Music Trade Review

Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE MUSIC TRADE
SEPTEMBER 9, 1922
REVIEW
AMERICAN PIANO CO. SUING THE CUNNINGHAM PIANO CO.
Files Complaint in U. S. District Court Claiming Damages for Advertisements Inserted in Phila-
delphia Papers by the Cunningham Co. Which Used "Knabe" and "Chickering" Names
The American Piano Co. has filed a com-
plaint in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, against
the Cunningham Piano Co., of Philadelphia,
claiming damages for advertisements inserted
in Philadelphia newspapers by the Cunning-
ham Co., of which the accompanying reproduc-
tion is an example. The action is based on a
claim of libel, and the plaintiffs seek to recover
damages to the amount of $100,000. The com-
plaint as filed by the American Piano Co. is in
full as follows:
IN
THE DISTRICT
COURT
OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT
OF PENNSYLVANIA
AMERICAN PIANO COMPANY, a
corporation organized and existing
under and by virtue of the laws of
the State of New Jersey, and a
citizen of said State,
Plaintiff
vs.
CUNNINGHAM PIANO COMPANY,
a corporation organized and exist-
ing under and by virtue of the
laws of the State of Pennsylvania,
and a citizen of said State,
Defendant.
June Term, 1922
No. 9570
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
AMERICAN PIANO COMPANY, the plaintiff, brings
this action in trespass for libel and seeks to recover from
the CUNNINGHAM PIANO COMPANY, the defendant,
the sum of One hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) as
damages on a cause of action whereof the following is a
statement:
1. The plaintiff is a corporation organized and existing
under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New
Jersey and is a citizen of said State.
2. The defendant is a corporation organized and exist-
ing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Penn-
sylvania, is a citizen of said State, and has its chief office
and place of business in the Eastern District thereof.
3. The plaintiff avers that the amount in controversy
is in excess of Three thousand dollars ($3,000) exclusive
of interest and costs.
4. The plaintiff corporation was organized on June 10,
1908, as a consolidation of the William Knabe & Company
Manufacturing Company, Chickering & Sons, and the Fos-
ter-Armstrong Company, the plaintiff thereby acquiring all
the capital stock of said companies and by direct con-
veyance taking full legal title to all of their several assets,
expressly including good will, trade-marks and trade names,
among such being the names "KNABE" and "CHICKER-
ING" as applied to pianos.
5. All three of the said companies had, prior to the
consolidation, been engaged in the manufacture and sale
of pianos and had acquired a high repvitation and a valu-
able good will for their several products. This was par
ticularly true in regard to the pianos manufactured and
sold by William Knabe & Company Manufacturing Com-
pany and by Chickering & Sons, whose pianos in tone,
quality and construction exhibited a workmanship which
could result only from many years of experience, skill and
training, and which gave to the names "KNABE" and
"CHICKERING," when used in connection with pianos,
an assurance of high quality and conscientious care in con-
struction.
6. The plaintiff, when it acquired the assets, the good
will and the trade names of both the Knabe and Chick-
ering companies and succeeded to their high standards and
fine musical traditions, greatly prized the valuable business
reputation which such standards and traditions implied,
and has since the moment of acquisition omitted no thing
or act which would tend to conserve and improve the
quality and character of the pianos which it continued
with great success to sell under the names "KNABE" and
"CHICKERING" and thereby enjoyed among the general
public a valuable good will and high reputation as manu-
facturers of the piano aforesaid.
7. With this end in view plaintiff has carefully main-
tained the former organizations and as far as possible the
same personnel of William Knabe & Company Manufac-
turing Company and Chickering & Sons and has carried
on the Knabe factory at Baltimore and the Chickering fac-
tory at Boston and has continued to use the name
"KNABE" and "CHICKERING" to indicate the same
methods, the same designs, the same constructions and the
same high quality of material and workmanship as used
previous to the consolidation.
8. Nevertheless, the said defendant corporation, know-
ing full well the high business and artistic reputation and
good will of the "KNABE" and "CHICKERING" pianos,
which are the property of the plaintiff corporation, but
contriving and wickedly and maliciously intending to in-
jure plaintiff by defaming, disparaging and discrediting the
business owned and operated by plaintiff, and to harass
and impoverish plaintiff corporation in the conduct of said
business did heretofore, to wit: on the second day of May,
1922, in the City of Philadelphia, and on divers occasions
subsequent thereto, falsely and maliciously publish and
cause to be published of and concerning said business of
plaintiff in the daily newspapers of Philadelphia, to wit:
the PUBLIC LEDGER, the NORTH AMERICAN, the
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER and the PHILADELPHIA
RECORD, and also on the third day of May, 1922, at
Philadelphia, as aforesaid, in the EVENING BULLETIN,
the following false and defamatory words:
"Way back in the early days of piano construction and
invention there started several ambitious manufacturers,
whose intentions and purposes were honest, but whose
commercial and business abilities lacked the necessary
training.
"In those days Boston contributed its share; Baltimore
was likewise prominent in the eyes of the artist and musi-
cian, as was also New York. Notably among the leading
pianos in the musical and artistic world were the Weber,
of New York; Chickering, of Boston, and the Knabe, of
Baltimore.
There were in our own city—the Albrecbt,
Prestein & Berwyn and Schomacher.
