The de Kleist
Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company
Introduction to the de Kleist Journals
The availability of the de Kleist Journal information came about due to a
collaborative book effort between Art Reblitz and David Bowers, The
Reblitz-Bowers Guide to Coin-Operated American Pianos and Orchestrions,
which is still a work in progress. Its genesis, however, inspired a lot of
new research, some of it in the Archives Department at the Smithsonian
Institution in Washington, DC, where certain accessible original de Kleist
factory records, donated many years earlier by the Wurlitzer Company, were
photographed. The de Kleist Journals dovetail nicely into and with the
Wurlitzer 10,000 series ledgers explained and with database reports
available elsewhere in this Mechanical Music Registry section. The overlap
between the de Kleist Journals and the Wurlitzer Ledger occurs in November of
1905, and sheds light on the relationship between de Kleist and Wurlitzer
during some of the early years of mechanical music development.
Eugene de Kleist
Eugene
von Kleist was born in Dusseldorf, Germany, in 1853, and reportedly learned
the organ trade from Limonaire Freres, a well-known street and fair organ
builder with a factory in Paris, France, and another located in Waldkirch,
Germany. At some point he thought it useful to Anglicize his name, changing
it to Eugene de Kleist. There are two conflicting accounts as to exactly when
this name change occurred, one being that this change took place when he
moved to Limonaire’s London, England, branch office, the other holding to
the idea that he changed his name when coming to the United States. Whatever
the case, de Kleist immigrated to the United States in 1892, and the
following year, 1893, he organized the North Tonawanda Barrel-Organ Factory,
and began a new career building barrel organs here in the United States.
Then, in January of 1903, probably to better demonstrate de Kleist’s
expansion of business beyond just the barrel organ, the de Kleist business
was reorganized and The de Kleist Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company
commenced doing business. This study of de Kleist approximately covers the
span of years beginning with 1903 and ending in the middle of 1907, a time
period documented by the de Kleist Journals #3 and #4. If other de Kleist
journals exist, then, of course, the study could be expanded, but, at least
for the time being, the study is limited to the two aforementioned journals
simply because these are the only two journal books made available to this
author.
The de Kleist Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company
It is the accounting journals for the beginning years of The de Kleist
Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company that have fortuitously been
made available for this study, and which includes three separate books:
Journal No. 3, beginning on page 1, January 6, 1903, to page 598,
July 31, 1905.
Journal No. 4, beginning on page 2, August 1, 1905, to page 583,
June 5, 1907. The cover page for this journal was not photographed, but
it is presumed to be Journal No. 4 because the dates seem to be a
continuum of Journal No. 3. There are additional page edges visible in
the photograph for page 583, but these additional pages are presumed to
be blank.
Cash Journal, beginning on page 2, January 2, 1907, to page 99, June
24, 1908. The edges of additional pages are visible in the photograph
for page 99, which is curled enough to reveal part of page 135 visible
underneath. Page 135 appears to be blank, and all other non-copied pages
for this journal are also presumed to be blank. The Cash Journal has no
observed sales/shipping data and so it is of relatively little
importance to this particular study, and thusly will not be further
referenced.
Inasmuch as the first and earliest de Kleist journal studied here is
clearly marked Journal No. 3, it is logical to presume that there must have
been at least two earlier journal books, Nos. 1 and 2. If these forerunner
books did in fact once exist they most certainly would have been maintained
by the North Tonawanda Barrel Organ Factory, the predecessor organization to
the newly organized de Kleist Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company. But because the fourth journal ends in June of 1907, and since the de Kleist
company was not bought out by Wurlitzer until January of 1909, it is highly
probable that at least one additional de Kleist journal, dating from 1907
onward, once existed. But while it is a logical certainty that these other
de Kleist journals once existed, and maybe still do, they are currently
somewhere beyond the reach of this author.
What is Included in this Study
What is included are ALL newly manufactured band
organs and coin-operated instruments specifically detailed in
the journal pages, no matter whether they have a clearly defined serial
number or not.
Also included are all repaired and/or remodeled instruments (i.e.,
band organs and coin-operated instruments repaired/remodeled by
de Kleist) detailed in the journal pages, but only if they have a clearly
defined serial number. There may be a few exceptions to this rule if the
item repaired has unusual or interesting historical qualities deemed
worthy of special note.
“Extras” are included for a lot of Pianinos, and to a much lesser
degree other instruments, with any such extras are called out as an
extension of the “Notation” line in database reports. “Extras” come in
two basic forms, (1) those part of the original sales order, and (2)
those that are delayed, i.e., “hold to fill” orders. There are many
instances whereby a group of Pianinos (up to 42 instruments making up
one journal entry) are purchased by Wurlitzer, but ordered held at the
de Kleist factory until further delivery instructions are received. When
any “extras” follow an invoice date the actual date the extras are added
is noted, which is probably about the time when the instrument was
finally shipped from the de Kleist factory. Thus, if and when different,
the recorded (or invoice date) versus the “extras” date have relative
significance.
Extra “Extras” describes a situation when there are two or more
instances of “extras” being added to a particular instrument. Many times
one or more extras are included at the time an instrument is first
entered into the journal, but the instrument not actually shipped. Then,
later on in the journal, one or more extras are again added to the
instrument, at which point the instrument is considered to have been
shipped. In such cases where there are two or more instances of extras
being added to an order the date indicated for extras in database
reports will always be the latest date observed for which extras were
added.
Motor information is included to the extent that it is recorded in
the journal activity. Usually the motor information is limited to
voltage and whether it is an A.C. or D.C. motor. In the case of A.C.
motors the frequency is usually included in the description, but not
always. Four motor brand names have been observed within the journals:
Holtzer-Cabot, Emerson, Eck, and one Peerless motor, although any
mention of such motor names tends to be moderately rare until the year
1906, whereupon by the middle of that year motor manufacturer name,
voltage attributes, and serial number were commonly listed. As a general
rule of thumb, it seems that Holtzer-Cabot motors were normally
installed by de Kleist, a speculation substantiated by numerous
Holtzer-Cabot Electric Company account entries scattered throughout the
journals. However, beginning in June of 1906 there are numerous examples
of Emerson motors and a relatively few Eck D.C. motors being installed,
which are often marked “yours” (inserted where the motor price extension
would normally go), meaning that they were supplied by Wurlitzer and/or
Wurlitzer’s customer. There are few observed journal account entries for
either the Emerson Electric Company or the Eck Dynamo and Motor Company,
other than an occasional oddity whereupon, for instance, a defective
Emerson motor was shown as freighted back to the Emerson Electric
Company in St. Louis, Missouri, or when several motors were returned to
the Eck Dynamo and Motor Company.
What is Not Included in this Study
Band organs and Tonophones manufactured by de Kleist's North
Tonawanda Barrel-Organ Factory (excluding carryover to the newly
organized successor company), which was the predecessor company to The de Kleist Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company, organized in
1903 and the only de Kleist entity to be included in this project.
Any accounting entries not specifically related to describing new or
repaired or remodeled instruments.
Repaired and/or remodeled instrument entries that DO NOT show a
stated or accurately discernable serial number. Occasionally a repair
notation does not reference a serial number, and even more infrequently
there can be a repair entry where the serial number, while present,
contains one or more digits that cannot be discerned with any reasonable
degree of certainty.
Any journal entries showing only extra new or replacement music
barrels, new or replacement (Tonophone) cylinders, music rolls, freight,
or parts and supplies. Parts and supplies includes items such as
separate orders for extra or replacement Tonophone cylinders, Band Organ
barrels, and electric motors, as well as a myriad of miscellaneous small
parts and/or supplies including such things as bellows, pump sticks,
rubber cloth, belting, valves, stickers, chests, glass panels, coin
chutes, etc. However, occasionally an extra barrel, cylinder, music roll
or part appears in the database report on the Notation line with new or
repaired instruments when such an “extra” is specifically mentioned as
part of the sales order.
Detailed information from Journal #4 beginning partway through
journal entries for December 20, 1906, and onward to the end of the
journal in June of 1907. Starting on December 20, 1906, whoever was
keeping the de Kleist Journal abruptly changed the way band organs and
coin operated instruments were recorded. Details for each instrument
suddenly stop altogether, and all that is recorded is the Wurlitzer
invoice number and overall amount due de Kleist, leaving some pages
filled with long lists of Wurlitzer invoice numbers, but having nothing
of any recognizable use in regards to this project. Thus, the general
accounting of instruments sold and/or repaired by de Kleist as shown in
the journals effectively terminates on December 20, 1906. However, to
complete the serial number sequence ending in 1906 some missing or
"out-of-range" items have been backfilled using information from the
Wurlitzer 10,000 series ledger, which includes several items that
actually shipped in 1907.
Interpretation
Date Format: Indicated journal dates tend to follow
a hierarchical pattern, with the top level being the page heading, which
consists of the day of the week spelled out, followed by the month, day,
and year, i.e., Tuesday January 6, 1903. This main heading is for the
entire journal page unless specifically modified within the body of the
page. Underneath the page heading the date can be modified in several
ways:
By section: Each topical section of a page
(which might include some combination of sub-headings such as Cash
Account, General Expense, Materials, Machinery, Stable, State Bank,
R. Wurlitzer Co., Herschell Spillman Co., or other customer name,
etc.) is separated by a penciled horizontal line that is broken in
the middle with a space in which nothing, a ditto mark, or a date
modification number can be placed if and when appropriate. This
section date modifier can take several forms, but is mainly on the
order of “July 1st,”or more often simply a number, such as “3,”
“11,” “12th,” “23” and so on.
By line item: A line item date affects a single
item, or a group of several items with subsequent items clumped
together beneath the initial item. The date is placed near the left
hand margin of the item(s) to which it refers, and it can takes the
form of “May 16,” or more generally “(May 16)” in parenthesis, but
it is occasionally simply a number, such as “16.”
