"HALF GOLD," (GOLD LEAF.)

Treasury Department, April 2, 1863.

SIR: Messrs. L. BRANDIES & Co. appeal from your decision assessing duty, at the rate of one dollar and fifty cents per pack, on fifty-five packs of "half gold" imported by them, alleging that "fifty packs of this half gold,' (which is only a technical name for it,) are composed of a body of silver slightly plated or coated on one side with an alloy of gold, and five packs are composed of silver, and plated with Dutch metal.

"We claim, consequently, the article being almost entirely silver leaf, to pay the duty at the rate of 75 cents per pack."

The article called "half gold" is not specially provided for by name in any of the existing tariffs. It is a combination of gold and silver leaf, and is used for similar purposes and as a substitute for gold leaf, and therefore is liable to duty, under the 20th section of the act of August 30, 1842, to the same duty as gold leaf, that being the enumerated article it most nearly resembles in "material, quality, texture, or the uses to which it may be applied."

Your decision is therefore affirmed.

Very respectfully,

S. P. CHASE, Sec. of the Treasury.

TO HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., Collector, New York.

SLIPPER PATTERNS.

Treasury Department, April 11, 1863. SIR: Certain "slipper patterns," imported by Messrs. SCHACK & HOTOP were classified by you as manufactures of worsted and cotton, and duty assessed at the rate of 35 per cent; from this classification and assessment the importers appeal, claiming that 10 per cent ad valorem is the proper rate of duty under the clause in section 6 of the tariff act of July 14, 1862, commencing: "Lastings, mohair cloth, silk, twist, or other manufacture of cloth, woven or made in patterns of such size, shape, and form, or cut in such manner as to be fit for shoes, slippers, boots, bootees, gaiters, and buttons, exclusively," &c., &c.

A majority of the experts of the customs, to whom a sample of the goods in question has been submitted, are of opinion that the article is of size and shape, and of a texture and color precisely adapted for slippers, and can be used for no other purpose advantageously, and should be admitted at 10 per cent, as claimed by the importers, and in this opinion I concur.

You will govern yourself accordingly.

Respectfully,

S. P. CHASE, Sec. of the Treasury. HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., Collector, New York.

COTTON SHIRTS.

Treasury Department, May 4, 1863. SIR: Messrs. JORDAN, MARSH & Co., of Boston, appeal from your decision assessing duty, at the rate of 35 per cent, on certain "cotton shirts," imported by them into Portland per steamer Jura, and claim to enter them at 30 per cent, alleging that the law expressly provides that shirts. and drawers pay that rate of duty.

The act of March 2, 1861, imposes a duty of 25 per cent, and section 10 of the Tariff act of July 14, 1862, imposes an additional duty of 5 per cent "on shirts or drawers wove or made on frames, composed wholly of cotton, etc."

The act of March 2, 1861, imposes a duty of 30 per cent, and section 13 of the Tariff act of July 14, 1862, imposes an additional duty of 5 per cent "on wearing apparel of whatever description, of whatever material ocmposed, except wool, made up or manufactured wholly or in part by the tailor, seamstress, or manufacturer."

The question which presents itself is, to which of these two classes the shirts imported by Messrs. JORDAN, MARSH & Co., properly belong.

The shirts are known to the trade as "patent finish shirts," and are composed wholly of cotton, and are manufactured by the tailor or seamstress from cloth in the piece-with the exception of the sleeves, which are woven without seams-then shaped to fit the arm holes, and afterwards attached, by sewing, to the body of the shirt.

It is quite clear they are not shirts "wove or made on frames," and, in my opinion, were properly classified by you under section 13 of the Tariff act of July 14, 1862, and subjected to duty at the rate of 35 per cent

ad valorem.

Your decision is hereby affirmed.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury.

TO JED. JEWETT, Esq., Collector, Portland, Me.

MOHAIR COATING OR CLOAKING.

Treasury Department, May 6, 1863.

