« EdellinenJatka »
of the importer has been jeopardized by the reliquidation the right of protest exists (T. D. 14446; G. A. 2403); but questions not involved in the reliquidation are not subject to protest (T. D. 8398), nor does the reliquidation restore the right of protesting where the right was lost on the original liquidation (G. A. 738).
Reliquidation under a decision of the Board of Appraisers is not open to protest (G. A. 1584, 1818, 2127, 2677), unless the collector fails to conform to such decision (G. A. 2403).
Where the collector reliquidates at a rate of duty claimed by importers, a second protest claiming a still different rate is not admissible (G. A. 1794).
When an Act of Congress changes the rates of duties on goods entered in bond and liquidated more than ten days prior to the operation of the act, the limitation of time in which protest should be made on the original entry becomes inoperative, and the protest may be filed within ten days from the date of the collector's decision as to rate and amount of duty under the later act on the withdrawal of the goods (G. A. 180).
(p) Claims in protests.-General Rules governing the subject. The classification of articles is involved in great doubt, often of difficult solution by the most learned judges and jurists. It would be an unreasonable rule to require a layman to solve them by one stroke of his pen in selecting a single clause of the tariff law within which he must confine his claim (G. A. 137). Alternative or multifarious grounds of protest are, therefore, permissible. Many “objections" may be assigned, based on a multitude of “reasons
(12760, adopting opinion U. S. C. C. in re. Glaenzer et al. 55 Fed. 642; G. A. 137, 2481; Legg vs. Hedden, 37 Fed. Rep. 861), but where claims are so conflicting as to be repugnant one to the other (G. A. 509), or are vague and indefinite (G. A. 65, 178, 787, 1218, 1623), they render the protest void.
Valid Claims in. Protests.
Claiming otherwise correctly, but inadvertently referring to a paragraph number not included in the particular schedule, but to the number immediately following it (G. A. 2132).
Claiming otherwise correctly but misnaming the goods (G. A. 854).
Claiming proper rate without any reference, and goods found to be dutiable under one provision only (T. D. 8166; G. A. 2561).
Claiming otherwise correctly, but incorrectly stating the rate assessed (G. A. 933).
Claiming one rate only, which proves to be the principal rate in proper paragraph (T. D. 8785).
Invalid Claims in Protests.
Claiming otherwise correctly but naming wrong paragraph of the schedule (G. A. 2211, 2749).
Claiming a certain rate without naming provision (T. D. 8005; G. A. 233).
Claim based upon a former decision (T. D. 8005).
Claiming under a schedule for “sundries” without naming a particular provision (G. A. 179).
Claiming relief based upon the existence of a fact which is a violation of law (G. A. 2705).
Claiming value of currency in invoices different from that fixed by Section 25, Act August 28, 1894 (G. A. 2716).
Claim based upon a reference to—"reasons stated by us in our letter” (G. A. 1526).
Claims under non-existent laws (G. A. 2779).
Sundry Rulings on Claims in Protests.
Claims under “similitude clause" (Section 4, Act August 28, 1894) should refer to that section and the particular provision thereof (T. D. 3842).
Claims for a higher rate than that assessed have to be sustained if well founded (T. D. 6877; G. A. 2413).
Claims must be made under the act in force at the time of entry (G. A. 494).
Claims alleging violation of law must specify grounds of contention (G. A. 32, 181, 1218).
Claims alleging illegality of appraisement must specify grounds of averment (G. A. 65, 178, 1218, 1623).
Claims for allowance in weight by soakage of sea water is not admissable where protestor has failed to comply with Regulations, 1892, Articles 851, 852 (G. A. 2569. See also G. A. 1719, appealed and held not subject to review by court, but see note "Jurisdiction of the Circuit Court,” Section 15).
Claims may be held good as to part of goods and part under collector's decision (In re Crowley C. C. A. 55 Fed. Rep. 283, distinguishing Davies vs. Arthur, 96 U. S. 148. T. D. 8218).
(q) Where protests admissible-Sundry cases. (See also note (a).
Protests are admissible where re-imported American whiskey or other merchandise is denied the benefit of Section 19 or Par. 387, Act August 28, 1894, by reason of the absence of required evidence. The protest should be filed within the ten days' limit whether a bond is also filed or not. The bond should also be filed within the limit (T. D. 12484, 12518; G. A. 1432, 1845, 2411).
