Melting Chocolate
Chocolate: A True Story
For English-speaking audiences, the counterstatement was summarized from the perspective of Switzerland’s most important chocolate pioneer.
Melting Chocolate
Chocolate: A True Story
For English-speaking audiences, the counterstatement was summarized from the perspective of Switzerland’s most important chocolate pioneer.
Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies.
Summary of CHOCOBERN'S
Counterstatement
How a culinary heritage was wrongly pushed off its pedestal.
Summary of CHOCOBERN'S
Counterstatement
How a culinary heritage was wrongly pushed off its pedestal.
My name is Rudolf Lindt. I was born in Bern in 1854. Since my father had the same first name, I was later called Rodolphe. In 1879, I developed a process for homogenizing the structure of chocolate. At that time, the structure of conventional chocolate was heterogeneous. My innovative product, however, had a homogeneous structure. I tried to differentiate myself in the market by calling it “Chocolat Fondant”. For over 20 years, my melting chocolate came exclusively from Bern. Its success motivated the competition to copy my technique. Thus, my technical process spread and eventually became the standard in chocolate production. As a result, traditional chocolate was driven out of the market. The general use of my technique has led to the fact that melting chocolate is now simply called chocolate. In fact, there are only a few cities that can claim to be the birthplace of a globally consumed luxury food item. Yet this important story has been forgotten even in the city where I was born.
This counterstatement attempts to answer the question of why this culinary heritage is no longer remembered in Bern. The search for answers begins with the most popular biography, which can be found in the book entitled “Patriarchs.” According to the narrative in this book, I was a lazy greenhorn who only became a pioneer by pure luck. Furthermore, a judge is said to have sentenced me. For this reason, my successes are said to have been undeserved.
The book also describes a legend that is often interpreted as a harmless joke. It has even made its way into various Wikipedia entries about me. As a result, it has become the most well-known disparagement of my personality. In reality, however, my family has been struck by various tragedies. Disparaging remarks about me can therefore not possibly be meant ironically.
The legal facts are described quite differently in court rulings. This allows various untruths in the book to be identified. Thus, the counterstatement mutates into a revelation. This serves as an example of how important factchecking is. In “Patriarchs”, source texts originating from my opponents are listed. The disparaging remarks can therefore be attributed to a lack of objectivity.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that no court has convicted me. If one wishes to stick to the truth, the legend about my melting chocolate should not be spread any further.
Using a paradox, it is possible to deduce the potential consequences of the negative portrayal of my person. A conclusion can then be drawn. Information about the author of this revelation will follow at the end.
This counterstatement attempts to answer the question of why this culinary heritage is no longer remembered in Bern. The search for answers begins with the most popular biography, which can be found in the book entitled “Patriarchs.” According to the narrative in this book, I was a lazy greenhorn who only became a pioneer by pure luck. Furthermore, a judge is said to have sentenced me. For this reason, my successes are said to have been undeserved.
The book also describes a legend that is often interpreted as a harmless joke. It has even made its way into various Wikipedia entries about me. As a result, it has become the most well-known disparagement of my personality. In reality, however, my family has been struck by various tragedies. Disparaging remarks about me can therefore not possibly be meant ironically.
The legal facts are described quite differently in court rulings. This allows various untruths in the book to be identified. Thus, the counterstatement mutates into a revelation. This serves as an example of how important factchecking is. In “Patriarchs”, source texts originating from my opponents are listed. The disparaging remarks can therefore be attributed to a lack of objectivity.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that no court has convicted me. If one wishes to stick to the truth, the legend about my melting chocolate should not be spread any further.
Using a paradox, it is possible to deduce the potential consequences of the negative portrayal of my person. A conclusion can then be drawn. Information about the author of this revelation will follow at the end.
My name is Rudolf Lindt. I was born in Bern in 1854. Since my father had the same first name, I was later called Rodolphe. In 1879, I developed a process for homogenizing the structure of chocolate. At that time, the structure of conventional chocolate was heterogeneous. My innovative product, however, had a homogeneous structure. I tried to differentiate myself in the market by calling it “Chocolat Fondant”. For over 20 years, my melting chocolate came exclusively from Bern. Its success motivated the competition to copy my technique. Thus, my technical process spread and eventually became the standard in chocolate production. As a result, traditional chocolate was driven out of the market. The general use of my technique has led to the fact that melting chocolate is now simply called chocolate. In fact, there are only a few cities that can claim to be the birthplace of a globally consumed luxury food item. Yet this important story has been forgotten even in the city where I was born.
This counterstatement attempts to answer the question of why this culinary heritage is no longer remembered in Bern. The search for answers begins with the most popular biography, which can be found in the book entitled “Patriarchs.” According to the narrative in this book, I was a lazy greenhorn who only became a pioneer by pure luck. Furthermore, a judge is said to have sentenced me. For this reason, my successes are said to have been undeserved.
