In the United States v. Zucker case of 1895, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning customs duties. The defendant, Zucker, had imported iron into the U.S., and was charged with paying import taxes based on its weight. However, he argued that since some of this weight was due to an adhering substance (rust), it should not be included in calculating his tax liability. The court disagreed with him and held that for purposes of assessing duty under tariff laws, goods are taken as they come without any deduction for impurities or foreign substances attached to them at time of importation unless specifically provided by statute. Therefore, even though rust may have increased the weight slightly thereby increasing his tax burden marginally; it did not warrant a reduction in payable duties because there were no provisions within existing statutes allowing such deductions.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Zucker, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's interpretation of the law was overly broad and could potentially lead to abuses of power by government officials. He contended that while Congress has a right to levy taxes, it does not have unlimited authority to do so in any manner it sees fit. In this case, he believed that levying a tax on imported goods based on their weight rather than their value was unconstitutional because it effectively amounted to an arbitrary penalty rather than a legitimate exercise of taxing power. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that all imported goods are subject to taxation regardless of whether they are intended for personal use or commercial sale. He maintained that such an interpretation would allow Congress to impose taxes on virtually anything brought into the country from abroad without regard for its actual economic value or purpose.