American Bead Co. v. United States

5 Ct. Cust. 459, 1914 WL 21680, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 128
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedDecember 14, 1914
DocketNo. 1341
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 5 Ct. Cust. 459 (American Bead Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Customs and Patent Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
American Bead Co. v. United States, 5 Ct. Cust. 459, 1914 WL 21680, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 128 (ccpa 1914).

Opinion

Martin, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion of the court:

The merchandise consists of small rounded disks of commercial agate, white in color, and pierced with a single hole through the center. They were invoiced by the importers as agate beads.

The appraiser reported the articles to be parts of agate buttons, and returned the same for duty as such under paragraph 427 of the tariff act of 1909. They were accordingly assessed with duty under that paragraph.

■ The importers protested against the assessment, contending that the merchandise was beads and therefore dutiable under the eo nomine provision for beads of all kinds contained in paragraph 421 of the same act.

This issue was tried upon evidence before the Board of General Appraisers and the board overruled the protest. The importers now prosecute their appeal from that decision.

The following is a copy of the pertinent parts of the two paragraphs thus relied upon by the respective parties:

421. Beads and spangles of all kinds, including imitation pearl beads, not threaded or strung, or strung loosely on thread for facility in transportation only, thirty-five per centum ad valorem; * * *.
427. Buttons or parts of buttons and button molds or blanks, finished or unfinished, shall pay duty at the following rates, the line-button measure being one-fortieth of one inch, namely: Buttons known commercially as agate buttons, * * * one-twelfth of one cent per line per gross; * * * and in addition thereto, on all the foregoing articles in this paragraph, fifteen per centum ad valorem; * * *.

The issue therefore is whether the importations were dutiable as beads under paragraph 421 or as parts of agate buttons under paragraph 427, both above copied.

It convincingly appears from the testimony that the present articles are simply certain sizes of similar articles made in many differ[460]*460ent sizes, all of which had been the subjects of importations into this country for more than 30 years next preceding the tariff revision of 1909. During all but the last few years of that period the merchandise figured exclusively in the bead trade, being imported by bead houses only and being known commercially as agate beads. In use the articles were strung upon ornamental strands, either alone or together with beads of other colors and materials. Such strands were cheap in character, generally selling for 5 or 10 cents apiece in the retail trade.

A few years prior to the tariff revision of 1909 a new use was found for the articles, which speedily became their chief use. By chance it was observed by a button manufacturer that in point of size and form these articles resembled certain button blanks made of pearl, ivory, glass, or other materials, and used as bodies in the manufacture of shanked buttons. Such button blanks were rounded disks like these with single perforations, through which metal shanks could be twisted by machinery, thus converting them into completed buttons. Upon experiment it was found that the present articles were susceptible of the same use by means of the same machinery, thus affording a cheap and suitable body for the manufacture of such buttons. Nor did this appear to be an abnormal or irregular use of the articles in question, for they were exactly suitable therefor in point of size, shape, material, and cost of production. And they were similar in size and shape to button blanks made of other substances for similar use in the manufacture of shanked buttons. Such buttons are largely used as shoe buttons. They are also sewed upon certain kinds of garments, and when made with agate bodies they are of course known commercially as agate buttons They are also made into sleeve and collar links, composed of two buttons held together by metal links.

The history of this development is told by the importers’ witness, Plarry S. Neumann, whose testimony upon that subject is here copied. The date of his examination as a witness was December 1, 1913. According to his statement the transactions of which he speaks began about seven years before that time, or about the close of 1906, being more than two years before the enactment of the tariff act of 1909.

Q. Are you familiar with the merchandise the subject of this hearing? — A. Yes, sir,
Q. You, I believe, testified that you bought these articles and used them largely in the manufacture of fancy buttons? — A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long is it since you first found that these articles were capable of being used by you in the manufacture of buttons? — A. I should say about seven years.
Q. At that time what was there — a machine developed, or what — that enabled you to make buttons out of these articles? — A. A demand sprang up for a shoe button. We were making them in pearl and we found them rather expensive. The trade wanted something cheaper. I happened to walk by the American Bead Co. ’s window [461]*461on Broadway and saw agate beads in the window. I went into the American Bead Co., whom I had never known before, and asked to see some of those samples. They showed me samples. I took the beads and we went to the factory and took those beads and put them in the same machine that we have to make pearl buttons with a revolving shank on, and they worked satisfactorily.
Q. At that time that you devoted yourself to getting beads for this use, did you not notice at all what the finish on the one side was, whether they were equally finished on both sides, or whether one was rough? — A. One was always rough, because we put the rivets through the well finished side. In other words, the rough was the back.
Q. And these beads bought from the American Bead Co. were bought out of stock?— A. We bought samples out of stock. They only carried a limited quantity.
Q. Subsequent to your development of this use for the article, did you buy from other people? Did you see other people who were the manufacturers of these to see whether the demand for your raw material could be filled? — A. Yes; after buying from the American Bead Co. I went to Europe to one of the syndicates that makes these goods in Austria and I went to Germany and bought them from another manu facturen We also bought them in France.
Q. How many manufacturers are there of these agate beads in the world that you know of? — A. To my knowledge there are five manufacturers.
Q. And have you bought these articles from all five of them? — A. Well, only four of them make this special class of goods, but we have bought them, I believe, of every one of them.
Q. Have you had samples submitted to you before purchase of their regular agate beads? — A. Well, we simply buy them according to the special sizes.
Q. Before buying, you see their product? — A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were those samples thus submitted finished on both sides or have they all this same defect of having one side finished and one rough side? — A. Always the same; always the same traces of being rough on one side.
Q. Do you know why that peculiarity of having one rough side and one finished side exists in the case of agate beads? — A.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Randolph Rand Corp. v. United States
45 Cust. Ct. 130 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)
Vandegrift v. United States
15 Ct. Cust. 165 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1927)
Lorsch v. United States
13 Ct. Cust. 172 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1925)
Auffmordt v. United States
7 Ct. Cust. 56 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Ct. Cust. 459, 1914 WL 21680, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-bead-co-v-united-states-ccpa-1914.