J. Orlando Co. v. United States

43 Cust. Ct. 115, 177 F. Supp. 779, 1959 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 23
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1959
DocketC.D. 2114
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 43 Cust. Ct. 115 (J. Orlando Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
J. Orlando Co. v. United States, 43 Cust. Ct. 115, 177 F. Supp. 779, 1959 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 23 (cusc 1959).

Opinion

LawRehce, Judge:

A number of importations of rosary bracelets covered by the protests enumerated in the schedule attached to and made part of this decision, which cases were consolidated for trial, were classified by the collector of customs as articles or wares not specially provided for, plated with silver on metals other than nickel silver or copper, but not in chief .value of silver, in paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 397), as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802, and subjected to duty at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem.

It is the contention of plaintiffs that the rosary bracelets in controversy should properly have been classified as rosaries, chaplets, and similar articles of religious devotion within the purview of paragraph 1544 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 1544), as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, supra, and by the Torquay protocol to said general agreement, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, which provides a rate of duty for such articles of 15 per centum ad valorem.

We here set forth the pertinent provisions of the statutes—

Paragraph 397, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, supra:

Articles or wares not specially provided for, whether partly or wholly manufactured:
*******
Plated with silver on metals other than nickel silver or copper, but not in chief value of silver-35% ad val.

Paragraph 1544, as modified by the general agreement, supra-.

Rosaries, chaplets, and similar articles of religious devotion, of whatever material composed (except if made in whole or in part of gold, silver, platinum, gold plate, silver plate, or precious or imitation precious stones), regardless of value_15% ad val.

Paragraph 1544, as modified by the Torquay protocol, supra:

Rosaries, chaplets, and similar articles of religious devotion:
Made in whole or in part of gold, silver, platinum, gold plate, silver plate, or precious or imitation precious stones_15% ad val.

The testimonial record in this case consists of the testimony of three witnesses who appeared on behalf of plaintiff and two for the defendant.

The first of plaintiffs’ witnesses was James J. Orlando of the firm Of The J. Orlando Co., Inc., importer of religious articles of the Roman Catholic faith, consisting of statuary, marble and wood carvings, .rosaries, religious medals on chains, and religious novelties. He stated that he was familiar with the rosary bracelets before the court [117]*117and identified a sample thereof, which was received in evidence as plaintiffs’ exhibit 1.

It consists of a silver-plated chain with 11 imitation pearl beads, the last bead being separated from the other 10 by a longer section of chain, a connecting ring and clasp, and an Immaculate Conception medal and a crucifix.

Orlando stated that this article is sold to religious stores, religious jobbers, and dealers throughout the United States as a rosary bracelet and that he has actually seen articles like exhibit 1 used by individuals in the Catholic Church and in subways for the purpose of keeping count of the prayers in the rosary.

He testified that a rosary is a string of beads used to keep count of prayers and that Homan Catholics, of which he is one, regard the rosary as a sequence of prayers in honor of the Blessed Virgin, consisting of 15 decades, each decade of 10 Hail Marys preceded by an Our Father and ending with a Gloria Patri. During the recitation of a decade, the person praying is to meditate on one of the Fifteen Mysteries, which is the reason why there were originally 15 decades.

He stated that normally a member of the Roman Catholic faith uses a 5-decade rosary, consisting of 59 beads, with a prayer said on each of the beads.

A pamphlet explaining the prayers to be said on the 59-bead rosary was introduced in evidence as plaintiffs’ illustrative exhibit 2.

The witness testified that there were various kinds of rosaries, in his experience, some of which are the Infant of Prague, a chaplet of 15 beads; the St. Ann chaplet of 18 beads; and the St. Anthony chaplet of 42 beads. Samples of said rosaries were introduced in evidence as plaintiffs’ collective illustrative exhibit 3. A 59-bead rosary was introduced in evidence as plaintiffs’ illustrative exhibit 4 to illustrate the standard type of rosary used by Catholics. This rosary contains 5 decades, each decade consisting of 10 Hail Mary beads and a bead separated from the series of 10, for the Our Father prayer.

It was Orlando’s testimony that the purpose of all rosaries was to keep count of prayers being recited in honor of the Blessed Virgin or other saints.

In comparing the arrangement of beads in exhibits 1 and 4, the witness stated that exhibit 1 contained one decade for the Hail Mary prayers and a separate bead for the Our Father prayer, or one-fifth of the standard rosary represented by exhibit 4.

The witness said rosaries were composed of various materials, including silver and gold with beads of wood, plastic, glass, or precious metals, and of various degrees or ornateness.

Catalogs of two manufacturers of religious goods, William J. Hir-ten and Frederich Singer & Sons, were introduced in evidence as plain[118]*118tiffs’ collective illustrative exhibit 5 to show that articles like exhibit 1 were offered in the trade as rosary bracelets.

The witness then stated that he had never seen articles like exhibit 1 on sale in a jewelry store nor had he heard them referred to as jewelry.

On cross-examination, it was the witness’ testimony that a rosary bracelet would not be a good delivery for an order for a regular rosary of 59 beads or for a rosary of any of the types found in illustrative exhibit 3. The witness stated that the rosary bracelet is dedicated to the Blessed Mother, the Mother of God. He stated that this article is worn by females on the wrist on all occasions. He identified a booklet of instruction, issued by the Roman Catholic Church for the recital of the rosary, which was received in evidence as defendant’s exhibit A.

On redirect examination, the witness testified that, in view of the arrangement of the beads in exhibit 1 and the presence of the medal and crucifix, it was his opinion that the article is worn to say the rosary when “you have the opportunity to do so” and that by repeating the prayers on the beads five times the entire rosary has been said.

In response to questions by the bench, the witness stated that a chaplet has a lesser number of beads than a rosary. He also stated that rosaries are sometimes worn about the neck and sometimes carried in the pocket. The witness said that the rosary bracelet, exhibit 1, provided an inconspicuous and convenient means of reciting the rosary and that, in his opinion, such bracelets were not worn for ornamentation but simply to have the beads available when the opportunity arose to say the rosary.

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

Related

Panation Trade Co. v. United States
48 Cust. Ct. 452 (U.S. Customs Court, 1962)
Devon Trading Co. v. United States
48 Cust. Ct. 451 (U.S. Customs Court, 1962)
Catholic Mfg. Co. v. United States
46 Cust. Ct. 490 (U.S. Customs Court, 1961)
Friedman v. United States
45 Cust. Ct. 342 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)
Catholic Manufacturing Co. v. United States
45 Cust. Ct. 245 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 Cust. Ct. 115, 177 F. Supp. 779, 1959 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 23, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-orlando-co-v-united-states-cusc-1959.