United States v. Hamburger Levine Co.

5 Ct. Cust. 217, 1914 WL 21702, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 59
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedApril 7, 1914
DocketNo. 1335
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 5 Ct. Cust. 217 (United States v. Hamburger Levine Co.) 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
United States v. Hamburger Levine Co., 5 Ct. Cust. 217, 1914 WL 21702, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 59 (ccpa 1914).

Opinion

Martin, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The merchandise involved in this .appeal consists of children’s frocks, and aprons made óf a .cotton fabric and ornamented with strips or bands of other cotton goods sewed upon their surface.

[218]*218The appraiser reported the articles to be wearing apparel composed of cotton, appliquéd. They were returned for duty at 60 per cent ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph 349 of the tariff act of 1909. Duty was assessed upon the merchandise in accordance with this return.

The importers thereupon filed their protest against the assessment, contending that the merchandise was not appliquéd, and claiming an assessment of 50 per cent ad valorem upon the merchandise as cotton Wearing apparel under paragraph 324, or alternatively at 45 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 332 as manufactures of cotton. The latter claim, however, is not insisted upon, the real question being .Whether the goods are dutiable simply as cotton wearing apparel or as cotton wearing apparel appliquéd.

This issue was submitted upon evidence to the Board of General Appraisers and the protest was sustained, the board holding that the articles in question were cotton wearing apparel, but were not appliquéd. From this decision the Government now appeals.

The following provisions of the tariff act of 1909 are controlling:

349. * * * Wearing apparel, handkerchiefs, and other articles or fabrics embroidered in any manner by hand or machinery, whether with a plain or fancy letter, initial, or monogram, or otherwise, or tamboured, appliquéd, or scalloped, by hand or machinery, for any purpose, * * * all of the foregoing, composed wholly or in chief value of cotton, flax, or other vegetable fiber, * * * and not elsewhere specially provided for in this section, 60 per centum ad valorem: * * *.
324. Clothing, ready-made, and articles of wearing apparel of every description, composed of cotton or other vegetable fiber, or of which cotton or other vegetable fiber is the component material of chief value, made up or manufactured, wholly or in part, by the tailor, seamstress, or manufacturer, and not otherwise provided for in this section, 50 per centum ad valorem.

As appears from tbe foregoing statement, the present issue is one of fact only, and the single question in the case is whether the cotton Wearing apparel at bar is or is not appliquéd. Several witnesses Were examined at the trial before the board, but their testimony did not purport to prove any peculiar commercial usage of the term “appliquéd;” therefore the question must be answered according to the common or ordinary meaning of that term.

As already stated, the present merchandise consists of children’s frocks and aprons made of cotton fabrics and ornamented with- strips or bands of other cotton goods sewed smoothly onto their surface. These strips or bands are an inch or two in width; they are doubtless printed in numbers in the piece and are then cut apart and divided into suitable lengths for use. They have various designs or patterns printed in bright colors upon them, some being geometric or conventional in form, others being the figures of children at play. The strips or bands are sewed onto the garments in question along the Upper and lower edges and also on the front. The pieces upon the front of the garments are either about the waist line in imitation of [219]*219belts or are about tbe neck having a yoke effect. They are designed solely for the ornamentation of the garments upon which they are sewn.

The question, therefore, is whether the printed strips or bands thus sewn upon such articles of wearing apparel make those articles appliquéd within the meaning of paragraph 349, above copied. It is contended by the importers that such rihbonlike strips or bands, even though bearing figures or designs, do not constitute appliqué work, and that this term when used with reference to such ornamentation applies only to patterns or designs which are cut in shape or outline out of one fabric and thereafter sewed upon another.

In attempting to ascertain the meaning of the. word "appliquéd,” the following definitions from the authorities are important:

Oxford:

Appliqué, sb. Work applied to or laid on another material; spec. A trimming cut out in outline and laid on another surface. Also in metal work; and fig. Hence appliquéd.

International Encyclopaedia:

Appliqué, a. Applied; laid on; said of ornaments cut from one fabric and transferred to another or to fabric of another color; as, lace appliqué upon a groundwork of other material.
Appliqué, n. Any ornament laid out and applied to another surface in cloth, wood, or metal; also, a piece of work or the kind of ornamentation thus produced.

Webster:

Appliqué. Haying a pattern which has been cut out and transferred from another foundation, as a kind of lace.

Century:

Appliqué, a. 1. In modern dress and upholstery, applied or sewed on, or produced in this way. Thus, the gimp or pattern of soiled or injured lace may be sewed upon a new ground, or embroidered flowers may be secured to new silk; in such a case the pattern or ornament is said to be appliqué, and the whole is appliqué work.
2. More generally, said of one material, as metal, fixed upon another, in ornamental work; as, an enameled disk appliqué upon a surface of filigree, an ivory figure appliqué upon a Japanese lacquer, and the like. (In both senses also used as a noun.) Point appliqué, point lace in which the design, after having been separately made, has been applied to the net which forms the foundation.

Encyclopaedia Britannica:

Needlework. * * * Appliqué or applied work belongs as much as patchwork to the medieval category of opus consutum, or stitching stuffs together according to a decorative design, the greater part of which was cut out of njaterial different in color, and generally in texture,-from that of the ground to which it was applied and stitched. Irish art needlework, called Carrickmacross lace, is for the most part of cambric applied or appliqué to net.

Manual of Needlework, teaching how to do Kensington, Appliqué, Cretonne, Roman, Cross-stitch, Outline, and other Embroideries. Mrs. Joseph L. Patten (New York, 1883). p. 18.

Cretonne embroidery. Is similar to appliqué, only instead of cutting out designs of cloth or velvet, the designs are cut from cretonne and sateen such as is used for uphol-[220]*220steries. The pattern, should be cut out with a fine pair of scissors; lay them face downward and paste carefully with very fine gum arabic or a little starch; then lay upon the fabric, where you have previously arranged to place them, and the gum or starch will keep them in place. Soft floss silk is the best for cretonne edges, and the a ork must be carefully done in close fine satin stitch, blending with color the silk and cretonne.

Encyclopaedia of Needlework, by Therese de Dillémont. (English edition, 1890). p. 531.

Appliqué work (fig. 862).

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

Related

Florea & Co. v. United States
48 Cust. Ct. 163 (U.S. Customs Court, 1962)
Massabni Bros. v. United States
13 Cust. Ct. 88 (U.S. Customs Court, 1944)
Alfred Kohlberg, Inc. v. United States
25 C.C.P.A. 276 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1938)
Massce v. United States
18 C.C.P.A. 243 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1930)
United States v. Caesar
18 C.C.P.A. 106 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1930)
United States v. Greenwald's Linen Importers
17 C.C.P.A. 241 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1929)
United States v. Mills, Duflot & Co.
10 Ct. Cust. 49 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1920)
United States v. American Bead Co.
9 Ct. Cust. 193 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1919)
United States v. McGibbon
7 Ct. Cust. 290 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1916)
Loewenthal v. United States
6 Ct. Cust. 209 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Ct. Cust. 217, 1914 WL 21702, 1914 CCPA LEXIS 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hamburger-levine-co-ccpa-1914.