In the 1900 Supreme Court case, The Barnstable, a dispute arose over damages caused by a collision between two ships - The Barnstable and The J.A. Rutter. Both vessels were moving in foggy conditions when they collided near Delaware's Breakwater Harbor. At issue was whether one or both of the ships had been negligent in their navigation and thus responsible for the accident. After reviewing evidence presented at trial, including testimony about each ship’s speed, course changes made prior to impact, and use of sound signals to alert nearby vessels of their presence as required under maritime law during periods of limited visibility due to weather conditions like fog; it was determined that both parties shared responsibility for the incident because they failed to take necessary precautions which could have prevented this mishap from occurring.

In the dissenting opinion for The Barnstable case, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a maritime lien against a vessel for damages caused by its negligent operation was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that such liens should only be granted in cases where there is an explicit contract or agreement between parties. They contended that allowing liens based on negligence would open up a floodgate of claims and potentially harm innocent third-party purchasers of vessels who may unknowingly inherit these debts. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies with previous court rulings which had denied similar claims in the past. Therefore, they disagreed with extending this principle to include instances of tortious conduct without any contractual basis.