The Paquete Habana facts for kids
Quick facts for kids Paquete Habana v. United States |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued November 7–8, 1899 Decided January 8, 1900 |
|
| Full case name | Paquete Habana.; The Lola. |
| Citations | 175 U.S. 677 (more)
20 S. Ct. 290; 44 L. Ed. 320; 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1714
|
| Prior history | Appeals From the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Florida |
| Subsequent history | None |
| Holding | |
| Federal courts could look to customary international law because it is an integrated part of American law. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Gray, joined by Brewer, Brown, Shiras, White, Peckham |
| Dissent | Fuller, joined by Harlan, McKenna |
The case of The Paquete Habana; The Lola was a very important decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1900. It was about how U.S. law should use and respect rules from other countries, called customary international law.
The Court decided that the U.S. military could not capture fishing boats as "prizes of war." This was because it went against a long-standing international rule. The Court said that these international rules are a part of U.S. law. This case helped shape how U.S. courts use international law. It also showed how courts can look at history and rules from around the world to make decisions.
Contents
What Happened in the Case?
Two Fishing Boats Captured
In April 1898, two fishing boats, the Paquete Habana and the Lola, sailed from Cuba. Cuba was a Spanish colony at the time. The United States had set up a blockade around Cuba. A blockade means ships surround an area to stop things from going in or out.
The U.S. ships captured the two fishing boats. The crews didn't know about the blockade. Tensions were rising between the U.S. and Spain.
War and New Rules
Soon after, the Spanish–American War officially began. President William McKinley said the war would follow "the law of nations." This means rules that countries generally agree on. He also set rules for capturing "prizes" during war. A prize is an enemy ship or goods captured at sea. But his rules didn't mention fishing boats.
The Paquete Habana and the Lola were taken to Key West, Florida. A federal court there sold them at auction. This court handles cases about captured ships.
Why the Boats Were Captured
Admiral William T. Sampson led the U.S. blockade. He said the fishing boats were captured because many Spanish fishermen had naval experience. He thought they could be called to fight for Spain. The U.S. also pointed to a long tradition of capturing enemy ships during war.
The owners of the boats disagreed. They appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. They said that for centuries, countries had agreed not to capture fishing boats during war.
No Threat from the Boats
The fishing boats had no weapons. They were not helping the enemy. They didn't try to escape the blockade or fight back. The owners argued that President McKinley's own rules said the blockade should follow international law. So, the boats should not have been captured.
The U.S. government argued that it followed international law. They said the President could decide if fishing boats should be exempt. But the government never said it didn't have to follow international law. Both sides were talking about "customary international law." This means common practices and rules that most countries accept as their duty. But they disagreed on what these rules allowed for fishing boats.
The Supreme Court's Decision
Fishing Boats Are Safe
The Supreme Court made a decision with 6 votes for the boat owners and 3 against. Justice Gray wrote the main opinion. The Court ruled that coastal fishing boats cannot be captured as prizes of war. This is a rule under customary international law. The Court said this rule must be part of U.S. law. This is true unless there's a specific U.S. law or court decision that says otherwise.
The Court looked at a lot of history to support its decision. It called this rule an "ancient usage among civilized nations." This means it's a very old practice that became an international rule.
History of the Rule
- In 1403, King Henry IV of England ordered his officers to leave fishermen alone during wartime.
- He later signed a treaty with France to confirm this rule between their countries.
- In 1521, Emperor Charles V and Francis I of France signed a treaty. It also said fishing boats were safe from capture. They did this because they knew people would go hungry if fishermen couldn't work.
Justice Gray also used ideas from legal experts and writers from around the world. These experts had studied international law for many years. The Court said: "Today, by general agreement of civilized nations... it is an established rule of international law... that coast fishing vessels... are exempt from capture as prize of war."
International Law and U.S. Law
One of the most famous parts of the decision explains how international law works with U.S. law: "International law is part of our law... Courts must use it when questions of right depend on it. If there is no treaty or U.S. law, courts must look at the customs of nations. They can also look at the works of legal experts. These experts help courts understand what the law truly is."
The Supreme Court's decision meant the lower court's ruling was wrong. The money from the auctions of the boats and their cargo had to be given back to the owners. They also received money for damages and costs.
The Dissenting Opinion
Justice Melville Fuller wrote an opinion disagreeing with the majority. Justices Harlan and McKenna agreed with him. Fuller believed that capturing fishing boats was allowed under international law. He also thought it was necessary for military reasons. He argued that the President, as the nation's leader, should decide if fishing boats are exempt.
External links
- Text of The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900) is available from: Findlaw Justia Library of Congress
- Abridged version of the case