Date Timing: All dates shown in the database are
taken as the approximate date upon which there was some kind of
actionable reason to record the item, such as an invoice from Herschell
Spillman or Wurlitzer, etc. However, specifically what action triggered
a particular journal entry is not always clear nor evident. As such,
dates do not necessarily represent the moment in time when a particular
item was actually sold or shipped. That said, it is, of course, possible
that journal dates do accurately reflect the day for which sales
activity occurred, and/or a repair/remodeling job was completed. The
upshot here is this: The journal dates, while not inevitably perfect
representations pinpointing when some activity took place, do suggest,
for practical purposes, the sale and/or repair/remodeling completion
date of an instrument.
Dates Out of Order: Sub-sectional dates in the
journal are often out of order. As an example, there are occasionally
pages where items sold to Wurlitzer are grouped together under one
section heading, but with small subgroups within that section marked
with a line item date, i.e., Feb 11, Feb 13, Feb 15, Feb 18, and so on.
However, there are also instances whereby line item dates are out of
order, such as Mar 10, Mar 11, Mar 9, Mar 12, etc., Instances such as
this suggest that whoever was keeping the journal missed an item, but
then simply added it sequentially to the journal but with an out of
order line item date.
But there are other permutations that occur that also make for
out-of-order dating. Consider the aforementioned Wurlitzer sub-section,
whereby line item dates of Feb 11, Feb 13, Feb 15, Feb 18 are called out
on a page where the main heading reads February 20, 1904. This could be
followed, for instance, by a later page with a series of band organs
individually dated Feb 3, Feb 5, and so on, all dates significantly
earlier than might be expected. Because there is a wide range of
possible interactions between page heading dates, section, and line item
dates, all within the same page, it is possible to come up with database
results that at first glance may seem both confusing and incorrect,
albeit such apparent inconsistencies are nonetheless accurately
recorded. What all of this means is that the potential for error
necessitates a very careful examination of each and every journal page,
especially when the page image is slightly out of focus, so as to
hopefully attain a high degree of accuracy.
Hold to Fill and Extras: Beginning with later
entries in Journal No. 3, not all Pianinos were shipped at the time the
sale was initiated (or invoiced). A relatively small number of Pianino
entries are marked with “Hold” or “Hold to fill.” Some of these
instances are further noted with the term “Shipped” or “Shipped Mar ?,
1905” The orders for these “hold to fill” instruments are normally then
later completed with certain extras added, I.e., additional items
requested by the customer, the price for which is added to the original
base price. This “hold to fill” terminology is soon dropped, although
many Pianinos (as well as other instruments) not specifically marked as
“hold to fill” are, nonetheless, essentially incomplete hold-to-fill
orders with no customer or shipping destination shown, and for which a
short time later certain “extras” are added to the instrument’s base
price. In contrast, there are some Pianinos that were fitted with what
was commonly defined as “extras,” but for which these so-called extras
were never specifically mentioned or called out. In such instances the
indicated instrument price includes the base price plus any added
extras, such as an electric motor, electric lighting, muffler, mandolin
attachment, or other item.
Display of “Extras:” Extras added at the time of
invoicing are not shown as dated in database reports because the invoice
and extras dates are identical. However, when extras are added after the
invoice date the later “extras” date in shown in database reports. All
“extras” information is displayed as an extension of the database
report’s Notation line.
Prices for “Extras:” Please note that whenever
“extras” are indicated the added costs for each individual item is
shown, unless no price is mentioned, but any summation for two or more
items is never added to the base instrument price in database reports.
Base price and any Extra costs are kept separate, although they were
surely added together when demanding payment from the original customer.
Summation of “Extras:” When only a single extra
item is noted no summation or total amount is calculated for that
particular instrument. However, whenever two or more extra items are
mentioned a total price is always calculated, even if one or more of the
extra items have no individual price designated. As long as one out of
multiple extra items is priced a summation will be generated. For
instance, if an extra music roll is included for $1.10, and an extra
motor is noted but not priced, the total for extras would be $1.10.
Similarly, if a music roll at $1.10 and a motor priced at $30.00 is
shown a total of $31.10 will be generated.
Extra, or not: When is an extra item no longer an
extra? During the heyday of extras it was common to include one or more
extra music rolls, a motor, electric lighting, a mandolin attachment,
and rarely some additional item, each of which was individually priced
as extra. Later on motors were sometimes priced, but often marked as
“yours,” meaning that the motor was supplied by Wurlitzer, not de Kleist.
The “yours” notation eventually fades away while motors continue to be
included but not priced nor marked as to source. Then during the latter
part of 1906 what is or is not an extra becomes even more clouded. The
previously common “extra” lighting and mandolin attachment items are
gone, and it becomes more and more common to have no stated extras.
Motors are generally included with an instrument, with no price, but
with motor serial numbers. Was this a way of keeping track of motors
supplied by Wurlitzer? During this latter part of the year motors are
called out in two ways: (1) no “extra” notation is present but a motor
is called out, or (2) an “extra” notation is observed for a music roll
or rolls and a motor is called out after the initial extra item, but the
motor is, in both cases, not priced. So, then, is the motor an extra
item, or not? For de Kleist it might have been an extra item, but
supplied by Wurlitzer. For Wurlitzer, on the other hand, if they were
supplying the un-priced motors, the motor was probably inclusive of the
retail price. To deal with this mystery in some kind of consistent
manner all un-priced motors are included as part of the instrument
description in database reports. Thus, if and when a “extra” music roll
or other priced item is specified, regardless of whether it is followed
by an un-priced motor, or not, only the music roll and/or additional
priced items will be treated as an “extra” item, and shown in the
“Extras” extension of the Notation line.