The book also describes a legend that is often interpreted as a harmless joke. It has even made its way into various Wikipedia entries about me. As a result, it has become the most well-known disparagement of my personality. In reality, however, my family has been struck by various tragedies. Disparaging remarks about me can therefore not possibly be meant ironically.
The legal facts are described quite differently in court rulings. This allows various untruths in the book to be identified. Thus, the counterstatement mutates into a revelation. This serves as an example of how important factchecking is. In “Patriarchs”, source texts originating from my opponents are listed. The disparaging remarks can therefore be attributed to a lack of objectivity.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that no court has convicted me. If one wishes to stick to the truth, the legend about my melting chocolate should not be spread any further.
Using a paradox, it is possible to deduce the potential consequences of the negative portrayal of my person. A conclusion can then be drawn. Information about the author of this revelation will follow at the end.
This counterstatement attempts to answer the question of why this culinary heritage is no longer remembered in Bern. The search for answers begins with the most popular biography, which can be found in the book entitled “Patriarchs.” According to the narrative in this book, I was a lazy greenhorn who only became a pioneer by pure luck. Furthermore, a judge is said to have sentenced me. For this reason, my successes are said to have been undeserved.
The book also describes a legend that is often interpreted as a harmless joke. It has even made its way into various Wikipedia entries about me. As a result, it has become the most well-known disparagement of my personality. In reality, however, my family has been struck by various tragedies. Disparaging remarks about me can therefore not possibly be meant ironically.
The legal facts are described quite differently in court rulings. This allows various untruths in the book to be identified. Thus, the counterstatement mutates into a revelation. This serves as an example of how important factchecking is. In “Patriarchs”, source texts originating from my opponents are listed. The disparaging remarks can therefore be attributed to a lack of objectivity.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that no court has convicted me. If one wishes to stick to the truth, the legend about my melting chocolate should not be spread any further.
Using a paradox, it is possible to deduce the potential consequences of the negative portrayal of my person. A conclusion can then be drawn. Information about the author of this revelation will follow at the end.
For 20 years, melting chocolate was an exclusive specialty from Bern. It even enjoyed worldwide fame, as its opponents had to admit without envy (Appeal of 1927, Plaintiff, p. 4). Is the “coincidental weekend” a fake? Is the irony behind the legend a fact? Was this cultural heritage rightly knocked off its pedestal? This revelation will shed light on the matter.
Summary
Legend
Summary
Legend
My invention is too often mentioned in connection with a legend. According to this legend, I supposedly forgot to turn off the machine when I left the factory on a Friday. Because of this oversight, the mixture is said to have stirred on its own over the weekend. When I returned to work on Monday, I am said to have discovered a completely new kind of chocolate. According to this narrative, modern chocolate would thus be the result of a lucky coincidence based on carelessness. Careless behavior can be attributed to inexperience. In this sense, I am described in various places of the book as a beginner who is said to have succeeded only thanks to a moment of luck. These descriptions can be categorized under “coincidence”.
Furthermore, it is claimed that I was vain. Because of my vanity, I am said to have rejected hard work and preferred leisure time. Since leisure activities depend on the weekend, these passages in the book can be grouped under the category “Weekend.” However, my achievements speak against such laziness. For instance, I was able to sell my company in 1899 for 1.5 million Swiss francs. Of that amount, 1.3 million was paid for goodwill. Today, that goodwill would be worth between 50.7 and 65 million Swiss francs. Based on current figures, I generated an annual surplus of 2.5 to 3.2 million francs starting in 1879. Later, the opposing party also justified the high price by citing the unique global reputation my name enjoyed in the year of the acquisition. If I had been lazy, I could hardly have built such a reputation. Actually, the high price would have to be called into question if the goodwill could have been achieved through laziness. Vanity is also a trait that can have a negative impact on a partnership. However, when it comes to the question of who to blame for the conflict, this trait makes perfect sense. The division into “Coincidence” and “Weekend” serves to make the connections between the legend and the text visible.
Only a simple method can be defined with a luck punch. To follow the logic of the legend, my method therefore had to be reduced to prolonged stirring. Cocoa consists of 50–60 percent fat. As a plant, it always contains some water as well. To achieve homogenization, the water content had to be reduced. To do this, I first developed the conching machine. This allowed the grinded mass to be made thinner and heated. The evaporation reduced water in the mass. To prevent drying out, I had to add cocoa butter during the conching process. The higher fat level liquefied the mass. Only then did the machine begin to stir, allowing unwanted flavors to escape along with the evaporated water.
The crystals are unstable in a liquid mass. As soon as the mass turns hard, the crystals stabilize. To control the crystallization process, I had to develop the technique of tempering. To do this, the viscous mass is exposed to a specific temperature interval after conching. The conched and tempered mass can then be molded into shapes.
