The New York herald., 1922-01-13
Benguiats, Seeking $780,
900 in Deal, Refuse to
Name Purchaser.
FIGURES ARE CONFLICTING
Dealers Declare Charges Are
Preposterous and Offer Bills
to Prove 1t.

ne mousse OF CdrtieT, Jnc., one OF
the largest jewelry firms in the United
| States, was sued in the Supreme Court
yesterday by Leopold and Vitali Ben
guiat importers of antiques, who al
legged misrepresentation in the sale Of
a necklace said to have brought
| 81 100000. The sale was made under
a contract with the Benguiat brothers,
who allege that Cartier, Inc. repre-
brought only sS25.0OO, and that the
! jewelry house withheld from them 4
large share of their profits from the
transaction.
The Bengulats allege that in May, 1920,
they were in possession of the neck
lace and made a sales agreement with
Cartier, Inc, by which the firm was
to sell the piece on commission for the
best price above 100000 that could be
! obtained.
They received 10000 on account then.
and say that they We're to receive
$4,000 more from Cartier when the
necklace was sold, and also that they
were to divide equally with the house
of Cartier whatever was obtained above
the agreed selling price Of $4,000. They
have already received $6l6.5I5, but they
demand In their suit S3S0,015 more, to-
gether with E.7O3 which they compute
as interest.
In November. 1890, the Eenguiats re
ceived check for sS1S.575 and a state
ment that the necklace had been sold
for ss25. 900, but that out Of the profit
before division there had been paid a
luxury tax Of s41.250 and travelling and
other expenses Of $il.250.
Believe sI,5OO,OOO Was Price.
The allegation that the necklace was
sold finally for O. price Of more than
81, SOC, 900" Is made on information and
belief The plaintiffs insist fraud was
commit,se when they we're not ac-
oualnteo with the actual result of the
sale. They say also that oil the ac-
counting they were enormously charged
with $1,000 for insurance, and that the
travelling and other expenses for which
s4l.250 was charged did not amount to
more than 5000.
David Levcntritt Is attorney for the
Bengyiats, and Evarts. Choate, Sherman
e. Leon are counsel for the defendant
concern. Mr.. Leventritt refused to dis
cuss the case yesterday. but Maurice
Leon, on behalf OF Cartier, Inc, said:
referring to allegations fled In court
involving the matter OF a pearl necklace
sold by the house of Cartier and settle
men,s thereof. the charges thereof
against the house of Cartier were pre-
postercus and would be shown to be
such in due course.
"EYarts. Choate. Sherman & Leon, at
torneys for Cartier. Inc. gave the attor-
ney fos Mr.. Bcnguiat. David Loventritt.
on December ., 1921. documentary proof
wsllcli bears cot the above statements
and which included the following:
Copy of letter. dated May 20, 1920.
written by r. G. Cartier. chairman of the
board Of directors OF Cartier. Inc, to the
purchaser OF the necklace. showing the
purchase price to be $4,000.
Copies OF Cartier BfIIs.
Copy of bill of Cartier Inc, dated
May rs. 1920. rendered TO the purchaser
of the necklace. as follows:
"Five row pearl necklace, consisting
OF three hundred and eighty-nine pearls
$50. weighing forty-three hundred and
five G.305) grains, with enamel clasp
representing Catharine. Empress OF Rus
sia. Also two diamond alternate clasps.
Agreed net cash, ss25.o00.
ALSO bill OF Cartier. Inc. TO the
purchaser covering rope of pearls pur-
chased for 100000. In addition 20 tho
FIVE row necklace purchased for ss25.000
tThis item was not Included in tho docu-
mentary evidence because OF the next
item included--that is. copy OF draft of
purchaser TO order OF Cartier for $685.
0OO.1
Also Photographic copy OF "a letter.
dated June 2i. 1920. written on behalf
Of the purchaser to Cartier. Inc, setting
forth the enclosure Of
Our New York draft in payment of
your two invoices, dated May 2s, total
ing s925.0oo.'
Mr. Leon said that added to this was
the receipt signed by Mr.. BenguIat for
the sSfs.57J that Cartier. Inc. paid for
the necklace under the agreement OF
May IL. 1920.