The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon
ArgueDate=
ArgueYear=
DecideDate=February 24
DecideYear=1812
FullName=The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon & Others
USVol=11
USPage=116
Citation=3 L. Ed. 287
Prior=
Subsequent=
Holding=An allied nation's property remains that nation's property when it comes into an allied nation's territory.
SCOTUS=1811-1812
Majority=Marshall
JoinMajority=
Concurrence=
JoinConcurrence=
Concurrence2=
JoinConcurrence2=
Concurrence/Dissent=
JoinConcurrence/Dissent=
Dissent=
JoinDissent=
Dissent2=
JoinDissent2=
LawsApplied=

"The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon", ussc|11|116|1812 is a United States Supreme Court case.

The schooner "Exchange", owned John M'Faddon and William Greetham, sailed from Baltimore, Maryland, on October 27, 1809, for St. Sebastians, Spain. On December 30, 1810, the "Exchange" was seized by order of Napoleon Bonaparte. The "Exchange" was then armed and commissioned as a public vessel of the French government under the name of "Balaou". M'Faddon and Greetham claimed that they owned and were entitled to possession of the Balaou, which had docked at a U.S. port due to bad weather. They believed that the "Balaou" was illegally seized by the government of France. At the time, France was involved with the War of 1812. The district court in the case found in favor of the French Government, finding that the M'Faddon and Greetham had no right to the "Balaou" as it belonged to the French government who were properly allies of the United States. The circuit court, on appeal, reversed the decision of the district court, granting property rights to the M'Faddon & Greetham. [The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Jan., 1909), pp. 227]

upreme Court decision

Chief Justice Marshall, delivering the opinion of the court, said that

"The U.S. had jurisdiction over the case via the territorial prescription jurisdiction, and territorial enforcement jurisdiction."

Marshall also stated that the ship belongs to the French government under of the assumptions of allegiance.

"But in all respects different is the situation of a public armed ship. She constitutes a part of the military force of her nation; acts under the immediate and direct command of the sovereign; is employed by him in national objects. He has many and powerful motives for preventing those objects from being defeated by the interference of a foreign state. Such interference cannot take place without affecting his power and his dignity. The implied license therefore under which such vessel enters a friendly port, may reasonably be construed, and it seems to the Court, ought to be construed, as containing an exemption from the jurisdiction of the sovereign, within whose territory she claims the rites of hospitality" (11 U.S. 144).

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 11

Further reading

*cite journal |last=Reeves |first=J. S. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1924 |month= |title=A Note on "Exchange v. M'Faddon" |journal=American Journal of International Law |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=320 |doi=10.2307/2188402 |url= |accessdate= |quote=