The committee at Hamburg have decided to receive articles used for ordinary domestic purposes, such as churns, washing-machines, pails, brooms, etc., of which we anticipate a large variety.

Our carriages and wagons will command special attention, as the American style of vehicles are held in high estimation.

Samples of provisions, lard, flour, mazena, etc., will be duly appreciated by the committee.

An especial interest is felt in Germany in regard to the part we shall take in this exhibition, and we are assured that the invitation to the different countries in Europe to unite in this project, has met with a warm response. The English manufacturers of agricultural implements and machinery have made arrangements for a large display. The French Minister of the Interior has issued a circular calling upon the citizens of the Empire to give it countenance and support. The Swedish government has voted money in its aid. Orders have been received from Russia for the purchase of American implements and machinery at the Fair -and probably every European nation will have its representatives there. The unfortunate effect, therefore, of a meagre show on our part may be easily conceived, and we shall do ourselves great injustice if we neglect this favorable opportunity of giving ample evidence of the spirit and resources of the "Great Republic."

Messrs. AUSTIN, BALDWIN & Co., of the city of New York, are the duly authorized agents of the Hamburg Committee, to whom all consignments for the exhibition must be made, and who will pay all the expenses of transportation from any part of the United States to the city of Hamburg, to the extent of the funds contributed, which are presumed to be sufficient for the purpose.

Messrs. JAMES R. McDONALD & Co., of Hamburg, have been appointed to receive and take special charge of all articles sent from the United States to the exhibition, and in absence of the owner, will see that they are properly exhibited, and sold if are desired, in which case prompt remittances will be made through the agency in New York.

The extensive grounds in the vicinity of Hamburg, covering eighty acres, have been laid out for the exhibition, plans of which, together with any further information, may be had on application to Messrs. AUSTIN, BALDWIN & Co.

First class steamers will sail from New York direct for Hamburg on the 30th of May, and 13th and 27th of June. It is my purpose to sail on the first date named. I would recommend that delegates should leave as early as the 13th of June, though the following steamer will probably arrive in time for the opening of the exhibition, which is on the 14th of July. The passage to delegates will be reduced 25 per cent from the regular rates.

Letters and communications addressed to me should be sent to the care of Messrs AUSTIN, BALDWIN & Co., No. 72 Broadway.

JOSEPH A. WRIGHT, U. S. Commissioner.

NEW YORK, May 14, 1863.

DECISIONS OF TREASURY DEPARTMENT UNDER THE TARIFF ACT OF JULY 14, 1862.

The following decisions have been made by the Secretary of the Treasury, of questions arising upon appeals by importers from the decisions of collectors, relating to the proper classification, under the tariff act of July 14, 1862, of certain articles of foreign manufacture and production entered at the ports of Boston and New York:

DUNNAGE MATS.

Treasury Department, March 31, 1863.

SIR: The appeal of ROBERT B. STORER from your decision assessing duty on the charge of dunnage mats contained in invoices of certain sheet iron imported by him, has been considered.

The appellant alleges: "These mats being the ordinary article of dunnage used in vessels from Russia, were bought and used solely for that purpose for the protection of the article which they accompanied, and therefore properly no more subject to duty than old boards and wood used to ceil the vessel or to raise the cargo from the vessel's floor" and "That no more mats were used than were absolutely needed."

The admission, on the part of the appellant, that the mats in question were a charge in the invoices, should, of itself, clearly establish the correctness of your decision.

It is, however, the law and the practice that no article of merchantable value shall be landed from the vessel in which they have been imported without the payment of or security for the payment of impost, if warehoused, unless they are made free of duty by the existing tariffs. In the case cited of "Old boards and wood used to ceil the vessel or to raise the cargo from the vessel's floor," duty would be assessed thereon, if of any merchantable value, when landed.

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

S. P. CHASE, Secretary of the Treasury. To J. Z. GOODRICH, Esq., Collector, Boston, Mass.

WASTE FUR.

Treasury Department, April 24, 1863.

SIR: Messrs. W. A. & A. M. WHITE appeal from your decision assessing a duty of 20 per cent on certain hatters' furs, imported by them per ships "Dreadnought" and "B. Adams," from Liverpool, and claim to enter them at 10 per cent, under section 19 of the act of March 2, 1861, as "furs rot on the skin from undressed skins."

It is alleged by the appellants, and admitted by the experts of the customs, that the article in question "is cut from same skins, at same time, and by same process as other fur which is allowed to come in under the old duty of 10 per cent."

This does not, however, make it a fur, but, on the contrary, clearly establishes its character as waste," as its production is an unavoidable incident to a process for obtaining the fur from skins.

In General Regulations, June 1, 1856, there is a decision classifying "waste silk, waste linen, or the waste or clipping of any other cloth, with

waste or shoddy ;" and this is reaffirmed in General Regulations, February 1, 1857, page 590, with the addition of or hatters' skins."

66

The principle of these decisions this Department sees no reason to change.

Under section 19 of the act of March 2, 1861, flocks, waste or shoddy, was subject to a duty of 10 per cent; and under section 6 of the act of July 14, 1862, an additional duty of 10 per cent is imposed.

The article in question was classified as "waste fur" by you, and as such subjected to a duty at the rate of 20 per cent.

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury.

TO HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., Collector, New York.

COUNTRIES BEYOND THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.

Treasury Department, April 24, 1863.

SIR: The following question has been presented to this Department: What is the proper interpretation or meaning of the words, "goods, wares, and merchandise of the growth or produce of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope when imported from places this side of the Cape of Good Hope," as used in section 14 of tariff act of July 14, 1862 ?

I am of the opinion that by "countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope" is meant all countries with which we carry on commercial intercourse by means of vessels passing by or around the Cape of Good Hope, in a westwardly direction when sailing to this country, and which, in the ordinary course of navigation, are reached from here and from England by vessels passing by or around the Cape of Good Hope eastwardly.

In connection with this subject, I consider it necessary to say that all goods, wares, and merchandise of the growth or produce of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope, when imported from places this side of the Cape of Good Hope, are subject to the additional duty of 10 per cent, unless their character, quality, and condition be entirely changed by manufacture or otherwise. For example, Manilla hemp, if manufactured into cordage in England, would not on the importation of said cordage into this country be subject to the additional duty of 10 per cent; in such a case its distinctiveness as hemp would be merged in its new condition. I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury. HIRAM BARNEY, Collector, &c., N. Y.

Ginger root, (FRESH OR GREEN)..

Treasury Department, May 6, 1863.

SIR: Messrs. LUN, Wo & Co. have appealed from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 5 cents per pound on certain "ginger root" imported by them from Hong Kong.

The appellants submit, "that, in their opinion, the ginger root contemplated in the tariff is the dried ginger root known in the trade and to druggists; whereas the ginger root which comes from China is fresh-the juice running out if cut-sprouting on the voyage, often one-half of the quantity shipped arriving in a rotten state, &c."

Messrs. LUN, Wo & Co. claim to enter the article in question as an unenumerated vegetable, liable to 10 per cent ad valorem duty.

Section 5 of the Tariff act of July 14, 1862, imposes a duty of 5 cents per pound on "ginger root;" and in the. absence of any provision for green" or "fresh" ginger root, this rate must prevail.

66

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury.

TO IRA P. RANKIN, Esq., Collector, San Francisco.

GOODS ORDERED, ETC., PREVIOUS TO THE ACT OF JULY 14, 1862, TAK

ING EFFECT.

Treasury Department, April 22, 1863.

SIR: The appeal of GEO. ROGGE from your decision assessing duty, in accordance with the tariff act of July 14, 1862, on three bales of woolens imported by him per "Aristides " from Antwerp, is before me.

The appellant says: "1st. The goods in question were contracted for in Europe, and on shipboard, and bill of lading signed, previous to any intention having been made known by Congress to amend or alter the tariff acts of March 2, 1861, August 5, 1861, and December 24, 1861; and such being the case, claim to enter them under the provisions of the last named acts of 1861.

"2d. That the clause in the act taking effect on the 1st of August, 1862, imposing the new duty on goods on shipboard,' is not equitable or just, as it places the merchant at the mercy of any sudden changes made in the tariff, and thereby causes him to sustain heavy pecuniary losses."

It will be perceived that the appellant does not allege that the duty was erroneously or illegally exacted, but simply complains of the want of equity and oppressiveness of the act of Congress of July 14, 1862.

As this Department has no authority to question the policy of any act of Congress, I dismiss the appeal and hereby affirm your decision. I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Secretary of the Treasury. HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., Collector, &c., N. Y.

COTTON-NEW ORLEANS AND SURAT.

Treasury Department, April 23, 1863.

SIR: I have considered your report on the appeal of HENRY S. SHAW from your decision assessing duty, at the rate of one-half cent per pound, on 200 bales of New Orleans cotton, and one-half cent per pound and 10 per cent ad valorem on 195 bales Surat cotton, imported by him from Liverpool.

66

The appellant alleges that the "200 bales are exempt from duty, being the production of the United States returned to this country," and claims the whole as entitled to free entry, it having been ordered sometime before the passage of the tariff act of July 14, 1862, and bought and shipped on board the vessels before the 1st of August, 1862."

It appears that the appellant has failed to produce the evidence required by law to entitle the 200 bales to free entry. The duty of one-half cent per pound and 10 per cent ad valorem assessed on the 195 bales Surat

cotton was strictly in accordance with the tariff act of July 14, 1862, section 8 of which imposes the one-half cent per pound, and section 14 authorizes the additional 10 per cent ad valorem "on all goods, wares, and merchandise of the growth or produce of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope, when imported from places this side of the Cape of Good Hope."

The claim that both parcels are entitled to free entry because the order was given and the cotton on board the vessels before the passage of the act of July 14, 1862, is groundless.

The 21st section of this act provides that "all goods on shipboard ou the 1st day of August, 1862, shall be subject to the duties prescribed by this act." There is no exemption of goods ordered, purchased, or shipped prior to its passage.

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury.

J. Z. GOODRICH, Esq., Collector, &c., Boston, Mass.

RAGS.

Treasury Department, April 25, 1863.

SIR: I have considered the appeals dated February 5 and March 17, 1863, of Wm. B. WOOD, from your decisions assessing duty, at the rate of 10 per cent ad valorem, under section 14 of the tariff act of July 14, 1862, as "East India Rags," on certain rags imported by him per "Neptune" and "Columbia."

In the appeal of February 5, the appellant says: "Had we entered them as rags, without any such description as 'Calcutta,' they would have been passed free, as the balance were."

In the appeal of March 17, the appellant says: "We have now an invoice of paper stock marked 'Surat gunny,' and the same duty of 10 per cent is demanded by the collector of this port;" furthermore, that “‘Calcutta' are light thin rags, and so called because they describe such rags as would be collected from worn-out garments of hot climates. But whether the rags were actually collected in the East Indies, or were selected from among those collected in Europe, we believe it impossible to decide."

The experts of the customs say the rags in question "appear to us to be Calcutta or East India produce, and were baled in material and manner similar to goods imported from these places. We therefore reported them as 'from beyond the Cape,' under 14th section act of July 14, 1862; and this we should have done if the bales had not been stamped nor invoiced as 'Calcutta or Surat.'"

The appellant having failed to show that the rags were the produce of a country this side of the Cape of Good Hope, and the reasons of the experts for classifying them as the produce of a country beyond the Cape of Good Hope being substantial and according to usage, the terms of the law leave no discretion.

Your decision is affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON. Acting Sec. of the Treasury. HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., Collector, &c., N. Y.