If the conching machine had really run unattended throughout the entire weekend, the mixture would have dried out first and eventually burned. Thus, the fact-check of the legend fails on logical grounds. Consequently, the disparaging remarks in the book associated with the legend are also false.
The legend is phrased with a touch of irony. However, there was also a dark side to my life. These circumstances must be examined in the next section. Only then is it possible to rule out any ironic intent behind this negative portrayal of me.
Furthermore, it is claimed that I was vain. Because of my vanity, I am said to have rejected hard work and preferred leisure time. Since leisure activities depend on the weekend, these passages in the book can be grouped under the category “Weekend.” However, my achievements speak against such laziness. For instance, I was able to sell my company in 1899 for 1.5 million Swiss francs. Of that amount, 1.3 million was paid for goodwill. Today, that goodwill would be worth between 50.7 and 65 million Swiss francs. Based on current figures, I generated an annual surplus of 2.5 to 3.2 million francs starting in 1879. Later, the opposing party also justified the high price by citing the unique global reputation my name enjoyed in the year of the acquisition. If I had been lazy, I could hardly have built such a reputation. Actually, the high price would have to be called into question if the goodwill could have been achieved through laziness. Vanity is also a trait that can have a negative impact on a partnership. However, when it comes to the question of who to blame for the conflict, this trait makes perfect sense. The division into “Coincidence” and “Weekend” serves to make the connections between the legend and the text visible.
Only a simple method can be defined with a luck punch. To follow the logic of the legend, my method therefore had to be reduced to prolonged stirring. Cocoa consists of 50–60 percent fat. As a plant, it always contains some water as well. To achieve homogenization, the water content had to be reduced. To do this, I first developed the conching machine. This allowed the grinded mass to be made thinner and heated. The evaporation reduced water in the mass. To prevent drying out, I had to add cocoa butter during the conching process. The higher fat level liquefied the mass. Only then did the machine begin to stir, allowing unwanted flavors to escape along with the evaporated water.
The crystals are unstable in a liquid mass. As soon as the mass turns hard, the crystals stabilize. To control the crystallization process, I had to develop the technique of tempering. To do this, the viscous mass is exposed to a specific temperature interval after conching. The conched and tempered mass can then be molded into shapes.
If the conching machine had really run unattended throughout the entire weekend, the mixture would have dried out first and eventually burned. Thus, the fact-check of the legend fails on logical grounds. Consequently, the disparaging remarks in the book associated with the legend are also false.
The legend is phrased with a touch of irony. However, there was also a dark side to my life. These circumstances must be examined in the next section. Only then is it possible to rule out any ironic intent behind this negative portrayal of me.
My invention is too often mentioned in connection with a legend. According to this legend, I supposedly forgot to turn off the machine when I left the factory on a Friday. Because of this oversight, the mixture is said to have stirred on its own over the weekend. When I returned to work on Monday, I am said to have discovered a completely new kind of chocolate. According to this narrative, modern chocolate would thus be the result of a lucky coincidence based on carelessness. Careless behavior can be attributed to inexperience. In this sense, I am described in various places of the book as a beginner who is said to have succeeded only thanks to a moment of luck. These descriptions can be categorized under “coincidence”.
Furthermore, it is claimed that I was vain. Because of my vanity, I am said to have rejected hard work and preferred leisure time. Since leisure activities depend on the weekend, these passages in the book can be grouped under the category “Weekend.” However, my achievements speak against such laziness. For instance, I was able to sell my company in 1899 for 1.5 million Swiss francs. Of that amount, 1.3 million was paid for goodwill. Today, that goodwill would be worth between 50.7 and 65 million Swiss francs. Based on current figures, I generated an annual surplus of 2.5 to 3.2 million francs starting in 1879. Later, the opposing party also justified the high price by citing the unique global reputation my name enjoyed in the year of the acquisition. If I had been lazy, I could hardly have built such a reputation. Actually, the high price would have to be called into question if the goodwill could have been achieved through laziness. Vanity is also a trait that can have a negative impact on a partnership. However, when it comes to the question of who to blame for the conflict, this trait makes perfect sense. The division into “Coincidence” and “Weekend” serves to make the connections between the legend and the text visible.
Only a simple method can be defined with a luck punch. To follow the logic of the legend, my method therefore had to be reduced to prolonged stirring. Cocoa consists of 50–60 percent fat. As a plant, it always contains some water as well. To achieve homogenization, the water content had to be reduced. To do this, I first developed the conching machine. This allowed the grinded mass to be made thinner and heated. The evaporation reduced water in the mass. To prevent drying out, I had to add cocoa butter during the conching process. The higher fat level liquefied the mass. Only then did the machine begin to stir, allowing unwanted flavors to escape along with the evaporated water.
The crystals are unstable in a liquid mass. As soon as the mass turns hard, the crystals stabilize. To control the crystallization process, I had to develop the technique of tempering. To do this, the viscous mass is exposed to a specific temperature interval after conching. The conched and tempered mass can then be molded into shapes.
