Music Trade Review

Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW
REDINQTON BILL TO BE OPPOSED.
THE NEW YORK PIANO MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION TO SEND A COMMITTEE TO FIGHT THE
MEASURE IN ALBANY ON THE REFUSAL OF MESSRS. SPIES AND BAUS TO WITHDRAW THE
MEASURE THE ASSOCIATION OF THE OPINION THAT NATIONAL AND NOT STATE
LEGISLATION IS THE REMEDY MR. PARSONS' DEFENSE OF THE STENCIL.
War has been declared between the ad- mon with the other members of the associ-
vocates of the Redington Bill to regulate ation, would be glad to learn why Messrs.
stencils and the New York Piano Manu- Spies and Baus had taken active steps
facturers' Association. At a meeting held outside of the Association, and what real
on Tuesday afternoon at 2 o'clock, in the good they hoped to effect. "Themeasure,"
parlor of the Union Square Hotel, the said he, "is intended to remedy a supposed
gauntlet was thrown down by those who evil within the limits of the state. If its
prefer to wait until the Association shall provisions, as they stand or may be
have drafted a suitable measure and was amended, apply to merely local interests,
promptly picked up by the champions of other states will be left free, and more
immediate, radical reform.
harm than good is bound to ensue. Legis-
Although the meeting was ordered for 2 lation of such a character should be na-
o'clock, it was fully 3 p. M. before those of
tional, and to be national, the bill must be
the New York manufacturers who signified put before Congress. Before this can be
their interest by their presence adjourned done, however, earnest deliberation is
to the meeting room.
Among those necessary, and such deliberation can best
present were A. H. Fischer, of J. & C. be secured within the National Associa-
Fischer; Wm. Dalliba Dutton, of Hard- tion."
man, Peck & Co. ; Henry Behr, of Behr
Mr. Baus rejoined that Mr. Dutton and
Bros. & Co.; John Evans, of Newby & other members of the association had been
Evans; Chas. H. Parsons, of the Needham in the business long enough to know that
Piano & Organ Co. ; Robt. C. Kam merer prompt national legislation was an impos-
and Geo. Nembach, of Geo. Steck & Co. ; sibility. Before anything effective could
Hamilton S. Gordon; Mr. Taylor, repre- be accomplished, several years must elapse,
senting the Pease Piano Co. ; Thos. La M. and in his opinion that length of time was
Couch, of the Kroeger Piano Co. ; Henry excessive. Immediate reform,heinsisted, is
Spies, of the Spies Piano Mfg. Co. ; Hugo absolutely necessary. The main object of the
Sohmer, of Sohmer & Co. ; Augustus Baus, bill, he declared, is to prevent fraud. " As
of the Baus Piano Co. ; Socrates Hubbard, matters stand at present," said he, "the
representing the Weber-Wheelock Co. ; W. purchaser is entirely without a guaranty.
S. Weser, of Weser Bros. Jos. M. Mann, of
Many instances are known of persons pay-
Mann & Eccles, Providence, R. L, was ing three or four hundred dollars for in-
present during part of the proceedings.
struments having an intrinsic value of only
In the absence of Myron A. Decker,
seventy or eighty dollars. The Redington
president of the Association, the meeting Bill has been prepared in the interests of
was called to order by Robt. C. Kammerer, the people, and not in the interests of a
vice-president, and Chas. H. Parsons was clique of manufacturers or of the Associa-
requested to act as secretary in the absence tion. The measure has been introduced
of Robt. A. Widenmann, secretary of the in the legislature of this State because we
local Association.
and others who are interested in its passage
For the information of those to whom are residents of the State. It has been
the contents of the Redington bill were brought forward in the interests of purity
not known, Mr. Parsons read by request and fair trade. If this State finds benefit
from its provisions, other States will
the provisions of the measure in full.
The chairman then announced the meet- quickly follow, so that the results looked
ing open for remarks, members and non- for from national legislation will be
members of the Association being invited achieved more effectively and more prompt-
ly by legislative action in various sections
to speak.
