In the 1893 case of Wharton v. Wise, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Alabama. The plaintiff, Wharton, claimed that he had purchased lands from an individual who obtained them through a patent issued by the U.S government under an act of Congress providing for sale of public lands in Alabama. However, these lands were within limits granted to defendant Wise's predecessor company for construction and operation of railroads as per another Congressional Act. The court held that when two acts are passed at different times and there is conflict between them regarding rights or privileges conferred upon individuals or corporations, it is not always easy to determine which one should prevail over other but generally later law will control unless there is clear intent otherwise expressed in earlier statute itself or implied from its nature and subject matter. In this case though both laws were enacted on same day so neither could be considered subsequent legislation controlling prior one thus creating ambiguity about their relative effect on each other’s provisions.

In the dissenting opinion for Wharton v. Wise, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting alcohol sales within one mile of a manufacturing establishment was an overreach of government power. He contended that such regulation should be limited to areas where it is necessary for public safety or welfare, and not extended arbitrarily based on distance from certain establishments. Furthermore, he asserted that this ruling could set a dangerous precedent by allowing states to regulate commerce in ways that infringe upon individual liberties without sufficient justification. In his view, while states have broad powers under their police authority, these powers must still respect constitutional limits and cannot be used as cover for arbitrary or unreasonable restrictions on personal freedom or property rights.