If the conching machine had really run unattended throughout the entire weekend, the mixture would have dried out first and eventually burned. Thus, the fact-check of the legend fails on logical grounds. Consequently, the disparaging remarks in the book associated with the legend are also false.
The legend is phrased with a touch of irony. However, there was also a dark side to my life. These circumstances must be examined in the next section. Only then is it possible to rule out any ironic intent behind this negative portrayal of me.
Furthermore, it is claimed that I was vain. Because of my vanity, I am said to have rejected hard work and preferred leisure time. Since leisure activities depend on the weekend, these passages in the book can be grouped under the category “Weekend.” However, my achievements speak against such laziness. For instance, I was able to sell my company in 1899 for 1.5 million Swiss francs. Of that amount, 1.3 million was paid for goodwill. Today, that goodwill would be worth between 50.7 and 65 million Swiss francs. Based on current figures, I generated an annual surplus of 2.5 to 3.2 million francs starting in 1879. Later, the opposing party also justified the high price by citing the unique global reputation my name enjoyed in the year of the acquisition. If I had been lazy, I could hardly have built such a reputation. Actually, the high price would have to be called into question if the goodwill could have been achieved through laziness. Vanity is also a trait that can have a negative impact on a partnership. However, when it comes to the question of who to blame for the conflict, this trait makes perfect sense. The division into “Coincidence” and “Weekend” serves to make the connections between the legend and the text visible.
Only a simple method can be defined with a luck punch. To follow the logic of the legend, my method therefore had to be reduced to prolonged stirring. Cocoa consists of 50–60 percent fat. As a plant, it always contains some water as well. To achieve homogenization, the water content had to be reduced. To do this, I first developed the conching machine. This allowed the grinded mass to be made thinner and heated. The evaporation reduced water in the mass. To prevent drying out, I had to add cocoa butter during the conching process. The higher fat level liquefied the mass. Only then did the machine begin to stir, allowing unwanted flavors to escape along with the evaporated water.
The crystals are unstable in a liquid mass. As soon as the mass turns hard, the crystals stabilize. To control the crystallization process, I had to develop the technique of tempering. To do this, the viscous mass is exposed to a specific temperature interval after conching. The conched and tempered mass can then be molded into shapes.
If the conching machine had really run unattended throughout the entire weekend, the mixture would have dried out first and eventually burned. Thus, the fact-check of the legend fails on logical grounds. Consequently, the disparaging remarks in the book associated with the legend are also false.
The legend is phrased with a touch of irony. However, there was also a dark side to my life. These circumstances must be examined in the next section. Only then is it possible to rule out any ironic intent behind this negative portrayal of me.
Before / After: Originally, chocolate had a rather grainy texture, as the cocoa particles and sugar crystals remained separate. It was only through the Berner process that the texture could be homogenized. This also improved the appearance of milk chocolate (slide the bar to the right or left).
Summary
Conflict
summary
Conflict
In 1899, I sold my factory to a company in Zurich. According to the narrative in the book, I am said to have subsequently worked against the Zurich management in the merged company. The negative traits attributed to me in connection with the legend now make sense, if they didn’t already.
In connection with a real estate transaction I was involved in, the book describes events that could be interpreted as criminal offenses on my part. According to this narrative, I am said to have been solely responsible for the breakup in 1905. After my resignation, I am also said to have engaged in unfair competition against my former company and to have been convicted of this in 1909.
A location clause in the 1899 purchase contract is not mentioned in the book. Following the merger, the autonomous operations at the Zurich and Bern locations should have been regulated. However, this contractual clause was never implemented. Furthermore, in 1905, the board of directors decided that the German market would no longer be supplied from Bern, but only from Zurich. As a result, the Bernes site would have lost much of its significance within the merged company. This drastic decision is also not mentioned in the book. This information comes from the court ruling against my brother. He and my cousin had already been working for me before the merger. They left the merged company at the same time as I did.
In 1906, they founded A & W Lindt. By opening this second chocolate factory, they violated the non-compete clause in the employment contracts with their former employer. The former employer subsequently sought the contractual damages. Three judgments were rendered in these civil lawsuits in 1909. One of the judgments concerned the former production manager at the Bernese site. My cousin was found not guilty. My brother, on the other hand, was ordered to pay damages. Seven days after my brother’s conviction, my death had to be announced. As if these circumstances weren’t bad enough, the claim in the book is also false. At no time was I ever legally convicted.
Following my death, another civil lawsuit was filed against A & W Lindt. In 1927, my brother and my cousin were ordered to pay damages of 800,000 Swiss francs for unfair competition. As general partners, they were liable in solidarity with their private assets. The plaintiff, however, had sought damages in the amount of 4 million Swiss francs. To that end, they tried to claim additional damages, which they alleged I had caused during my active career. After my death, the liability for damages was said to have passed to my brother as my sole heir. In the judgment, however, the court concluded that no culpable misconduct on my part had been proven. Thus, the judge effectively granted me a posthumous exoneration.
