by the importer to be dutiable as “printed matter,” under paragraph 403 of said act, 30 Stat. 189 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1673]. This contention was overruled by the Board of General Appraisers. (G. A. 5,606, T. D. 25,087.) The opinion of the board reads in part as follows: Fischer, General Appraiser. The claim that paper bags upon which there appears printed matter are dutiable as printed matter under the provisions of paragraph 403 was decided by this board adversely to the importer in an unpublished decision filed June 26, 1902, in the matter of protest 78,671-F of Adolf Kraut. The board in that ease said: “The fact that the bags have printed matter thereon will not make them dutiable under paragraph 403. The articles are paper bags, and have become by a process of manufacture a distinct article for use as such, and the printing thereon is merely incidental thereto, and is not a controlling feature.” It may be observed that cartons and boxes made of paper frequently have on the outside some printing to indicate the character, quantity, or quality of the merchandise packed .and sold therein, yet it cannot be said that those articles are properly dutiable as printed matter; and these bags are in this particular in precisely the same category. The board decision referred to above was affirmed, without opinion, by the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York, December 17, 1903, in the case of Kraut v. United States, 130 Fed. 392. Howard T. Walden, for Importer. Henry A. Wise, Asst. U. S. Atty. Before HAZEL, District Judge. [MAJORITY] At the conclusion of the argument the court affirmed the decision of the Board of General Appraisers, without opinion.