In the case of Carver v. United States in 1895, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving land ownership and mineral rights. The plaintiff, Carver, had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had obtained it through a military bounty land warrant under an act of Congress in 1852. Later, he discovered that there were valuable minerals on this property and sought to claim them as his own. However, the government argued that under the terms of the original grant for military service (which did not include mineral rights), these belonged to them instead. The court sided with the government's interpretation stating that when lands are granted by acts such as those providing for bounty-land warrants for military services or homesteads or preemptions - unless otherwise expressly provided - they do not carry with them mines of gold and silver found within their limits after patenting; but these remain subject to disposal by legislation at discretion of Congress.

In the dissenting opinion for Carver v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of the Constitution. He believed that a person should not be punished twice for the same offense, as it violated their Fifth Amendment rights against double jeopardy. In this case, he felt that since Mr. Carver had already been tried and acquitted in state court for his actions during an altercation on a train, he should not have been retried in federal court for essentially the same crime (interfering with interstate commerce). Justice Brewer also expressed concern about potential abuse of power by federal authorities if they were allowed to retry cases after acquittals at state level without any restrictions or guidelines.