The accusations in the book can thus be clearly disproved. Both parties appealed the second instance ruling to the Federal Supreme Court. Three days after the briefs were filed, my brother passed away. In 1928, the two parties reached an out-of-court settlement. Even while still in mourning, my nephew had to sign on behalf of his dead father. This rendered the pending appeal proceedings moot. As part of the settlement, A & W Lindt was transferred to the plaintiff’s ownership and was immediately liquidated. In the 1930s, the merged company also closed its facility in Bern. Thus, the craft that had revolutionized the global chocolate market disappeared in the oldest district of Switzerland’s federal city.
In the book, however, the settlement is incorrectly placed before my brother’s death. As a result, the tragic event is perceived merely as a footnote, and the rest of the narrative can be interpreted ironically. Only with the correct chronology does it become clear just how much the Bernese side was weakened by the death. This was followed by the closure of both plants. The loss of jobs led to further personal tragedies. Under these circumstances, it should now be clear to everyone why there is no room for jokes in a story about me. A review of the sources will also reveal that the irony is partly based on the subjective perception of the Zurich side.
In connection with a real estate transaction I was involved in, the book describes events that could be interpreted as criminal offenses on my part. According to this narrative, I am said to have been solely responsible for the breakup in 1905. After my resignation, I am also said to have engaged in unfair competition against my former company and to have been convicted of this in 1909.
A location clause in the 1899 purchase contract is not mentioned in the book. Following the merger, the autonomous operations at the Zurich and Bern locations should have been regulated. However, this contractual clause was never implemented. Furthermore, in 1905, the board of directors decided that the German market would no longer be supplied from Bern, but only from Zurich. As a result, the Bernes site would have lost much of its significance within the merged company. This drastic decision is also not mentioned in the book. This information comes from the court ruling against my brother. He and my cousin had already been working for me before the merger. They left the merged company at the same time as I did.
In 1906, they founded A & W Lindt. By opening this second chocolate factory, they violated the non-compete clause in the employment contracts with their former employer. The former employer subsequently sought the contractual damages. Three judgments were rendered in these civil lawsuits in 1909. One of the judgments concerned the former production manager at the Bernese site. My cousin was found not guilty. My brother, on the other hand, was ordered to pay damages. Seven days after my brother’s conviction, my death had to be announced. As if these circumstances weren’t bad enough, the claim in the book is also false. At no time was I ever legally convicted.
Following my death, another civil lawsuit was filed against A & W Lindt. In 1927, my brother and my cousin were ordered to pay damages of 800,000 Swiss francs for unfair competition. As general partners, they were liable in solidarity with their private assets. The plaintiff, however, had sought damages in the amount of 4 million Swiss francs. To that end, they tried to claim additional damages, which they alleged I had caused during my active career. After my death, the liability for damages was said to have passed to my brother as my sole heir. In the judgment, however, the court concluded that no culpable misconduct on my part had been proven. Thus, the judge effectively granted me a posthumous exoneration.
The accusations in the book can thus be clearly disproved. Both parties appealed the second instance ruling to the Federal Supreme Court. Three days after the briefs were filed, my brother passed away. In 1928, the two parties reached an out-of-court settlement. Even while still in mourning, my nephew had to sign on behalf of his dead father. This rendered the pending appeal proceedings moot. As part of the settlement, A & W Lindt was transferred to the plaintiff’s ownership and was immediately liquidated. In the 1930s, the merged company also closed its facility in Bern. Thus, the craft that had revolutionized the global chocolate market disappeared in the oldest district of Switzerland’s federal city.
In the book, however, the settlement is incorrectly placed before my brother’s death. As a result, the tragic event is perceived merely as a footnote, and the rest of the narrative can be interpreted ironically. Only with the correct chronology does it become clear just how much the Bernese side was weakened by the death. This was followed by the closure of both plants. The loss of jobs led to further personal tragedies. Under these circumstances, it should now be clear to everyone why there is no room for jokes in a story about me. A review of the sources will also reveal that the irony is partly based on the subjective perception of the Zurich side.
In 1899, I sold my factory to a company in Zurich. According to the narrative in the book, I am said to have subsequently worked against the Zurich management in the merged company. The negative traits attributed to me in connection with the legend now make sense, if they didn’t already.
In connection with a real estate transaction I was involved in, the book describes events that could be interpreted as criminal offenses on my part. According to this narrative, I am said to have been solely responsible for the breakup in 1905. After my resignation, I am also said to have engaged in unfair competition against my former company and to have been convicted of this in 1909.
