In Arthur v. Davies, 96 U.S. 135 (1877), the articles in question were suspenders or braces, made of india-rubber, cotton and silk, cotton being the component material of chief value, and suspenders or braces made of india-rubber, cotton and silk, cotton being the component material of chief value, a few threads of silk being introduced for purposes of ornament. It was held that the goods were dutiable under 22 of the act of March 2, 1861, (12 Stat. 191,) which imposed a duty of 30 per cent on "braces, suspenders, webbing or other fabrics, composed wholly or in part of india-rubber, not otherwise provided for," and to an additional duty of 5 per cent ad valorem imposed on the same articles by 13 of the act of July 14, 1862, (12 Stat. 556,) and not to a duty of 50 per cent ad valorem, imposed by 8 of the same act, (12 Stat. 552,) "on manufactures of india-rubber and silk, or of india-rubber and silk and other materials." This was held on the ground that, if the articles were technically and commercially braces and suspenders, composed in part of india-rubber, they took their dutiable character from that source.