Small v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1895. The case involved a dispute between the Northern Pacific Railroad Company and a farmer, John Small, over the ownership of a strip of land that the railroad had taken from Small for the purpose of constructing a railway. Small argued that the railroad had taken the land without providing him with just compensation, as required by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Small, holding that the railroad had taken the land without providing just compensation and that Small was entitled to damages. The Court also held that the railroad had violated the Fifth Amendment by taking the land without providing just compensation, and that the railroad was liable for the damages caused by the taking. The decision in Small v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company established the principle that the government must provide just compensation when it takes private property for public use. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving the taking of private property for public use.

In the case of Small v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company, Justice Harlan delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was wrongfully based on an overly narrow interpretation of the law and failed to consider other relevant facts. He noted that while it is true that Congress had not specifically authorized railroad companies to issue bonds for construction purposes, this did not mean they were prohibited from doing so; rather, such authority could be implied from existing laws governing railroads. Furthermore, he argued that even if there was no express authorization for issuing bonds in this particular instance, it would still be reasonable to infer such authority since Congress had previously granted similar powers to other corporations and thus should have done so here as well. In conclusion, Justice Harlan believed that the Court should have taken into account all applicable statutes when making its ruling instead of relying solely on one isolated provision.