American Goods Returned-Entireties.-This protest is different in no inaterial respect from that which was the subject of this board's decision in E. Denike's case, Ab. 34555 (T. D. 34090). The Denike case has since that time been reversed by the Court of Customs Appeals (Denike v. U. S., 5 Ct. Cust. Appls., —; T. D. 34553), and apparently the court has departed from the iong-established rule and extended the rule in the Hillhouse case to paragraph 500. Following that decision, the protests are sustained.-Ab. 36096 (T. D. 34629).

American Horses Refused by Foreign Consignee.-Horses of domestic origin, shipped for exportation to Canada and rejected by Canadian veterinary officials, may be returned free of duty as nonexportation without formal entry thereof being made.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30305).

Animals.—Certain animals, American products, were exported while the tariff act of 1897 permitting the free entry of these on return to the United States was in force; these animals were returned to the United States subsequent to the enactment of the tariff law of 1909, by which free entry was denied an importation of this kind. Held, a tariff law creates no vested rights to import free or at any particular rate of duty goods, wares, merchandise, or products of any kind; no contractual obligation had been incurred by the taxing power incapable of being impaired by a subsequent modification or repeal of the provision in question; the law in force at the date reentry was sought applies and the importation of animals was properly held dutiable under paragraphs 225 and 227, tariff act of 1909. Campbell v. U. S. (107 U. S., 407) distinguished.-Bragg v. U. S. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 31575; (G. A. Ab. 23875) T. D. 30879 affirmed.

American Automobile Repaired Abroad.-Ordered, That the decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers be, and the same is hereby. reversed, and that the claim of the appellant, that the chassis of the automobile involved in this proceeding is entitled to free entry as American goods returned, be, and the same is hereby, sustained. It is further

Ordered, That the body of said automobile was properly dutiable as assessed under paragraph 141, tariff act of 1909; and said cause is remanded to the Board of United States General Appraisers for proper action in the premises.Tiller v. U. S., T. D. 32275 (Ct. Cust. Appls.); Ab. 24740 (T. D. 31255) reversed. An automobile of American manufacture was taken abroad and while there its body was burnt and replaced by a better and more expensive one.

The case of Hillhouse v. U. S. (152 Fed. Rep., 163; T. D. 27831) announced a doctrine which was somewhat of a departure from the general trend of authorities relative to the administration of the customs law. While it was an automobile that was under consideration in the Hillhouse case, and it was held that duty should be assessed on so much of the machine as was a new manufacture and had not been used abroad for a year, but no duty should be assessed upon the remainder of the machine, that decision arose under another paragraph of the law-paragraph 504 of the tariff act of 1897-the protestant claiming that the automobile in question was a household effect, and as such was entitled to free entry, while in the case at bar the protestant's only claim is that it is an American manufacture returned without having been advanced in value or improved in condition. The automobile in question should be treated as an entirety, and, if so treated. it certainly has been advanced in value and improved in condition.-Ab. 24740; reversed by T. D. 32275 (Ct. Cust. Appls.), supra.

Automobile Tires of American manufacture were shipped to Europe and there attached to a foreign automobile and imported to this country. The

automobile in question was assessed for duty as an entirety and the protestants claim that the tires should be admitted free as American goods returned under paragraph 500. Protest overruled. Hillhouse v. U. S. (152 Fed., 163; T. D. 27831) and Ab. 24740 (T. D. 31255) noted.-Ab. 33164 (T. D. 33120).

Burlap Bags.-Where an allowance of drawback has been made, the reimportation of the merchandise, although of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States, is prohibited except upon the payment of duties equal to the drawback allowed.

The allowance of drawback on imported materials which are used in the manufacture of articles produced in the United States would preclude the reimportation of such articles except on the payment of the drawback allowed on such materials.

In order to bring bags of American manufacture within the exemption of paragraph 500, such bags must be imported by the exporter thereof, and the burden of proof is on the protestant to prove this fact.-T. D. 31100 (G. A. 7130).

Certificate of Exportation-Waiver-Domestic Products Returned.— Production of certificate of exportation upon the entry of domestic products exported and returned should be waived only upon the filing of an affidavit by the importer or consignee showing that it is impracticable to produce the same and when collector is satisfied from an examination that the merchandise is in fact of domestic production.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30510).

Upon refusal of the collector to waive compliance with the regulations, it is reasonable to infer that he was not satisfied that the goods were of domestic origin.

The assessment of duty on certain positive moving picture films, affirmed.— Stone & Co. v. U. S. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 37009; Ab. 39571 affirmed.

Circus Animals.-Animals taken abroad for temporary use or exhibition by an American circus may be returned to the United States free of duty.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30481).

Dogs and Other Domesticated Animals. The provisions of T. D. 30608, for the registration and return, free of duty, of horses taken abroad for personal use, extended to dogs and other domesticated animals taken abroad for a similar purpose.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30742).

Entry of American Teams.—American teams taken into foreign contiguous territory in the ordinary course of business, free of duty upon return to United States, provided such teams have not remained in a foreign country over three days.-Dept. Order (T. D. 31687).

