Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/140

THE PACIFIC, 125 �v:hen the local law gave a lien upon the vessel where it was built; but it said that no such case had been sanctioned by the supreme court. Under this decision a contract, in order to be enforceable in admiralty at all, must be maritime. If it be not maritime no state law can help the jurisdiction of the court, and contraets for building and furnishing material to a vessel in the original construction of it are not miaritime contraets. �In the case of Roach v. Chapnmn, 22 How. 129, where the steamer under libel was built in Louisville, Kentucky, and the persons who f urnished the boilers and engines libelled in admiralty in Louisiana, the court held that there was no jurisdiction. It so held on the express ground that "a contract for building a ship or supplying engines, timber, or other materials for her construction is clearly not a maritime contract." �In that case it was insisted, for the libellants, that the local law of Kentucky, by giving a lien, supplied the defect of jurisdiction arising from the non-maritime character of the contract; but the supreme court replied that "local laws can never confer jurisdiction on the courts of the United States;" In fact, it is well settled that local laws can neither enlarge nor diminish the admiralty jurisdiction, either by declaring those contraets to be maritime which are not, or those not maritime which are so by the admiralty law, �I think that the f oregoing propositions settle all the claims in this case. They are all for materials, engines, machinery, work, or sup- plies furnished the .original owners of the dredge in its original con- struction and equipment. As such, they corne within the ruling of the supreme court in the case of Roach v. Chapman. The claims are not maritime, because they are for original construction and equipment. Not being maritime, the question of horne orforeign vessel does not arise, and we have no need to examine the effect of the vessel law of New York. Not being maritime, the comprehensive law of Virginia, (chapter 235, p. 217, Acts of the Assembly, 1877-8,) giving liens and power of attachment against vessels foreign and domestic, can avail nothing in this court. In order to the existence of the admiralty jurisdiction in this court two things must coneur — First, the claim must be mar- itime in its essential character; and, second, the lien must exist, either under the admiralty or the local law; a mere lien under a local law will not suffice of itself. I will sign a decree of dismissal as to the libel, and as to all the petitions in the nature of co-libels. ��� �