Serial Numbers: The journals do not account for
every sequential serial number within the scope of the journal
documents, there being numerous single numbers or small gaps in the
otherwise sequential serial numbers reported. It is unknown why this is
so. It has also been noted that the serial numbers of instruments are
generally not recorded in perfect sequential order, except in rare
instances, and then only two or three instruments may be in sequential
order at a time. While the overall trend is consistently upward toward
larger serial numbers, as would be expected, on a much smaller scale
(perhaps covering only a few pages) the numbers often tend to skip
around and jump forward a few numbers and then fall back to a much
earlier number. It is as though de Kleist had a stock of finished
instruments shoved into a warehouse and then someone just randomly
grabbed an easy to get at machine and sold/shipped it, without paying
any attention whatsoever to its serial number or relative age.
Duplicate Serial Number: Duplication of serial
numbers falls into two distinct categories: Those with (1) identical
numbers clearly written in the journals, and (2) those that appear to be
the same number because one or more digits are overwritten, unclear,
smudged, and/or poorly shaped. Dealing with the first type tends to be
easy; there is nothing much to do but record the identical instances
verbatim. The second and often ambiguous type usually requires some
time, diligence, a good eye coupled with a dose of intuition, and lots
of patience:
There are a fortunately small number of instances where serial
numbers shown in the journals are clearly and unequivocally
duplicated. Buy why? Is there an error in the journal, whereby the
person keeping up the journal made a mistake, or did someone on the
manufacturing floor error when stamping serial numbers into the
pinblock? This author currently has no way to resolve this kind of
historical question. Moreover, some instances of duplication
occasionally seem to suggest what the error might be, but any such
speculation proves nothing and can usually be countermanded by other
instances of number duplication. Take for instance the duplication
of numbers for a Tonophone versus a Keyboard Tonophone. Does the
fact that they are variations of the same type of instrument have
any significance? How about a duplication whereby a Tonophone and a
Pianino have the same number? It is possible that different parts of
the factory miscommunicated and thusly made a numbering error. But
what about when two Keyboard Tonophones have the same number, or
when two Pianinos mentioned on the same journal page just a few
lines apart both clearly have identical numbers? The solution to
such mysteries has been to stop speculating and simply record the
journal information as accurately as possible and let the matter
rest, until and unless clarifying information is made available at
some future date.
In the case whereby two serial numbers collide that have been
interpreted as identical how does one determine which number is the
most correct, and then what to do with the other apparently less
correct number or numbers? If one of two or more similar looking
numbers is clearly written the process is obviously simplified, but
what to do when both (or all) numbers look vaguely identical. For
serial numbers up through 10,000 untangling the puzzle can be both
frustrating and very time consuming. The methodology generally
employed has been to flag the duplicates and go on entering data.
Then once a large amount of data has been keyed in for both sides of
any suspect serial numbers a list of duplicates and a list of
missing serial numbers was created. At this point it becomes a game
of mix and match, comparing suspect entries until all of the
formerly mismatched pieces seem to fall into place. This may not
guarantee absolute success, but it generally seems to have arranged
the uncertain pieces in what appears to be a suitable manner. For
serial numbers at or above 10,001 putting problem serial numbers
into the right slot is usually fairly easy, because these later
entries can be cross referenced with the Wurlitzer 10,000 series
ledger. Thus, by comparing date, model, motor, and destination
criteria any suspect serial number issues are usually swiftly
resolved.
Motor Serial Numbers: Serial numbers for motors are
first noted in June of 1906, and are included in the database if and
when set forth in the de Kleist journals. Unfortunately, these motor
numbers are oftentimes poorly and/or lightly written and in such
instances some digits in the five to six digit serial numbers can be
difficult to accurately decipher. Nonetheless, because the first two or
three digits usually tend to be the most legible the numbers provided
can be considered accurate enough to be useful for dating purposes. When
there are two or more instruments listed under a single journal entry,
and if motor numbers are also provided for these multiple item orders,
the motor numbers provided are assigned to each instrument according to
the sequence in which they are listed in the journal, i.e., the first
mentioned motor number is arbitrarily assigned to the first mentioned
instrument. However, arbitrarily assigning motor numbers based upon the
order they appear in the journal entry is no guarantee that a certain
motor went into the instrument so noted in the database.
Cartage: Some instrument entries occasionally
include the term “& Cartage,” or just “Cartage,” which is a term
commonly defined as a fee charged for the carting of goods. Cartage, if
included, is present within the body of the overall item description,
but shown in the “Notations” field in database reports. When this term
is present it is presumed to mean that the dollar amount shown in the
journal’s right hand fiscal column includes the instrument and any
special customization expenses plus cartage (or local cartage, as
distinguished, for instance, from freight carried by railroad). In a few
instances there is a separate reference to cartage other than in the
body of an item, and the cartage cost is usually less than a couple of
dollars. This suggests that this cartage fee is for local cartage, since
the cost is so little. So, then, where is the instrument being carted?
To a nearby railway depot? Once in a while there is a reference to
freight charges to a major city, such as Columbus, Ohio, with charges in
the fifteen dollar or more range. Occasionally there is a journal
reference to payments made to the New York Central and/or Erie
Railroads. In later journal entries an order description commonly
concludes with the notation “shipped by freight to” or "Expressed to"
and the customer’s name and destination city and state.
Keyboard Tonophone: During the year 1903 Keyboard
Tonophones tend to be manufactured in groups, often 10 to 12 at a time,
with the serial numbers for a group of keyboard models sequentially
contiguous, such as #8695 to #8705, or #8835 to #8847, or #8957 to
#8966. However, there are exceptions to this rule of thumb, with minor
interruptions in grouped serial number consistency, such as the grouping
#8795 to #8806, where #8802 is the lone non-keyboard Tonophone misfit.
And then there is the rare instance whereby either a single or maybe
three keyboard models are intermingled amongst a long run of
non-keyboard models.
Shipping Destinations: There is an element of
ambiguity and potential confusion in determining some of the shipping
destinations, which is caused due to the way many items are grouped
together under a single subheading. For instance, several instruments,
each an individual order, might be grouped one after the other under a
Rudolph Wurlitzer Company subheading, with each individual entry
displaying a clearly defined freight destination. Other times, however,
two or more instruments might be similarly grouped together with the
only shipping information located below the last entry. It is presumed
that this was done to avoid having to duplicate identical shipping
details. Sometimes a larger group of individual instruments will be
listed with, again, the only shipping information shown once, but
located somewhere within the group and not after the last item. And,
then, there will be the odd situation where two or more instruments are
grouped together with the only shipping information following the first
item, but that seems to apply to the second or later items, too. Late in
Journal No. 3 the writer begins to show multi-instrument orders as one
single journal entry, whereupon numerous instances of up to 42
instruments form a single order, with all of the mixed serial numbers
written out in one big continuous, flowing batch. The shipping and other
common information is then placed immediately below the batch of
numbers. Needless to say, such inconsistencies makes devising a hard and
fast rule for applying shipping information problematic. What to do? In
any typical grouping instance the shipping information will be presumed
to apply to entries grouped immediately above it, but probably not
applicable to anything that follows it, unless some special circumstance
suggests otherwise. This less than perfect method of applying behavioral
patterns to discern correct destination data seems to be consistent with
generally observed patterns under Wurlitzer or other customer
subheadings, where there are often numerous repair or replacement parts
listed amongst a single or groups of instruments.
However, that even a small degree of interpretation is necessary does
introduce the prospect of an error when presenting certain shipping
information. At this time there is no way to prove or disprove the
accuracy of the methodology being used to attribute possibly ambiguous
shipping data, other than it often seems to coincide with the intent of
the person maintaining the de Kleist Company Journals. There are
relatively few instances, however, when the shipping information was so
ambiguous that it seemed impossible to guess whether any shipping data
was meant for a particular item or not, whereupon no shipping data was
included, unless something was encountered later on in the journal that
made an educated guess seem feasible. Moreover, whether or not a few
items in the database show what may someday turn out to be a bogus
shipping destination probably makes little practical difference, and may
be more than offset by unrecognizable errors originally written into the
journal books themselves. The instruments listed in the de Kleist
database have an exceedingly low survival rate and instruments were
commonly moved around to different locations during the useful lifetime
of the machine. Consequently, any original destination information
probably carries no real value in helping to locate a surviving
specimen. More than likely it will be the date information alone that
will be treasured, enabling a collector to fairly accurately date the
birth of some rare de Kleist Tonophone, Pianino, Chimes, Mandolin
Quartette, or other instrument that has miraculously survived to this
day.
Text Discernment: Another issue that often hinders
the accuracy of shipping data is the fact that some of the de Kleist
Journal photographic images are a little out of focus, and therefore a
bit fuzzy looking. This often makes handwriting on any focus-impaired
pages slow and difficult to comprehend. To make matters worse, when the
handwritten script is additionally ill formed and/or some characters are
highly faded it can be quite challenging to interpret the material
accurately, especially more so when a difficult to discern word or name
is uncommon or unique, and there are no other similar references
elsewhere in the journals by which to compare. Thus the reader should
keep in mind that some uncommon, not easily recognized names or places
might be no more than a best guess. However, to enhance accuracy in any
such situations, whenever a previously guessed word or name is repeated
elsewhere in the journal it is meticulously studied in relation to the
uncertain spelling. Oftentimes the alternate instance is clear enough,
or some part of it is clear enough, to correct any prior
misinterpretations and/or misspellings.
