Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW.
384
lars as to stands had, on May 21st, been advertised in
any way, no catalogues or circulars were obtainable,
and nobody in a position to give information of any
kind, authoritative or otherwise, was available. Under
such circumstances we may be excused for wondering
what kind of a spectacle met the view of President
Carnot, and the distinguished company that surrounded
him, on the day of the alleged " opening." It now
seems tolerably clear, however, that the next issue of
THE
MUSIC TRADE REVIEW will contain a letter from
our representative.
* * *
THE "COURIER'S" APOLOGY.
N the Musical Courier of May 29th last we notice
the following :—
" The editors, desirous of offering reparation for
the attack on Mr. Frederick A. Schwab, published in
7A? Musical Courier of February 20, 1889, and for
such other allusions hitherto made against him, feel, in
fairness to Mr. Schwab, as well as in justice to them-
selves, that they should state that such publications
have been made on misrepresentations and distortions
of facts imparted to them by rival critics and enemies
of Mr. Schwab.
" After thorough investigation we have failed to find
any evidence reflecting on Mr. Schwab's character as a
journalist and manager of public amusements.
" Under these circumstances it is the function of this,
as it should be of every journal, to make the amende
honorable, and The Musical Courier deeply regrets
that anything of the kind has ever been published in its
columns."
Thus endeth the famous libel suit.
I
THAT STENCIL LAW.
WITH an excess of zeal on its own behalf the Music-
al Couriet, week after week, indulges in an ostensibly
virtuous attack upon stencilled goods, and in a homily
upon the terrible penalty awaiting stencilers.
On the 27th day of last March the Courier contained
the full text of a couple of enactments of the New York
State Legislature, the one purporting to amend a sec-
tion of the Penal Code relating to offences against
trade-marks, the other to amend a section relating to
false labels. Commenting upon these new laws, the
Courier states that " pianos made here or outside, even
though they indicate the name of the manufacturer, but
have the place of manufacture falsely stencilled, cannot
be sold, offered for sale, nor can they be kept on hand
to show with the ultimate purpose to sell." Other de-
ductions concerning "stencilled pianos" follow, together
with certain threats by the Courier to inform the Dis-
trict Attorney of the alleged misdeeds of certain piano
dealers, none of which threats have yet borne any fruit.
Concerning this trade mark legislation we thought it
right to obtain, on our own account alone, and unim-
pelled by any man or firm, the opinion of an able, un-
biassed, independent legal authority, and to publish such
criticism adopted by Freund. That individual has too
long been allowed to run amuck. What with his "open
letters" condemning prominent members of the trade,
followed, at convenient intervals, and when it suited his
selfish purposes, by equally insincere and nauseatingly
fulsome eulogies of the same men; his snaring refer-
ences to "coals of arms," etc.; his wretched gossipings
in which he has endeavored to set rival manufacturers
by the ears, one after another, as chances of making a
dollar presented themselves; and his insolent references
to contemporary editors and others, it is high time that
the music trade and the music trade press took a firm
stand with regard to Mr. John C. Freund; and Mr. J.
Burns Brown merits the thanks of all fearless and hon-
est members of the trade for his initiatory action,
Matters will not be allowed to stop where they are;
ing two columns of THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW, was,
and if Mr. J. Burns Brown needs any help in his cam-
published by us in the early days of last month. Since
paign against mean and slanderous personalities and
its publication three issues of the Musical Courier have
editorial hectoring and insolence, he knows where he
appeared, but in neither of them was the slighest refer-
can get it.
ence made to it. What reasonable inference must be
* *
drawn from this silence ? Simply that the Courier can-
not dispute this professional opinion ; simply that it is
FOX'S F U N N Y CONFUSIONS.
in error in its premises as in its conclusions; simply
THE Indicator of the 25th ult. contains the following
that its interpretation of the recent trade-mark legisla-
item
of news (?)
tion is unsound.
"
The
following notice of a new incorporated com-
In writing these criticisms of the Courier's conduct we
pany
appeared
in the Chicago dailies this week:
must not be understood as being desirous of defending
"'A. H. Whitney Company, Quincy; to manufacture
any deceitful, dishonest, or nefarious practice that may pianos and organs; capital, $100,000; incorporators, A.
obtain in the music trade, but of arriving at the true in- H. Whitney, T. D. Woodruff, R. W. Gardner.'
terpretation of the law upon this subject. Our object is
" The similarity of the name would lead one to con-
to warn the trade against the folly of submitting to the found Mr. Whitney with Mr. A. E. Whitney of the
guidance of a paper which, intentionally or otherwise, is Whitney & Holmes Organ Company of Quincy, and
doubtless Mr. A. H. Whitney was a misprint and should
misleading.
have been A. E. Whitney. Whoever it is, however, it
We again call the Musical Courier'.<• attention to the is evident that the concern intends to make pianos."
opinion of the attorney regarding this new enactment
There is no Mr. A. E. Whitney of the Whitney &
of the Legislature, and request that the Courier publish Holmes Organ Company of Quincy. The Mr. Whitney
n its next issue its opinion of it.
of that company was Mr. A. II. Whitney. There is no
believe prove, absolutely, that the law will protect a
merchant who affixes to the article he Fells his name
and address, which of themselves do not and cannot
constitute a trade-mark, according to the Revised Stat-
utes of the United States.
