New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-01-26
i CARD FROM WM. KNABE g. co.

! TO the EditOr Of The Tribune.
SIR: 1t would he a sufficient answer on our
part 70 the OF Messr Stcnway Sons OF Jan. %
10 say that II there is any foundation in fact for its
statements ami preenSiOns better opportunity could
have been afforded FOR proving their truth than that
which was open 10 those gentlemen in their recent smt
against us in Baltimore. Whether not they re-
| criyed the highest award for pianos from the
| Centennial Commission, they pretend, and
whether or the award granted 10 them was
higher than that which granted u.s. the main
issues distinctly joined in the between the Messrs.
Stenway and ourselves, and their seeking They posi-
lively asserted the Affirmative, and positively
serted the negative Of those issues. If they had been
able to maintain the truth Of their avermens, in law or
fact then WIS their opportunity. Instead of attempting
t. do so they retired Om the contest as soon as the
answer was Ned in winch challenged them 70 main
tain the allegations Of their bill They sent agent TO
Baltimore persuade us to soften their fall on the score
OF personal good feeling, by joining in amicabe card,
in WHEN thcy 10 throw the responsibility Of the sIt
ON their Baltimore AGENT sutrO and dlslvOw its institu-
ton IN their name a. without their approval author
NY We declined unite with item in tins, and required
them to pursue their their own respOnsi
bnty a.,urlg hem at tn same time that we greatly
preferred III 70 20 TO hearing, that the qVes
lions involved IN it might he discussed and settled.
They thrirupon finally ordered its withdrawal
"a their card admits, and their bill ac-
coriingiy dismissed withOut more, as the record
shows, II L.. becomes them now, think, to make
hash OF pretr> which they then deliberately aban
ionrd AID appeal 10 the public TO accept as true the
Identical assumptions which they could not venture judi,
ca,ly to maintain Their assault upon voluntary,
and they chose grounds and their weapons.
II is too late for them now what they could have
done if they had chosen. II they could they should have
done IT, and NJ one who knows them doubts that II they
could they would
Whether Messrs. steinway Sons candid In saying
that they have found Messrs Knabe Co. formi-
dable competitors" is question which can be better
settled by those familiar with the trade than by
the oublic At large We 0uy say that they really con-
dcr the business done Mr. Satro in their behalf in
Baltimore a. an immense SALE" their own competition
with their brother manufacturers cannot certainly be re-
rded AS very formidable" Ii notorious fact, stated
in our ansH ar that nearly every Of the piano
bi5!tors 20 whom awards given by the Centennial
| Commissioners has publicly claimed positively we
have fiat his award the highest We filed with our
answer least Half dozen advertisements establishing
ths fac;, ard especially circular OF MI ouro Himself
Steinway a sons Ike unbsningy stated in terms, on OPP
poslte pages OF one and the sge sheet that ae OF these
honsrs had received the highest award, and that the
uos of each the standard instruments OF the world
| rims SHINING against them alike and equally with
ourselves they pretend they should have selected the
house WIN. knabe * Co. the only one whose pre-
tensions II was necessary for them suppress, II they
could. And this, 200. although in our ns Ot
which they complained aud complain We d!d not men
lion their names alude them their manufactures,
or ,ay WORT which did not give IN all OF our com
pctitors precisely the to complain OF Us ~
Steiuway & Sons, there any reason for cOmnaint
a all. surely II we're not much IN their way tney
took q deal Of unnecessary trouble to get us out
1 Of IL. 49,
We have only add that the attempt of Messrs Stein
way 4 Sous, their card, To nd themselves OF rrspOn-
ability suit instituted IN their lamo IN Ba lmore,
aud the time To justify thelr agent sltto IN
bringing IT, uncandid and unworthy OF them The Dill
was Med against us, their name aud none Other, on
the 2n 81 December 1876 sutro had no a aren't part
IN H. except that he TO the truth OF Tie acts stated
IA the bill the ground that the compalnais were non
rpsidents and that he crsOnally informed ~ The
matters fact which II alleged The application for
an Injunction against set down for hearing ON the
10Th Of January 1877 by which day we were required
Ia show cause AGAINST IT, Between the Ming or the bill
aud the 18th OF January Messrs. Seinway sons per
Jntted the case to stand, and the whole weight aud
force VI their and character (and not sutros
! To DO gwen TO the proceedings. ON the ioth We
| died our answer aud their counsel even thea