The Schooner Exchange v. M’Faddon, 11 U.S 116 (1811)

The Schooner Exchange v. M’Faddon, 11 U.S 116 (1811)

Principle: National ships of war are viewed as been exempted by consent of the power of the friendly jurisdiction whose port the ship enters.alabama-claims

Facts: Two Americans claimed they owned and were entitled to the schooner Exchange they seized on the high seas. The claim which the United States Attorney put forward for the prevention of the ship leaving was that, the ship which was owned by the Emperor of France had been forced to enter the port of Philadelphia due to bad weather.
At this point, the U.S and France were on friendly terms. The United States’ request for the dismissal of ownership and release of the ship was granted by the district court.
Issue. Are National ships of war viewed as been exempted by the consent of the power of the friendly jurisdiction whose port the ship enters?

Decision: Yes. National ships of war are viewed as been exempted by consent of the power of the friendly jurisdiction whose port the ship enters. A nation’s jurisdiction within its sovereign territory is exclusive and absolute.
The Exchange been a public armed ship, currently under the control and supervision of a foreign power, who at the time of the ship’s entry into the United States territory, was at peace with the United States, must be viewed as having entered the states territory under an implied promise that while in such environment, would be exempt from the jurisdiction of the country. Reversed.

Rayhanul Islam

The author is an original thinker; often challenges the regular rule of conduct considering various perspective on the basis of scientific reasoning to ensure the peace and prosperity of the society. He works as freelancer advocate and promotes legal knowledge and human right concept to the root level. The author is also a tech enthusiast and web developer, he loves psychology as well.

You may also like...

error: Content is protected !!