
    GREMPLER v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    March 12, 1901.)
    No. 2,910.
    Customs Duttf.s — Classification—Composition Metal.
    Composition metal of which copper is the component material of chief value, in sheets which require to be reworked before the metal is available for use, is not dutiable under paragraph 177 of the tariff act of 1894, as a partly manufactured article composed wholly or in part of any metal, but is entitled to free entry under paragraph 452.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
    Appeal by the United States from a decision of the circuit court reversing the decision of the board of general appraisers as to the classification for duty of certain imported merchandise.
    The following is the opinion of the circuit court (TOWNSEND, District Judge):
    The merchandise in question consists of composition metal, of which copper is the component material of chief value, and which is imported in large sheets. It was assessed for duty as a “manufactured article, not specially provided for, composed wholly or in part of any metal, and whether partly or wholly manufactured, thirty-five per centum ad valorem,” under the provigions of paragraph 177 of the act of 1894, and was claimed to be free under paragraph 452 of said act, as a “composition metal of which copper is á component material of chief value, not specially provided for.” It is contended that this merchandise is partly manufactured, because it has been thus made into sheets. This contention is met by proof that these sheets are not available for any purpose until after they have been beaten to one-sixth their present thickness, and then cut into pieces and put into books to be sold, apparently for use in gilding. The invoice consists of kupfermetall, buchmetall, and clippings. It appears that the kupfermetall is all copper, and therefore it is not included under the provisions for composition metal. As to the buchmetall and clippings, I think the question has been disposed of favorably to the contention of the importer by Judge Wheeler in Benedix v. U. S. (G. C.) 99 Bed. 25$, where an article practically identical with this here in question was before him upon a similar contention. The decision of the board of general appraisers is affirmed as to the kupfermetall, and reversed as to the buchmetall and clippings.
    D. Frank Lloyd, Asst. U. S. Atty.
    Albert Comstock, for appellee.
    Before WALLACE, LAGOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Decision of circuit court affirmed on opinion below.  