Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar

Summary

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar Cadwalader v. Partridge — Opinion of the Court

On this point we are inclined to adopt the view of the solicitor general that 'a decision by the secretary, or by a court, reversing a previous erroneous ruling of the department, is of no aid to an importer who has not duly protested against a similar ruling with respect to another importation.' The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court, with a direction to set aside the verdict, and grant a new trial.
Source: Wikisource

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar Cadwalader v. Partridge — Opinion of the Court

Ad valorem, as buttons not specially enumerated or provided for. When the buttons were withdrawn from the warehouse for consumption, at the dates aforesaid, the plaintiff were compelled to pay the duty as assessed and liquidated by the collector, to-wit, $139.50. Within 10 days from the date of such withdrawals, the plaintiffs protested against that exaction of duty, and afterwards appealed to the secretary of the treasury, who, on February 25, 1887, affirmed the collector's decision.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature