844 FEDERAL SEPOBTEK. �eion of J. F. Steffen, for the purpose of being repaired; that during those months the libellants, Charles Nelson, Peter Johnson, and Jonas Carlson, at the request of said Steffen, worked upon said boat as ship carpenters "at the agreed rate of wages" of four dollars per day, — Nel- son for 48 days, Johnson 22 days, and Carlson 29 days; that there is due said libellants on account of said labor as follows : To Nelson $192, to Johnson $88, and to Carlson $116, no part of which has been paid, and for which they each claim a lien upon said boat under the laws of Oregon and under the general admiralty law. �The respondent, William Eeid, answering the libel, says in article 1 that the boat belongs to respondent, and was only in possession of Steffen to be repaired upon a contract between them, but that said Steffen was not the agent of said owner "for the purpose of procur- ing any work or labor" on said boat, nor for any "purpose save that of executing the work he had contraoted to do." In article 2 the respondent says that he is "ignorant" of the employment of the libel- lants upon the boat, and their claim to a lien thereon for their labor. The third article states, in effect, that Steffen abandoned his contract and the respondent was compelled to finish said repairs, and that there is now due said Steffen thereon the sum of $927.50, which sum the respondent is willing to pay to the creditors of the latter entitled thereto, but is prevented from so doing by the prooess of the state circuit court issued at the suit of Steffen's creditors, and asks that the respondent be discharged without costs. The libellants except to the second article of the answer as insufficient, and to the third article, and so much of the first as states that Steffen was not the agent of the respondent to employ the libellants, for impertinence. �The exception for insufficienoy is disallowed. When a respondent has no knowledge conceruing the matter contained in any article of a libel, according to the precedents, it seems that it is sufficient to say that he is ignorant thereof ; though I think it would be well to require him also to state what his belief about the matter is, as in answer in chancery. Ben. Adm. § 473. �The contract of a material-man is a maritime one, and may be en- forced in admiralty. Ben. Adm. §§ 267, 268 ; The St. Lawrence, 1 Black, 522; The Eliza Ladd, 3 Sawy. 519. AU persons who are employed to repair a vessel or do work upon her are material-men within this rule. 1 Pars. Ship. & Adm. 141; Ben. Adm. §§ 267, 268. By the general maritime law material-men have a lien upon the vessel for the services or supplies f umished by them ; but by the admiralty law of the United States, as expounded by its courts, ma- ��� �
