New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-07
LAST OF THE TESTIMONY IN.
NEARING THE END OF THE SUIT ABOUT THE
JAEGER UNDERWEAR TRADEMARK.

NrARIxC THE END OF THE SUIT ABOUT THE
JAEGER UNDERWEAR TRADEMARK.
The trial of the case Of the DR.. Jacger's Sanitary
woollcn system Company against George lie Bou''i-
,icr Of Four,centh.st for injunction restraining
the latter from selling his underwear as Jaeger
goods came TO close before Judge Gidersleevc III
the superior Court yesterday. The plaintiffs were
represented by W. J. Curtis and a. H. >toher, ana
the defendant by John Delahlm,y. The day was
taken M with the testimony offered by the de-
PENDANT At the close of this the case was sub
mted as the plaintiffs had fully offered their case
uron the direct examination, and as the defendant
had produced nothing which the plaintiff was required
TO contradict
The defendant produced two Observation-Disclosures
Foster and Lovc-to testify TO their analysis OF
various specimens Of goods submitted TO them from
the stock OF the plaintiff. well from the goods
sold by the defendant. Though the PLAINTIFFS OK
pert Dr. Endemann. had positively testified TO the
presence Of shoddy and dyed wool In the garments
sold by the defendant, these experts declared tha'
they could find any evidence OF the existence OF
such shoddy. The plaintiff offered to let the de
fendant's witnesses examine the results produced In
court by DR.. Endemann, who, with his instruments
and specimens was on hand TO demonstrate what he
had found but defendants counsel declined the sug
gestion.
The other chief witnesses for the defendant were
A. n. Loeb and the defendant himself. Mr.. Loeb, In
his testimony, referred TO the picture printed In his
catalogues the interior of weaving room, Nhch
il had been shown by the testimony OF an ensraVer
was reproduction of The cut used by the Dr. Jaeger
Company and said that il also n true picture
of the interior his firms weaving rOom and that In
ordering that II be copied from the Jaeger catalogue
for his catalogue, he directed that changes be aide
from gas fixtures electricity fixtures, and In the
Position OF several figures. and also in The position
of a desk He insisted that the picture was Il faithful
of no int of
But the photograph which was to be produced 10
prove this not shown.
Mr.. Loeb also testified that he made the goods sofa
by lie Bouticr. and that he made the same quantities
goods correspond in numbers with those of the
Messrs Benger Sochne, who the manufacturers
Of the genuine Jaeger goods He readily admitted
that his firm did not sell the goods as Jaeger goods
but as Normal Sanitary Underwear and rs htutgarter
underwear. and that whatever stamps were used on
the goods as sold by lie Boutilier and containing the
word Jaeger" or Jaeger System," were put on
solely upon lie BOutilliers demand AID lnslstencc,
and were not put similar goods sold TO anybody
else He also admitted that some OF the stamping
was done by his at the store OF lie Boutill"r
the goods having been shipped from stuttgart without
stamp. and that the stamp containing the words
system DR.. Jaeger was put on alike on wooiieh
and part cotton goods sold by lie Boutllicr: but that
upon the goods contaildng part cotton which were
sold 10 others than lie B0utiler, the stamp part
N.
nation said that not essential feature of
the Jaeger goods that they should be made Of all
wool-that the rame could be applied equally to part
cotton goods as we'll TO Atwood goods.
The examination Of Mr. lie Boutilller by his own
counsel was brief His crossexamination developed
some extraordinary testimony II" admitted, among
other things did other witnesses fol the defendan
that goods OF similar appearance TO those made by
Loeb were sold by him under the brand put upon them
ufncfu throughout
and that therefore he applied the word jaeger only
10 the particular goods sold TO him by Loeb, peihg
all wool, ard with cotton varying from 10 10 IS per
cent In some (Which Loeb testified were merely
samples as high 80 per cent. Confronted WIN MS
advertisements that he sells the goods and the
same qualities at from 20 to 40 per cent cheaper Than
Others, he was unable to produce from the mass OF
garments before him any which correspondent to any
Of the garments OF the Jaeger Company, and which
he sold at from 30 TO 40 per cent cheaper than the
Jaeger Company. although the catalogues and price
lists OF both before him.
When confronted with the fact that the royalty
paid to Dr. Jaeger for the latter's supervision over
the manufacture OF the genuine goods and guarantee
of the purity Of the wool amounted TO barely per
cen, Of the selling price, he could not sustain his
claim that the payment OF royalty by the Jaeger
Company would account for his being able TO sell
the goods cheaper, he had frequently advertised
The testimony given by lie Boutillier in previous
eases all showed that he then said uniformly that
Jaeger goods 10 be entitled to the name, must be
made Of all pure wool OF the finest quality. Yet
In the present suit had testified that the purity
so far as the material Is concerned, was no feature
OF the Jaeger goods and that the presence OF cotton
i'm any proportion did not make them the less Jaeger
goods He could not explain the contradiction eA-
cent by saving that the Jaeger system was a pro
cressye one In his establishment, although he also
admitted that the great ma ory Of people considered
that goods in order to be Jaeger goods must be
made of pure wool without the presence of vegetable
fibre Of any kind. lie also admitted that he knew
Of lu,ey other dealer who sold Loebs goods or
any other goods u,fer the name OF Jaeger underwear
excepting himself and the Dr. Jaeger Company. and
that he used the name because OF It's value ana De-
cause he could sell his goods under IT.
He was also confronted with the statement In ms
special jaeger catalogue that the good, containing
cotton contained 10 per cent. cotton, in spite oil The
fact that he was selling goods containing three or
four times as much cotton, and this upon the state
mcnt that they contained only 10 per cent.
HIS testimony closed with general examination
into the business methods pursued by him In connoc-
lion with these facs ana in IN erdeavoi 10 0btln RON
him his reasons for advertising the goods he sOd as
Jaeger goods in the manner he did.
Tie case will be submitted upon briefs by the
counsel and the decision viii be awaited with great
deal OF interest merely by the parties TO the SUIT
but also by "a large body OF interested persons In The
trade. II remains to be seen whether upon ,hc sa'
of facts shown i'm this case, the Cont VIII permit
the defendant to m.use the Jaeger name, rs the
plaintiff declares the defendant has done; ana whether
The Jaeger name shall become the common property
Of MI persons. or whether the plaintiffs claim that
undsr The assignments and contracts with the cilg
inal manufacturers and DR.. jaeger, IL shall be 'la-
tanned in maintaining the name Us applied To inc
genuine goods.