Some time after the entry  was liquidated, the importer filed a protest against said liquidation on the ground that a  clerical error  had been  made in the preparation  of the consular invoice, in that the person who had prepared it had mistaken  the currency of the manufacturer's invoice for Dutch florins and converted it  into marks at the rate of 1.70 marks per florin,  whereas in  fact the prices appearing  in said manufacturer's invoice were in francs and should have so appeared.  In its protest the importer made  an offer  to produce a corrected consular invoice, if necessary, and obtain the same from Europe without delay.   No  bond, how ever, was filed for the production of such corrected consular invoice as required by law and  the regulations of the Bureau of Customs and the long established custom  in  such cases.

Thereafter a  second consular invoice, alleged to  be  a correction of the first, was presented, issued at Antwerp.

Belgium, in  which the currency is stated  in francs and Antwerp is given as the port of  shipment.   This  invoice was not accepted by the Bureau of Customs as a correction of the invoice previously presented,  for the reason that  it had been consulated in a different country and by a different consul, the first one having been certified by  the American consul at Hamburg, Germany, where, says the invoice, the goods were purchased by the  importer.

Later a third consular invoice, issued, as was the first one, at Hamburg, and dated April  22, 1908, was filed as a substitute for the first one.   In this invoice the currency shown is  francs, which had been reduced to marks, and the port of shipment is given as Hamburg,  This third invoice was not accepted by the Bureau of Customs for the reasons that; "In  each of these  three invoices, Arnold Otto  Meyer appears as the seller of the merchandise on the faces of the documents  and also  in  the briefs of the invoices,  yet in each instance he  has  declared himself  as  'agent  of the purchasers.' All of  which  said  invoices are, therefore, irregular for the reason  that Arnold Otto Meyer cannot use a seller's invoice and  act in  the dual capacity of  seller and agent of the purchasers in one and the same transaction. If, as a matter of fact, he is the  agent of the purchasers in this transaction,  then each of the invoices is defective,  be cause no  original invoice showing  from whom he  obtained the goods, and whence he obtained them and at what price, is attached to the invoice filed, as required by law. (See Tariff Decision Circular No. 863.)

"On comparison of a French commercial invoice, which forms part of the record  (which may be the original bill of  the item involved, and which gives  Paris  as the  place of  original sale)   with the invoice  from Antwerp, and the so called corrected invoice from Hamburg, it is found that the latter are merely copies of the commercial invoice.   Consequently, the consulated copies of the French commercial invoice do not represent the value of the merchandise either at  Antwerp, or at Hamburg the place  of sale.

"In so far as the importer has failed  in each instance to present an  invoice which  conforms with the  law  and the facts, the appraiser's return, based on an invoice filed at the time of entry, must be accepted."

The last  two invoices not being in  conformity with the law,  the  protest  of the importer was overruled,  it  being held that  no corrected consular invoice had been presented as required by law.

Plaintiff appealed to the Court of First Instance of the city of Manila from the decision of the Insular Collector of Customs overruling its protest, and that court, after hearing the case, reversed the decision of the  Insular  Collector  of Customs  and held that the Collector erred in accepting  as correct the appraiser's return, as it was based upon an in correct invoice.

Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act of Congress of June 10, 1890, as  amended, known here as the  Customs Administrative Act of the United States, are as follows:

"SEC. 2. That all invoices of imported merchandise shall be made out in the currency of the place or country from whence the importations shall be made, or, if purchased, in the currency actually paid therefor, shall contain a correct description of such merchandise, and shall be made in triplicate or in quadruplicate  in case of merchandise intended for immediate  transportation  without appraisement, and signed by  the person owning or shipping the same,  if the merchandise has been actually purchased, or by the manufacturer or owner thereof, if the same has been procured otherwise than by purchase, or by the duly authorized agent of such purchaser, manufacturer, or owner.

"SEC. 3. That all of such invoices shall, at or before the shipment of the merchandise, be produced to the consul, vice-consul, or commercial agent of the United States of the consular district in  which the merchandise was manufactured or purchased,  as the case may be, for export to  the United  States, and shall have indorsed thereon,  when  so produced, a declaration signed by the purchaser, manufacturer, owner, or agent, setting forth that the invoice is in all respects correct and true, and  was made at the place from which the merchandise is to be exported to the United States; that it contains, if the  merchandise was  obtained by purchase, a true and full statement of the time when, the place where, the person from whom the same was purchased, and the actual  cost  thereof, and  of  all charges thereon,  as provided by this act;  and that no discounts, bounties, or drawbacks  are contained in the  invoice but such as have been actually allowed thereon; and when  obtained in any other manner than by  purchase, the actual market value or wholesale price thereof, at the time  of exportation to the United  States, in the principal markets of  the country  from  whence exported;  that such  actual market value is the price at which the merchandise described in the invoice is freely offered  for sale to all purchasers in said markets, and  that  it is the price which the manufacturer or owner making the declaration would have  received, and was willing to receive,  for such  merchandise sold in the  ordinary course of trade in the usual wholesale quantities, and that it includes all charges thereon as provided by this act; and the actual quantity thereof; and that no  different  invoice of the merchandise mentioned in the invoice so produced has been or will be furnished to anyone. If the merchandise was actually purchased, the declaration shall  also contain  a statement that the currency in which such  invoice  is made out is that which was actually paid for the merchandise by the purchaser.

"SEC. 4. That, except in  case of personal effects accompanying the purchaser  [passenger],  no importation of any merchandise exceeding one hundred dollars in dutiable value shall  be admitted to entry without the production of a duly certified invoice thereof as required by law, or of an affidavit made by the owner, importer, or consignee, before the collector or his deputy, showing why it is impracticable to produce such  invoice; and no entry shall be made in the absence of a certified  invoice,  upon affidavit as  aforesaid,  unless such affidavit  be accompanied  by a statement  in the  form  of an  invoice, or otherwise,  showing the actual cost  of such merchandise, if purchased, or if obtained otherwise than by purchase, the actual market  value or wholesale price thereof at the time of exportation to the United States  in the principal  markets of the country from which the same has been imported; which statement  shall be verified by the oath  of the owner, importer, consignee, or agent desiring to  make entry of the merchandise, to be administered by the collector or his  deputy,  and  it shall be lawful for the collector or his deputy to examine the deponent under oath, touching the sources of his  knowledge,  information or belief, in the premises, and to require him to produce any letter, paper, or statement of account,  in his  possession, or under his control, which may assist the  officers of customs in ascertaining the actual  value  of the  importation or  any part thereof; and  in  default of  such  production, when so  re quested, such owner, importer,  consignee, or agent shall be thereafter debarred from producing any  such letter, paper, or statement for the purpose  of avoiding any additional duty,  penalty or forfeiture incurred  under this act, unless he shall show to the satisfaction of the court or the officers of the customs, as  the  case  may  be, that it was not  in his power to produce the same when  so demanded; and no merchandise shall be admitted to entry under the pro visions of this  section unless the collector shall be satisfied that the failure to produce a duly certified  invoice is due to causes beyond  the  control of the owner, consignee,  or agent thereof:  Provided, That the  Secretary of the Treasury may make regulations by which books, magazines and other periodicals published and imported in successive parts. numbers or volumes, and entitled  to be  imported free  of duty, shall require but one declaration for the entire series. And when entry  of merchandise  exceeding  one hundred dollars in value is made by  a statement in the form  of an invoice, the collector shall require a bond for the production of a duty certified  invoice."

These sections are applicable to the Philippine Islands by virtue of the provisions of section 20 of Act No. 355, known as the Philippine  Customs Administrative Act, reading  as follows:

"SEC. 20. If any case shall arise not provided for by this Act  or by the  regulations of the Insular Collector, or by the lawful decrees,  orders  or regulations existing at the passage of this Act and not by this Act repealed, the laws of the United States and the regulations  of the Treasury Department of the United States in analogous cases, so far as the same are consistent with the provision of this Act, in the discretion of the Insular Collector, shall be followed and applied so  far as they may be practicable."

Under these provisions the importer  in this  case was, from the facts  appearing, under  obligation to file with his entry a  consular invoice from the place of manufacture  or purchase, and having presented one certified at Hamburg, Germany, showing the merchandise in question to  have been purchased there, the presumption was that the goods were either purchased or manufactured at that place.  That  being the case, the market value of said articles for tariff purposes was  their value at Hamburg and not what they  would be sold for in Gien, France, the alleged place of manufacture, where the importer claims to  have purchased them.

Sections 174 and 177  of Act No.  355 are  as follows:

"SEC. 174. In the assessment of duties upon merchandise subject to an ad valorem rate  of duty, or to a  duty based upon or regulated in any manner by the value thereof, the kind  of money  expressed in the invoice shall be  reduced to the currency of the United States  at the  rate of value of foreign money, as  established by the Secretary of the Treasury  of  the United  States upon the first days of January, April,  July, and October  of  every year.  The date of the invoices  will indicate the value of the money, but the reduction of Insular or local currency  of the  United States shall  be  at the ratio fixed for the current quarter by the Civil  Governor in accordance with law.

"SEC. 177. Whenever imported merchandise is subject to an ad valorem rate of duty, or  to a duty placed upon or regulated  in any manner by the value thereof, the duty shall be assessed upon the actual market value or wholesale price of such merchandise as bought and sold in usual wholesale quantities at the time of exportation to the  Philippine Is lands in the principal markets of the country from whence imported,  and in the condition in which such merchandise is there bought  and sold  for exportation to the Philippine Islands, or consigned  to the Philippine Islands for  sale, including the value of  all cartons, cases,  crates,  boxes, sacks, and coverings of any kind, arid  all other  costs, charges, and  expenses incident to placing the merchandise in  condition, packed ready for shipment to  the Philippine Islands; and if there be used for covering or  holding imported  merchandise,  whether dutiable or free,  any unusual  article or form designed for use otherwise than in the bona fide transportation  of  such merchandise to the  Philippine Islands, additional duty  shall  be levied  and collected upon  such material or article at  the rate to which the same would be subject if separately imported.   The words Value' or 'actual market value,'  whenever  used in any law relating to the appraisement  of  imported  merchandise,  shall be construed to mean the actual market value or wholesale price as above defined,"

Under these provisions the market value of imported articles is their value in the country of export, which is required to be shown upon a consular invoice covering the importation; and as the goods in  this case  were imported from Hamburg, Germany, as shown by the consular  invoice  certified at that place and by the statement of the shipper on the back thereof, it is  clear that the correct dutiable value of the importation was that  in Hamburg, Germany,  and not the value at which the  manufacturer would sell them at Gien.  According to the testimony of  Edward  Plique, manager of the Comptoir Ceramique of Paris,  France, the manufacturer of the plates  imported, the prices appearing in the commercial or manufacturer's  invoice were factory prices and they represented,  with slight modification, the market value of the  plates in France.  It is  not denied that the prices. shown in the commercial  invoice  and the evidence attached thereto are  more or less  fairly representative of the market value  of the articles in France;  but it is clear that they do not  show the market value of said goods either  at  Hamburg, where the goods were sold  and consulated, or at Antwerp, where they were placed on board ship bound to the Philippine Islands.

It is obvious that if the goods are of French manufacture and  were taken to Antwerp or to  Hamburg and sold in either of these places,  as the consular invoices  in the case show,  something must be added to their  price in Paris, France, or at Gien, the place  of manufacture,  in order to arrive at the correct market value  in either Hamburg or Antwerp.   There should be added to their value at the place of manufacture  the cost of  transportation to Antwerp or Hamburg, as the case may be,  the duties to which such goods would be subject  upon  their importation into Belgium or France for consumption therein, the cost  of placing them in the market  ready  for  sale in the particular country, and a reasonable profit to the seller.

In the case of United States vs.  Passavant (169 U. S.,  16), certain velvets were imported from Germany into the United States, which had been  originally imported  from another country  in the gray and there subjected to  processes of dyeing  and finishing while under  bond in that country.  The invoices  covering  the  merchandise  gave certain figures as the net invoice value and contained also certain additional sums under the heading "German duty." This duty was a tax imposed by the German Government on the  particular class of merchandise in question when it was sold by the manufacturers thereof for consumption or sale in the markets of Germany, but which duty or tax was remitted by the German Government when the merchandise was purchased  in  bond or consigned  while  in  bond for exportation  to a  different country.  The merchandise was purchased in bond  for exportation to a foreign country at the net invoice price stated and the so called German duty was not paid upon its exportation.   In the  appraisement of the merchandise the appraiser, in determining the whole sale price thereof at the time of exportation in the principal markets of the country whence imported, decided that the dutiable value of the  same was the net invoice value, plus the German duty.   The importers filed a protest in accordance with the provisions  of law, and the Board of General Appraisers  acting  thereon  reversed  the  decision of the collector of  customs on the ground that the so called  Ger man duty was not a lawful element of dutiable value.  An appeal was  taken to  the United States circuit court for the southern district of New York, where the decision  of the Board of General Appraisers was affirmed.  That court certified two questions for review to the Supreme Court of the  United States.  The first  one  was whether or not the Board of  General Appraisers had a right to inquire into and reverse the collector's decision as to dutiable value, and the second, if it was decided that the Board of General Appraisers had such right, was the German duty lawfully included in the estimate of dutiable value?

In the decision  of this case the court interpreted section 19 of the Act of Congress of June  10, 1890, and from which section 177 of Act No. 355 is adapted.  That section reads as follows:

"That  whenever imported merchandise is subject to  an ad  valorem rate of duty, or to a duty based upon or regulated in any manner by the value thereof, the duty shall be assessed upon the actual market value or wholesale price of such merchandise as bought and sold in usual wholesale quantities, at the time of exportation to the United States, in the principal markets  of the country from  whence  imported, and in the condition in which such merchandise is usually  [there]  bought and sold for exportation  to  the United States or consigned to  the United States for sale, including the value of all cartons, cases,  *  *  *."

