Opinion by
Kincheloe, J.
At the hearing it was conceded that the mats in question are similar in all material respects to those the subject of United States v. Penn (27 C. C. P. A. 242, C. A. D. 93) and they were found to be dutiable as claimed, but as a liquidation of duty had never in fact taken place and as there was no appraisement of the merchandise, the protest was dismissed upon motion of counsel, in view of section 514.