Review of Interpretative Conundrums: Issues
regarding the interpretation of smudged and/or difficult to decipher
handwriting are generally reviewed by a jury made up of mechanical music
researchers and/or authors, namely (in order by last name): Q. David
Bowers, Matthew Caulfield, Terry Hathaway, Dana Johnson and Art Reblitz.
Overall Accuracy: It is certain that there are
errors in the de Kleist database information, either (1) originally
introduced by whoever maintained the de Kleist journals or (2) by this
author when attempting to decipher some almost undecipherable, faded,
and poorly formed handwriting. To mitigate any interpretation errors,
once all useful journal data had been keyed into the database and serial
number duplications had been resolved to whatever extent was reasonably
possible, each and every database entry was individually proofed against
the de Kleist Journals, and any mistakes corrected and/or overlooked
items integrated into the database structure. Once proofing was
finalized various fields in the database were then sorted and rearranged
to put related data juxtaposition, so that similar and/or related data
could be easily examined and compared for irregularities, misspellings,
wrong lookup table insertions, missing data, and any other incongruity.
But no matter how much diligence has been pursued in making the de Kleist
Journal project reach toward perfection, ultimately, there are still
errors to be found and made right, although some will remain invisible
and have to wait patiently unrecognized until further information
someday becomes available.
Backfilled Records: A database record as configured
here is the set or collection of individual data fields that comprise
and make up a complete unit of information, i.e., that describe one
particular band organ or coin operated instrument. Backfilling is the
process of importing information when a record is deficient and omitted
information is available elsewhere from some credible source, in this
case the source being the Wurlitzer 10,000 series ledger. Thus, true
backfilling is an option only for instruments with serial numbers equal
to or greater than 10,001. Backfilling can be partial, such as when only
the destination information is absent for an entry, or when no reference
to a particular instrument can be found in the journals. Such omissions
can result due to part of a page accidentally being obscured during the
photographic process, or when a particular instrument is overlooked by
whoever maintained the journals. When backfilling occurs it is so noted
in database reports in the Editor's Comment line, and is most obvious
when an entire instrument's record is imported. Because of the ability
to backfill certain missing details or entire records (between November,
1905, and December 20, 1906) it was decided to preserve the integrity
and sequential order of the database, where possible, through
importation, i.e., backfilling.
Public Assistance: A link to partial page images
showing instances of words or names that cannot be interpreted with any
assurance of correctness is available for viewing in the Updating the Database and Reporting Errors section located near the
bottom of this page, so that interested parties can participate in
resolving certain handwriting interpretation issues.
Incomplete Data
The extracted de Kleist Journal data made available within and/or linked
to this web page is known to be incomplete. Several journal pages were
missed during the photographic copy session, and numerous pages are either
partially cut-off or part of the page obscured by a coat sleeve and/or hand.
Fortunately in many instances this obscuration of page data did not block
out instrument sales/shipping information pertinent to this particular study
project. If and when replacement page copies are made available any
recognized incomplete or missing data issues will be promptly corrected. In
the meantime, however, the de Kleist Journal material, with all of its
imperfections, is presented "as is" via the database report links at the
bottom of this page. For anyone interested in what pages have major issues
please click here for a PDF file reporting all de Kleist compromised journal pages.
Information Recorded in the Database
An accounting journal, by definition, contains a running log of company
activity, along with references to General Ledger accounts, which are
separate ledger books not available to this author. As such, the journal
books are not a chronological listing of instruments sold, repaired, and
shipped, but rather they contain entries for “acceptables” (today normally
referred to as “receivables”) and "liabilities." These two broad categories
are further broken down into many sub-categories. Some of these
sub-categories, such as those for various band organ customers or the
Rudolph Wurlitzer Company (the exclusive distributor for coin-operated
instruments), relate to new or repaired instruments, such as the Tonophone,
Pianino, Mandolin Quartette and various Band Organs, which are interspersed
with sales of extra music barrels or cylinders, music rolls, repair parts
and/or supplies. Only the entries specifically relating to the sale or
repair of instruments is included in the de Kleist database. The separate
sale of extra or replacement barrels, cylinders, music rolls, parts, and
supplies, regularly interspersed amongst the organ and coin-operated
instrument line items, are not included, nor is any cash, material,
machinery, stable, or any other sub-category accounting, all of which lay
outside the scope of this particular study.
Journal No. 3
The
cover page of the first and earliest journal book examined (see image at
right) for this study clearly bears the rubber stamped title “THE
DE KLEIST MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MFG. CO.” in purple ink, with “NORTH TONAWANDA,
N.Y.” in black ink stamped directly underneath. Then further down the page
and enclosed in brackets is the penciled notation “Journal No. 3 – 1903.”
The accounting data entries for Journal No. 3 begin appropriately on page 1
and thereafter extend on consecutive pages (except for a few blank pages) up
through page 598. Page 599, the last page in the book, is blank. At the very
top of each data page is a date heading, with the first page dated “Tuesday,
January 6, 1903.” Directly underneath the date heading on this first page is
a sub-heading: “The de Kleist Musical Instrument Manufacturing Company
begins business with the following.” This single, unique heading
precedes all accounting and descriptive data, and infers that this page
represented the first day of business for the newly organized de Kleist
company, formerly known as the North Tonawanda Barrel Organ Factory.
