Hence the IMHO Jim. I'm going on what I know of the rest of his material. This is just one of his many pieces that don't have anything to corroborate it. In other words his version is the only one prior to it appearing in his volumes. Perhaps when you've had a serious close look at all of his material you would like to pick fault with what I have to say.

Jon,
I don't know how close Lohr's 1901 adaptation is to the published original. I'm also no good at ABC but I could give you the dots easily enough or scan the sheet and email you it.