The Washington times., 1895-05-26
PROVOKED THE PATRONS
Complaints Made About the Co.
lumbia Portrait COMPANY.
LAW OFFICERS ARE P0WERLESs
They Declare That the Only Remedy
of Those who Claim to Have Been
Victimized by the Concern lis to
Bring Al Civil lSuit-Charges Made by
Those who Have Had Experience.

Complaints have been made to the po-
lice court aud the District attorney of the
operations of the Columbia Portrait Com
pauy, the main office of which is located
at No. 519 Seventh street northwest. The
latest complainant, Mr. Charles A. Cooper,
OF No. S19 Sixth street southwest, has
written a statement TO The Times.
number OF persons who claim to have been
victlmiZed by the concern were also called
on yesterday, and asked for versions of
their experiences with the company.
1t appears that the portrait company can
vasserS call at a house and promise, if fur
nished with a photograph or daguerreotype
of some dear one, perhaps long since dead,
to return it with a large crayon reproduc
tioD free. The agent explains that the
company he is employed by isseeking to ad-
vertiSe their fine crayon work in that par
ticular locality, and in order To do so ef
fectively viii make one free enlarged pic
ture in the block in which he is canvassing.
After the photograph or daguerreotype is
furnished, the agent informs the lady of the
house that she will be required, as she is
going To get picture gratis, to purchase
the frame for the same from the company.
he also promises that the picture will be
a good likeness, and agrees 10 let the lady
inspect a proof before she pays for the
fTanie.
The scheme seems TO be, according to
some of the patrons called upon, TO get
possession Of valued family portraits and
hold them until the person pays for the
frame in which the alleged crayon is placed.
As some of these photog raphs and daguer-
reotypes are the only ones OF departed
relatives and friends in eXisteEce, it can
easily be seen that their owners would
make almost any sacrifice rather than
part with them.
In relating his experience with the Co
Iumbia Portrait Company, Mr.. Cooper said:
Ion Monday afternoon, May 18Th, | was
called to pass my opinion on proof of sup
posed pastel portrait, made by the concern,
and finding, according 10 my experience,
the same eutiIely unsatisfactory, did
not hesitate to speak my mind, and tell
their representative that the proof sub
mitted was not free-hand production, as
represented, but very poor Photographic
enlargement. the expression on the right
side of the face having been lost. and upon
my being so emphatic with him he admitted
that they would make a new print, and
asked my sister, for whom ii was done,
and accept my decision, which was agreed
upon, and the following overtures made
to me.
OVERTURE OF THE COMPANY.
I'VE will use this print and you will
call on Thursday, May 10th, and inspect
the pastel which will be finished, and if it
is not entirely satisfactory we VIII make
others until you are thoroughly satisfied"
The complexion, color of hair and eyes
were given and then the question OF
framing was raised and he showed his
samples and stated prices and one was
selected and one half the amount paid and
receipted for by William Marchand, as
near as / can interpret.
ION the day appointed / called TO in
spect the pastel and the manager refused
to allow me TO do SO, but as lac was only
dealing with my sister, demanded the
privilege on the ground of having been
selected by his own representative. After
arguing for some time he reluctantly pro-
duced the so-called pastel and before could
comment on il he began trying TO convince
me of the excellent likeness and artistic
workmanship, stating that 1t was fine
pastel.
Il did not agree with him because the
expression was lost and the only celoring
was q fitle red on the cheeks. and the
ewes and hair were daubs Of black which
rendered il most hideous The manager
became angry and referred me to the artist
and then did all the talking himself and
finished by saying that he would not have
another made but would send this home
to my sister and convince her that it was
all right.
ION Saturday. the so-called portrait
came, aud my sister c6cired TO accept 1t,
because the promise OF Mt. Marchand' 5 rep
resent ative had not been fulfilled. The
man who delivered ii was very insulting
aud remarked, Well, we have your money
and that is all that we care for. On hear
ing that / Immediately went 20 tie office Of
The concern ard asked TIE manager If lie
intended to refund the money or make sat
| isfactory picture, and he replied that
| he had done all that he intended to and that
could take whatever steps saw fit.
CANNOT BE BEPROSECUThD.
81 applied to the Police Court and stated
| the case substantially as above and was in
formed that the company could not be pros
ecuted and my only redress would be TO sue
| for breach of contract for the amount paid,
and also sue out a writ OF Ieplevin to re-
| coyerthe photograph. Theclerko thecourt,
or gentleman from whom / obtained my ad-
vice, consulted the prosecuting attorney and
| his reply was that the court could do moth
/ ing, as similar concern on Four-a nd "a half
=
could not prosecute them
Mrs. ]. s. Powers, of No. S23 Sixth street
southwest, when seen by the reporter, said:
SIT was my own fault. / should have
! known better than to have been taken in
| by any such scheme. The first man OF
| agent representing the portrait company
that came to my house said he was giving
away crayons taken from smaller family
1 pictures. They were given free, because
the company wanted TO advertise their work
in my locality, and that only one family in
each neighborhood would be selected. Oi
course, said he, the company expected me
/ to buy one of their frames for the picture.
The cost would be only $780,
Mrs. Powers said she gave him two
cabinet pictures from which to make
| crayon. When he next called with q proof
she had decided not to have the picture
made, and asked him to return her cab
| met photographs. She gave him 90 cents,
and he promised to return them to her.
| He brought one a few days later and said
/ he would send the other by mail the same
afternoon. This be did not do, and she
called at the company's office and asked
| for the return of the picture. The man in
charge said he would not have 1T until
night.
s'Why is it you can not give me the
picture now, if you viii have it to-night?"
she asked.
1.-The picture is not here" ne replied.
/ 81 haven't got it,"
Yesterday after reporters had called upon
several patrons of the company, the picture
was returned to Mrs. Powers.
Mrs. Burke, who resides at No. GA Sixth
street southwest, said the agent of the
portrait company represented to her that
the crayon would not cost her penny.
He only wanted to make it as an advertise
ment on her block.p She declared she did
not want a picture, but he finally induced