New York Merchandise Co. v. United States

8 Cust. Ct. 209, 1942 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 32
United States Customs Court·Decided April 1, 1942·No. C. D. 607·Published·Cited by 43 cases

Opinion

Dallinger, Judge:

This is a suit against the United States, arising at the port of New York, brought to recover certain customs duties alleged to have been improperly exacted on a particular impor[210] tation of brass shells. Duty was levied thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as manufactures of metal not specially provided for. It is claimed that said articles are properly dutiable at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 353 of said act as parts of articles suitable for producing or distributing electrical energy, or, alternatively, at the same rate under the same paragraph as parts of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device.

This case was originally decided on November 6, 1940, Abstract 44688, and is again before us as the result of a rehearing granted the Government.

At the first hearing, held at New York on October 9, 1939, it was stipulated by and between counsel for the respective parties that the merchandise herein was similar in all material respects to that passed upon by this court in N. Minami & Co., Inc. v. United States, Abstract 37615, 73 Treas. Dec. 1104.

Samples of the merchandise at bar were admitted in evidence as collective exhibit 1, and a Christmas-tree lighting set, of which the imported article is alleged to form an essential and indispensable part, was admitted in evidence as illustrative exhibit A.

In addition to said exhibits, the plaintiff offered in evidence the testimony of Abraham L. Buschman, who is in charge of the electrical department of the plaintiff-corporation. After identifying the exhibits, he testified in part as follows:

Q. Will you please state how Exhibit 1 is used in connection with Illustrative Exhibit A?' — A. The screw shells are set into the insulated material and electric wires lead to each individual brass screw shell, and the wire leads to the next socket or the next outlet and at the end we have an outlet connecting the electric wires to a plug which in turn can be inserted in electric current so as to carry the electricity through the entire string.
Q. What is the function of Collective Exhibit 1 in connection with Illustrative Exhibit A?- — A. The function of the brass shell is to distribute the electrical current through any lamp that may be inserted in there.
Hi Hi H« H? * Hi Hi
Q. In other words, if there were seven lights in each one of these seven sockets, by placing the plug into the source of the electric current you would produce light in the seven lamps; is that correct? — A. That’s right. But it is not necessary to put a lamp in each of the sockets. If you put a lamp in one socket you would still have a light from that one lamp.
Judge Dallingek. In other words, you can place a lamp in one socket or in all of them?
The Witness. Yes, sir.
By Mr. Mandell.
Hi ^ Hi ^ ‡ * H«
Q. Is that the only use to which Collective Exhibit 1 is put that you know?— A. That is the only use I know of. That is the purpose for which we manufacture them.
[211] Q. As far as you know, they have no pther use?- — A. No.
Q. They are specially designed for that use? — A. They are specially designed for Christmas tree outdoor lighting sets.
* * * * * *
Q. Is Collective Exhibit 1 an integral part of Illustrative Exhibit A? — A. Yes, sir.
* ***.** *
Q. What is the essential feature of Collective Exhibit 1? — A. Being an integral part of that entire unit. The unit cannot function without these brass shells. The brass shells carry the current through the wire.

On cross-examination the witness testified in part as follows:

X Q. What does the? word “intermediate” mean in connection with these brass shells? — A. It refers to size.
X Q. Only to size? — A. Only to size.
X Q. The reason you call that an outdoor Christmas tree lighting set is because the wiring is covered with rain resistant or water resistant material, isn’t that right? — A. Not only that, but the sockets are pitched as well.
X Q. So the water will not get inside of them? A. That’s right.
* * * * * * *
X Q. What is the difference between the intermediate shells and miniature shells? — A. Only the size.
X Q. No other difference? — A.- Only in size.

On redirect examination the witness testified in part as follows:

R Q. * * * Can this set that is used for outdoor electric lighting operate with the removal of these female base shells? — A. No, sir.
R Q. The function of Exhibit 1 in Illustrative Exhibit A is not merely as a holder or container for the bulb, is it? — A. No.
R Q. Its function is also to distribute electric current to the lamp, is that correct? — A. It is connected by electric wires so it can distribute the electric current to the lamps.

At the second hearing, held at New York on December 11, 1939, the Government offered in evidence the testimony of T. Jefferey Cook, an electrical contractor, who testified in part as follows:

Q. Now, I show you Plaintiff’s Collective Exhibit 1 in the case at bar and ask you if you are familiar with that merchandise? — A. Yes, sir.
‡ ‡ ‡ ‡
Q. In your experience, is a set of Christmas tree lights like Illustrative Exhibit A the only use to which those sockets are put, the. only use to which the female brass shell is put? In other words, is it limited to making Christmas tree lighting sets? — A. No; it could be used for other things.
Q. Could be used in any socket where that sized light is to be used? — A. It could be, yes.
:ji H: # # % H*
Q. Now, are you familiar with the smaller shell known as the midget size?— A. It is a candelabra size. That is medium or intermediate; the next size smaller is candelabra, and then miniature.
Q. Are you familiar with miniature? — A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the miniature shells, the Christmas tree lighting sets are put up in series rather than parallel, are they not? — A. The miniature shells are used in series lighting because the current is less than ordinary voltage in the house.'

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

New York Merchandise Co. v. United States, 8 Cust. Ct. 209, 1942 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 32 (cusc 1942).

8 Cust. Ct. 209 (New York Merchandise Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United States
67 Cust. Ct. 348 (U.S. Customs Court, 1971)
Davies v. United States
58 Cust. Ct. 334 (U.S. Customs Court, 1967)
Gallagher & Ascher Co. v. United States
57 Cust. Ct. 348 (U.S. Customs Court, 1966)
Protests 977742-G of New York Merchandise Co.
17 Cust. Ct. 175 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Protest 947310-G of New York Merchandise Co.
17 Cust. Ct. 175 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Protests 937098-K of New York Merchandise Co.
17 Cust. Ct. 171 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Protest 976801-G of New York Merchandise Co.
17 Cust. Ct. 171 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
New York Merchandise Co. v. United States
16 Cust. Ct. 148 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Globe Lighting Fixture Mfg. Co. v. United States
16 Cust. Ct. 31 (U.S. Customs Court, 1946)
Protests 113005-K of New York Merchandise Co.
14 Cust. Ct. 238 (U.S. Customs Court, 1945)
Protest 977751-G of N. Y. Merchandise Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 273 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protests 33745-K of N. Y. Mdse. Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 273 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protests 20425-K of New York Merchandise Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 238 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protest 79101-K of New York Merchandise Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 223 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protests 977722-G of New York Merchandise Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 224 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protest 807799-G of Thomas Import Co.
10 Cust. Ct. 461 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protest 966945-G of New York Merchandise Co.
10 Cust. Ct. 461 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protests 92685-K of New York Merchandise Co.
10 Cust. Ct. 449 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protests 93783-K of New York Merchandise Co.
10 Cust. Ct. 450 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)
Protest 844419-G of N. Y. Merchandise Co.
10 Cust. Ct. 440 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)