Beschreibung:

Three different documents relating to a lawsuit brought by Anheuser-Busch Brewing Company (complainant) against Fred Miller Brewing Company (defendant) regarding the use of the name "Budweiser," to restrain the use of the trade name. The complaint is 7 pp, legal-sized paper, n.d., but other documents in the group dated 1895. "The Bill seeks to enjoin the defendant from using the name 'Budweiser' as the designation of a brand or brew of beer manufactured by it, and no ground for relief is established by the testimony unless it may be found within the equitable doctrine relating to unfair competition in trade. Although it is undisputed that this designation has been employed by the complainant and its predecessor in business, for about twenty years, as the name of a special manufacture of beer, for which wide reputation and extensive trade has been obtained....the name is distinctly geographical - referring to a place in Bohemia, Austria, called Budweis -- and it is both conceded and indisputable that this use confers no property right or monopoly in such name as a trade-mark.... There is, however, no foundation for the further allegation that the beer manufactured and sold by the defendant under this name is of an inferior quality, or 'an ordinary American beer,' and there is no testimony which even tends to impugn its actual quality as a beverage." The complaint goes on to say that in neither case (A-B or Miller) is the name used to indicate place of manufacture (Budweis), but simply to assert that the beer is made "according to the Budweiser process."... Therefore the issue is purely one of a fraudulent appropriation of this name without foundation in fact, under circumstances which both intend and cause imposition, to the injury of the complainant's business and good-will. With no property right existing in the name 'Budweiser' it is clear that the defendant cannot be precluded from using it to designate its special brew, if necessary for accurate description, or even if such use is 'truthful,' ... But if the manufacture of beer was not of such character as to make this name specially applicable, and it was selected arbitrarily and for the purpose of taking advantage of the established reputation of the complainant's 'Budweiser' and with the effect of disturbing its trade therein, such use constitutes unfair competition - 'unfairly stealing away another's business and good-will' -- and must be regarded inequity as fraudulent. They then go on to enumerate why the Miller beer is not a "Budweiser." The first point states: "1. The predecessor of the complainant, Mr. [Carl] Conrad, commenced the manufacture of a beer of distinctive character and excellence, about the year 1876, through Anheuser & Co. as brewers. This product was originally made of materials imported for the purpose similar to those used in a certain brewery at Budweis, and by the same process which was there employed, and the beer so produced was thereupon called "Budweiser," constituting the first adoption of such title for manufacture of beer in this country." They then note that the unique ingredients were (1)Saazer hops, (2)a fine quality of Bohemian barley, supplemented by (3) Bohemian pitch and (4) Bohemian yeast, by which it is claimed peculiar flavor and quality were imparted.... Conrad then transferred the brewing rights to A-B. A second two-page document, also on legal-sized paper describes the unique character of the "Budweiser" brewing process - cooler, timing of the addition of hops, length of time brewing, etc. The third document, New York, 19 April 1897, is a notice "that I shall proceed to take proofs for final hearing on the part of the complainant...The names and residences of the witnesses whom it is intended to examine... are stated below. All of said witnesses reside more than one hundred miles from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where the Court at which the above entitled cause will be tried is to be held. You are invited to attend and cross-examine