In the case of The Samuel, Pierce and Beach were claimants in a dispute over a ship that had been seized by the United States government. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress did not have authority to pass laws which would allow for such seizures without due process. Furthermore, they held that any law passed by Congress must be consistent with the Constitution and its principles of justice. In this case, it was determined that since no legal proceedings had taken place prior to seizure, there was an infringement on constitutional rights as well as an unjustified taking of private property without compensation or just cause. This decision set precedent for future cases involving similar issues regarding governmental power and individual rights under the U.S Constitution.

In the case of The Samuel, Pierce and Beach were claimants who argued that they should be allowed to keep a vessel which had been seized by the United States for violating revenue laws. The majority opinion held that since the vessel was used in violation of law, it could not be retained by its owners. However, Justice Johnson dissented from this decision and argued that while it is true that vessels used in violation of revenue laws cannot remain with their owners, there are certain exceptions to this rule when an owner can prove innocence or ignorance regarding such violations. He further stated that if Pierce and Beach could show evidence proving their lack of knowledge about any illegal activities involving their vessel then they should have been able to retain ownership over it.