Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The Schooner Sally. United States v. The Schooner Sally, 1805 — 6 U.S. 406 · caselaw · US
Admiralty
The Schooner Sally. United States v. The Schooner Sally
6 U.S. 4062 Cranch 406·Supreme Court of the United States·1805
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
*The Schooner Sally. United States v. The Schooner Sally.
Admiralty jurisdiction.
The question of forfeiture of a vessel, under the act of congress against the slave trade, is of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.
This was a libel in the District Court of the United States for Maryland district, against the schooner Sally, of Norfolk, and cargo, Elias De Butts, claimant, seized by the collector of the port of Nottingham, as forfeited under the act of congress prohibiting the slave trade. (1 U. S. Stat. 347.)
In the district court, the vessel and cargo were acquitted on the merits, which decree was, on appeal, affirmed in the circuit court; whereupon, the United States sued out the present writ of error. The error assigned was, that the cause was of common-law, and not of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. But—
[MAJORITY — The Court,]
The Court,
upon the authority of the case of the United States v. La Vengeance, 3 Dall. 297, without argument, affirmed the decree.