Nix v. Hedden

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

So I randomly ran across this court case from 1893 and found it somewhat odd, but still quite interesting.  Curious what you guys think on whether or not they reached the correct decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

Here's the full text: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=149&invol=304

[minionofmidas]

Yes, evidently. Plaintiffs might have had some sort of case if the law were new - but they were saying tomatoes had been falsely classified, and paid tax duties on, with nobody complaining, for a hundred years. If "vegetable" had not been intended to include tomato in 1883, someone would have noticed in 1884 when the duty was due.

[will101]

This feels like the equivalent of The Court defining pi as 3.2.  There are many ways in which they could have ruled that the intent was to include tomatoes with vegetables, but to override science and give a ruling that a tomato has been a vegetable all along was the wrong way to handle the situation.  Not the worst ruling ever, but definitely towards the wrong end of the scale.

[Bacon King]

This feels like the equivalent of The Court defining pi as 3.2.  There are many ways in which they could have ruled that the intent was to include tomatoes with vegetables, but to override science and give a ruling that a tomato has been a vegetable all along was the wrong way to handle the situation.  Not the worst ruling ever, but definitely towards the wrong end of the scale.

This wasn't the government trying to redefine science, though; the court in its decision even acknowledged that botanically a tomato is actually a fruit. This case was only about the culinary definition for tariff purposes, just like how beans are considered vegetables instead of seeds.