A location clause in the 1899 purchase contract is not mentioned in the book. Following the merger, the autonomous operations at the Zurich and Bern locations should have been regulated. However, this contractual clause was never implemented. Furthermore, in 1905, the board of directors decided that the German market would no longer be supplied from Bern, but only from Zurich. As a result, the Bernes site would have lost much of its significance within the merged company. This drastic decision is also not mentioned in the book. This information comes from the court ruling against my brother. He and my cousin had already been working for me before the merger. They left the merged company at the same time as I did.
In 1906, they founded A & W Lindt. By opening this second chocolate factory, they violated the non-compete clause in the employment contracts with their former employer. The former employer subsequently sought the contractual damages. Three judgments were rendered in these civil lawsuits in 1909. One of the judgments concerned the former production manager at the Bernese site. My cousin was found not guilty. My brother, on the other hand, was ordered to pay damages. Seven days after my brother’s conviction, my death had to be announced. As if these circumstances weren’t bad enough, the claim in the book is also false. At no time was I ever legally convicted.
Following my death, another civil lawsuit was filed against A & W Lindt. In 1927, my brother and my cousin were ordered to pay damages of 800,000 Swiss francs for unfair competition. As general partners, they were liable in solidarity with their private assets. The plaintiff, however, had sought damages in the amount of 4 million Swiss francs. To that end, they tried to claim additional damages, which they alleged I had caused during my active career. After my death, the liability for damages was said to have passed to my brother as my sole heir. In the judgment, however, the court concluded that no culpable misconduct on my part had been proven. Thus, the judge effectively granted me a posthumous exoneration.
The accusations in the book can thus be clearly disproved. Both parties appealed the second instance ruling to the Federal Supreme Court. Three days after the briefs were filed, my brother passed away. In 1928, the two parties reached an out-of-court settlement. Even while still in mourning, my nephew had to sign on behalf of his dead father. This rendered the pending appeal proceedings moot. As part of the settlement, A & W Lindt was transferred to the plaintiff’s ownership and was immediately liquidated. In the 1930s, the merged company also closed its facility in Bern. Thus, the craft that had revolutionized the global chocolate market disappeared in the oldest district of Switzerland’s federal city.
In the book, however, the settlement is incorrectly placed before my brother’s death. As a result, the tragic event is perceived merely as a footnote, and the rest of the narrative can be interpreted ironically. Only with the correct chronology does it become clear just how much the Bernese side was weakened by the death. This was followed by the closure of both plants. The loss of jobs led to further personal tragedies. Under these circumstances, it should now be clear to everyone why there is no room for jokes in a story about me. A review of the sources will also reveal that the irony is partly based on the subjective perception of the Zurich side..
In connection with a real estate transaction I was involved in, the book describes events that could be interpreted as criminal offenses on my part. According to this narrative, I am said to have been solely responsible for the breakup in 1905. After my resignation, I am also said to have engaged in unfair competition against my former company and to have been convicted of this in 1909.
A location clause in the 1899 purchase contract is not mentioned in the book. Following the merger, the autonomous operations at the Zurich and Bern locations should have been regulated. However, this contractual clause was never implemented. Furthermore, in 1905, the board of directors decided that the German market would no longer be supplied from Bern, but only from Zurich. As a result, the Bernes site would have lost much of its significance within the merged company. This drastic decision is also not mentioned in the book. This information comes from the court ruling against my brother. He and my cousin had already been working for me before the merger. They left the merged company at the same time as I did.
In 1906, they founded A & W Lindt. By opening this second chocolate factory, they violated the non-compete clause in the employment contracts with their former employer. The former employer subsequently sought the contractual damages. Three judgments were rendered in these civil lawsuits in 1909. One of the judgments concerned the former production manager at the Bernese site. My cousin was found not guilty. My brother, on the other hand, was ordered to pay damages. Seven days after my brother’s conviction, my death had to be announced. As if these circumstances weren’t bad enough, the claim in the book is also false. At no time was I ever legally convicted.
Following my death, another civil lawsuit was filed against A & W Lindt. In 1927, my brother and my cousin were ordered to pay damages of 800,000 Swiss francs for unfair competition. As general partners, they were liable in solidarity with their private assets. The plaintiff, however, had sought damages in the amount of 4 million Swiss francs. To that end, they tried to claim additional damages, which they alleged I had caused during my active career. After my death, the liability for damages was said to have passed to my brother as my sole heir. In the judgment, however, the court concluded that no culpable misconduct on my part had been proven. Thus, the judge effectively granted me a posthumous exoneration.
The accusations in the book can thus be clearly disproved. Both parties appealed the second instance ruling to the Federal Supreme Court. Three days after the briefs were filed, my brother passed away. In 1928, the two parties reached an out-of-court settlement. Even while still in mourning, my nephew had to sign on behalf of his dead father. This rendered the pending appeal proceedings moot. As part of the settlement, A & W Lindt was transferred to the plaintiff’s ownership and was immediately liquidated. In the 1930s, the merged company also closed its facility in Bern. Thus, the craft that had revolutionized the global chocolate market disappeared in the oldest district of Switzerland’s federal city.
