(3510.) Damage Allowance on Tin Plates. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 26, 1878. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 20th instant, further in regard to the appeal (7424 e) of Messrs. N. L. Coit & Co. from your decision refusing an abatement of duty on account of damage occurring, on the voyage of importation, to certain tin plates imported into your port per the "Germanic," December 17, 1877. It appears that you refused such allowance for damage, because of a doubt entertained by your officers as to whether abatement for duty on account of such damage is not barred by the provision in Schedule E of the Revised Statutes, which prescribes that no allowance or reduction of duties for partial loss or damage shall be hereafter made in consequence of rust to iron or steel, or upon the manufactures of iron or steel, except upon polished Russia sheet-iron. Under date of January 23, 1863, the Department addressed the following letter to the Collector at New York: "SIR: Your letter' of the 12th instant, reporting upon the application of Messrs. Phelps, Dodge & Co. for abatement of duty on certain tin plates, damaged on the voyage of importation, has been received. "I am of opinion, upon consideration, that the article in question does not fall within the intent of the third section of the act of 14th of July, 1862, and that Messrs. Phelps, Dodge & Co. are entitled to abatement to the extent of damage sustained on the voyage of importation. "Respectfully, "S. P. CHASE, "Secretary of the Treasury." The third section of the act of July 14, 1862, is the one from which the provision in Schedule E of the Revised Statutes, before mentioned, was taken. It is understood that the practice at your port, and at the other ports of the United States, has since been in accordance with the decision of January 23, 1863. The Department is of opinion that this decision should control in the present and other like cases, and you are therefore authorized to pursue the usual course in granting damage allowance on the merchandise embraced in this appeal. * You will conform your general practice to the decision herein made, Very respectfully, JOHN SHERMAN, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, New York. Secretary. (3511.) American Bags Exported filled with Foreign Dye-wood ground in United States, Dutiable on Reimportation. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 26, 1878. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter, without date, received at the Department on the 18th instant, in which you ask whether bags, of domestic manufacture, exported filled with foreign dye-wood which has been ground in the United States, would be exempt from duty when returned empty, provided a declaration of intent to return the same empty is filed at the time of exportation. In reply, you are informed that the only provision of law bearing upon the question is that found in the free list, as follows: "American manufactures of casks, barrels, or carboys, and other vessels, and grain-bags, [the manufacture of the United States,] if exported containing American produce, and declaration be made of intent to return the same empty under such regulations as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury." It will be observed that bags, barrels, and other vessels which, under this provision of law, may be returned free, must have been exported containing an article the produce of the United States. This would seem to refer more especially to the products of the soil, and whether such limitation should be applied or not, it is the opinion of the Department that foreign dye-woods ground in the United States are not the produce of the United States within the meaning of this law. The bags, therefore, referred to by you would not be entitled to free . entry on their return, under the provision of law above mentioned. Very respectfully, Mr. C. W. SLADE, Boston, Mass. JOHN SHERMAN, Secretary. (3512.) Fog-Signals. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 27, 1878. SIR: In response to your letter of the 25th instant, I enclose herewith five (5) copies of the official circular of this Department, No. 28, series of 1877, which contains the steering, sailing, &c., rules now in force. Further copies of this circular may be obtained from any collector of customs in the United States. This circular, from rule 1 to rule 25, inclusive, is taken bodily from the laws of the United States found in the Revised Statutes, sections 4233 and 4234, and the remainder of the circular, headed "Additional rules," consists of recommendations formulated by the Board of Supervising Inspectors of Steam-vessels, in pursuance of the authority conferred by section 4412 of the Revised Statutes. For your further information I have also to say: 1. The general alarm-signal referred to in your letter is not called for by the circular enclosed, and is not required by law. 2. The fog-signals required by law are set forth in rule 15, and, with the recommendation of the Board of Supervising Inspectors of Steamvessels, appearing on the last page of the circular, constitute all the regulations to be observed by vessels in fogs. 3. The bell mentioned in the law is understood to be the bell generally known as a "watch-bell," and usually carried on sea-going vessels. There is no penalty for not having such a bell, but should a vessel be caught in a fog and not sound one, as required by law, a fine of $200 attaches. It is therefore suggested that it would be well for all vessels to be supplied with such bells. 