Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 158 views

    The Schooner Exchange

    Uploaded by

    Alyk Calion
    1) An American citizen filed a libel claiming their ship was unlawfully seized by the French while in international waters. 2) The ship was now armed and serving in the French navy. 3) The court dismissed the libel, finding that as an armed ship in the service of a foreign sovereign at peace with the US, it was exempt from American jurisdiction within US waters under principles of territorial sovereignty and comity between nations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    The Schooner Exchange

    Uploaded by

    Alyk Calion
    158 views1 page
    1) An American citizen filed a libel claiming their ship was unlawfully seized by the French while in international waters. 2) The ship was now armed and serving in the French navy. 3) The court dismissed the libel, finding that as an armed ship in the service of a foreign sovereign at peace with the US, it was exempt from American jurisdiction within US waters under principles of territorial sovereignty and comity between nations.

    Original Description:

    asdasdasdasdas

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) An American citizen filed a libel claiming their ship was unlawfully seized by the French while in international waters. 2) The ship was now armed and serving in the French navy. 3) The court dismissed the libel, finding that as an armed ship in the service of a foreign sovereign at peace with the US, it was exempt from American jurisdiction within US waters under principles of territorial sovereignty and comity between nations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    158 views1 page

    The Schooner Exchange

    Uploaded by

    Alyk Calion
    1) An American citizen filed a libel claiming their ship was unlawfully seized by the French while in international waters. 2) The ship was now armed and serving in the French navy. 3) The court dismissed the libel, finding that as an armed ship in the service of a foreign sovereign at peace with the US, it was exempt from American jurisdiction within US waters under principles of territorial sovereignty and comity between nations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    THE SCHOONER EXCHANGE (THE EXCHANGE V MCFADDON)

    Facts:
    On 24 August, 1811, John McFaddon & William Greetham, of the State of Maryland, filed their libel in the District Court
    of the United States for the District of Pennsylvania against the Schooner Exchange, setting forth that they were its sole
    owners, on 27 October, 1809, when the ship sailed from Baltimore, bound to St. Sebastians, in Spain. That while
    lawfully and peaceably pursuing her voyage, she was on 30 December, 1810, violently and forcibly taken by certain
    persons, acting under the decrees and orders of Napoleon, Emperor of the French, out of the custody of the libellants.
    In the commission it was stated that the vessel was armed at Bayonne. The libel with costs upon the ground that a
    public armed vessel of a foreign sovereign in amity with our government is not subject to the ordinary judicial tribunals
    of the country so far as regards the question of title by which such sovereign claims to hold the vessel.
    Issue:
    Whether an American citizen can assert in an American court a title to an armed national vessel found within the
    waters of the United States.
    Held:
    Dismissal of the libel is affirmed.
    The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no
    limitation not imposed by itself. All exceptions, therefore, to the full and complete power of a nation within its own
    territories must be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. They can flow from no other legitimate source.
    Rise to a Class of cases in which every sovereign is understood to waive the exercise of a part of that complete
    exclusive territorial jurisdiction which has been stated to be the attribute of every nation.

    1st. One of these is admitted to be the exemption of the person of the sovereign from arrest or detention
    within a foreign territory.
    If he enters that territory with the knowledge and license of its sovereign, that license, although containing no
    stipulation exempting his person from arrest, is universally understood to imply such stipulation.

    2nd. A second case, standing on the same principles with the first, is the immunity which all civilized nations
    allow to foreign ministers.
    In what cases a minister, by infracting the laws of the country in which he resides, may subject himself to other
    punishment than will be inflicted by his own sovereign is an inquiry foreign to the present purpose. If his crimes be such
    as to render him amenable to the local jurisdiction, it must be because they forfeit the privileges annexed to his
    character, and the minister, by violating the conditions under which he was received as the representative of a foreign
    sovereign, has surrendered the immunities granted on those conditions, or, according to the true meaning of the
    original assent, has ceased to be entitled to them.
    3rd. A third case in which a sovereign is understood to cede a portion of his territorial jurisdiction is where he
    allows the troops of a foreign prince to pass through his dominions.
    It is obvious that the passage of an army through a foreign territory will probably be at all times inconvenient
    and injurious, and would often be imminently dangerous to the sovereign through whose dominion it passed.
    But the rule which is applicable to armies does not appear to be equally applicable to ships of war entering the
    parts of a friendly power.
    It seems then to the Court to be a principle of public law that national ships of war entering the port of a
    friendly power open for their reception are to be considered.
    the Exchange, being a public armed ship in the service of a foreign sovereign with whom the government of the
    United States is at peace must be considered as having come into the American territory under an implied promise she
    should be exempt from the jurisdiction of the country.

    You might also like