In the book, however, the settlement is incorrectly placed before my brother’s death. As a result, the tragic event is perceived merely as a footnote, and the rest of the narrative can be interpreted ironically. Only with the correct chronology does it become clear just how much the Bernese side was weakened by the death. This was followed by the closure of both plants. The loss of jobs led to further personal tragedies. Under these circumstances, it should now be clear to everyone why there is no room for jokes in a story about me. A review of the sources will also reveal that the irony is partly based on the subjective perception of the Zurich side..
Summary
Sources
summary
Sources
The book “Patriarchs” includes a bibliography. It lists “Pioneers of Business and Technology: Sprüngli and Lindt”. This biography, published in 1970, was written by H. R. Schmid. To mark the 125th anniversary of the merged company, his version was also published under the title “125 Years of Bringing Pleasure”. The coincidence is mentioned only in passing. Otherwise, the text is written in a very factual style.
Another source listed is the company biography published in 1995, titled “150 Years of Bringing Pleasure.” It was written by P. Treichler and G. Corradi. The legend appears in this book for the first time. In the text, it is already linked to other disparaging remarks. The section about the time we spent together is titled “A Time of Wars and Crises.” My nephew was born in 1905. So, in the year of the company’s anniversary, he turned 90. During the time of wars and crises, he lost his father. He was still in mourning when he was forced to step in for the settlement negotiations. The way the anniversary was celebrated at Lake Zurich was inconsiderate toward him.
The following insights can be drawn from the source analysis: During the research for “Patriarchs”, mainly existing texts were accepted at face value. The legend with the associated negative connotations is based on the company biography published in 1995, which was written by the opposite party involved in the dispute. Consequently, there can be no objectivity. The description of the dispute, however, follows more closely the account given in the biography from 1970.
The exception to this is the incorrect chronology surrounding my brother’s death. Furthermore, there is no indication in any source that I was convinced. These errors in the book cannot be explained. What is certain, however, is that the version in question is not only too subjective for a biography, but also too incorrect. The version in “Patriarchs” is, in fact, a story written to disadvantage the Bernese side.
The author is also a historian. For this reason, his version seems particularly professional. As a result, his text is frequently cited by the media. One example of this is “Switzerland and Chocolate.” Although the legend is illogical, it is given a platform in this documentary film. Thus, it became the most well-known devaluation of my innovation. It can even be found on Wikipedia. Today, the legend is probably better known than my melting chocolate, which was, after all, the first modern chocolate.
Another source listed is the company biography published in 1995, titled “150 Years of Bringing Pleasure.” It was written by P. Treichler and G. Corradi. The legend appears in this book for the first time. In the text, it is already linked to other disparaging remarks. The section about the time we spent together is titled “A Time of Wars and Crises.” My nephew was born in 1905. So, in the year of the company’s anniversary, he turned 90. During the time of wars and crises, he lost his father. He was still in mourning when he was forced to step in for the settlement negotiations. The way the anniversary was celebrated at Lake Zurich was inconsiderate toward him.
The following insights can be drawn from the source analysis: During the research for “Patriarchs”, mainly existing texts were accepted at face value. The legend with the associated negative connotations is based on the company biography published in 1995, which was written by the opposite party involved in the dispute. Consequently, there can be no objectivity. The description of the dispute, however, follows more closely the account given in the biography from 1970.
The exception to this is the incorrect chronology surrounding my brother’s death. Furthermore, there is no indication in any source that I was convinced. These errors in the book cannot be explained. What is certain, however, is that the version in question is not only too subjective for a biography, but also too incorrect. The version in “Patriarchs” is, in fact, a story written to disadvantage the Bernese side.
The author is also a historian. For this reason, his version seems particularly professional. As a result, his text is frequently cited by the media. One example of this is “Switzerland and Chocolate.” Although the legend is illogical, it is given a platform in this documentary film. Thus, it became the most well-known devaluation of my innovation. It can even be found on Wikipedia. Today, the legend is probably better known than my melting chocolate, which was, after all, the first modern chocolate.
The book “Patriarchs” includes a bibliography. It lists “Pioneers of Business and Technology: Sprüngli and Lindt”. This biography, published in 1970, was written by H. R. Schmid. To mark the 125th anniversary of the merged company, his version was also published under the title “125 Years of Bringing Pleasure”. The coincidence is mentioned only in passing. Otherwise, the text is written in a very factual style.
