
    No. 49624.
    Protests 928690-G, etc., of R. Gliksman et al. (New York).
   Opinion by

Keeps, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar to that the subject of United States v. Hearty (31 C. C. P. A. 106, C. A. D. 257). In accordance therewith the merchandise was held dutiable on the weight of the poultry alone, as claimed.  