BEUTTELL fl. MAGONE.

157

That was an issue between the plaintiffs and the defendants, triable before the court. Holliday v. Cohen, 34 Ark. 707, 716. It was, however, submitted to toe the issue between the interpleader and the plaintitrs, because it w.as known its fate must be determined by the rl\sultof that issue.. There was no ground for the attachment other than the t,Dll-king of the deed qf assignment. If the assignment was valid, the attachl,l1;nt was confessedly wrongfully sued out, and vice. versa. The ".ea.l.1.·. ... .. w.as. o.n the in.terplea, and the interpleader'.s rights could. no.t . be the and defendants agreeing to submit to jurY issue between them 9n the attachment· . There was an error in the. mode of impaneling the jury in the case. llauwaYqCo; ,v. lames, Rep. 148,Cdecided at the present ter!l1.) But are lill :of opinion that upon the state of the pleadings and the pl'oofs in this case there was nothing for the court to submit to the jury, and i that the court. should have directed a verdict for the interpleader. Chandler v. Von Roeder, 24 How. 224; Commissioners v. Clark, 94 U. S· .278. '1'here was.no evidence tending in the slightest degree to impeach the An appellate court should not reverse a judgment for an el10Fwhen it plainly, appears from the record that the error worked complaining party no. harm. Deery v. Cray, 5 WalL. 795, 807; $mjth v. Shoemqker, 17 Wall. 630; Gregg v. Moss, 14 Wall. 564; West U. S. 507,521,10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 838. As the verdict rendered. w.as the only verl1ict that could have been rendered in the maMer how the jtiry was impaneled or constituted I the plaiJ;ltiffs were not harmed by Judgment affirmed.

BEUTTELI. tI. MAGONE,

t,,,

Collector.

,.

r

(Circuit Oourt, S. D. New York.. January 29,1890.

OVSTOl\JB LAWS-RUGS-TOURNAT VELVET CARPETS.

rugs and Dag. Dag. rugs of like qhar<.cter or descriptioll- to TOurl?aY 'vehtet carpets, though not, Or not made from, portions of· such carpets, are, under ScheduleK'of the.ta:riff !!oct of March 3,1883, (22 U. S. StASS,) dutiable at the rate pf duty illlPosed by that Bchedule npon Tournay .

.' During November and December of the year 1887 the plaintiff made six importations from Halifax,Englund, into the port of New York,of mercpandise as Daghestan rugs anll Dag.. -'ago rugs. These rugs classified for duty by the defendl,lnt, as collector of that pqrt,a./3 rugs of like character or description to TotirnaY,velvet carp.ets, that "mats l rugs, screens, covers, hassocks, bedsides, otber portions, of carpets, or carpetings, shall be subjected, to the.rate 'of dp,tY,hewin imposed Qn:carpets or like chllracter or dein, Kof the tafiff,.act of)4arch 3,

158
pets

FEDEltAL

'voL' 48.

