Saturday, August 19, 2017

A Flock of Falcons

Here’s a couple that I just like, even though there’s not much in the way of quality going on here:


The one has a wartime, plastic nose – the kind that never seems to work very well – and both are fairly plain, nose drive pencils . . . with two things going for them.  First, they have a really cool name on the clip:


“Falcon.”  Additionally, both have the same message printed on the barrels.  I’ve seen a few other examples, and every one I see has this same lettering:


“Let US Not Forget Pearl Harbor.”

Friday, August 18, 2017

Maybe Not Entirely Correct

Recently, The Pennant asked me to rework my series of articles concerning the history of the Faber houses of A.W. Faber and Eberhard Faber (I added some information concerning the third firm, Johann Faber, while I was at it).

Both here and in The Pennant arttcle, I addressed claims by the German A.W. Faber firm that Eberhard Faber was merely an American agent for its products, and specifically that Eberhard Faber sold nothing other than A.W. Faber products prior to 1894, when the German house terminated the American agency.

The evidence tends to support A.W. Faber’s claim: although Eberhard Faber was a prolific registrant of trademarks, the Eberhard Faber name was not registered for trademark protection until 1920, suggesting that Eberhard was not using his own name in commerce, but that of his German relatives instead.

I do, however, have a bit of evidence to suggest that the name “E. Faber” was in use much earlier than the trademark history suggests:


I’m pretty sure this one came from an online auction, because as plain as it looks, I’m not sure I would have taken the time to read the imprint otherwise:


“E. Faber.NY / Pat. Jan.25,1881."   A patent issued in 1881 would have been good for a period of 17 years, or until 1898 – that doesn’t quite get us back to before 1894, the date before which A.W. Faber claimed Eberhard sold only products marked with the German house’s name . . . but it’s very close.

Patent number 237,005 was issued to Bradley A. Fiske of Napierville, Illinois:


It was his second patent.  His first, number 226,607, was also for a pencil, issued on April 20, 1880:


The year after Fiske’s second patent was issued, in 1882, he relocated to New York, where his next patent, for a penholder (number 255,272), was assigned to Eberhard Faber.  In 1883, another Fiske patent, number 272,948, also for a mechanical pencil, was assigned not to Faber, but to a man named Bernard Hecht, and the patent indicates that Fiske had moved on to Newport, Rhode Island.

Based on Fiske’s history, it appears that his association with Faber was fleeting, and in 1882.  Would Eberhard Faber sit on a newly acquired patent for more than twelve years before putting it into production?  I don’t think that’s likely.

What I do think is likely is that Eberhard Faber was quietly bilding up its own reputation apart from (but derived from) A.W. Faber, and the omission of a trademark filing appears to be an attempt to fly under the radar rather than a historical testament to the accuracy of A.W. Faber’s claim.   By  the name “E.Faber” was finally registered as a trademark, on an application not filed until September 27, 1946, the coast was clear, and Eberhard Faber claimed to have been using the name on lead pencils since 1861:


. . . and on mechanical pencils since 1919.  Now we know that isn’t correct.

Thursday, August 17, 2017

Knowledge Converts the Leftovers to the Prize

I don’t remember how or when this one came my way.  I only remember that it wasn’t what interested me when I rolled the dice online:


I also remember being disappointed in whatever the other item was that came with it, and how quickly I put the other one aside to look at this one more closely, hoping to find something that would make the investment worthwhile.  The nose is a little different from the usual fare:


But the eureka moment arrived when, loupe in hand, I could make out something on the barrel:


“Patented  Jan. 1, 1850."  The date is one that sticks in your mind after you’ve researched patents for awhile, since so few were issued prior to the Civil War.  This date refers to patent number 6,981 issued to Albert G. Bagley:


What’s the most interesting to me is that all the examples I’ve seen with Bagley’s patent date stamped on them have been combination dip pen/pencil writing instruments – not pencils only.  However, the title of Bagley’s patent is “Pen or pencil case,” not “and” – so I suppose it makes sense that one might turn up with a pencil only.

