New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-06-17

49, bsck for slS25 and ordered the Eldrdge TwoSpool
Sewing Machine Did she it? She did not Instead she got
letter from Meier of the hrm stating that the $40 ID machine
was willamette which he considered good machine tor
H. s As for the adj 1t may have been little misleading
wrote the naive Mr. Meier but there separate advertise
ments one the Eldridge and one for the Willamette
Careful study of the offer in print failed to convince Mrs
Elliott that Mr. Meier right In fact convinced her OF the
reverse and being lady Of determination she wrote TO the ror
land AID Club branding the ad false and tricky and pertinent
w observing that the failure of big local firm live to its ad
is why many country people sending to big mall order
houses for their goods Would the AID Club help her get the
Eddge machine advertiseda The AID Club tried ddn
succeed For Meier Frank nterposed defence which does
credit least their ingenuity They passed the buck to The
0esonan in which Mrs Elliott had the advertisement
Now The Oregonian independent in certain respects For in
nce considers itself exempt from obedience to the law as we
shall But its attitude toward its advertisers is-wel
seville is harsh dsagreeabe word. I'll say ngrahahns 1t
snsly took the burden shoulders and wrote Mrs
Elliot. that compostor had made regrettabe mistake that
there should been rule line separating the two advertise
nent just above the ubhead Special for Monday
Possibly this Competitors being human. do But
will refer the ad reproduced above and imagine
line drawn The Oregonan specifies he will strange
Eb Two of them in fact First Elddge Sewing Machine
advertised NTH no price gven Second machine Of standard
make the Willamette offered without anything to indicate what
machine Why this vital points, Advertising
commonly employed for the OF conceang
and prices But even allowing all this this omission OF the
nene appears in the advertisement in The Journal al
though here the wording very slightly changed Did The Journal
cmposo by singular but coincidence commit the
ame eorp Haven't Meier & Frank got any saving OF
humor?
Even taking their absurdes face value neither The Ore
gonn Meier Frank we'll Here adver
dment obviously making an offer of Edrdge machine for
sS25 If Meier Franks they should have made
good by sending the machine If it The Ocsonlan error
Meier Frank should still have made good and deducted the cost
Of the from The Oregonans account That is the way in
decent firms and decent newspapers handle such problems
As is Meier Frank stand sef-convcted in the of lost
customer and The Oregonan the contemplate position OF
Intellectual accornpicc
In another The Ocgonian has made showing with
The Ad Club The Schwan Piano Company has for time been
notorious locally the Of claims Pianos at . Go
lower than the local market price OF its slogans Com
plants to the Better Business Bureau led the purchase
e' OF an instrument advertised 1915 Grade 1917 Model
II" sLoZ5 Seven piano experts have examined the piano.
ana declare that only 1915 grade but that
nal pree would be less than that actually charged by the Schwan
concern The woodwork and finishing very poor. The
mechanism up grade. and of the pedals false
'" vii be made Of thin
"hle the piano under investigation there
paed The Oregonan a column. double adver
nn OF the Schwan Piano Company with picture OF Mr.
hovsky at the top. in exact style with absolutely
designate advertising To this practice which illegal
unehical The Oregonian prone particularly in the
f OF prescrptonake medical ads Secretary English mme
wrote TO The Oregonan without specifying the Schwan ad
but calling the fact that the Federal law
- 'ng violated in the local field In reply W. Hoffman, the
manager Of The Oregonan wrote TO the Better Business
letter the nfane inpudence Of which eliminates in this
IN accord With what The Oegonian doing in that