The U.S. Supreme Court case "The Carib Prince" in 1897 revolved around a dispute over the seizure of a British vessel by American authorities during peacetime. The ship, named The Carib Prince, was seized off the coast of Florida under suspicion that it had been involved in filibustering activities against Spain's rule in Cuba - an act which would have violated U.S neutrality laws at that time. However, upon investigation and trial, no evidence could be found to substantiate these claims or justify the seizure and detention of the vessel. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of The Carib Prince’s owners and ordered for its release along with compensation for damages incurred due to this unjustified action by American officials.

In the dissenting opinion for The Carib Prince case of 1897, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to deny compensation to a British ship owner whose vessel was seized by U.S. authorities during peacetime was incorrect. He contended that international law and treaties between nations should be respected even in times of peace and regardless of whether or not there is an existing treaty covering such situations specifically with the nation involved. In his view, it was unjust to seize a foreign vessel without providing just compensation as it violated principles of fairness and equity inherent in international relations. Furthermore, he believed this ruling could potentially harm future diplomatic relationships between countries if left unchecked.