Music Trade Review

Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW
LYMAN
Editor and Proprietor.
PUBLISHED
EVERY
SATURDAY
3 East 14th St., New York
SUBSCRIPTION (including: postage) United States and
Canada, {3.00 per year; Foreign Countries, $4.00.
ADVERTISEMENTS, $2.00 per inch, single column, per
Insertion. On quarterly or yearly contracts a special dis-
count is allowed.
REMITTANCES, in other than currency form, should
to made payable to Edward Lyman BilL
Bntirtd at tkt Ntw Ytk Post Offict as Second-Class MOtor.
NEW YORK, SEPTEMBER 25, 1897.
TELEPHONE NU/1BER, 1745.--EIOHTEENTM STREET.
THE KEYNOTE.
The first week of each month, The Review
will contain a supplement embodying the liter-
ary and musical features which have heretofore
appeared in The Keynote. This amalgamation
will be effected without in any way trespassing
on our regular news service. The Review will
continue to remain, as before, essentially a trade
paper.
THE TRADE DIRECTORY.
The Trade Directory, which Is a feature of
The Review each month, is complete. In it ap-
pear the names and addresses of all firms en-
gaged in the manufacture of musical instruments
and the allied trades. The Review is sent to
the United States Consulates throughout the
world, and is on file In the reading rooms of the
principal hotels in America.
"NEW YORK" AND THE A. B. CHASE CO.
HE subjoined paragraph appeared in
an article in the Musical Courier
Trade Extra of last week:
"Great country house is A. B. Chase,
although they have a legitimate right to
put New York on the fall board of their
pianos."
An interesting question and one which
vitally affects every piano manufacturer in
this country is evolved from this statement.
According to this publication the A. B.
Chase Co., whose factory is at Norwalk,
Ohio, have a legitimate right to stencil
New York upon the instruments which
they manufacture.
Let us ask, what constitutes a legitimate
right, and do the A. B. Chase Co. really
possess that right?
If so how was it gained, and how main-
tained?
Some years ago, the A. B. Chase Co.,
extending their lines of operation toward
the East, thought it advisable for their busi-
ness extensions to open up a branch in
New York. Accordingly they secured
premises at No. 86 Fifth avenue. This
move, as evidenced by their subsequent
action, presumably entitled them to place
the name New York upon the fall board of
their instruments.
T
Considerable comment was caused by
this move, and this action on their part
was criticised in many quarters. Some al-
leged that they assumed a position which
their factory location in Norwalk, Ohio,
did not entitle them to occupy. Still the
facts were the A. B. Chase Co. maintained
a branch in New York which was con-
ducted under the supervision of the com-
pany's officers.
Had they not deemed that the placing of
New York upon their pianos would give
their instruments a standing in the East,
and in all sections for that matter, in other
words, give the prestige of a New York
nomenclature to their instruments, un-
doubtedly they would have refrained from
adding that to the fall board.
Thus their agents in every part of the
country upon exhibiting the A. B. Chase
pianos to customers, were enabled to allege
if they so desired that the company main-
tained establishments in New York and
Norwalk. It is also well to observe that
the word Ohio did not appear in conjunc-
tion with the word Norwalk, therefore, a
customer might be led to believe that the
factory was at Norwalk, Conn., a suburban
town wherein are located many factories of
New York concerns, while a huge branch
was maintained in the first city of the Un-
ion. Noted firms, such as Chickering,
Knabe, and Mason & Hamlin, have always
preserved the single name of the home
city of manufacture upon their instruments,
while they have for years maintained mag-
nificent branches in that great trade artery
of New York designated as Fifth avenue.
Time rolled on, and evidently the busi-
ness conducted at the New York branch of
the A. B. Chase was not profitable. This
presumption is based upon the fact that at
the expiration of the lease the branch was
discontinued, and the agency of the A. B.
Chase Co. was placed with Geo. W. Her-
bert at No. 10 East Seventeenth street.
It is possible that expenses of the lease
of the building where Mr. Herbert con-
ducts his business may be shared by the A.
B. Chase Co. Even if such be the case,
and we have no knowledge that it is, the
arrangement does not remove the identity
of Mr. Herbert as an agent. He is an old-
time, respected dealer, and his connection
with the A. B. Chase Co. has not, as far as
our observations go, changed his mode of
conducting his business in the remotest
particular. So even if it were true that a
portion of the expenses of conducting the
Herbert business were borne by the A. B.
Chase Co. that would not give the com-
pany the right to class the Herbert estab-
lishment as a branch,
The question arises if the A. B. Chase
Co. had a legitimate right, and that has al-
ways been questioned by some, to place
the name of New York upon their pianos,
while they maintained a branch at this
point, did not they forfeit that right when
they discontinued their branch and placed
their instruments in the hands of a local
agent?
The action of the company in continuing
to stencil New York upon their instruments
has been severely criticised in some quar-
ters, and now when it is declared by a trade
paper that the A. B. Chase Co. have a legit-
imate right to place New York upon their
instruments, we think it is a proper occa-
sion on which to raise the issue and ascer-
tain the sentiment of the trade in this par-
ticular.
And there is really more at stake in a
matter of this kind than appears to those
who give the matter purely a superficial
view. Take such firms as Steinway,
Sohmer, Steck, Hazelton, Fischer, Estey
Gabler, and other great local institu-
tions who maintain extensive factories in
New York and profit by the prestige which
indisputably lies in the name of the second
city of the world. It would be a work of
supererogation on our part to announce that
this city is the very center of the wealth
of the nation and that its name carries a
mercantile and artistic weight. Property
is more valuable here, rents are higher,
expenses are greater than in country locali-
ties, and is it right for firms whose estab-
lishments are in small inland towns, not
even in the State of New York, to give
purchasers the impression by placing the
name of our city upon their instruments
that they are part and parcel of us? Are
they not attempting to profit by the pres-
tige of a name, to the use of which they
are not morally or legally entitled?
Although we have had for many years
the most friendly personal and business
relations with the A. B. Chase Co., yet a
paper has a duty to perform, and must
rise above personal affiliations, and we
unhesitatingly say that in our opinion
whatever right accruing to the A. B. Chase
Co. to place the name New York upon
their pianos by the establishment of a
branch here was forfeited at the time their
interests here were transferred.
We say further, that it is a question in
which every manufacturer in New York
is interested, and in our opinion no one
has a right to profit by the name of New
York unless they possess the rights which
entitle them to the prestige of the name
of our city.
Steger & Co. would have the same right;