Conn-Distin-Pepper articles.
[The following is a series of articles discussing a protracted disputer between Distin, C.G. Conn, and J.W. Pepper that resulted in Conn forced to apologize to Pepper for misstatements, false arrest, and imprisonment.]
[Untitled.]
Vox Humana,
Vol 5 #6 October 1876, page 3.
"A London paper says; "Mr. Henry Distin, after a successful career of twenty years as a military musical instrument maker in England, disposed of his business some time ago, and is new preparing to leave for the United States, where he is called to establish and superintend a monster musical instrument factory"."
Explanations Wanted.
The Musical Courier,
Vol 7 #3 July 18, 1883, page 56.
Will Distin and Pepper explain to bandmen why they have Levy's portrait hanging up in their salesroom placarded as using exclusively the American Distin cornet made in Philadelphia, when he has not used a cornet bearing the name of Distin for nearly fifteen years?
Will Pepper and Distin explain why they advertise that Levy, Arbuckle and Bent use their cornets, when it is well known to New York musicians that it is not true?
Will Distin and Pepper explain to bandmen that they can purchase the same instruments in New York at a much less price than the same instruments can be bought with the stamp "Genuine-Henry Distin, made for J. W. Pepper, Phila. and N.Y. City?"
Will Distin and Pepper explain to bandmen that they are sorry for having deceived them by their peculiar manner of business?
Will Distin and Pepper explain that Trumpet Notes has published noting but the truth concerning them, and that they dare not attempt to prosecute its editor for so doing?
Will Pepper explain why he makes so much ado about the original Distin being connected with him in business? Does anyone dispute it? and is it any great credit to his firm?- Trumpet Notes.
What has C.G. Conn to Say Now?
The Musical Courier,
Vol 7 #5 August 1, 1883, page 80.
It having been falsely asserted by jealous rivals-men who would say anything (but their prayers), to get orders-that the Henry Distin now associated with me is not the original band instrument maker who for twenty-two years was manufacturer for the English Army, I hereby make the following offer to settle the matter in the minds of the public, should any doubt exist. I, J. W. Pepper, of the City and Country of Philadelphia, do hereby offer a reward of #1,000 in gold, free traveling expenses from any part of the world by parlor car or steamship, and one month's board at the best hotel in Philadelphia, if I cannot prove to any doubter, that the Henry Distin, now band instrument maker for me, is the identical man that was for twenty-two years band instrument maker for the English Army, and sold his London business to Boose & Co. Come on, ye men who doubt or lack faith and take a grand summer excursion at my expense. J. W. Pepper.
Something Additional from Pepper.
The Musical Courier,
Vol 7 #6 August 8, 1883, page 92.
It having been asserted that Henry Distin does not make his superior band instruments in Philadelphia; that he imports his valves, bells, &c.; that various claims and statements made by us are untrue and misleading, &c. This jealous attack, inspired by an unsuccessful business rivalry, can do us no harm with our neighbors and near-by customer who have visited our factory and seen for themselves, and for whom we are now furnishing instruments of unexcelled merit; but to convince those at a distance, who are liable to be mislead by this man's scurrilous and envious attack, we hereby declare that we will forfeit $1,000 in gold, with free traveling expenses from any part of the world and a month's board at the best hotel in Philadelphia, if we do not prove by ocular demonstration that we manufacture the celebrated Henry Distin superior cornets and other band instruments at our factory direct and complete from the raw material up to the finishing touches. Anyone who doubts should come, see and be convinced.
Conn Vs. Pepper.
The Musical Courier,
Vol 7 #8 August 22, 1883, page 118.
It is known here that J. W. Pepper, a band instrument manufacturer of Philadelphia, has made outrageous assaults upon the business integrity of C. G. Conn, and has for some months made statements regarding Mr. Conn's Factory that were not borne out by the facts. Mr. Conn has endured this until forbearance was no longer a virtue, and last week began action for libel. The following is an extract from the Philadelphia Press of Friday, August 10, giving full particulars. It says : "James W. Pepper, manufacturer of musical instruments at Eighth and Locust streets, was arrested this afternoon upon the charge of libel preferred by Charles G. Conn, also a manufacturer of musical instruments at Elkhart, Ind. Pepper publishes a paper in which, it is alleged, on August 1, he made an attack on Conn, charging him with being an imposter and guilty of false pretenses. The article complained of also stated that Conn misrepresented his facilities for manufacturing, and was illustrated by two woodcuts, one showing the building Conn claimed to occupy, and the other a shanty which it is stated he really used as a manufactory. Pepper waived a hearing before Magistrate Lennon, and was held in #1,000 bail to answer at court." - Elkhart (Ind.) Evening Review, August 13, 1883.
The Cornet Controversy.
The Musical Courier,
Vol 7 #22 November, 1883, pages 318-319.
