In United States v. Farden, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime based on circumstantial evidence. The defendant, Farden, was accused of stealing a horse from the United States government. The government argued that Farden had been seen in the vicinity of the horse shortly before it was stolen, and that he had been seen riding away on the horse shortly after it was stolen. The Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to convict Farden of the crime. The Court noted that the evidence presented by the government was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of guilt, and that the jury was entitled to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. The Court also noted that the jury was not required to accept the defendant's version of events, and that the jury was free to draw its own conclusions from the evidence presented. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to convict Farden of the crime of stealing a horse from the United States government. The Court noted that the jury was entitled to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence presented, and that the jury was not required to accept the defendant's version of events.

In United States v. Farden, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in relation to taxes imposed on distilled spirits. The majority opinion held that such appeals were not within the scope of federal judicial power and thus could not be heard by a federal court. Justice Field dissented, arguing that Congress had clearly intended for such appeals to be brought before a district court as provided under section 3224 of the Revised Statutes. He argued that this intent should have been respected by allowing those affected by decisions made regarding internal revenue laws access to courts established for their protection and redress against any wrongs they may suffer at the hands of administrative officers or agents acting under authority derived from Congress.