Saxonville Mills v. Russell, Collector was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of taxation. The case involved a dispute between Saxonville Mills, a Massachusetts-based textile manufacturer, and the Collector of Internal Revenue, who had imposed a tax on the company's income. The company argued that the tax was unconstitutional, as it violated the Fifth Amendment's prohibition against the taking of private property for public use without just compensation. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the Collector, finding that the tax was constitutional and that the company had failed to prove that it was an unconstitutional taking of private property. The Court held that the tax was a valid exercise of the government's power to tax, and that the company had not established that the tax was an unconstitutional taking of private property. The Court also noted that the tax was not excessive or oppressive, and that it was not a taking of private property for public use without just compensation.

In Saxonville Mills v. Russell, Collector, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a tax imposed on imported woolen goods violated the Importation Act of 1872. The majority opinion held that the tax did not violate this act and thus could be collected from importers of these goods. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that Congress had no authority to impose such a tax under the Importation Act because it was designed only for revenue purposes rather than protectionist ones. He further noted that if Congress wanted to protect domestic manufacturers by imposing taxes on foreign imports then they should have done so explicitly in their legislation instead of relying upon an interpretation which would stretch its meaning beyond what is reasonable or necessary for its purpose. In conclusion, Justice Field believed that since there were other ways available for protecting domestic industry without violating constitutional limits then those methods should have been used instead of attempting to use an existing law in a manner which he felt went against its original intent and purpose.