Another source listed is the company biography published in 1995, titled “150 Years of Bringing Pleasure.” It was written by P. Treichler and G. Corradi. The legend appears in this book for the first time. In the text, it is already linked to other disparaging remarks. The section about the time we spent together is titled “A Time of Wars and Crises.” My nephew was born in 1905. So, in the year of the company’s anniversary, he turned 90. During the time of wars and crises, he lost his father. He was still in mourning when he was forced to step in for the settlement negotiations. The way the anniversary was celebrated at Lake Zurich was inconsiderate toward him.
The following insights can be drawn from the source analysis: During the research for “Patriarchs”, mainly existing texts were accepted at face value. The legend with the associated negative connotations is based on the company biography published in 1995, which was written by the opposite party involved in the dispute. Consequently, there can be no objectivity. The description of the dispute, however, follows more closely the account given in the biography from 1970.
The exception to this is the incorrect chronology surrounding my brother’s death. Furthermore, there is no indication in any source that I was convinced. These errors in the book cannot be explained. What is certain, however, is that the version in question is not only too subjective for a biography, but also too incorrect. The version in “Patriarchs” is, in fact, a story written to disadvantage the Bernese side.
The author is also a historian. For this reason, his version seems particularly professional. As a result, his text is frequently cited by the media. One example of this is “Switzerland and Chocolate.” Although the legend is illogical, it is given a platform in this documentary film. Thus, it became the most well-known devaluation of my innovation. It can even be found on Wikipedia. Today, the legend is probably better known than my melting chocolate, which was, after all, the first modern chocolate.
Another source listed is the company biography published in 1995, titled “150 Years of Bringing Pleasure.” It was written by P. Treichler and G. Corradi. The legend appears in this book for the first time. In the text, it is already linked to other disparaging remarks. The section about the time we spent together is titled “A Time of Wars and Crises.” My nephew was born in 1905. So, in the year of the company’s anniversary, he turned 90. During the time of wars and crises, he lost his father. He was still in mourning when he was forced to step in for the settlement negotiations. The way the anniversary was celebrated at Lake Zurich was inconsiderate toward him.
The following insights can be drawn from the source analysis: During the research for “Patriarchs”, mainly existing texts were accepted at face value. The legend with the associated negative connotations is based on the company biography published in 1995, which was written by the opposite party involved in the dispute. Consequently, there can be no objectivity. The description of the dispute, however, follows more closely the account given in the biography from 1970.
The exception to this is the incorrect chronology surrounding my brother’s death. Furthermore, there is no indication in any source that I was convinced. These errors in the book cannot be explained. What is certain, however, is that the version in question is not only too subjective for a biography, but also too incorrect. The version in “Patriarchs” is, in fact, a story written to disadvantage the Bernese side.
The author is also a historian. For this reason, his version seems particularly professional. As a result, his text is frequently cited by the media. One example of this is “Switzerland and Chocolate.” Although the legend is illogical, it is given a platform in this documentary film. Thus, it became the most well-known devaluation of my innovation. It can even be found on Wikipedia. Today, the legend is probably better known than my melting chocolate, which was, after all, the first modern chocolate.
Summary
Afterwords
summary
Afterword
Felix has written down the true story of my achievement. He was born in Bern and grew up in the surrounding area. To preserve this cultural heritage, he founded Chocobern. Since January 2020, he has been accompanying guests through Switzerland’s most extensive chocolate history, sharing his local knowledge with them. Now, one could accuse him of trivialising the story about myself. Moreover, since the broadcast of “Switzerland and Chocolate,” he has been repeatedly asked about the legend. However, a complete explanation of the background is not possible. He has therefore decided to publish a counterstatement to the version presented in “Patriarchs.” Interested guests can be referred to this website in the future.
With Felix, guests can enjoy various specialties that sweeten up their stay in Bern. I can therefore recommend a visit to him to every chocolate lover. You can learn more about his offerings related to Bern’s chocolate side at the following link.
With Felix, guests can enjoy various specialties that sweeten up their stay in Bern. I can therefore recommend a visit to him to every chocolate lover. You can learn more about his offerings related to Bern’s chocolate side at the following link.
Felix has written down the true story of my achievement. He was born in Bern and grew up in the surrounding area. To preserve this cultural heritage, he founded Chocobern. Since January 2020, he has been accompanying guests through Switzerland’s most extensive chocolate history, sharing his local knowledge with them. Now, one could accuse him of trivialising the story about myself. Moreover, since the broadcast of “Switzerland and Chocolate,” he has been repeatedly asked about the legend. However, a complete explanation of the background is not possible. He has therefore decided to publish a counterstatement to the version presented in “Patriarchs.” Interested guests can be referred to this website in the future.
With Felix, guests can enjoy various specialties that sweeten up their stay in Bern. I can therefore recommend a visit to him to every chocolate lover. You can learn more about his offerings related to Bern’s chocolate side at the following link.
With Felix, guests can enjoy various specialties that sweeten up their stay in Bern. I can therefore recommend a visit to him to every chocolate lover. You can learn more about his offerings related to Bern’s chocolate side at the following link.
