In the case of Lehigh Mining and Manufacturing Company v. Kelly, 1895, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state tax imposed on mining corporations violated either the contract or commerce clauses of the Constitution. The Pennsylvania-based company argued that their charter exempted them from such taxation and that it interfered with interstate commerce since they shipped most of their product out-of-state. However, after examining both arguments, the court ruled in favor of Kelly (the Auditor General), stating that there was no violation to either clause. They found no contractual obligation within Lehigh's charter preventing future taxation by Pennsylvania law nor did they see any interference with interstate commerce as this tax applied equally to all businesses within its jurisdiction regardless if products were sold locally or across state lines.

The dissenting opinion in the Lehigh Mining and Manufacturing Company v. Kelly case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar issues, particularly those involving property rights and taxation. The dissenting justices believed that the company had a legitimate claim to its mineral rights, which should not be taxed by local authorities as they were separate from surface land ownership. They contended that this tax violated principles of fairness and equity since it imposed an undue burden on businesses like Lehigh Mining who owned these subsurface resources but did not use or derive any income from them unless extracted for sale or use. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Pennsylvania law regarding mineral rights taxation, arguing instead for a more literal reading consistent with past precedents set by both state courts and prior Supreme Court decisions.