The first eight journal pages contain accounting divisions relating to
“Resources” and “Liabilities.” This accounting data infers but does not
directly show sales, repair, or shipping activity. However, what it does do
very well is provide an insightful picture of the company during its opening
days, the bank it dealt with, and who it used as suppliers. Amidst this data
are sub-sections for “Cash Accounts,” lists of purveyors owed money,
“Patents,” “General Expenses,” “Materials,” “Machinery,” and “Stable”
(harness, feed, etc.). Throughout the journal both general accounting and
instrument information is interspersed and sometimes very intermingled with
otherwise relatively uninteresting handwritten text. What this continual
mixing of detail means is that each page requires careful examination in
order to accurately cull out any instruments repaired or sold and shipped.
The first instrument noted is a 41 key style #18 organ, shown on page 9,
specifically dated December 31, 1902, and purchased by the Herschell
Spillman Company. As this first entry demonstrates some line items are
specifically dated, overriding the page heading date, but suggesting a date
on which the sale of the organ actually occurred.
De Kleist Journals and Wurlitzer Ledger Overlap
Journal books Nos. 3 and 4 dovetail nicely with the Wurlitzer 10,000
series ledgers, which begin to overlap with the de Kleist journals in
November of 1905. When comparing dates between the de Kleist Journals and
Wurlitzer Ledger the dates tend to generally correspond quite accurately,
but with a smattering of clearly obvious discrepancies, a few extreme enough
to suggest some sort of original recording error. This stated:
The de Kleist Journal and Wurlitzer Ledger dates correspond quite
accurately (1) if and when no extras are included, or (2) if and when
extras are included but any such extras are of the same exact date the
journal entry is made.
When extras are included, AND when the date of any such extras is
later than the de Kleist Journal entry date, the date in the Wurlitzer
Ledger is the “extras” date shown in the de Kleist Journal. This "extras"
date essentially represents the date for which a “hold to fill” period
terminates (whether stated in the Journal as such, or not) and the
sale/shipping event takes place.
Although most of the time the dates between the two above mentioned
documents are identical, it is also the case that occasionally the two dates
vary by one or two days maximum. But this minor variance can easily be
attributed to an entry delay by the de Kleist or Wurlitzer accounting
department, such as when entering a transaction on the next or following
work day.
Adding Current Historical Information
The database structures used to implement the de Kleist Journal databases
are designed to accommodate, in addition to the necessary fields to hold the
actual journal data, an additional field dedicated specifically to retain
author and/or reader provided historical information relative to a
particular instrument. This makes it possible for the web site authors, as
well as outside collectors, enthusiasts, and historians, to submit pertinent
historical information about a specific item, which can then be considered
for inclusion within the overall database structure.
Interesting Journal Oddities
Journal 3, page 573: June 25, 1905; In full payment of ???? Pianino
damaged by fire in RR wreck at Elgin, Ill, as per our proposition Dec
21, 1904; R.W.Co; $75.00
Tonophone cylinders and Keyboard Tonophone cylinders when purchased
apart from a Tonophone are called out separately, i.e., “Tonophone
Cylinder” or “KB Tonophone Cylinder.” The price for both is the same,
normally $20.00 each. In one instance, journal 3, page 582, a Tonophone
and KB Tonophone cylinder is mentioned on successive lines, both entries
with the same cylinder number 391 and the same $20 price. Was there a
difference between cylinders for regular and KB models?
Journal 3, page 582: There are groups of music rolls sold two
different ways, “Pianino Music Rolls” and “Tonophone Music rolls.” The
Tonophone Music Roll entry appears twice and is very clear. The two
different music roll categories are also next to each other. This page
contains the only instances of this unexpected music roll type that I
have seen to date. The roll numbers for both types are in the same 60 to
63 sequence and the price is $2.00 each. Is this an error, or does this
suggest that a regular or modified Pianino roll might have been used on
some remodeled Tonophones?
In Journal 4, page 24, a new Tonophone #9894, Oak case, was shipped
August 25, 1905, with a tuning & testing roll, and it was equipped with
a “new style wind chest.” Extras included Music roll 70 and a 110V D.C.
motor. The Tonophone was priced the same as a Pianino, $149.50, with
aforementioned extras added to that base price. This Tonophone is NOT
shown as a remodel. Roll 70 is probably a Pianino roll, as many new
Pianinos in this part of the journal ship with an extra roll #70. This
suggests that in the closing days of the Tonophone some of the remaining
stock may have been originally shipped with Pianino roll mechanisms and
new style wind chests. It’ll be interesting to see if more of these roll
operated Tonophone are mentioned.
Journal 4, page 61, New York C & H R R [New York Central & Hudson
River Railroad Company], Oct 2, 1905; Repairs of instrument damaged by
same being thrown over in car on switch, by another car being run in on
the switch at too high speed & striking first mentioned car.