Horses taken abroad for personal use of owners may be registered on exportation and returned free of duty under provisions of T. D. 30481 and paragraph 500.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30608).

Merchandise Made of Foreign and American Articles.-These wheels and axles of American manufacture, with tires made in Germany, were shipped into Mexico to have certain alterations made there and were then returned to the United States. The goods were not dutiable as entireties. The wheels and axls should have been admitted free under paragraph 500 as articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States. The tires, made in Germany, were dutiable at 14 cents per pound.-Denike v. U. S. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 34553; (G. A. Ab. 34555) T. D. 34090 reversed.

Moving-Picture Films of American manufacture exported, exposed abroad, not entitled to free entry upon return to United States under paragraph 500, but moving-picture films of either domestic or foreign manufacture may be exported to 60690°-18-VOL 1-58

foreign countries for exhibition purposes and returned free of duty. T. D. 30021 of October 2, 1909, modified.-Dept. Order (T. D. 31602).

Moving-picture films of domestic production, exposed in this country, exported and returned without having been advanced in value or improved in condition while abroad, entitled to free entry under paragraph 500.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30021).

Pro Forma Invoice. The pro forma invoice for purposes of entry takes the place of the certified invoice and is a complete substitute therefor; and so, the production and filing on some day later than the date of filing the pro forma invoice, of papers required by regulations to be produced and "filed with the entry," is not a compliance with articles 570 and 571, Customs Regulations of 1908. McBride v. U. S. (1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 293; T. D. 31354); U. S. v. Frank & Lambert (2 ibid., ; T. D. 31973); U. S. v. Bennett & Lowenthal (2 ibid., —; T. D. 31975).—U. S. v. Rettig et al. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 32254; (G. A. Ab. 26388) T. D. 31832 reversed.

Reimportations.-Duty being collected on original importation of foreign cans used in the transportation of milk or cream, such cans admitted free on reimportation.-Dept. Order (T. D. 31888).

Reimported Circus Animals.-Animals of foreign origin exported for exhibition by circus or menagerie may be reimported free of duty under act of March 3, 1899, but such animals of domestic origin not entitled to free entry.Dept. Order (T. D. 29989).

Scrap Iron. The regulations of the Treasury are explicit and they are reasonable and lawful in requiring that when free entry is claimed for goods under paragraph 500 the importer must furnish a certificate of prior exportation of the goods, made by the collector and naval officer, if any, at the place of export; or failing in this, the production of them must be waived by the collector and naval officer, if any, at the port of entry. Neither the certificate nor the fact of waiver is here shown, and the goods were not entitled to free entry. Lunham v. U. S. (1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 220; T. D. 31409).—U. S. v. Goldberg (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 32986; (G. A. Ab. 26417) T. D. 31842 reversed.

Shooks. In view of a long, practical departmental construction of language that does not essentially differ from the language of paragraph 500, boxes or barrels made from American staves or shooks are entitled to free entry under that paragraph. This right is not limited to the value of the shooks and staves constituting a part of the barrels or boxes.-Kraemer & Co. v. U. S. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 33369; (G. A. Ab. 29427) T. D. 32751 reversed.

Shooks Tongued and Grooved.-Where shooks of American manufacture were returned as barrels or boxes, and were tongued and grooved before importation, there is no requirement that the shooks be returned without advancement in value under paragraph 500. They are therefore free of duty when their identity is proved by regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury to be of Ameri ́n origin.-T. D. 33323 (G. A. 7453).

Treasury Regulations.—Article 570 of the customs regulations requires as to American goods returned the filing of the declaration by the foreign exporter with the entry and as well the filing therewith of the oath or declaration of the owner, importer, consignee, or agent. The collector has no authority to waive the filing of the oath or declaration of the owner with the entry and a subsequent filing was not a compliance with the law. U. S. v. Rettig (2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 537; T. D. 32254).—U. S. v. Saunders et al. (Ct. Cust. Appls.). T. D. 35337; (G. A. 7586) T. D. 34650 and (G. A. Ab. 36196) T. D. 34668 reversed,

Shotgun with New Stock.—A double-barrel shotgun claimed to be of American manufacture, returned from England with a new stock, was claimed entitled to free entry as American goods returned without having been advanced in value or improved in condition (par. 500). Protest overruled.— Ab. 36022 (T. D. 34609).

Wearing Apparel Repaired.-Wearing apparel and other personal effects taken abroad by residents of the United States and repaired while abroad dutiable on the cost of repairs only when reimported as baggage.-Dept. Order (T. D. 30871).

DECISIONS UNDER THE ACT OF 1897.

American Barley Returned as Barley Malt.-Paragraph 483, providing for the free entry of American goods previously exported, applies only when the article imported is the identical article exported.

Barley sent to Copenhagen, Denmark, and there converted into barley malt. has undergone a chemical change which renders it a different commodity, and can not be imported free of duty under the provisions of paragraph 483.—T. D. 25971 (G. A. 5897).

