The Admiral was a Supreme Court case that focused on the issue of maritime law. The plaintiff, John Griswold, had chartered a vessel called the Admiral from its owner and master, William H. Webb. During their voyage together, Griswold became dissatisfied with Webb's performance as captain and discharged him without paying any wages or other compensation for his services. In response to this action by Griswold, Webb sued in admiralty court for breach of contract and damages resulting from his wrongful discharge. The Supreme Court ultimately found in favor of Webb because it determined that under maritime law he was entitled to receive payment for his services regardless of whether they were satisfactory or not; thus affirming the right of seamen to be compensated according to their contracts even if those contracts are breached by one party or another.

In The Admiral, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a ship's captain had the authority to sell a vessel and its cargo in order to pay off debts. Justice Field wrote for the dissenting opinion, arguing that while it is true that captains have some authority over their vessels, they do not possess absolute power. He argued that such an expansive interpretation of maritime law would lead to chaos and confusion on ships as captains could make decisions without any oversight or accountability from owners or other parties with interests in the vessel. Furthermore, he noted that Congress had already passed laws governing how vessels should be managed and sold which superseded any common law principles regarding maritime contracts. Thus, he concluded that this case should be decided based on those statutes rather than by relying solely upon general principles of admiralty law.