4. The terms roadstead and fairway, as used in the law, are understood to include, and to be restricted to, all the navigable waters of the United States. Your remarks upon the lack of uniformity in the rig of steering wheels will receive the consideration of the Department. Very respectfully, L. S. CHASE, Esq., New Bedford, Mass. (3513.) H. F. FRENCH, Assistant Secretary. Tare-Weight of Bands securing Iron Rods. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 27, 1878. SIR: The Department is informed that it is the practice at some ports to allow, as tare, the weight of bands of iron wire surrounding coiled iron rods, while at other ports no such allowance is made. You are informed that the weight of the bands mentioned may properly be allowed for, when they consist of the bands ordinarily used for securing such wire rods, and are of little or no commercial value. Very respectfully, By order: H. F. FRENCH, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Philadelphia, Pa. (3514.) Cushions in part of Wool-Duty on. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 27, 1878. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter dated the 5th instant, submitting the appeal (7584 e) of Messrs. Shun Yuen & Co. from your assessment of duty at the rate of 50 cents per pound on the weight returned by the United States weigher of certain cushions imported by them per "City of Tokio." From your report and an inspection of the sample submitted by you, it appears that the article is 18 by 24 inches in size, and intended for a cushion for a chair or other seat. It is composed of cane and linen cloth stuffed with straw, and is covered upon one side with red woollen cloth similar to flannel. Referring to the decision of the 17th of February, 1877, (Synopsis 3117,) in an analogous case, the Department decides that the cushion may be properly classified under the provision in Schedule K, for house furniture, and that duty at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem should be assessed thereon, without the assessment of any specific duty. You will therefore readjust the entry accordingly, and take the usual measures for the refund of any duties levied in excess. Very respectfully, H. F. FRENCH, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco, Cal. (3515.) Parchment Scroll, Imitation of Antiquity-Duty on. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 27, 1878. SIR: The Department is in receipt of your letter of the 15th instant, transmitting the appeal (7581 e) of Lindsay & Baker from your decision. assessing duty at the rate of 35 per cent. ad valorem on a certain socalled manuscript parchment scroll, contained in an ivory case, imported per "Sarmatian," on the 4th ultimo, which the appellants claim to be exempt from duty, and which was returned by the appraiser as a manufacture of ivory, wood, and parchment. It is understood that the scroll contains the book of Esther, in Hebrew characters, divided into squares, with fancy borders of female figures, &c., surrounding the same, and that it is rolled in a handsomely-carved and well-preserved ivory case. The appraiser reports that he has made a very careful examination of the scroll, with the microscope and otherwise, and that he is of opinion that the characters and figures imprinted thereon are not manuscript, but rather lithographic productions, and that such opinion is strengthened by the facts that the figures are repeated with uniform regularity, and the lines are drawn with a degree of accuracy towards the objects presented which could not be the case were they wrought by hand. The appraiser also states that in his opinion the article is not an "antiquity." The Department. therefore decides that the claim of the appellants must be rejected, and that the article was properly subjected to duty at the rate of 35 per cent. ad valorem, as a manufacture of ivory, wood, and parchment, under section 2499, Revised Statutes, and Schedules K and M. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 27, 1878. SIR: Referring to this Department's letter, dated the 25th instant, authorizing you to permit books and printed matter imported by post from Canada, in unsealed packages, to proceed, after being marked, to any place in the United States at which there is a custom-house, and to which they are addressed, I transmit herewith, for your information, · a copy of Circular No. 3, dated January 8, 1878, in which is embodied the existing regulations of the Post Office Department in reference to importations through the mails. Very respectfully, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Detroit, Mich. H. F. FRENCH, Assistant Secretary. [Circular referred to above.] Circular-Importations through the Mail. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 8, 1878. The following regulations regarding importations through the mails, promulgated by the Postmaster General as a substitute for his regula |