The Beaconsfield case in 1894 revolved around a dispute over the salvage rights of a British ship named "The Beaconsfield." The vessel had run aground near Cape Fear, North Carolina and was abandoned by its crew. A group of American salvagers rescued the ship and filed for compensation under U.S. law. However, the owners of The Beaconsfield argued that since it was a British vessel, they should not be subject to U.S laws but rather international maritime law which would result in lower salvage fees. The Supreme Court ruled against them stating that once abandoned, nationality does not protect a ship from being subjected to local jurisdiction where it is found or brought into after being saved - thus making it liable for higher salvage charges as per US law.

In the dissenting opinion for THE BEACONSFIELD, 1894 case, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and international law. He contended that a ship should not be held liable for damages if it had followed all necessary precautions to prevent an accident. In this case, he believed The Beaconsfield had done everything possible to avoid colliding with The Victoria but was unable to due to dense fog. Therefore, according to him, both vessels were equally at fault and should share the liability of damage costs equally rather than placing full responsibility on one party as decided by the majority ruling.