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Three Interesting Rex Patent Pencils

One of my top priorities when I reorganized things around the museum was to round up all of the pencils made by the Rex Manufacturing Company and display them all together, so that I could better track who Rex was making things for, and when.  In the course of doing so, I (re)discovered three that I’ve been meaning to write about here.

For starters:


This one is marked “Conjeco” on the clip:


And it has the August 4, 1925 patent date on the upper section:


This one slipped into the dead letter office because I could make neither heads nor tails of the name . . . until I was researching the “Manjeco” the other day, which was a contraction of the Manufacturing Jewelers Company (see http://leadheadpencils.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-manjeco.html), and I wondered whether this might be something along the lines of “Consolidated Jewelers’ Company.”  The only reference I could find to the company comes in what google calls a snippet view from The Jewelers’ Circular in 1924 – but the index listing shows more than the view itself:


The next Rex pencil I've got to show you is the larger of the two in this next picture:


Both are marked “Edison,” and I’m only counting the larger one as one of my three interesting pencils today, since I’ve already written about the ringtop (see http://leadheadpencils.blogspot.com/2015/01/two-out-of-four-horsemen-aint-bad.html):


The larger has the “four horsemen” patents on the top, indicating later production:


But what makes it noteworthy to me is the great imprint on the clip:


Unlike the block type found on the imprint, the full-sized version has Edison’s trademarked logo, which is included in American Writing Instrument Trademarks 1870-1953:


From this we know that at least in 1920, when the trademark application was filed, the president of the Edison Pen Company was George S. Bernard, and the company was already located in Petersburg, Virginia.  It was also the only trademark Bernard ever filed.

My third interesting Rex (for now) is this one:


It’s marked on the barrel: “Laughlin / Detroit, Mich.”


It’s a bit earlier than the other two I’ve shown you today, stamped with McNary’s original patent of February 19, 1924:


As with the Edison, I’ve written about the Laughlin before – in fact, I’ve written about a pencil nearly identical to this one (see http://leadheadpencils.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-long-awaited-laughlin-article.html).  However, what interested me about this one was a unique bit of stamping I haven’t run across before:


“Pat. Pend.” conspicuously stamped on the top side of the clip.

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Filling In More of the Ajax Story

The Ajax appears on page 18 of The Catalogue, and at the time I wrote the book, all I knew of the brand made it appear to be a one-trick pony:


Each is marked only on the cap with the AJAX logo, so I’ve never put much stock in what colors they come in (for example, the Weidlich Pen Co. of Cincinnati is along the same lines; mixing and matching caps could give you nearly any color you want).

I noted in the book that pens had turned up with an imprint indicating these originated in Philadelphia - and thanks to American Writing Instrument Trademarks 1870-1953, I can tell you exactly where in Philadelphia:


John Lehn, doing business as the Ajax Pen Company, claimed that the mark was first used on March 4, 1924.  The address of the company as of the filing of the trademark that year was 1951 North Eighth Street, Philadelphia.

I’ve also learned since the book was written that there were more to the company’s pencil offerings than the ones I’d pictured:


Only one of these is marked, and it’s the one that has a really cool clip:


The marking is on the cap, and since the pencils are I believe earlier than 1924, it’s not surprising that the trademarked logo is absent:


Although the other one is unmarked, I keep it alongside this one because (1) the Ajax-marked one isn’t working, (2) the unmarked one is identical and (3) not only is it working, when I took it apart, it is unlike anything I’ve seen anywhere else:


There’s no markings on either to indicate this variation was patented, and there’s no patent issued to Lehn or assigned to Ajax listed in American Writing Instrument Patents Vol. 2: 1911-1945; perhaps one was never filed, or perhaps Lehn licensed someone else’s design.