Ind' 1

of45, cetits,

iii

td such

C!-d, ' Agal.nst lltld 'd protested, claun7 1[lg that these .tugs were per carttum ad vdlorem as "rl,lgB," unuer the, ptdyision' fOr al16'ther rugseontairied in the same Idi par. appe.al.s to the ll'ecretary ofthe'tteasury, and. WIthIn a.fteradverse deCISIOns the tore.cover thedtff'erence dutIesattlie rtlte eX'acted and: the'dutIes at the b,imin pis,pr(jtest. . Upon 'the trialit,appElared that the;serUgs of thefolldwing si2;es:' ,86 inches long by 18 or 36 inches 27 inchenvide'; 63 inches long by 36 inqhes 'inchetil long bY44, inches iipPE'r surfaces 'of the SOItie were plush, made ofworstedj .that the upper surface of Tournay 1thich was apother naltiefor Wilton velvet carpets, were alsopHISh, from worsted. and Jthat there'were other carpets enumerate.d eo nomine, or otHerwise, in ,the tariff actE1fMarch 3, 1883',"whose upper's,urface that the backsor'lowersurfaces of these rugs were of the Sl;lme genefal character aathe syrfilCe or back of Wilton ,or Tournay velvet carpets, thQugh made of.differentmateriala; that the designs upon the dpper surfaces of these"rttgs were of the conimonrtig designs, and of the same designs 'l\Sfound on Wilton or Tournay velvet carpets; that these wereotheMvise onhe same character or description as Wilton or Tournay velvet carpets; that the plaintiff advertised and put upon .the market thes.e rugs under the designation of Wilton Daghestan rugs; that on and prior to March 3, 1883, rugs of like character and description to the rugs in suit were bought and sold in the trade and commerG6;of this country name of Wilton rugs; that there were rugs made from portions of carpets or carpeting; that the rugs insuit were not so made, but were.each, woven in a loom, generally to the number of 10 to 15, separate and distinct, being only by fringe, which of threads running through the entire Il'linber of rugs one time; that after'rthese rugs so woven, they were cut apart by cutting this fringer, and the fringe left at the ends of each rug was tied, and each rug was then rendy for the market; that the looms on which the rugs in suit were woven were heavier than the looms on which the Wilton or Tournay velvet carpets were made;,.and had six frames, while the looms upbit Which the Wilton or Tourri'ay velvet carpets:W,ere woven had only to five frames; that die looms on which the rugs Were, wov:en were especially adapted to weaving not carpets; that .the10oms upon which Wilton or Tourntlyvel\tet', carpets were' woven were ,. pted 'forweaving carpets, and were not adapted for weaving' tugs; .alId that bedsides were simple pieces or portions of carpets or' earpetings, cut into desired lengths, and without any finishfng 'after being so cut, to be laid down beside beds. Both sides haVing restedj bOth plaintiffan:d defend-

!4',s

.:'

v.

M"'GONE.

1.59

ant respectively moved court t() nirect the jury to find a verdict his favor. . . ., , Stephen. .G. ,(Jlarke and pharles f<:>r plaintiffs. Edward'M''ltcheU,U.S. Atty.,snd ThomaaGreenwood, U. S. Atty., for deferidant. . ,
tAcoMisE, Circuit J"UdM,{orally.) The iruga in suit are of like, characteror desorlptionto Wilton or Toumay 'Velvet carpets. The provisions fottheaeand other carpetsdr clli'petings',and also for rugs, contained in Kofthe tariff a'ct of March 3, 1883, and similar provisions containQd in various other tariffa.cts, from 1861 to March 3,1883,-Act 68, § 13, (12 U. S. e;t.178j) Act July 14, 1862, c. l63; §!9; (Id;'543j) 30,1864, c. 171, §'5, (13 U. S. St. 202;}((Ae( March 2, 18'67 ,c. 197, § f, (14 U. S.St. '5:51Jj) .Schedule L, § little doubt as to the que$ti'on'raised be.re. lt appears that epngress, after providing for a greattnany different kinds of. by names, or by descrill,tive terms atIve of tHe ma'tenals of whlCh they are-composed, hasfu.rther provlded that of like character or description to any Of these enumerated carpets OrC8Tpetings shall besnbject to the rate of duty imposed on,such carpetor'carpetings. :B:aving made provision for sudh rttgs,it has then provided that all other rugs, not inclUded. inthBtprovision, shall be l!ubjecttO duty at the rate of 40 per cent. ad valorem. There is no reason to suppose',' as contended by the plaintiff insuppdrt of his cl8.iin, intended that ,rugs of like character or description to some one of tbe various enumerated carpets or carpetings, when they are, or ate ma,de '..om, portions thereof, shouid 'pa,y the same rate of duty as is itnposed'Pnsucb carpet or ca'rpetings, but, when tIDteo made, should Pay rate of duty. ,. Ontbe contrary, 'there if: reason to eonelude' that congress considered the character or description of rugs, if like the charaCterpr deseri any 0l1e of such Clitp'ets' or carpetings, 8 more impor,talitelement infixing their classifieationthantheir mode of I therefore direct a verdict for the defendant. .
"

,

'INGltRsoLL

et al. 'lJ.

,

MAGONlt,

(Oircuit Oourt, B. D. New

York.

February 18, ;1.891.)

"

'traveUtll!' rugS whioh were imported during t-he year 1888, and which are artlclee generally used for wrapping about the legs or the body of a person when traveling, and as coverings for lounges and beds, or for throwing over the body of a person when lying on a lounge or bed, are not duitable under the provisions for rugs conof; the act ot

'. .

.

a

U.,s.

:At LaW.

During

,j,n,tQ/

1888 :the plaintiffs ma:deatl impodation from England York of certain woolen II

,

'