American Goods Returned.-It seems that where it is impossible to comply with the regulations of the Secretary as to proof of identity of American articles exported and returned the rule in U. S. v. Dominici (78 Fed. Rep., 334) would not apply.-T. D. 21476 (G. A. 4515).

Certificate of Collector at Place of Exportation.-Where goods have been exported from one port of the United States and later are returned here for entry at another port, and when free entry of these goods as of domestic growth, produce, or manufacture is claimed, it is a reasonable exercise of the power vested in the Secretary of the Treasury for him to require a certificate showing the fact of original exportation; and it appearing the collector at the port of entry did not waive the production of such a certificate, and such a certificate not having been produced, an appeal will not lie against the collector's decision holding the goods dutiable.-Lunham v. U. S. (Ct. Cust. Appls.), T. D. 31258; (G. A. 6426) T. D. 27576 affirmed.

American Bottles Returned with Foreign Labels.-Where bottles containing tabasco sauce were exported from this country to Great Britain and while abroad had attached to such bottles caps and labels and fixtures which materially advanced such articles in value, upon reimportation into this country such merchandise was not free of duty under paragraph 483.-T. D. 27576 (G. A. 6426); affirmed by T. D. 31258 (Ct. Cust. Appls.), supra. Old Jute Bagging.

CUSTOMS REGULATIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH.-Where a claim is made under said paragraph 483, involving the identity of old bagging, that it is of domestic origin, oral evidence of this alleged fact is inadmissible. The only method of proof that can legally be offered is that prescribed by the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, which is a condition precedent to the right of free entry of said merchandise. U. S. v. Dominici (78 Fed. Rep., 334; 24 C. C. A., 116) and other cases followed.-T. D. 30409 (G. A. 6987).

Returned Blank Checks with Foreign Revenue Stamp.-Blank checks of domestic manufacture sent abroad to have necessary revenue stamp printed thereon by the British Government not advanced in value thereby, and entitled to free entry under paragraph 483 on reimportation.-T. D. 19772 (G. A. 4220). Cloth Boards Exported and Returned.-Cloth boards exported to be wrapped with foreign textiles and returned to be treated under the regulations

governing the exportation and reimportation of box shooks.-Dept. Order (T. D. 28043).

Compliance with Treasury Regulations.-Where an importer complies with the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury relative to establishing the identity of American manufactures of the kind described in paragraph 483, a prima facie case is made out for the free entry of the goods.

This presumption can be rebutted only by a report of the local appraiser affirmatively finding the articles to be of foreign manufacture, or by other satisfactory evidence to the same effect.-T. D. 28633 (G. A. 6696).

Drawback.

Where the collector of customs assesses a duty equal to drawback which he supposes was allowed on the exportation of certain American manufactures reimported from abroad, the onus is on the importer to prove the contrary, although such proof involves a negative.

In proving such negative the importer will satisfy the requirements of law by producing just enough evidence to counterbalance the evidence against him.— T. D. 29982 (G. A. 6929).

ON REIMPORTED SUGAR.-Where an exporter of sugar manufactured in the United States has received from the Government an allowance of drawback on the merchandise, upon reimportation of the same article the owner is entitled to have it entered and passed by the collector upon the payment of duty equal to the drawback allowed.-T. D. 27241 (G. A. 6324).

FREE GOODS AND FREE COVERINGS.-While free goods ordinarily operate to make usual coverings free of duty when imported, the rule is otherwise where the same goods have been previously exported and the Government has made an allowance of drawback on such coverings.

EXCEPTION WHERE DRAWBACK ALLOWED.-Paragraph 483, relating to manufactures of the United States of the kind there described, expressly excepts from its provisions articles of any kind upon which an allowance of drawback has been made and prohibits their reimportation except on payment of duties equal to the drawbacks allowed.

MAILING PROTEST NOT FILING.-A protest mailed to the collector of customs, but not received by him within the statutory time specified by section 14 of the customs administrative act of 1890, is properly rejected as not filed in time. GIVING NOTICE TO COLLECTOR UNDER SECTION 14.-The giving of notice to the collector in writing required by said section 14 is synonymous with filing such protest with the collector, which involves actual delivery of the paper either to said officer or some subordinate usually deputed to receive it in due course of business.-T. D. 29514 (G. A. 6861).

EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY.-Certain wooden crates, used as containers for vegetables exported from Cuba, and assessed for duty under section 19 of the customs administrative act of 1890 as usual coverings of such merchandise, were claimed to be free of duty under paragraph 483 as American manufactures of the kind there described. Held, (1) that the identity of such articles must be proved under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury as a condition precedent to their free entry, and the proof must be filed with the collector of customs at the time of making entry of the goods; (2) in the absence of such proof no amount of oral evidence introduced before the Board of General Appraisers will avail to establish the domestic character of such articles so as to authorize sustaining the protest.-T. D. 29446 (G. A. €849).

USUAL COVERINGS.-The usual and necessary coverings of goods subject to specific rates of duty, or of free goods, are themselves free of duty. U. S. v. Leggett (66 Fed. Rep., 300; 13 C. C. A., 448); In re Irsch (G. A. 3350),