In Journal 4, page 213, there is an order for 87 Pianino rolls with
a total cost of $88.74. The roll numbers range from roll #84 to #36,
with most of the rolls being numbered in the 80s. What is unusual is
that this is the first music roll order where the paper color is
mentioned, and specifically noted as “Purple Paper Rolls.” From this
journal entry it would seem that purple paper rolls were being cut by
de Kleist starting in April of 1906. This raises other questions, such as
what paper was used prior to the purple paper rolls, and when were the
red paper rolls introduced? Circa 1968-1969 this author vividly recalls
handing several pristine purple colored Pianino rolls, as well as maybe
two or three Wurlitzer 65-note rolls of the same purple color. The paper
texture and quality seemed similar to the standard Wurlitzer red paper
rolls, of which most collectors are familiar, but this author was never
certain as to the relationship between the early purple and red rolls,
or why purple paper rolls existed.
Journal 4, page 274, entry dated June 22, 1906: 1 Emerson motor 104V
– 60cyc. #313917 defective 3 hours trying to start; Freight to Emerson
El. Mfg. Co., St. Louis, Mo; $1.50.
Journal 4, page 349, entry dated August 15, 1906: Gear Drive
complete; Expressed to Western Piano Company, St. Louis, Mo; $7.25.
Journal 4, page 363, entry dated September 18, 1906: Buffalo Tool &
Machinery Co.; Bank of New York. Sept 18 – 2 Steam Engines & quantity of
black line pipe – as sold to your Mr. Warne – F.O.B. North Tonawanda,
N.Y.
Journal 4, page 422, entry dated November 12, 1906: 1 set parts to
change Pianino from belt to gear drive; Freight to R W Co, Chattanooga,
Tenn; $11.06.
Journal 4, page 459, entry dated December 17, 1906: 4 cast iron
worms & shafts; Expressed to Stanley Butte, Memphis, Tenn; ($2.75 each)
$8.60. [A cast iron shaft would have been relatively difficult and
expensive to machine compared to off-the-shelf steel hardware stock, and
it would have been fragile and subject to easy breakage compared to a
steel shaft. Thus it is presumed that the foregoing journal entry
describes a cast iron worm gear affixed to a steel shaft.]
Database Report Style Notes
Throughout the journals there are many band organ and coin-operated piano
repair and/or remodel entries. To make these notations easier to read commas
have sometimes been added to separate discrete elements that in the original
text tended to run together.
Report Header Style Notes:
The de Kleist Journal starts on page 1, dated Tuesday, January 6,
1903, and begins with the heading: "The de Kleist Musical Instrument
Manufacturing Company begins business with the following.
An asterisk (*) after a serial number flags the item as being a
first instance or occurrence within the ledger/database.
The dagger (†) after a style description flags a repaired item whose
model related information is copied from what is presumed to be the
initial or primary journal (sale) entry.
The "Destination" line, if present, follows this format: "Customer
Name" (if any given); plus the "Ship to Name" (if any given); plus City
and State (if any given). If no destination data is provided this line
will not be present.
The journal credit amount indicated for an entry is shown at the 2nd
data line's right hand margin.
The original ledger material has been slightly edited and obvious
spelling and location errors corrected, but in all instances the
original intent has been preserved. Otherwise the reader would be
confronted with an endless number or annoying (sic) notations.
Updating the Database
and Reporting Errors
Clicking
on the linked image to the right provides access to partial page images
showing instances of phrases, words, or names that have yet to be
interpreted with any assurance of correctness, or that may not yet be
discernible in any useful way. These images allow other interested parties
to participate in resolving vexing handwriting interpretation issues, all of
which have been previously studied by several individuals, but with no
unanimous or definitive interpretation forthcoming, and so additional
comments are solicited and welcome. Maybe someone "out there" on the World
Wide Web will have just the perfect combination of experience, knowledge,
and insight to provide the clarity needed to correctly comprehend what has
remained elusive up to this time.
The database is designed to additionally accommodate current historical
comments and other pertinent information relative to a particular
instrument, which, if submitted, will be considered for inclusion within the
database. To report errors and/or to submit new and/or supplemental
information regarding the de Kleist Journals please send corrections and/or
comments via a e-mail to
Distribution of Database Information Last Updated on June 16, 2014
The database PDF
report files require Adobe Acrobat Reader (or its equivalent) to view or print
their contents. The free Acrobat Reader can be downloaded from Adobe by
clicking on the icon at left.
Download the current database reports
as a PDF
file by clicking on the buttons shown below.
The de Kleist Journal
Pages (1903 ~ 1906)
265 pages.
233 pages.
270 pages.
236 pages.
32 pages.
6 pages
All database report information is
offered "as is," without any guarantee or warranty whatsoever of any kind,
neither stated, implied, nor inferred, as to the accuracy, correctness,
exactness, suitability, or usefulness of any content.
The de Kleist Journal data compiled and put into database
format by Terry Hathaway, and with appreciation to Q. David Bowers for
making the information available as part of a book project.
Consultation on interpretative issues: Q. David Bowers,
Matthew Caulfield, Dana Johnson & Art Reblitz.
The
cover page of the first and earliest journal book examined (see image at
right) for this study clearly bears the rubber stamped title “T
