1. Complainant and defendant both sell only to manufacturers of articles into which artificial leather enters. In the process of manufacture the marks of either party are obliterated or concealed, and the sale of the finished article to the jobber, wholesaler, retailer or consumer is on the reputation of the manufacturer, and not on the reputation of complainant or defendant. Held, the name and arrangement of names used by defendant is not such as to cause confusion with that of the complainant.
2. The fact that defendant was organized by a former employe of complainant is immaterial. He had as much right to use the name Oxtex as any third person, as long as the name and mark used was not so near to that of the complainant as to lead customers to suppose that the artificial leather sold by the defendant is the product of complainant.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Vice-Chancellor Bigelow in the court of chancery.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, COLE, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.