.void on account of the defect in the libel, which was an error, as I 'think. But he now shows that he may have a defence on the merits. Default opened as to principal defendant and garnishee, on payingthe fees and expenses paid upon the reference; the principal defendant to file his answer, setting up defence referred to in his affidavit, within five days after entering order on this memorandum, and stipulating that the issues be referred to a commissioner for trial; either party, however, being at liberty to make any application to the court that he may be advised, in consequence of the libel being unsigned except by "Beebe, Wilcox & Hobbs," proctors, on one day's notice.
SMITH tl. STEAMER JOSHUA. LEVINES.
(District Oourt, S. D. NemYork. December 28, 1880.)
O. H. Williams, for libellant. O. E. Crolvell, for claimant. CHOATE, D. J. This is a suit for wages during the years 1877, 1878, and 1879. The libellant alleges a special agreement to pay him $100 \. month during the time the vessel was running. He served as engineer and fireman. The promise to pay the libellant $100 a month is proved, but the claimant has attempted to show that he was so intoxicated when he made the promise that he did not know what he was doing. I think the weight of the testimony is against the claimant on this point, and the libellant is entitled to recover his wages at that rate. His wages amount to $2,030 between September 1, 1877, and February 11, 1879. He admits that the claimant is entitled to credits, which reduce the amount to $810.29, for which sum, with interest from February 11, 1879, with costs, the libellant is entitled to a ··decree,
THE SCHOONER .MARY CHLLTON.
THE SCHOONER MARY CHILTON.;
(District Court, 8..
New York. November, 1880.)
Where the claimant (owner) of the vessel, who personally contracted with the libellant for repairs made at his dock. in Brooklyn, New York, resided at the time, and had long before resided, in New York city, and the vessel at the time was registered at New London, Con" necticut, and had "New London" painted on the stern, and the owner informed libellants that she was registered there, was mortgaged, and that he could ascertain about her from the collector there; Held, that these facts did not import a representation that the claimant lived in New London. That while the owner, if he has misled tl!.e libellant by representations as to the vessel being foreign or domestic, may be estopped to deny such representations, (The E. A. Barnatrd, 2 FEn. REp. 712, 716,) Still the libellant does· not appear to have been misled by them. The libellant, knowing that the claimant had bought the vessel, was bound to inquire as to his place ofresidence. That the'vessel, being in the port where her owner resided when the repairs were made, was a domeStic v6ilsel,:and no lieu attached by the maritime law. The Albany, 4 Dill. 439. That no lien therefor attached under the laws of New York,the necessary specifications not having been tiled. .
,Robert Payne, for libellant. W ·. W. Good1'ich, for claimant.
CHOATE, D. J. This is a suit for labor '/tnd materials nished in repairing the schooner Mary Chilton. The repairs were put upon her at the libellant's dock in Brooklyn. The libel claims .' lien therefor both by the maritime law and by the state law. As to a lien by the state law there is no proof that the libellant filed the necessary specification. As to a general maritime lien it is shown that the owner of the vessel, who personally contracted with the libellant for the repairs, then and long before resided in New York city. The vessel had been registered at New London, Conn., and "New Londou" was painted on her stern when the vessel came to the libel-