Are admissible (but not necessary) against assessment of duty on personal effects of persons arriving in the United States (T. D. 8890, 11762 ; G. A. 1983). See second proviso of Section i, Act March 3, 1875, supra.
Are admissible where charges or other additions to invoice or entered value are made under duress or infuence of customs officers (T. D. 9752, 14674; G. A. 2042, 2346, 2347).
Are admissible against charges for overtime, so-called, of discharging officers on the ground that alleged services were not rendered (G. A. 2044), or against gauging fees under section 3023, Revised Statutes, supra (G. A. 1826).
Are admissible although the entry was made without invoice for goods valued not over $100 (G. A. 1629).
Are admissible where the collector omits to call for reappraisement when dissatisfied with the valuation, and he advances the value of the goods or any portion of them. The collector's omission to call for reappraisement does not bar the importer's right to protest (G. A. 1299, 1902).
Are admissible where free withdrawal under section 16, Act June 26, 1884, has been denied. The protest must be filed within ten days after payment of duties, and appeal within thirty days after such payment to the Secretary of the Treasury, to whom the protest should be forwarded (T. D. 15506).
Are admissible against excessive amount of duties on goods arising from increase of weight by soakage of sea water (G. A. 1719, 2569, 3025; see also Earnshaw vs. Cadwalader, 146 C. S., 247; T. D. 13391).
(r) Where protests not admissible-Sundry cases.—(See also remedy by reappraisement, section 13 and note).
Protests are not admissible against collector's decision, fixing the value of the invoice currencies in accordance with the values proclaimed under section 25, Act August 28, 1894 (G. A. 2716, 2732; United States vs. Klingenberg, 114 Sup. Ct. Kep., 790).
Not admissible against decisions as to excess of sea stores or duties thereupon under sections 2795, 2796, Revised Statutes, supra (T. D. 9927).
Not admissible against charges paid to owners of private bonded warehouses (G. A. 1562).
Not admissable where goods are found to be different from invoice description Invoices must contain a correct description of the goods ” and importers are bound accordingly (G. A. 1643, see Section 2).
Not admissible against decisions of either the collector or the Secretary of the Treasury refusing drawback under Section 22, Act Aug. 28, 1894. The proper remedy is by action in the Court of Claims directly against the United States (Campbell vs. U. S., 107 U. S. 407; G. A. 2333).
Not admissible upon questions as to sufficiency of identification of American products returned under Section 19 or paragraph 387, Act Aug. 28, 1894. Such questions are for consideration of the Secretary of the Treasury (G. A. 2822).
Not admissible in forfeiture proceedings. But where goods under seizure are appraised, they are entitled to reappraisement (T. D. 14777, adopting opinion Circuit Court; G. A. 2830 In re Chichester, 48 Fed. Rep. 281).
Not admissible where goods are invoiced and entered by the piece, package or other undefined quantity, and the appraiser ascertains the dutiable value of the actual quantity imported which proves in excess of invoice value (G. A. 2842, Reg. 1892, Art. 895).
Not admissible where additional duty under Section 7, is incurred under a reappraisement (see note 1 (c) to Section 13.
Not admissible in case of dissatisfaction with allowance for damage under Section 2984, Revised Statutes, supra. Such questions are for consideration of the Secretary of the Treasury (G. A. 2829).
Not admissible in questions involving the imposition of immigrant head-money tax (G. A. 2835).
Not admissible against decision of the Board of General Appraisers as to the valuation of merchandise where the board acts within their statutory powers. (See note 1 (c) to Section 13).
(8) Sundry Rulings Relating to Protests.
Where an article and the usual coverings are classed as an entirety under Section 19, a decision on a protest includes the coverings (G. A. 2578).
Protest and appeal is necessary prerequisite to a claim for compromise of a suit for excess of duties under Section 3469, Revised Statutes, supra (T. D. 5690).
Where protest has been made and entries are up for reliquidation thereunder, all errors in liquidation may be corrected (T. D. Protesters are afforded access to records of their cases to enable them to acquaint themselves with the cases for consideration by the Board of General Appraisers (T. D. 12498, 13930).
