New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-04-11
DECORATIVE ARTISTS PLEASED.
A Jury DECIDES THAT THEY ARE EN-
TITLED To PAY WHETHER THEIR DE-
NOT

SIGNS ARE ACCEPTED OR NOT
Much interest has been manifested by decorative
artists and those whoSo interests are associated
with the profession in atqucstion on which court
decision was passed yestArday. The case In point
was a suit by Herman\TM schadermundt. who Is
engaged in the work OF Assigning interior decora-
tiors for the Congressional library at Washington,
and whose work inquired prominently in decorations
a. the Worlds Fair. lie alse designed the Interior
OF the Waldorf CAFE.
The case tried In Part II OF the City Court yester-
day before Judge o'Dwycr involved the question
whether or not an artist who had made designs Tor
interior decoration which had not been carried out
was entitled to compensation for his professional
services in preparing the pans
Mr. Schladermundts action instituted against
Bowes Colgate, member OF the wel-known
firm of Colgate & Co.. soap manufacturers.
on his direct examination, the artist TESTIFIED that
he had received letter frcm MIR. Colgate. who.
he said was a total stranger to him at the time.
requesting him to call upon Mrs. Colgate with refer
ence to decorating their drawng-room In the house
at No. 80 East Fifty-seventh The artist further
testified that Mrs. Co.gate's request he prepared
designs to Illustrate his ideas OF the decoration OF
the drawing room; that subsequently he submitted
the designs to Mr.. and Mrs. Colgate. who finally
wrote TO him that they had decided to do nothing
with his suggestions. and offered TO return the
plans.
Mr. Schladermundt testified that he then sent in a
bill but that Mr. Colgate paid no attention to IT,
The amount In suit small. but the action was
brought as a test the point.
For the defence. ii was declared that Mr. Co.gate
had asked other artists. among them the Tiffany
Glass Company. to submit sketches. and that the
others had made no charge, and that the designs
submitted by the various artists were only III the
nature OF estimates and were submitted In the same
way that contractors would submit bids In the nope
OF obtaining the order for the execution OF the work.
vba he
the defense was that Mr.. Colgate had failed to In
form the plaintiff that he had intended to make
competition out of It, II appeared that MT Schlad-
ermundt was wholly unaware that other persons
were competing and that he submitted his designs
in good faith supposing that he alone was giving
advice and drawing plans
Mr. Colgate testified that his understanding OF the
transaction was that 1t was competition and In
thu artist. in which he said: Il am thinking OF
the parOrn in h0qse sna have
dress you to ask II convenient that you call upon
Mrs. Colgate"
asked Mr. Colgate whether he considered that he
had Informed Mr.. Schadermundt by that letter that
he was be In competition with other artists. Mr..
Colgate replied that he thought that he had so in
timated to Mr.. Schadermundt. AS Mr.. Colgate did
Schiadermundt and Mrs. Colgate. who had had the
interview not present In court, this was the only
testimony on the point whether 1t was. In fact. COM
The jury remained out about half an hour and re.
turned verdict for the full amount for the plaintiff
to the great satisfaction OF the profession repre-
sented in court by John NJ. Carrcrc OF Carrere &
Henry j. Hardenburgh Walter Shirlaw. William $.
Manning Prngie Mitchell. manager OF the Tiffany
Glass Company. and Messrs. Wood Palmer. archi-
This Is the first recognition by the courts of the
contention by artists that they entitled to re-
enumeration for their profess ional services. even
where their designs have not been accepted or car
ried out, although In the case OF architects the law
L. we'll settled that they entitled to compcnsa-
! ton In such cases.