730 FEDERAL REPORTER. �rendered cornes fairly within the definition of maritime service as given by Judge Betts in The Amstel, ^s being "labor con- nected with the equipment or refitment of the vessel." But, however this may be, I am of opinion that it is, from ^ts nature and on the authorities, a maritime service, because it is "nec- sary for the ship, her voyage or business." See, also, cases cited in 2 Low. 484; Ben. Adm. § 285. �Since the foregoing waa written my attention bas been called to a decision of Judge Dyer that the storage of the sails of a vessel on the land is not a maritime service, for which a suit in the admiralty will lie. Huhhard v. Roach, 12 Chic. L. News, 298, [2 Fed. Eep, 393.] He commenta on and disap- proves of the opinion of Mr. Benedict, cited above from bis work on admiralty, to the effect that the stevedore's service is maritime ; and also his opinion that the storage of the sails is a maritime service. Ben. Adm. (2d Ed.) § 283. �The authorities, however, which were cited in Hubhard v. Roach, and on which the decision is expressly put, very im- perfectly represent the present state of this question, and for the reasons given above I am unable to concur in the reason- ing of the learned judge so far as it affects the question now before this court. �Exceptions overruled, with leave to the claimant to answer within one week. ����
