Philbin v. United States

52 Cust. Ct. 141, 1964 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1321
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedMay 4, 1964
DocketC.D. 2451
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 52 Cust. Ct. 141 (Philbin 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
Philbin v. United States, 52 Cust. Ct. 141, 1964 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1321 (cusc 1964).

Opinion

Kao, Judge:

Plaintiff, a customhouse broker, imported certain items of merchandise for the account of the Syntax Society, a nonprofit corporation incorporated under the laws of Louisiana. Included in the importations were the following articles:

Carnival masks, assessed with duty at the rate of 20 per centum ad valorem, as manufactures, wholly or in chief value of cotton, as provided in paragraph 923 of the Tariff Act of 1980, as modified by .the Japanese Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, ,90 Treas. Dec. 284, T.D. 53865, supplemented by Presidential proclamation, 90 Treas. Dec. 280, T.D. 53877;

metal cups, assessed with duty at the rate of 50 per centum ad .valorem within the provisions of paragraph 339 of said act, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, as hollowware, not specially provided for, plated with gold;

diadems and necklaces, assessed with duty at the rate of 55 per cen-tum ad valorem, as jewelry, commonly or commercially so known, valued over 20 cents per dozen pieces, in paragraph 1527(a) of said act, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802; and

sceptres, assessed with duty at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem, as articles designed to be carried on or about the person, valued over $5 per dozen pieces, within the purview of paragraph 1527(c) (2) of said act, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739.

Each of the three protests here involved, which have been consolidated for purposes of trial, is limited to the claim that the items in issue should have been accorded free entry as regalia, within the purview of paragraph 1773 of said Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by T.D. 54609. Nevertheless, counsel for plaintiff, in his opening statement and in questioning the witnesses called in behalf of plaintiff, laid some stress upon the apparent contention that the articles invoiced as diadems and necklaces are not jewelry, commonly or commercially so known, within the contemplation of paragraph 1527(a), as modified, [143]*143supra. Since, as submitted for decision, tbe claim of plaintiff as stated in tlie protests bas not been enlarged, no further consideration will be given to tbis aspect of tbe case.

Paragraph 1773, supra, which is, therefore, tbe only provision here in contention, reads as follows:

Statuary and casts of sculpture for use as models or for art educational purposes only; regalia and gems, where specially imported in good faith for the use of, either by order of or for presentation (without charge) to any society incorporated or established solely for religious, philosophical, educational, scientific, or literary purposes, or for the encouragement of the fine arts, or for the use of, either by order of or for presentation (without charge) to any college, academy, school, seminary of learning, orphan asylum, or public hospital in the United States, or any State or public library, and not for sale, subject to such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe; but the term “regalia” as herein used shall be held to embrace only such insignia of rank or office or emblems as may be worn upon the person or borne in the hand during public exercises of the society or institution; and shall not include articles of furniture or fixtures, or of regular wearing apparel, nor personal property of individuals.

The two witnesses who testified in behalf of plaintiff bad each served in tbe capacity of chief officer or captain of tbe Syntax Society. The first of these, Judge George Janvier, a retired member of tbe judiciary of tbe State of Louisiana, was, for some 25 years, head of the organization. He, as well as Hughes Walmsley, the captain who succeeded him, was completely familiar with all of tbe activities of the society, and of the so-called Comus organization through which the Syntax Society operates. It appears from the combined testimony of these witnesses that the sole function of both organizations is to produce a carnival parade and ball, known as the Comus parade and ball, on the last day of the Mardi Gras season in New Orleans, as a sort of climax to the season, and that every year, since 1857, with the exception of wartime or national emergency, these events have been produced under the auspices of the Syntax Society.

The witnesses described in detail the colorful spectacle of the Comus parade, disclosing that each year a special theme is selected for illustration and representation by the 17 floats which form part of the parade. In addition to the floats, the parade comprises bands, marching units, and flambeau and torch carriers, and perhaps a total of 1,000 persons participate in the parade. Of these, some 150 are members of the Syntax Society, and they are the persons who wear the masks which are here involved. Both witnesses were of opinion that the parade theme has educational value and tends to encourage the fine arts in presenting for public view authentic representations of the central theme which is always selected for its artistic and educational worth, as for example the following subjects of prior parades:

1962 — “Tbe Gardens of Casbmere”
1917 — “Romantic Legends”
[144]*1441907 — “Tennyson”
1930 — “The Legend of Faust”
1963 — “The World of Mark Twain”
1952 — ’“Bible Stories We All Know”
f “Legends of Childhood” 1915 I “pageant 0f Mystick Krewe of Comus”
1935 — “Insect Life”

Pictures of the floats in the two last-mentioned parades are in evidence as plaintiff’s exhibits 3 and 2, respectively.

' The parade apparently lasts about 2% hours, during which time it proceeds over a set route along the streets of the City of New Orleans-, and is generally viewed by 'about 500,000 people. The parade ends at the Municipal Auditorium, where the ball takes place.

- The masks which are worn by the paraders are discarded after the parade and are not used again, since frequently they are slit to provide larger spaces for seeing and breathing. New masks are furnished those members who also participate in the ball. These are also discarded after the ball ends. Plaintiff’s exhibit 4 is a mask in its condition as imported. Plaintiff’s exhibit 5 is a mask which has been slit, and to which a stronger elastic band has been attached.

Attendance at the ball, which is not limited to members of the society, is by invitation only. Invitations are generally extended to about 5,200 people of whom perhaps 2,800, which would represent the seating capacity of the Municipal Auditorium, the largest available hall for the function, actually attend.

The other items in issue are appurtenances for the king and queen of the ball. The king wears a crown and carries a cup. The queen wears a crown, of the type shown on a photograph in evidence as plaintiff’s exhibit 1, and a necklace and carries a sceptre. These articles, which are symbolic of their respective positions at the ball, are used only in connection with that function, although they are on display for a short period before the event. Thereafter, they are given to the king and queen as personal mementos and may never again be used in a public exhibition.

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

Related

Moral Re-Armament, Inc. v. United States
65 Cust. Ct. 68 (U.S. Customs Court, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 Cust. Ct. 141, 1964 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philbin-v-united-states-cusc-1964.