TILLMOBB V. MOOSB. 031 �was only experimental. This is what the plaintiff does, and what the office and Judge Shepley appear to decide that she is entitled to do. I am net prepared to dissent from this con- clusion. �The only evidence of inftingement is from the plaintiff herself, who produces a strip of water-proof cloth with a strip of India rubber sewed to its lower edge, which she swears is exactly what she bas seen sold by the defendants, as and for skirt protectors. This appears to me a sufficient proof of infringement in the absence of contradiction. �Decree for the complainant. ���TnJiMOBB V. MooBE, Owner, and another. �ÇDkt/riet Court, B. Maryland. November 8, 1880.) �1. LrBBL — Paeent— Abduction of Son. — A parent may maintain a libel �in admiralty for the wrongf ul abduction and carrying to sea of a son. �2. Tort — Master — Ship-Ownbr. — A ship-owner is liable for such tort �of the master, where the master is in command of the vessel as the agent of the owner. �3. Abduction — Damages.— JBisîtï, iinder the circumstances of thîs case, �that the owner of the ship was not liable, but that the master was answerable in the sum of $180 to the mother of the minor for the abduction of her son. �In Admirality. Libel in personam. �Applegarth e Ilagner, for libellant. �I. A. L. McClure, for respondents. �MoEBis, D. J. This is a cause of damage bronght by tho libellant against the owner and master of the schooner Thomas W. Moore, for damages for the abduction and ni- treatment of her son, Henry Johnson, a youth of about 16 years of age. �The libel alleges that libellant is the only surviving parent of her said son, and entitled to his services and wages, and to bave care and custody of him; that about September 26, ����
