/ i FEDERAL REPORTER.
3. SAME-Arr-nAr.s TO Snoiinmar or- Tanssumr.
The collector is the special statutory officer for the liquidation of duties in
the first instance; and the secretary of the treasury’s jurisdiction of any partic-
ular liquidation is appellate only. `
4. SAMm—R1tv. Sr. § 2931. ~
The hearing and decision of appeals under section 2931 by the secretary of
the treasury is a quasi judicial proceeding before a special statutory othcer or
tribunal; and their eifect is to be determined by the rules ordinarily applicable
to such tribunals.
5. SAME—REVERSING Snonm*r.mr’s Dnorsrou.
The decision upon such an appeal, when promulgated by the secretary’s or-
der and acted on by a subsequent reliquidation of duties accordingly, is " tinal
and couclusive" upon the government, and cannot be lawfully recalled by the
secretary, and reversed or modified, either as a part of the same proceeding on
appeal, or collaterally by any independent order. Section 2931, in enacting
that his decision shall be ‘* hnal and conclusive," enacts the rule ordinarily ap-
plicable to such decisions, and is intended to bind the government as in ap-
praisals of value under section 2930.
6. SAMn—Acr oF_MAncn 3, 1875.
A . The act of March 3, 1875, does not authorize a reliquidation against the im-
porter, in the absence of any pending protest and appeal, except for errors aris-
~ ing solely on matters of fact, and not for an erroneous construction of the tarili
, law or classification of goods. ‘
7. SAMu—Oas1c STATED. ' I
_ Where, in January, February, and April, 1880, three entries on importations
were made, and the estimated duties paid at the time of entry, but the duties were
liquidated at a larger sum, which, on appeal to the secretary, was set aside, and
~ the importer’s classification sustained, and the duties paid accordingly; and
afterwards the secretary gave a· contrary order to the collector, who again, in
l April, 1881, reliquidated, he duties according to his first liquidation, and the
government thereupon sued for the excess,—h¢zld, that the payment of the duties
upon the first two entries had become a binding settlement by the lapse of a
year before the last liquidation under the act of 1874, but not as to the third
entry; held, alan, as respects the third entry, that the decision on appeal in
favor of the importer, under section 2931, was binding and conclusive upon the
government, and that the subsequent order of the secretary and the last liquida-
tion were invalid and void.
Motion for judgment upon a verdictdirected in favor of the plaintiif,
subject to the opinion of the court. The action was brought to re-
cover an alleged balance of duties due to the government upon three
importations by the defendant, in 1880, of "iron tank-plates, punched
and out ready for use." The three entries were made, respectively,
January 30th, February 16th, and April 10th. The goods were en-
tered by the defendant as “manufactures of iron not otherwise pro-
vided for," and subject to estimated duties amounting, respectively,
to $1,927.45, $1,348.55, and $1,835.05, which sums were paid to
the collector for duties on the day of entry in each case ; and the
goods were at the same time delivered to the importer. The col-
lector, in his first liquidation of the duties upon these importations,
assessed them as "boiler‘ or other plate iron," which is subject to a
higher rate of duty. Upon due protest and appeal by the defendant,
the secretary of the treasury, by order of November 23, 1880, re-
versed the classification . and assessment of the collector, and sus-
tained the position of the importer; and, in accordance with this de-
cision and order, the duties were reliquidated by the collector in Jan-