" Finally, piano-fortes and organs are not branded
with such signs or devices as can be properly called
trade-marks, because the names are unaccompanied by
marks, emblems, or devices. Trade-marks are gener-
ally used in other trades, such as in patent medicines
cigars, etc.
"Every piano-forte and organ, almost without excep-
tion, simply bears a firm name, followed by the name of
the city where the firm conducts business, and these
are refused recognition as trade-marks by our courts
and statutes."
This sound, elaborate, and exhaustive opinion, occupy-
EDITORIAL INSOLENCE.
AN editor is not licensed to use the weapons of defa-
mation and slander. Certainly he is not entitled to re-
vile individuals, who may be personally distasteful to
him, for their accidental or occasional shortcomings.
By such revilings he demonstrates that he has neither
the dignity, the impartiality, nor the good sense which
are indispensable in every editor worthy of the name.
Unfortunately there are editors in this country who
are unworthy of the name; men who prostitute their
talents and their positions to the base and inglorious
purposes of petty revenge and unreasonable personal
dislike.
*
Opinion in the Centennial number of THE MUSIC TRADE
REVIEW. This eminent authority begins his observa-
tions as follows :—
" The title of the act referred to is chapter 45, ' An
Act to amend section three hundred and sixty four of
the Penal Code, relating to offences against trade-
marks.
" Therefore the body of the act (which states what
offences constitute misdemeanors) must necessarily be
included within the scope of the title, (viz.: ' offences
against trade-marks')
" This act, then, solely relates to offences against
trade-marks, and to persons who knowingly commit
such offences."
He then goes on to point out, in the clearest manner,
that
"THE MERE NAME, AND ADDRESS OK A PERSON, FIRM
OR CORPORATION, IS NOT A TRADE-MARK IN ANY LEGAL
OR GENERAL SKNSE. Section 4,939 of the Revised Stat-
utes of the United States, is explicit as to this, viz:
' The Commissioner of Patents SHALL NOT RECEIVE
AND
RECORD
a n y PROPOSED
TRADE
MARK
* * * * * *
Which is MERELY THE NAME OF A PERSON, FIRM OR COR-
PORATION, unaccompanied by a mark sufficient to dis-
tinguish it from the same name when used by other
* * * * * * and quotes decisions which we
persons,
A recent article in the American Musician was notice-
able for two things. Firstly, it contained a most un-
generous and unmanly attack on Mr. J. Burns Brown,
of the New England Piano Company's warerooms;
secondly, it was written over the signature, " Scrutator."
That this abominable slur was penned by John C.
Freund there is abundant evidence, and in refraining
for once from flaunting his own name before the public
he not only played the part of the ostrich, but showed
how very conscious he himself was of the dirty work
he was doing when perpetrating such a slur.
Meeting with Mr. Brown a few days afterward, that
gentleman characterized Freund's conduct in perfectly
fitting terms, and a physical encounter ensued which,
while not at all creditable, in point of pugilistic method,
to Editor Freund, resulted in the latter being decidedly
and deservedly worsted.
Reviewing this occurrence from the point of view of
the credit of the trade, and also from the point of view
of the dignity of the trade press, we must congratulate
Mr. J. Burns Brown upon his vigorous and energetic
protest against the methods and systems of public
misprint in the matter, and nothing calculated to '* con-
found " anyone but Editor Fox, whose occasional con-
fusions are grotesque and amusing. We' are reminded
of the time, some four years ago, when Fox, after a visit
East, wrote a glowing description of the piano actions
made by Alfred Dolge ! Further, we have been present
when Fox has stoutly maintained that Thurdsay, was
Wednesday notwithstanding the opinion of every other
Chicagoan to the contrary. Should Fox chance to give
up the ghost within the lifetime of Professor Huxley (of
which event we trust there is not the ghost of a chance),
it is intended by certain analytical chemists to submit
his brain to the inspection of that eminent scientist,
with the view of shedding a little light upon these ex-
traordinary " confoundings." Whatever may be the
cause of them, there they are, confound them. And to f
think of a man with a head like this posing as a com-.
piler of " tabulated statements !" The most charitable
assumption is that Fox is a born comedian; but even
on that assumption it seems odd that that distinguished
playwright, his esteemed and astute associate editor,
should not have taken advantage of the circumstance.
BLUMENBERGE THE OMNISCIENT.
THAT all-wise person Marc A. Blumenberg allowed
the following paragraph to appear in the issue of the
Musical Courier dated May 22d last:
" E. P. Carpenter has resigned the presidency of the
Carpenter Organ Company, of Bratlleboro, to give his
attention to other enterprises in which he is engaged.
The company last week, at its adjourned annual meet-
ing, elected George E. Crowell, C. H. Davenport, W. C.
Carpenter and Martin Austin, Jr., directors. Mr. Crow-
ell is the president; Davenport, treasurer; Austin, sec-
retary, and Carpenter, manager. The change is in the
retirement of E. P. Carpenter from the active manage-
ment, though he still retains an interest in the company,
{Continued on page 394).