In the case of Magone v. Rosenstein, 1891, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving import duties. The plaintiff, Rosenstein, imported silk ribbons from France and was charged with an import duty by Daniel Magone, Collector of Customs for New York City's port. However, Rosenstein argued that according to a treaty between the U.S. and France in 1883 which stated "all articles of merchandise not enumerated in this convention...shall be admitted at a reduction of ten percent upon such rates as are or may be established by the laws of said countries," his goods should have been taxed less than they were. The court had to determine whether silk ribbons fell under this category or if they were excluded because they were specifically mentioned elsewhere in tariff legislation passed after the treaty was signed but before it took effect (the Act). The Supreme Court sided with Magone stating that since Congress explicitly included 'silk ribbons' within its list when passing subsequent tariff acts post-treaty signing but pre-treaty enforcement; therefore these items did not fall into non-enumerated category and thus didn't qualify for reduced tariffs per Treaty stipulations.

In the dissenting opinion for Magone v. Rosenstein, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's interpretation of the law was incorrect and overly broad. He contended that a tax on imported goods should only be levied once, at their point of entry into the country, rather than every time they are sold or transferred within U.S borders. According to him, this would prevent double taxation and uphold principles of fairness in trade practices. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that Congress had intended to impose such an additional tax when it passed relevant legislation; instead asserting there was no clear evidence supporting this claim from legislative history or statutory language itself.