"AH of the above-named firms, in due course, passed
into the hands of receivers or went voluntarily out of
business or had been purchased by commercial houses,
where their identity (except for advertising purposes) was
nothing more than the name.
"The great industries of the country have frequently
changed hands. The mammoth steel concerns of Pittsburgh
are comparatively of recent date. Constant changes and
business fraudulently, was using the names "Knabe" and
"Chickering" not as representing a product of a recog-
nized standard of excellence, but as an advertising device
and was wilfully and dishonestly misleading the public, and
by the use of justly respected names was endeavoring to
impose upon the public pianos of inferior standard and
workmanship.
9. Plaintiff further avers that by means of said sev-
eral libelons publications it has been greatly prejudiced in
its business and has been deprived of gains and profits
which otherwise would have arisen and accrued to it and
has been generally injured and damnified to the full amount
of One hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), for which
amount it asks judgment with interest and costs.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff brings this suit.
AMERICAN PIANO COMPANY,
By
(Signed)
W.
ATTEST:
(Signed) GEO. W. BOOTH,
(Seal.)
B.
ARMSTRONG,
Vice-president.
Secretary.
Statement by the American Piano Co.
In connection with the filing of the com-
plaint, the American Piano Co. issued the fol-
lowing statement:
"It is well known in the trade that the Ameri-
can Piano Co. is a large company with its va-
rious manufacturing divisions — in Boston,
Chickering & Sons, manufacturers of the
'Chickering'; in Roch-
ester, the Foster-Arm-
strong Co., manufac-
turer of the Haines
Brothers, Marshall &
Wendell,
Franklin,
Foster, A r m s t r o n g
and other pianos; and,
in Baltimore, William
Knabe & Co., manu-
f a c t u r e r s of the
'Knabe.' Another di-
vision is that con-
cerned-with the Am-
pico. These various
divisions operate as
entirely distinct, sepa-
rate entities, both in
the manufacture and
distribution of their
respective products.
THE PIANOS
YESTERDA Y AND
OF TODAY
"The A m e r i c a n
Piano Co., at various
times, has been com-
pelled to go to great
expense in maintain-
early days of Piano construction and invention, there started several
ing its position. This
icturers, whose intentions and purposes were honest, but whose com-
>d busii ess abilities lacked the necessary training;.
has been forced upon
, Boston contributed its share; Baltimore was likewise prominent in the
it in order to protect
eyes of the artist and musician, as was also New York Notably among the leading pianos in
and thoroughly estab-
the musical and artistic world were the Weber, of New York; Chickering, of Boston, and the Knabe, of
Baltimore. There were in our own city—the Albrecht. Prestien & Barwyn and the Schomacker
lish the great names
All of the above-mentioned firms, in due course, passed into the hands of receivers or went volun-
of William Knabe &
tarily out of business or had been purchased by commercial houses, where their identity (except for
Co. and Chickering &
advertising- purposes) was nothing- more than the name.
'
The great industries of the country have frequently changed hands. The mammoth steel concerns of
Sons as separate en-
Pittsburgh are comparatively of recent date. Constant changes and inventions in an article comprising
tities, although divi-
over 3600 pieces, slich as a piano, require personal attention and up-to-date methods.
For over a quarter of a century we have been making the famous Cunningham
sions of the American
Pianos right here in Philadelphia. We have seen piano manufacturers and dealers
Piano Co.
come and go. but we have stuck to our policy of making the best piano possible and, sell-
ng it to the home direct—pricing them as only manufacturers can.
"The trade will re-
The Cunningham of today is the Cunningham of a quarter of
call
long months of
a century ago with all the improvements and musical effectiveness
litigation showing the
that modem efforts can offer.
absolute independent
It Pays to Think
operation of William
Knabe & Co. and also
of Chickering & Sons,
and the decisions of
the courts establish-
ing the right to use
the names 'Knabe' and
'Chickering'as applied
•IANO CO.
to pianos in these di-
Uth AND CHESTNUT
FACTORY. MJTH * PARKSIDC
visions. In the cases
of both Chickering &
Sons and W i l l i a m
One of the Advertisements Which Caused the Suit
inventions in an article comprising over 3/>0() pieces,
Knahc & Co., verdicts have been given showing
as :i piano, require personal attention an 1 upti -date
beyond
question that these two institutions
methods.
maintain, in the manufacture and distribution
- "For over a quarter of a century we have been making
the famous Cunningham pianos right here in Philadelphia.
of their individual products, entirely separate
We have seen piano manufacturers and dealers come and
and distinct positions. Their individuality re-
go. but we have stuck to our policy of making the best
mains absolutely unimpaired, for example : Knabe
pianos possible and selling them to the home direct—
pricing them as only manufacturers can.
prestige is based, not on the succession of
"The Cunningham of to-day is the Cunningham of a
ownership during its long career, but upon the
quarter of a century ago, with all the improvements and
pedigree of skill that has continued through
musical effectiveness that modern efforts can offer,"
meaning by said publication and intending and, in fact,
more than eighty years in the family of em-
causing it to lie suspected and believed by the public gen-
ployes whose sons have succeeded fathers in
erally that the said plaintiff who was then and is still
a branch of the art, thus preserving Knabe tra-
continuing and conducting the manufacture and sale of
ditions.
{Continued on page 10)
"Knabe" and "Chickering" pianos was conducting said