Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/793

 778 FEDERAL REPORTER. �character, gave rise to a maritime lien upon the lighter. The exist- ence of such a lien is not afiected by the fact that the lighter was a domestic vessel. The supreme court of the United States adhere to the anomalous doctrine that when the vessel is domestic a material- man bas no lien by the maritime law of the United States ; but that doctrine bas never been extended to such a case as this, where the claim is for services performed in navigating a vessel on navigable waters of the United States, in the harbor of New York, and in part betvreen New York and Weehanken, in the state of New Jersey, and I am by no means inclined so to extend it. �The right of the libellant to maintain this proceeding I therefore consider to be clear, and I proceed to consider the matters of defence. One defence is that the claim is stale and the lien lost by laches. The service rendered to this vessel, as diselosed by the libel, was in substance a continuous service, extending through the months of August, September, October, and November, 1879. In January, 1880, the vessel was taken possession of by the sheriff, by virtue of a writ from the state court, and retained in his custody until March 12, 1880, when she was sold to the present claimant at sheriff's sale. The libel in this proceeding was filed March 1, 1880, and notice thereof was given at the sheriff's sale. Upon these facts it is impos- sible to contend that there has been any unreasonable delay in enforc- ing this demand, and the defence based on the ground of laches must fail. �Lastly, it is contended that the libellant's lien was eut off by the sheriff's sale of the vessel. That sale was had in a proceeding taken in accordance with the laws of the state of New York (Laws 1863, c. 482) to enforce a lien for repairs and material furnished, createdby those laws, and whatever may be flnally settled in respect to the validity of such a sale for any purpose, I am unable tosee how it can ever be held that the legal effect of such a sale is to destroy a maritime lien upon the vessel existing at the time of the commence- ment of the proceedings under the state law, and whioh by the laws and constitution of the United States the parties have the right to enforce by an admiralty proceeding in rem. The Lottawanna, 21 Wall. 580. �My opinion, therefore, is that the libellant's lien was not affected by the sheriff's sale in the proceeding taken in the state court, and re- mains a valid and subsisting lien upon this vessel, capable of being enforced by this proceeding. Let a decree be entered condemning the vessel to pay the libellant's demand, with costs. ��� �