Not perhaps . . . probably, I suppose, since the pencils pictured in the book were stock pencils sold under several names, and so was this one, which came after the ones shown in the book:


The color, the shape of that rounded top and the clip all point towards this one being made by Conklin.  So many of these are unmarked that it wasn’t until I took a closer look before throwing it in the junk box that I noticed the imprint:


I’ve had this one for awhile, but since I’d already noted in The Catalogue that Ajax was from Philadelphia, at the time I didn’t really have much new to say.  Fortunately, the new trademark book gave me a good reason to circle back around!

Monday, August 14, 2017

And Now, For Some Overdue Respect

I take a little flak from the peanut gallery whenever I post about pencils like these . . .


The objection, to paraphrase, is that they are beneath the dignity of this blog – as if we pencil guys have standards!  Actually I do, but mine isn’t a standard of financial value or brandname recognition.  The mighty threshhold any pencil must meet before it finds its way to this blog is this:

It has to be something I find interesting.

Fortunately, when it comes to these, I’ve found something which might raise these pencils to other, more objective standards of historical significance and desirability.  

For the last few years, I’ve indexed these under the Brown and Bigelow tab, since that top example is marked with a B&B logo and I tracked down the design patent issued in the United States for these in 1937 (applied for in 1935 – see http://leadheadpencils.blogspot.com/2013/03/what-they-are-and-where-they-got-idea.html).

The others, though, are unmarked and are clearly not American – all clues concerning their origins point to either German or Japanese.  I’ve hoped for a long time to find one that had some more definitive markings to identify it, so I was pleased to find this:


The seller already had me at “sterling” and the fact that this one’s a ringtop, which are more difficult to find.  The manufacturer’s imprint stamped on top was a bonus, and I was doubly pleased that the name would finally command some long overdue respect for these:


“Sarastro-Unitas D.G.R.M.”  Sarastro was a German manufacturer best known for making sterling overlays for Mont Blanc (that’s what the capital letter “S” stamped on some Mont Blancs means).

This isn’t something I’ve discovered, only something I’ve learned.  Once I had a name to associate with these, other examples were easy to find:

From a 2015 eBay auction by eBay seller "flikmywick" -- the photos have been deleted from eBay but were preserved in internet search results.

This was in another eBay auction, but the original auction has apparently been deleted - all that remains is the image preserved in an internet search.

Was Sarastro responsible for all the German-made examples along these lines?  It certainly seems reasonable to attribute the 1936 Olympics example to the firm.  The “Peace” pencils?  I have found some indication that the Japanese firm Kanoe made some of them, but it would make sense for pencils marked “Peace” to be made in both Germany and Japan during both countries’ rebuilding in the wake of World War II.  

Sunday, August 13, 2017

The Observation of the Century

Not long ago, a full-sized Century pencil owned by Joe Nemecek limped into the museum for repairs.  After I got it working again, I took a shot of it alongside my ringtop example for grins:


I also shot it alongside a couple identical pencils marked “EVRDA” on the clip.  EVRDA (short for Everyday) was the name A.A. Waterman last traded under, during his last enterprise with the Chicago Safety Pen Company (see http://leadheadpencils.blogspot.com/2012/11/evrda.html).


I don’t have much else to offer about these, except for the observation that there were two variations of the EVRDA clip:


It's difficult to tell, but it looks like both the ball clip and flat clip variations appear in the catalog excerpt I included with that last article:


Saturday, August 12, 2017

What a Box!

Since I spent so much time yesterday talking about Eagle Automatics, it seemed a good time to show off one that came my way recently:


The top of the box was a little rough, but it was unusual in having two drawers, one for the pencil and one containing a box of copying leads:



Both the pencil and the leads I have, and neither is particularly noteworthy.  What is special is the other three sides of the box, which are very well preserved and which contain some amazing graphics and some interesting language:


In particular, note what’s written on that bottom panel:


“Each pencil bears our name and date of Letters Patent.  All others are infringements and will be dealt with as such.”

