Here, likewise, a determination of the legal jurisdictional principles depends upon the resolution of the factual issues — the situs of engagement and discharge. The witnesses should be seen and heard or depositions or interrogatories submitted on issues so vital. While the decisions in the cases of The Prince Pavle, D.C.E.D.N.Y., 32 F. Supp. 5, and The Halcyon, D.C.E.D.N.Y. 1940, 32 F. Supp. 8 establish that the court may in its discretion decline jurisdiction for a statutory wage claim where the suit is between foreigners and there was no engagement in the United States, the Court of Appeals for the fourth circuit in Lakos v. Saliaris, 1940, 116 F.2d 440 at page 441; held per Parker, J.: "It is well settled that the protection of this statute [46 U.S.C.A. § 597] extends to foreign seamen on a foreign vessel within a port of the United States and that it secures to them the payment of their wages upon the completion of the voyage ending in such port.

There is ample authority for declining jurisdiction. See The Prince Pavle, D.C., 32 F.Supp. 5; The Halcyon, D.C., 32 F.Supp. 8; Willendson v. Forsoket, 29 Fed.Cas. 1283, No. 17,682; The Robert Ritson, 20 Fed.Cas.P. 878, No. 11,895, 3 Fed.Cas.p. 15 note; The Belgenland (Jackson v. Jensen), 114 U.S. 355, 5 S.Ct. 860, 29 L.Ed. 152. The case of The Wilja, 2 Cir., 113 F.2d 646, is not in conflict with the determination of this motion which is to decline jurisdiction.

On June 15, 1940, while in the Port of Gibralter on the Mediterranean Sea, 15 of them obtained from the captain a writing whereby he agreed to pay to each a war bonus of $100, on arriving at a discharging port, and thereupon the libellants returned to their posts, the boat proceeded and when it arrived at the Port of Bayonne in the United States, one half of the wages due each was demanded, and according to their allegations, refused.         The libellants are in the City of New York, and the affidavits filed, state they do not have sufficient money to pay passage either to their native lands or to Panama, and because they might, by reason thereof, be without redress unless this court takes jurisdiction (In re The Halcyon, D.C.E.D.N.Y., 32 F.Supp. 8),         Counsel by their presentation have led the court to believe that the only matter to be litigated is the war bonus, and have stated specifically that Elias Alberto is not covered by the agreement relied upon.         The court deems it advisable to say that taking jurisdiction herein is dependent upon the particular facts and circumstances, and it is not suggested that the cause is meritorious, that question is for determination at the time of trial.