Admiralty has jurisdiction of a libel in rem by a master for his wages, where that lien is given by a state statute; The William H. Hoag, 168 U. S. 443, 18 Sup. Ct. 114, .42 L. Ed. 537.
The seamen's lien for wages attaches to the ship and freight, and the proceeds of both, and follows them into whosoever hands they come; Brown v. Lull, 2 Sumn. 443, Fed. Cas. No. 2,018; and lies against a part, or the whole, of the fund; Pitman v. Hooper, 3 Sumn. 50, Fed. Cas. No. 11,185 ; id. 3 Sumn. 286, Fed. Cas. No. 11,186 ; but not the cargo ; Sheppard v. Taylor, 5 Pet. (U. S.) 675, 8 L. Ed. 269. It applies to proceeds of a vessel sold, under attachment in a state court ; Gallatin v. Pilot, 2 Wall. Jr. 592, Fed. Cas. No. 5,199; overruling Foster v. Pilot No. 2, 1 Newb. 215, Fed. Cas. No. 4,980; and to a vessel while in the bands of a receiver of a state court, for wages accruing during the receivership; The Resolute, 168 U. S. 437, 18 Sup. Ct. 112, 42 L. Ed. 533.
Seamen discharged by the breaking up of a voyage are entitled to no lien for services not performed, when they could have obtain ed other employment of like character and at as good or better wages; The Augustine Kobbe, 37 Fed. 696.
This lien of a seaman is of the nature of the privilegium of the civil law, does not depend upon possession, and takes precedence of a bottomry bond or hypotheaition; 2 Pars. Mar. Law 62, and cases cited ; Poland v. Spartan, 1 Ware 134, Fed. Cas. No. 11,246; or over subsequent collision liens; The Amos D. Carver, 35 Foci. 665. Taking the master's order does not destroy the lien; The Eastern Star, 1 Ware 185, Fed. Cas. No. 4,254. And see 2 Hagg. Adm. 136. For services for bringing a vessel into port, moving her about, drying her sails, etc., there is a lien; The Hattie Thomas, 59 Fed. 299; but not for services of a watchman in the home port; The Sirius, 65 Fed. 236 ; nor for men hired to watch the cargo of a vessel, by a con tractor ; The Seguranca, 58 Fed. 908. Gener ally, all persons serving in a way directly and materially useful to the navigation of the vessel have a lien for their services ; Wilson v. Ohio, Gilp. 505, Fed. Cas. No. 17, 825 ; 3 Hagg. Adm. 376; Turner's Case, Ware 83, Fed. Cas. No. 14,248; Sheridan v. Furbur, 1 Blatchf. & H. 423, Fed. Cas. No. 12,761; Macomber v. Thompson, 1 Sumn. 384, Fed. Cas. No. 8,919. A woman has a lien if she performs seaman's service; 1 Hagg. Adm. 187; Sageman v. Brandywine, 1 Newb. 5, Fed. Cas. No. 12,216. Men hired for service on a barge without sails, masts, or rudder, with no duties upon land except in loading and unloading, have a lien on the vessel ; Disbrow v. The Walsh Bios., 36 Fed. 607. The
lien oasts against ships owned by private persons, but not against government ships em ployed in the public service ; The St. Jago de Cuba, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 409, 6 L. Ed. 122; U. S. v. Wilder, 3 Sumn. 308, Fed. Cas. No. 16,694: See as to lien for seamen's wages, 4 Can. L. T. 153, 213.
Under the law of England no maritime lien is recognized for personal injuries re ceived by a seaman on board ship ; The Egyp tian Monarch, 36 Fed. 773. The question is unsettled in America, as to whether admir alty has jurisdiction over actions for person al injuries, either in rem or even against the owner ; Bened. Adm. § 309 a. See The Har risburg, 119 U. S. 199, 7 Sup. Ct. 140, 30 L. Ed. 358.
A ship broker, who obtains a crew, has been held to have a lien for his services and advances for their wages; The Gustavia, 1 Blatchf. & H. 189, Fed. Cas. No. 5,876. One who performs towage service on the navi gable waters of the United States acquires a lien, which may be enforced by proceedings in rem, and cannot be destroyed by the sale of the vessel under a state law ; The John Cuttrell, 9 Fed. 777.
"A stevedore is a workman or contractor who loads or discharges a ship and properly stows her cargo.
"A contract for such services is maritime, and gives a lien certainly on foreign vessels, certainly on domestic vessels where a state statute gives it, and probably on domestic vessels even in the absence of a state statute.
"A large number of cases have held that although the service of a stevedore is mari time he has a remedy in rent only against a foreign ship or against a domestic ship un der a state statute. The cases holding that a stevedore has no lien upon a domestic ves sel compare his work and character to that of a material man and follow the analogies prevailing before the act of congress of June 23, 1910. [See infra.] But most of these cases when examined seem to be cases of foreign vessels where the qualification was put in by the court not as a decision but as a cautious reservation. The better opinion seems to be that a stevedore is more like a sailor than a material man, and it has been decided by Judge Brown in The Seguranca, 58 Fed. 908, that a stevedore should have a lien even in the home port, as a sailor would have." 1 Hughes, Admiralty 113, etc.