The Edith was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1876. The case involved a dispute between the United States and the owners of the Edith, a vessel that had been seized by the United States for alleged violations of the Revenue Act of 1864. The owners of the Edith argued that the seizure was unlawful because the Revenue Act of 1864 did not apply to vessels that were engaged in foreign commerce. The Supreme Court agreed with the owners of the Edith, ruling that the Revenue Act of 1864 did not apply to vessels engaged in foreign commerce. The Court also held that the seizure of the Edith was unlawful and that the owners of the vessel were entitled to damages for the unlawful seizure. The Court's decision in The Edith established the principle that the Revenue Act of 1864 did not apply to vessels engaged in foreign commerce. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving the application of the Revenue Act of 1864.

In the case of Edith, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion. He argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to consider certain facts and circumstances surrounding the case. Specifically, he noted that there were two separate contracts involved in this dispute: one between Edith and her husband for their marriage settlement agreement; and another between Edith's father-in-law (the defendant) and his son (Edith's husband). The latter contract provided for an annuity to be paid out of funds belonging to Edith’s father-in-law upon his death. According to Justice Field, these two agreements should have been considered together when determining whether or not Edith had any legal right or interest in her father-in law’s estate. Furthermore, he argued that even if she did not have such a right under either contract alone, she may still have acquired some sort of equitable claim due to her reliance on both contracts combined as part of their marital arrangement. Therefore, Justice Field concluded that the Court should have taken into consideration all relevant evidence before making its ruling against granting relief for Mrs. Edith