Appolon, The (1824)

Although the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in The Appolon, 22 U.S. 361 (1824), awarding damages for an illegal seizure of a ship, did not specifically mention the Fourth Amendment, it illumined the doctrine of probable cause that the Court would later use in Fourth Amendment cases.

The unanimous decision, authored by Justice Joseph Story, arose under admiralty law when a U.S. customs collector seized a ship, partly owned by French subjects and partly by a resident of Charleston, South Carolina, while it was anchored at Saint Joseph's in Spanish Florida after sailing from France to America. The Spanish had established this port with the apparent intention of allowing French ships to avoid paying the retaliatory duties that the United States would impose if they docked in U.S. ports. Ultimately, Story upheld most of the damages that lower courts had awarded for an illegal seizure of the ship and its cargo. Story acknowledged that many of the questions argued were more appropriate for resolution by other branches of government. The Court's responsibility was simply to determine whether laws had been violated and, if so, to award appropriate damages.

Addressing “whether there was a justifiable cause of seizure,” Story observed that the ship had been on a river common to the United States and Spain and that U.S. jurisdiction over such matters was limited either to places where it had exclusive jurisdiction or to the high seas. Perhaps with a view toward the impressment issue that in part had led to the War of 1812, Story observed that “an exercise of an universal right of search” had “never yet been acknowledged by other nations, and would be resisted by none with more pertinacity than by the American.”

Proceeding to inquire as to whether there was “probable cause of seizure” in this case, Story distinguished between the law of prize in war and ordinary municipal seizures. In a time of war, those who initiate seizures are exempt from damages when they proceed with probable cause. However, “[p]robable cause has never been supposed to excuse any seizure, except where some statute creates and defines the exemption from damages. The party who seizes seizes at his peril.” Although the government pointed to “public facts and geographical positions,” including the infestation of smugglers in this area, “the question, whether the Appolon designed to engage in this unlawful traffic, must be decided by the evidence in this record, and not by mere general suspicions drawn from other sources.” Captain Edon, the [Page 92]captain of the Appolon, had not been charged with any such violations. Moreover, even probable cause would not have provided a valid defense in this case. Story proceeded to affirm most of the damages that had been assessed.