Mr. Dutton suggested that as Messrs. of the country. It is not held by us that
Spies and Baus had been recognized as manufacturers are to be blamed at all for ex-
prime movers in the agitation, a brief ex- isting conditions, so far as fraud and mis-
planation of their purpose in openly aiding representation are concerned. The dealers
this effort to bring about an apparently are the persons aimed at, and only such of
them as are guilty, directly or indirectly,
much "needed reform would be welcome.
Mr. Baus responded to the suggestion by of fraudulent practices." Mr. Baus con-
saying that he had merely attended in or- cluded his speech by challenging the As-
der to ascertain whether the Association sociation to declare its intentions with
intended to support the measure as an or- reference to the proposed measure.
ganization or to suggest a substitute mea-
Mr. Parsons said he had given considera-
sure covering the vital points or to antago- ble thought to the subject and had prepared
nize immediate legislation in any shape or in writing what he had to say. He pro-
form. Mr. Spies remarked that his views ceeded :
on the subject were identical with those of
In order that my position may not be
his colleague.
misunderstood, I wish to call your atten-
Mr. Dutton, in continuation of his previ- tion in advance to two points.
First—That the company which I repre-
ous remarks, said in effect, that the ex-
sent, for business reasons of its own, does
planation of the two gentlemen who had not stencil pianos, and
.just spoken did not explain. He, in com-
Second—That our factory is on the other
side of the North River and would not
therefore be materially affected by this
bill, whether it becomes a law or not.
I mention this to show that in my view
of the case, I am considering the general
good of the Trade and not my own partic-
ular interests.
For a man to stand up at the present
day and say a word in defense of the so-
called outrageous, fraudulent, disreputable
"Stencil racket " requires about the same
amount of moral courage that it did forty
years ago to advocate abolition principles
in the State of South Carolina, and yet it
is one of the first principles of common
law that the prisoner is considered innocent
until he is proved guilty and it is equally
the practice to first establish that an action
is a crime before we pass a law prescribing
a penalty.
Notwithstanding the abuse which has
been heaped for years by a certain trade
paper on stenciling in any and every form,
I am prepared to claim that this practice
when properly used is straightforward,
honest, upright business, against which
there is no possible objection within the
bounds of common sense.
Holding this view, I object to the pro-
posed bill for the following two reasons:—
First—Because it is unwise, unbusiness-
like and unreasonable.
Second—Because it is unconstitutional.
Referring to the first reason I would
say: The placing of a name on. a manufac-
tured article, does not by any means indi-
cate the maker, nor is it of any interest to
the buyer that it should do so. On the
other hand, it docs indicate the endorser of
the article which is of vital interest to the
buyer.
When you take a note to your
bank for discount, do the directors take any
interest whatever in the maker of the note?
Certainly not—they look at the back of it
and if it is properly endorsed by you, it is
all that is required.
Precisely the same rule applies to pianos,
organs or any other manufactured article.
The actual maker, while in every way
worthy, may be obscure and utterly un-
known and his name stamped on his prod-
uct gives neither information nor security
to the buyer, while a proper endorser may
give both.
Permit me to illustrate. Suppose the
firm of Herpolsheimer & Sons are small
manufacturers. They are artists in their
way but possess neither capital nor busi-
ness capacity and therefore outside of a
small circle of intimate friends they are
utterly unknown.
Of what possible use is it for them to be
required to put their name on the instru-
ments they make. Does it give any infor-
mation to the purchaser. Not the slightest,
for they have never been heard of. Does
it give any security to the purchaser? Not
the least in the world, for with their lim-
ited business capabilities, they are liable to
fail in 12 months and then of what use is
the warrantee?
On the other hand suppose a large first-
class house like Lyon & Healy take the
product of this small maker ai\d stamp it
with their name. It becomes valuable to
the purchaser at once, for two reasons:
First—Because Lyon & Healy are ex-
perts and know the qualities of a piano and
having a reputation to sustain, could not
afford to put their name on a bad one,
and
Second—Being financially responsible,
their warrantee would be unquestioned.
When some of my brothers in this trade
are so strenuous that the law shall compel
the name of the bona fide maker to appear
on this article, I am reminded of an anec-
dote which was told me by a satirical friend
a few days ago.
He said: I called on an old and reputable