The court  answered the first question in the affirmative and held "that what was to be ascertained was the actual market value or wholesale price of the merchandise  as bought and sold in usual wholesale quantities at the time of exportation in the principal markets of the country from whence imported.  This  market value or price was  the price in  Germany and not the  price after leaving that country,  and  the Act does not contemplate two prices  or two market values.   The certificate of facts states that the German  duty is  imposed on merchandise when 'sold by the manufacturers thereof for  consumption or  sale in  the market of Germany;'  and is  collected when the finished product goes into consumption in Germany. As the tax accrues when the manufacturer sells,  his wholesale price includes it, and the purchaser who buys these cotton velvets in  wholesale quantities  in  the German  markets  pays a price covering the tax, and that is the price for the merchandise  when bought and sold in these markets  *  *  * but the laws of this  country in the assessment of duties proceed upon the market value in the exporting country and not  upon that market value less such remission or amelioration as that country chooses to allow in  accordance with its own views of public policy.   *   *  *

"The  second question  must also  be  answered in the affirmative."

It is to be noted in the case at bar that the value appearing on the first invoice presented by the importer at the customhouse was accepted as the  dutiable value of the merchandise.  If this value was incorrect, then it became the duty of the  importer to treat such invoice as pro forma merely and  file  a  bond for the presentation of a correct consular  invoice.  (United  States vs. Frank & Lambert, United States Treasury Decision No. 31973; United States vs. Bennett & Loewenthal,  id.,  No. 31975.)   This  was not done, but the importer sought to amend the original invoice by  the  presentation of  a  second  invoice  consulated  in another consular district, and, on the hearing in the Court of First Instance, he was  permitted, over  the  objections and exceptions of the appellant herein, to prove the value of the  merchandise in  France, a place  and country from which  no  consular invoice covering the merchandise  in question had been  presented.  The importer did not, how ever, offer any evidence as  to the value of the goods either in Hamburg, the place from  which they were  originally invoiced, or in Antwerp, the place where they were alleged to have been placed on  board ship bound to the Philippine Islands.

In the absence of a bond  to produce a  corrected consular invoice, and  especially  where  a second  and third invoice have been  presented which are defective,  the first invoice cannot  be  impugned by  the importer presenting  it, nor can he be heard to  say that  it is incorrect.   If an importer desires to correct his own mistake relative to the contents of an invoice, he must comply with the  requirements of the law and  the rules and  regulations of the department pertaining to such  correction.   It is  presumed that every importer is familiar with the law and  with the rules of the department.   It is usually his own fault if he does not comply  with them. While  the result in this  particular case may be a hardship on the importer and while, in many respects, it is clear that he has paid a  higher  duty than he ought to have paid if his contention as to the facts is true,  nevertheless it appears that  all that  was a result of  his  own  negligence  or failure  to  meet properly the requirements of the law and the  rules and regulations of the department.  Courts  are  not permitted to abrogate laws or destroy reasonable rules and regulations of  a department.  They were made,  the one  by the legislature, the other  by officials with full  power in  the  premises. Courts cannot abrogate the one unless unconstitutional, and it will  not interfere with the other where  they are just and reasonable.

The presumption  is that the action of the Insular Collector of Customs was correct (par. 14, sec. 334, Code of Civil Procedure; Vandiver vs. United States, 156 Fed. Rep., 961; Lazard vs. Magone,  40 Fed. Rep., 662), and the burden being upon the importer to prove  that his contention is right (Chung Yune vs. Kelly, 14 Fed. Rep.,  639; In re Austin, 47 Fed. Rep.,  873; In re  Sherman,  49 Fed.  Rep., 224), if he fails in sustaining this  burden,  the action of the collector  stands.   (Tiffany vs. United States, 105 Fed. Rep., 766; In re Solvay Process Co., 134  Fed, Repi, 678; United  States vs.  Knowles, 122 Fed. Rep., 971; Legg vs. United  States, 163 Fed. Rep.,  1006.)   When an importer challenges by legal steps the correctness of the assessment of a duty by the Collector of Customs, the question  to be decided is not whether  the collector was wrong, but whether the importer  was right, the burden being  on the latter to  establish  the  correctness of  his own  contention.  In view  of the  statutory requirement  relative to  the  presentation of a consular invoice showing the value of the merchandise  in  the country in which  it  was purchased, sold or consigned  for  shipment to the  Philippine Islands, the presumption that an  invoice presented conforms to this requirement,  the acceptance of the  invoice presented and the appraisal  of the merchandise  in accordance therewith by  the customs authorities, the failure  of the  importer to treat the invoice presented by him  as pro forma and file a bond for the presentation of a corrected consular  invoice as required by law, it cannot  be said  that the protestant has removed the burden laid upon him or that he has shown cause to overrule the decision of the Insular Collector of Customs.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the decision of the Insular  Collector of Customs  overruling the protest is affirmed.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Johnson, Carson, and Trent, JJ.,concur.