In the 1891 case of The Corsair, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over salvage rights. A British vessel named "The Corsair" was stranded near Cape Fear in North Carolina during a storm and was abandoned by its crew. An American ship called "The Merrimac" discovered it and towed it to safety, claiming salvage rights as compensation for their efforts. However, another group of salvors also claimed they had contributed to saving The Corsair and demanded part of the reward. The court ruled that while both parties were entitled to some compensation due to maritime law principles recognizing those who aid vessels in distress, priority should be given based on who first offered assistance successfully - which was The Merrimac's crew in this instance. Moreover, the court clarified that even if other salvors contribute later on without an initial party’s consent or knowledge (as happened here), they are not necessarily excluded from receiving some remuneration but their claim is subordinate compared with those who took primary action.

In the dissenting opinion for The Corsair case, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling - which held that an American vessel had been lawfully seized by a Spanish warship off the coast of Cuba - was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed this seizure violated international maritime laws and treaties between Spain and America. They contended that there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove any wrongdoing on part of 'The Corsair' or its crew members, thus making their arrest and detention unlawful. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "piracy," arguing it should be strictly defined according to international consensus rather than broad domestic interpretations. This disagreement extended into concerns about potential diplomatic implications if such seizures were allowed without clear proof of criminal activity under universally recognized definitions.