tion 19, act of March 2, 1861, if for planting, or, if for manufacture into sugar, to that declared for unmanufactured articles in section 24 of the same act, both being 10 per cent. ad valorem. They are found in the revision under Schedule F, for the first named, section 2504, and the general clauses in 2516.

Very respectfully,

B. H. BRISTOW,

Secretary.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Key West.

(2023.)

Duty on magic-lanterns and Jew's-harps.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 30, 1874.

SIR: Your letter of the 7th instant is received, transmitting the appeals, dated October 27, 1874 (3719 c, Feigenbaum & Co., and 3720 c, Davis Bros.), from your decision assessing duty at the rate of 50 per cent., less 10 per cent., on certain magic-lanterns imported, per "City of Sparta," August 26, 1874.

It appears that the articles in question were returned by the appraiser as toys for children, composed of metal and glass, the same being magic-lanterns of small size, intended for the amusement of children, and costing from $3 to $20 per dozen.

The question involved in this case was considered by the Department in its decision of November 12, 1864, when it was held that magiclanterns should be classified as toys for children, if of such size, material, and general character as would render them suitable for the play and amusement of children only.

This ruling still applies, and therefore your decision is affirmed. The Department also affirms your decision in assessing duty at the rate of 50 per cent., less 10 per cent., on certain Jew's-harps, as toys, imported by Feigenbaum & Co., under immediate-transportation bond, which are embraced in their appeal (3721 c) dated October 23, 1874, transmitted by you to the Department on the 7th of November instant. As the question involved is similar to that here passed upon, your decision is affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

B. H. BRISTOW,

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco.

Secretary.

(2024.)

Goods wrecked over two years.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, November 30, 1874.

SIR: Your communication of November 20 is received, transmitting the application of Messrs. Platt & McNear to introduce certain merchandise free of duty recovered from a wreck which had remained unrecovered over two years.

On examination of the papers, the evidence appearing satisfactory, you are authorized to admit the merchandise referred to in such communication free of duty for all that may have been or may be recovered subsequent to the expiration of the two years. I am, very respectfully,

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco.

B. H. BRISTOW,

Secretary.

TO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, D. C., January 26, 1875.

The decisions of the Department upon the construction to be given to the tariff, navigation laws, and other acts of Congress, for the month of December, 1874, are published herewith for the information and guidance of collectors of customs.

CHAS. F. CONANT,

Acting Secretary.

(2025.)

Steel by the Martin-Siemen's process.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 1, 1874.

SIR: Your communication of November 19 is received, transmitting the statement of Naylor & Co., in regard to the proper classification to be applied to steel made by the "Martin-Siemen's process."

You refer to the decision of this Department, made under date of October 15, 1873 (Synopsis 1863), in which.metal converted or cast into ingots in the similitude and having the uses of steel is to be charged with duty under classification as steel.

The Department has carefully considered the mode of preparing iron described as the "Martin-Siemen's process," and the character of the metal produced by it. In all its distinctive characteristics, it is a steel-making process, designed only to produce an article having the quality of steel. The metal is also converted or cast in the manner described in the statutory definition of steel of this class.

The Department, therefore, holds that no claim for return to the duty chargeable on iron can be sustained in regard to metal so made, even if the quality should prove deficient in the requisites of the best steel. It is intended for the purposes to which steel is applied, and actually used for these purposes.

You are, therefore, directed to review the assessments of duty made by you on the product of the "Martin-Siemen's process," as imported at your port, charging all such importations with the duty levied by law on steel of that grade.

Very respectfully,

H. B. BRISTOW,

Secretary.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Boston.

(2026.)

Uncleaned rice.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 3, 1874.

SIR: Your letter of the 21st ultimo is received, transmitting the appeal (3001 c), dated October 18, 1874, of C. Adolph Low & Co. from your decision assessing a duty of 2 cents per pound on certain rice imported from Siam, per "Clete," September 1, 1874, which the importers claim to be uncleaned, and liable to duty at only 2 cents per pound.

The claim of the importers is that the rice in question is not cleaned within the meaning of the law, although it has been hulled and subjected to at least one process of sifting and cleaning.

The samples show, however, a very slight difference only from the best cleaned rice. A very small proportion of dust and roughness of the exterior surface remains to be removed by a final process of cleaning, but a proportion so small as to scarcely distinguish it from rice fully cleaned.

The Department, therefore, decides that the rice in question is not rough rice, or uncleaned rice, in the distinctions of the law, but that it is actually cleaned rice, closely approaching in quality the best cleaned rice, and dutiable at 2 cents per pound, as substantially the cleaned rice of the statute.

Your decision is therefore affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

B. H. BRISTOW,

Secretary.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco.

(2027.)

Embroidered dresses.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 4, 1874.

GENTLEMEN: Your communication of November 28 is received, inclosing samples of importations, per "America," November 16, 1874.

Manufactures designed for use as clothing, or articles of a finished character, are certainly not included in embroideries, if the material is either silk or wool, the only open question being whether they are so included if of linen. The Department adheres, however, to the distinction long recognized as applicable to embroideries, applying it only to articles in which the embroidery constitutes the leading characteristic and the embroidery-work is the chief element of value.

It will be observed that in Shedule M, under the term "embroideries," a distinction is made between manufactures of cotton, linen or silk embroidered, and articles embroidered with gold and silver, thus warranting the inference that articles embroidered with other materials were not to be included. Linen or silk dresses embroidered for mere ornamentation, and in which the value of the material, apart from the embroidery, is largely in excess of the value of the embroidery, distinctively, must continue to be classified as manufactures of linen or silk, respectively.

I am, very respectfully,

B. H. BRISTOW,

Secretary.

Messrs. LORD & TAYLOR, New York.

(2028.)

Carriages, when free of duty.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, December 4, 1874.

GENTLEMEN: Your communication of December 2 is received, applying for free admission of a carriage belonging to J. M. English, imported per steamer "Denmark," October 6.

In reply, you are informed that the law admitting articles free, the property of persons arriving from foreign countries, restricts such admission to personal and household effects.

Immigrants arriving from a country contiguous to the United States are permitted to bring teams of animals, with their harness or tackle,