In the case of Miller et al., Executors, v. Milwaukee in 1926, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving taxation and property rights. The city of Milwaukee had imposed taxes on certain railway properties owned by Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company (C&NW). However, C&NW argued that these properties were exempt from local taxation under an 1855 Wisconsin statute because they were used for interstate commerce purposes. The executors of Miller's estate, who held shares in C&NW stock, sued to recover dividends which they claimed had been wrongfully diminished due to this tax imposition. The Supreme Court sided with the City of Milwaukee stating that even though there was an exemption clause in the original charter granted by Wisconsin state law back in 1855; it did not cover all forms of taxation indefinitely into future but only those existing at time when charter was issued or specifically mentioned therein. Therefore any new form or method adopted subsequently could be applied unless expressly prohibited by terms within said charter itself - something not present here hence making such taxes validly levied against company’s property.

In the dissenting opinion for Miller et al., Executors, v. Milwaukee (1926), Justice Stone argued that the majority's decision to deny a federal court jurisdiction over a case involving an interstate water dispute was incorrect. He contended that this issue should not be left solely to state courts as it involved interests of more than one state and thus fell under federal purview. The justice believed that such disputes were inherently national in character due to their potential impact on multiple states' rights and resources, necessitating intervention by federal courts. Furthermore, he expressed concern about possible bias if only one state’s court system handled these cases without any possibility of appeal or review at the federal level.