SIR: I have bad under consideration the appeal of Messrs. WHITE, BROWN, DAVIS & Co. from your decision assessing duty on certain "mohair and worsted piece goods," at the rate of 18 cents per pound and 30 per cent ad valorem, under section 13 of act of March, 1861, and section 9 of act of July 14, 1862, as manufactures of wool of every description, made wholly or in part of wool, not otherwise provided for."

The appellants allege that "these goods are not made wholly or in part of wool, but of worsted or mohair-worsted or mobair being the component material subject to a duty of 35 per cent ad valorem."

Samples of the goods in question have been submitted to the experts of the customs, a majority of whom are unable to discover the presence of wool, but are of the opinion that "wcol waste" may be, to a very limited extent, a component material. "Wool waste," however, is not recognized by the tariff act as "wool."

In my opinion, the claim of the appellants is well established, and your decision is hereby overruled.

I am, very respectfully,

GEO. HARRINGTON, Acting Sec. of the Treasury. HIRAM BARNEY, Esq., 'Collector, &c., N. Y.

JOURNAL OF MERCANTILE LAW.

IMPORTANT TO IMPORTERS-HALF MONTH'S STORAGE.

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT, MAY 21.

RICHARD IRWIN et al. vs. AUGUSTUS SCHELL. Before Judge NELSON. This suit involves the question of the right of the collector to collect the half month's storage, according to the regulations of the Treasury, under the following circumstances:

The plaintiffs in the case of several shipments of goods in June and July, 1857, from Liverpool to this port, caused warehouse entries to be made at the custom-house, under the act of Congress of 28th March, 1854; but before the goods were removed to the warehouse, they changed their minds and applied to the collector for permits to land the goods for removal to their own stores, or for consumption-whereupon the collector charged them half a month's storage, besides the duties, which storage for the goods in the five vessels, amounted to the sum of $98 26, and which was paid under protest.

It is admitted that no act of Congress can be found for making this charge against the merchant under the above state of facts. The charge is wholly an arbitrary one, prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, and a fixed sum might as well have been imposed as the half month's storage. The imposition is sought to be sustained in the idea that in case the goods are entered for warehousing, and before they are landed and removed the merchant applies for a permit to land for consumption, the vessel, in the meantime, may be regarded as the warehouse, with the permission of the Treasury. But this is hardly plausible, as it involves the absurdity of charging the merchant for the use of his own vessel.

Besides, the government has no interest in the warehousing business, as according to the act of 1854 the goods are stored at the risk and expense of the importer.

The truth is, that the charge is made simply for the favor granted to the merchant in permitting him to land the goods for consumption after he has entered them for warehousing. After being thus entered, the collector might doubtless compel him to procure his goods in the usual way, through the warehouse, which would increase considerably the expense. Hence, if the merchant changes his mind and applies for a permit to land for consumption, this charge is imposed. The change, as appears from the case, adds nothing to the labor or trouble of the officers of the customs, as is, indeed, obvious from the usual course of the business.

As I bave said already, there is no law for this charge against the merchant; and any other arbitrary sum might as well be imposed. And I have hesitated whether I ought not to put an end to it. I certainly should, were it not for considerations which I will now state.

It does not appear in the case whether the charge goes to the government, or is a perquisite to the collector. But as it is imposed by a regu lation of the Treasury, it is fair to presume, that it goes to the government. This is a suit against the collector, and the question, under the

circumstances, arises, whether the payment of this storage was an involuntary payment. If it was not, then the action will not lie. It is true the plaintiffs paid under protest. But their own acts led to the charge. They entered their goods for warehousing and afterwards changed their minds and asked for permit to land. The collector, under instructions of the Treasury, probably, might have refused this and compelled the warehousing of them.

The Secretary of the Treasury, however, says, if you will pay a half month's storage, I will give you a permit. This is a favor extended for compensation. I do not agree that public officers can make these bargains, but if the merchant voluntarily accedes to them I am inclined to think he cannot turn round and sue the collector as for an involuntary payment. The merchant was not compelled to accede, as he might have procured his goods through the warehouse.

There is no difficulty where the merchant makes up his mind on the arrival of the goods what he will do with them-warehouse them, or land them for consumption. He is not compelled to enter them for warehousing. The goods may remain on board his ship till entered, and permits of landing obtained.

