In the United States v. Verdier case of 1896, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning customs duties and importation laws. The defendant, Mr. Verdier, was accused of smuggling silk into the country without paying appropriate customs duties. He argued that he had not violated any law because at the time of his actions there were no specific regulations in place regarding silk imports from Japan to San Francisco via Vancouver. The court disagreed with Verdier's argument stating that even though there might not have been explicit rules about this particular route or type of goods, general custom laws still applied which required payment for imported goods regardless of their origin or destination within U.S borders. Therefore, it held that Mr.Verdier was indeed guilty as charged since he knowingly evaded these general customs duties by importing silk through an unconventional route to avoid detection by authorities. This ruling reinforced the principle that ignorance or deliberate evasion does not exempt individuals from complying with existing legal requirements especially those related to taxation and revenue collection for government services.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Verdier case is not available for review. This 1896 Supreme Court case does not have a recorded dissent, which suggests that the decision was either unanimous or those justices who disagreed chose not to write a separate opinion outlining their disagreement with the majority's ruling.