What’s interesting to me is the ominous nature of the warning.  Yes, Eagle emblazoned nearly everything they made with patent dates and when it came to both patents and trademarks the company was both prolific and territorial.  However, a warning like this suggests that there was at least one product which actually infringed upon Eagle’s patents – or was close enough to justify such strong language.

Now to find the “all others!”

Friday, August 11, 2017

A Different Take on a Familiar Name

In a recent auction of larger, flattop pencils online, this was not the one that interested me the most:


The pencil appeared to be a Magnum Pointer (see page 47 of The Catalogue), but in red . . . a color that I didn’t have.  Besides, I don’t think I’ve added one to my collection since I wrote the book:


But with that silver-colored trim, it doesn’t quite fit into the series.   I wondered if it might instead be part of this series:


At the Chicago Show three years ago I bought an advertisement from Terry Mawhorter referring to these as the “Silver Canary.”  The advertisement was for a third-party contest, though, with these pens and pencils being offered as a prize – so I wasn’t firmly convinced that was the name Eagle gave to it.  Unfortunately, that piece of ephemera was such an odd shape that was sure to put it someplace where it wouldn’t get damaged.  That explains why I can’t lay my hands on it to snap a picture for it now; it is amazing how few things get lost around the museum, but when things go missing they really go missing.

No worries.  It will turn up.

In the meantime, though, I don’t think this new Eagle belongs alongside the Silver Canary, since the latter sports clips which are bolted on, as well as a bell-shaped cap:


This example, just like those gold-filled Magnum Pointers, has a distinctive clip stamped “Pat. Pend.”:


I’m not sure whether the imprint relates to just the clip or to the entre pencil.  The patent for the pencil is easy: it was applied for by Otto Huber on June 6, 1929 and was issued on April 14, 1931 as number 1,800,201:


The clip, though, is a little trickier to find.  Since to my knowledge it appears only on Eagle Magnum Pointers, I checked the “Patents by Assignee” section of American Writing Instrument Patents Volume 2: 1911-1945, and none of the clip patents listed under Eagle fit the bill.  Some rainy day I’ll wade through all the clip patents to see if this patent was issued to an individual and was never assigned to Eagle – or even more fascinating, if the patent was assigned to a company other than Eagle.

Of course, it’s possible the patent was never issued at all.

There are two types of Magnum Pointers in the Eagle lineup, and this one appears to have a bit of both: the trim of the “Platinite Finish” line, and the clip of the gold-filled ones.  Note that on the platinite finish ones, the barrels are faceted and the clip matches the earlier “Ritaway” series:


Magnum Pointers are prominently marked on the cap on both series:



Which leads me to one other interesting feature on this new addition.  It isn’t marked “Magnum Pointer”


It’s marked “Automatic.”

The Automatic name has a long and varied history with the Eagle Pencil Company.  It was originally used to describe the company’s early “Stop Gauge” clutch pencils and was registered as a trademark by Eagle (yes, it’s included in American Writing Instrument Trademarks 1870-1953) as number 9,102 on February 14, 1882:


The name was also applied to later Eagle pencils, both the thin model Automatics frequently found with “Property of U.S. Government” imprints as well as the wooden Giant Automatics, including those painted with Chicago Worlds’ Fair, Popeye and other souvenir scenes.

Does this mean my example comes before, after or during the Platinite Finish and gold filled Magnum Pointers?  I’ve always been inclined to think Platinite Finish Magnum Pointers came first, since they carried over features from earlier lines, while the gold filled ones were a later, more refined step.  Since the skinny plastic Automatic wasn’t patented until a bit later, after flattop pencils such as these had become passe, I’m inclined to think that after upscaling the Magnum Pointer line with gold filled trim, Eagle reverted back to Platinite trim to cut costs and revived an old and venerable name in an effort to boost sales – shortly before abandoning everything but the Automatic name.