The great Conn-Pepper-Levy-Distin cornet fight receives the following notice from the Washington (D.C.) Evening Critic:
Levy and Distin
THE GREAT CORNETIST AND INSTRUMENT MAKER IN A
REPUTATION DUEL.
A good-sized breeze comes to Washington and The Critic from New York and Philadelphia, through musicians here, regarding a windstorm that has been raging for some years between Levy, the great cornetist, and Distin, the world-famous manufacturer of cornets. When Distin, the legend runs, used to manufacture instruments in London, he employed Levy to test his cornets, for which Levy received a large salary. The Distin manufactory was the largest in the world, and the most noted. It soon gave Levy great and wide notice. After awhile Distin left London, came to the United States and associated himself with a music house in New York. Levy was over in this country then and called upon Distin. He again gave letters of recommendation for the Distin instruments and was given cornets. About a year or so ago Distin left New York and formed a co-partnership with Pepper, the great manufacturer of band instruments at Philadelphia. The firm employs seventy-five men, and a big business is transacted. Levy, it is said, as soon as he heard of the new firm, went to Philadelphia and applied for a cornet or two for his own use, and again offered to trade his letters of recommendation for goods. Distin gave him a cornet. Soon he asked for other favors of Pepper, and was refused. Pepper's father
DENOUNCED LEVY.
in the house, and it is further said, was about to fire him out of the building, when Levy left, but not to cease his importunities, for he entered an injunction against the firm, setting up the claim that their sales of instruments were being made upon his recommendations, and that his certificates as to the quality of manufacture only applied to the instruments made by Distin in England, and that the instruments made at Philadelphia did not merit his good name. A suit is pending, and the band fraternity in all parts of the country is watching it with great interest. The question with bandmen is, "Have we been blowing Levy's reputation or Distin's cornets?" Levy is backed, says The Critic's informant, by Conn, the cornet manufacturer, of Elkhart, Ind., who thinks it will be a clever take to get Levy's influence and impugn the reputation of the Philadelphia manufacturers.
In this war among the wind-jammers an unusual interest is evidenced in Washington. A large per cent of the members of the Marine Band, who use the Distin instruments are making affidavits in favor of Distin & Pepper, and say that their instruments are superior to those manufactured by Distin in England.
Who is the Interested Part?
The Musical Courier,
Vol 21 #13 (Sep 24 1890), page 314.
Our esteemed contemporary the Chicago "Herald" is responsible for the following:
The musical instrument manufacturers and importers of the country are a thoroughly disgusted lot of people over the new tariff bill. [The McKinley bill] Under the old tariff imported instruments and material paid a uniform duty of 25 per cent. When the new bill was under consideration at Washington the item of musical instruments was stricken out, evidently at the request of some Congressman with an axe to grind or a monopoly to foster. The effect of this action would have been to place musical instruments and material on the non-mentioned list, where such imports would have had to pay duty on chief value - that is, the most valuable parts of such imports would form the basis of the duties they would have to pay. The great objection to this, aside from its manifest injustice to the trade, is that there would be constant wrangling between importers and custom officers as to what these articles should pay. For instance, the collector at Baltimore or New Orleans might put a lower valuation upon articles that were taxed much higher when taken into the country through New York. No possible way could be devised under this classification for a uniform tariff on such imports. The results eventually would be that importers would forego the trouble and worry of handling such goods. A committee representing the manufacturers, importers and dealers went to Washington and succeeded in having the item reinstated where it belonged, and they thought then that the mater had been fixed for good, but it now appears that the Senate struck the item out again.
The only reason that can be assigned for this jugglery is that Congressman Somebody is a brother of somebody who is a director of manager of a little band instrument factory at Williamsport, Pa., and that the action of both the House and Senate was prompted through a desire to build this little factory up into a vast monopoly and enrich its owners. The value of imports of the kind exceeds $2,000,000 annually, and could the Williamsport concern get a tithe of this business cut off it would be a very much great institution than it could every become otherwise.
We don't know who Mr. Somebody is or who his distinguished brother may be, but we should be surprised and annoyed to think that a little tenpenny concern like the Disston [sic] Band Instrument Company, who have but recently removed their shop to Williamsport, should be able to influence legislation of such grave importance to an industry in which they play so small a part. The value of imports of all musical instruments and all parts thereof does not reach, let alone exceed, $2,000,000 annually, and band instruments form less than about a sixth part of the $1,703,129 which is the value of our total importations last year.
The objection to the chief component part valuation, which is spoken of, is indeed a serious matter, and it can cause no benefit to anyone and infinite trouble to everyone connected with the business.
As to the position of the music trades in all their branches in the McKinley bill as it at present stands, or rather waves, there is no one outside of the chosen few who know aught about it. And the chosen few are not just at present publishing their information, because - well, let it go at that.
[In 1993, Lloyd Farrar stated that this senator was Luther R. Keiffer.]