A protest is not needed where fines, penalties and forfeitures have been incurred, unless it is claimed the same was illegally enforced, when a protest would protect the interest of the party after the proceeds have been covered into the Treasury (T. D. 9965, Reg. 1892, Art. 959, 974), but goods under seizure do not lose full right of reappraisement (T. D. 14778).
Where protests have been lost by a fire or by carelessness of the custodian, copies may be filed with the Board of General Appraisers, upon proof of loss of the originals (Marine 7's. Lyon et al., C. C. A. 62 Fed. Rep. 153).
Findings of fact by the Court (a jury being waived) will not support a judgment for the importer, if they fail to show what duty the collector charged, and to sufficiently describe the goods, and if it does not appear under what provisions the respective parties claim (Saltonstall vs. Birtwell, 150 U. S. 417).
An adverse decision of the Board of General Appraisers does not prevent submission of other cases to the Board by protest involving the same question (T. D. 11736).
A decision reversing a previous decision and reducing the rate of duty, is no aid to an importer who has not duly protested against the erroneous ruling in another importation (Cadwalder vs. Partridge, 137 L'. S. 553).
A protest cannot be sustained where the action of the customs officials is obstructed by the action or negligence of the protester (G. A. 2260).
A protest is not essential for a refund of duties paid on tools of trade and other personal effects arriving with the owner (T. D. 15185).
A variance in the middle initial letter between the name signed to the entry and that signed to the protest is immaterial (G. A. 2992).
Appeal to Court. SEC. 15. That if the owner, importer, consignee, or agent of any imported merchandise, or the collector, or the Secretary of the Treasury, shall be dissatisfied with the decision of the board of general appraisers, as provided for in section fourteen of this act, as to the construction of the law and the facts respecting the classification of such merchandise and the rate of duty imposed thereon under such classification, they or either of them, may, within thirty days next after such decision, and not afterwards, apply to the circuit court of the United States within the district in which the matter arises, for review of the questions of law and fact involved in such decision. Such application shall be made by filing in the office of the clerk of said circuit court a concise statement of the errors of law and fact complained of, and a copy of such statement shall be served on the collector, or on the importer, owner, consignee, or agent, as the case may be. Thereupon the court shall order the board of appraisers to return to said circuit court the record and the evidence taken by them,
together with a certified statement of the facts involved in the case, and their decisions thereon; and all the evidence taken by and before said appraisers shall be competent evidence before said circuit court; and within twenty days after the aforesaid return is made the court may, upon the application of the Secretary of the Treasury, the collector of the port, or the importer, owner, consignee, or agent, as the case may be, referit to one of said general appraisers, as an officer of the court, to take and return to the court such further evidence as may be offered by the Secretary of the Treasury, collector, importer, owner, consignee, or agent, within sixty days thereafter, in such order and under such rules as the court may prescribe; and such further evidence with the aforesaid returns shall constitute the record upon which said circuit court shall give priority to and proceed to hear and determine the questions of law and fact involved in such decision, respecting the classification of such merchandise and the rate of duty imposed thereon under such classification, and the decision of such court shall be final, and the proper collector, or person acting as such, shall liquidate the entry accordingly, unless such court shall be of opinion that the question involved is of such importance as to require a review of such decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, in which case said circuit court, or the judge making the decision may, within thirty days thereafter, allow an appeal to said Supreme Court;* but an appeal shall be allowed on the part of the United States whenever the Attorney-General shall apply for it within thirty days after the rendition of such decision. On such original application, and on any such appeal, security for damages and costs shall be given as in the case of other appeals in cases in which the United States is a party. Said Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction and power to review such decision, and shall give priority to such cases, and may affirm, modify, or reverse such decision of such circuit court, and remand the case with such orders as may seem to it proper in the premises, which shall be executed accordingly. All final judgments, when in favor of the importer, shall be satisfied and paid by the Secretary of the Treasury from the permanent indefinite appropriation provided for in section twenty-three of this act. For the purposes of this section the circuit courts of the United States shall be deemed always open, and said circuit courts, respectively, may establish, and from time to time alter, rules and regulations not inconsistent herewith for the procedure in such cases as they shall deem proper. (See 82, Act March 3, 1875, supra, Act March 3, 1891, post.)
*Under Act March 3, 1891, post, customs cases are now sent to the Circuit Courts of Appeals.
+Section 23 relates exclusively to abandonment for damage. Section 24 is probably meant.