In the Werner v. Charleston case of 1893, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving taxation and property rights. The city of Charleston had imposed taxes on bonds issued by it to fund railroad construction, which were held by Mr. Werner who was not a resident of South Carolina where Charleston is located. He argued that as an out-of-state bondholder, he should be exempt from local taxation under federal law protecting interstate commerce and due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court disagreed with his argument stating that these bonds were subject to local tax laws because they represented investments in real estate within South Carolina's jurisdiction; therefore, their ownership did not constitute interstate commerce protected by federal law or violate any constitutional protections for property owners. This decision affirmed states' authority to impose taxes on securities tied to physical properties within their borders regardless of where those security holders reside.

In the dissenting opinion for Werner v. Charleston, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a city ordinance requiring business licenses infringed upon individual rights and exceeded municipal authority. The dissenting justices believed that such an ordinance should not be used as a means of generating revenue or regulating businesses but rather should only serve to cover administrative costs associated with issuing licenses. They contended that this overreach of power by local government could lead to potential abuses, including discrimination against certain types of businesses or individuals based on arbitrary criteria set by the municipality. Furthermore, they expressed concern about setting a precedent where municipalities could impose taxes under the guise of license fees without any state-level oversight or regulation.