Upon the whole, after some difficulty, I have come to the conclusion, for the reasons above stated, that the plaintiffs cannot recover. Judgment for defendant.

PETROLEUM IN GERMANY.

Large quantities of petroleum are now constantly forwarded to the interior of Germany by the railroads; but as there is some danger connected with its conveyance, the Association of North-German Railway Companies have issued special regulations for the transport of petroleum, binding on them all. The principal conditions insisted on are the following: The traffic to be exclusively confined to refined petroleum, crude being totally excluded. The casks to be immediately examined when brought to the station, and not to be received unless in irreproachably good condition. Refined petroleum not permitted to be loaded, unloaded, or stored in the goods sheds, but only at place at a safe distance and in the open air, fixed on at each station by the respective station masters. The petroleum not to be conveyed in the covered vans with other goods, but placed in separate open trucks, simply covered by a tarpaulin. The loading and unloading to be performed exclusively by daylight, and no smoking permitted by the men employed, under any circumstances, in the neighborhood of the casks. No lamps or lanthorns to be attached to the petroleum trucks at night when in motion. On each side of the truck a red board to be displayed, on which to be painted in conspicuous letters the words "Petroleum, dangerous." Petroleum only to be forwarded by goods trains. The trucks to be placed in the middle of the train, as at night lamps are attached to the last carriage so as to be visible from behind. The minimum quantity is fixed at 50 centners. If less, full freight for the above quantity to be charged.

RAILWAY, CANAL, AND TELEGRAPH STATISTICS.

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROADS.

FROM the reports of the several railroad companies for 1862, as communicated to the Auditor General of the State, and reported to Legisia ture, we extract the following information:

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD.

Capital authorized, $20,000,000; paid in, $13,274,600. Funded debt, $9,527,400; total funded and floating debt, $9,570,400 at six per cent. Cost of road, $21,806,852 76; length, 365 miles; double track 318 miles; two branch roads. Has six engine houses, etc.; 253 engines; 113 passenger; 44 baggage and express; 3,471 freight, and 400 coal cars. Has 81 iron, 57 wood, and 17 stone bridges, 102 passenger, and 106 wood and water stations.

During the year 1,089,659 passengers were carried, and 1,989,126 tons freight. Express trains run 27 and mail trains 24 miles per hour.

Expenses Maintenance of real estate and road, $768.731 68; repairs of machinery, $1,144,566 87; operating road, $1,920,046 65; total, $3,833,345 20. Receipts, $10,143,738 78.

Accidents: Six passengers, 22 employes, and 39 others killed-67; 11 passengers, 38 employes, and 27 others injured-76.

PITTSBURG, FORT WAYNE, AND CHICAGO.

Capital authorized, $6,500,000; subscribed, $5,351,062 90; paid in, $5,351,062 90. Funded debt, $12,935,173, at per cent; no floating debt.

66

Cost of road, $17,448,687 16; length, 468,3 miles; double track, 59,6%. Has 13 engine houses, and 109 engines. Has 53 passenger, 23 express and baggage, and 1,174 freight cars. Has 3 iron, 183 wood, and 39 stone bridges; 73 passenger, and 45 wood and water stations.

During the year 626,892 passengers were carried, and 592,770 tons freight. Express trains run 26, and mail trains 23 miles per

hour.

Expenses Maintenance of real estate and way, $470,958 64; repairs of machinery, $335,872 09; operating road, $999,987 83; total, $1,806,818 56. Receipts, $3,613,841 36.

Accidents: Eight employes and 12 others killed-20; 9 employes and 2 others injured-11.

PITTSBURG AND CONNELLSVILLE.

Capital authorized, $5,000,000; subscribed, $2,143,000; paid in. $1,763,130 47. Funded debt, $1,500,000; at 6 per cent; total funded and floating, $1,610,417 19.

Cost of road, $2,154,348 76; length 149 miles; double track, 64 miles. Has 3 engine-houses; 10 locomotives; 9 passenger, 3 express and baggage, 31 freight, and 19 coal cars. Has 1 iron, 9 wood, and 2