634 FEDERAL REPORTER. �declared to be reviewable upon the specifie questions specif- ically stated. The reproduction of the aet of 1851, in sub- stantially its original language, seems to me to be controlling in respect to any supposed legislative repeal by implication. It is claimed that section 3011, being a re-enactment of the act of 1845 in regard to suits against collectors to recover money paid under protest, gives power to test the question of value; but section 3011 had existed from 1845 to 1864, and during thia time the supreme court had repeatedly decided that a valid appraisal was final. The last decision on the subjectwas made by Judge Clifford in the first circuit, in 1863. If the act of 1845 had no effect upon the appraisal acts of 1842 and 1851, it is difificult for me to see how it has an enlarged effect, as section 3011, upon section 2930, which is the act of 1851. �Again, we have in the revision three sections — 2930, 2931, and 3011. They must be construed together. The positive declaration of 2930 is that an appraisal made by the proper of&oer, after appeal, is final. It would be in my jadgment a great stretch to construe this language to be modified by sec- tion 8011, especially as the supreme court has repeatedly given to this statute, upon this part of the tariff system, a con- struction in opposition to that which is now claimed by the plaintififs. �The testimonj is excluded. ����
