In the case of Matheson v. United States (1912), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with issues related to customs duties and importation laws. The appellant, Matheson, was a New York importer who had imported merchandise from abroad and claimed that he had been charged excessive customs duties by the Collector of Customs at Port of New York. He argued that under section 6 of the Tariff Act 1897, his goods should have been classified differently leading to lower duty charges. However, both lower courts ruled in favor of the government stating that they correctly assessed and collected these duties based on existing law. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision arguing that while there might be ambiguity in interpreting some parts of Section 6, it did not apply to this particular case as there were no such ambiguities present here. They concluded that Congress intended for certain items like those imported by Matheson to be taxed at higher rates than others depending upon their value or nature irrespective if they are part or component material used in manufacture or production.

In the dissenting opinion for Matheson v. United States, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's interpretation of a statute that allowed for additional penalties when an individual was found guilty of smuggling goods into the country. He argued that this law should not apply to individuals who were merely in possession of smuggled goods but had no role in their importation. According to him, such an interpretation would lead to absurd results and potentially punish innocent parties who unknowingly possessed smuggled items. Furthermore, he contended that it was unreasonable and unjustifiable to impose harsher punishments on those possessing smuggled goods than on those actually responsible for smuggling them into the country.