|
''Talbot v. Seeman'', , was a United States Supreme Court case. It was a maritime case involving the circumstances under which salvage rights attach to a neutral vessel, captured by enemy forces, and then recaptured by the United States Navy. ==Background== The ''Amelia'' was a merchant vessel owned by citizens of Hamburg. It was captured on the high seas by the French military vessel ''La Diligente'' during the Franco-American Naval Conflict of 1798-1800. The vessel was then recaptured during the same period by the ''USS Constitution'' under the command of Captain Talbot. Talbot asserted salvage rights over the captured vessel. The Court considered two issues: # Whether the recapture by the ''Constitution'' was legal # Whether ''meritorious service'' (a prerequisite for salvage) was performed in the recapture. The first issue was complicated by two factors. First, an enemy vessel captured in time of war is captured legally. However, in this case the vessel was not an enemy vessel, but a vessel legally owned by a non-party to the conflict. Second, there was no declaration of war in the conflict between the United States and France. The Hamburg vessel was on its way to France at the time it was recaptured by Captain Talbot. Hans Seeman and other owners of the vessel claimed that under the Laws of War the French would have to release it to them and thus Captain Talbot's capture of the vessel did them no service. Talbot claimed that he saved the vessel from adjudication under the laws of France, which could have forfeited the vessel or demanded salvage payment to France. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Talbot v. Seeman」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|