An Excellent Reproduction (1966) of a 1902-03 Toy Catalogue

Sunday, September 8, 2013

An Excellent Reproduction (1966)

of a 1902-1903 Toy Catalogue

   This week I received a reproduction of a Gong Bell Manufacturing Bell Toy Catalogue. The original catalogue was printed for the1902-1903 season. When it arrived, I opened the carefully-packaged catalogue to see if the item was OK, and it was. I left it on my desk for a few days without really paying much attention to it. Yesterday, I looked and several things caught my eye. First, there was a lot of yellowing. I;d already noticed that even later reprints of catalogues have some yellowing. I thing some of the better reprinters use acidic paper and not acid-free or archival paper. Consequently, over time the paper will yellow.  If you ever frame a fine lithograph or water colour piece of art, make 100% sure that the matting around the art is acid free and archival! The second thing that I noticed was that the catalogue was exceptional in quality. And the third thing that tied the first two observations was the fact that this catalogue was reprinted in 1973, in what I like to call the BDE (Before Digital Era). 

  This doesn't sound like a "big deal", until you realize that Photoshop was released in 1990,  and I doubt even if scanners were around then in inexpensive pricing or even good quality. SO what might I deduce? That both  Mr. Lloyd W. Ralston (Warren, Ohio) and Mr. F.H.Griffith (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)  got together to reprint an old catalogue with exceptional quality and via older methods. If you look at the left sided page next to the "price List" page, you will see that the reproduction date was in 1966. I was 18 then and probably in my first or second year of university.  That's 47 years ago! In 53 years, when I am long since departed, this will be a true antique paper catalogue! 

  So if Mr.  Ralston and Mr. Griffith are still alive, or their relatives are, I would commend them on the superb job that they did, and will be looking for more of these catalogues. If their relatives ever read this, please drop me a line (write to me). 

That's the logo that I use as a copyright watermark, as well as on my business card.

(for those who don;t know me already,my name is Mr. Stacey Bindman

I've made the scanned images above extra-large for everyone to look at the fine illustrations. The images were originally hand-drawn, and that's what also makes them so nice to look at. 

I've added my watermark logo and written notice because there are some people who do make a living reproducing these catalogues, so it's not "fair" for people to copy them. However,if you ever need to use them for an article or an educational paper, just write to me, and I'll send you larger-sized images without the  watermark - just remember to give me the credit note, as well as the others - Mr. Lloyd W. Ralston and Mr. F.H Griffith - they did all the excellent work - really!

And of course, if any of my  friends who have helped me with this blog by allowing me to use their photos ,ever need a CD copy of any of the catalogues that I have presented, just e-mail me. It's the least I can do for all of your kindness in helping me with this blog!

Of course, now that I've presented the catalogue, I will search out the toys in a few future posts.

I couldn't leave that alone!

Thanks for dropping by,

and have a great part of the day or night,

wherever you may be.

Stacey

toysearcher@gmail.com

Identifying an Old Toy Isn't as Easy as it Seems!

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Identifying an Old Toy 

Isn't as easy as it Seems!

   I purchased a reprinted Hubley Catalogue from an Arizona Bookstore who deals in old books.  I scanned the pages for future use,and thought that I'd look for a few old toys and match them up with the catalogue photos.  That seemed quite simple enough,and then the trouble (small) began. First of all, the catalogue had no date as to when it was printed, nor were the toys identified as to their dates. So I searched  on the Net for "Hubley Patent # 1956342" and found 2 sites. One is Google, and the other is a company that helps people with patents. I'm presenting Google's image of the patents since they (I assume) don't mind if I use them. I sent an e-mail to the other company asking for their permission. I usually go to the United Stated Patent Office, but it's very hard to find anything there-easily!

The  above image is page 20 of the catalogue

Since the catalogue  didn't have a printing date on or, nor the production year of the toys,  I know that it would be hard to match up catalogue photos with sold toys! The reason is that Hubley and other companies were in business for a long time. Also, they made new models of cars, as newer "real" cars came out. Also, they patented and invented newer designs that were also more interesting such as take-apart toys.

Below are 3 screen-captures of the actual patent.

Since the toy was actually processed and accepted for a patent in 1934, I would then assume that that would be the year that the toy actually started being produced. Of course, the toy could have been made earlier, with the patent being petitioned for at a later date.

At this point, I decided to go to one of my many sources and search on Liveauctioneers for this toy.

Dan Morphy Auctions is a great  seller, and has sold lots of old and antique toys. So I decided to start here.

First of all, you need to read the Hubley description of the toy. cast iron toys could be repainted in different, not have nickel-plated grills, or even have metal rims, instead of  painted wooden  rims. Then of course, another company could also have produced the same car model and the toy could look very much like the Hubley. It's not like the 2012-13 Apple lawsuit against Samsung for patent infringement, where Apple also included "rounded corners" as a patent infringement on their iPhone!

The  above red toy is the correct one, but the paint job is incorrect.

The description has the chassis as black and the car body would have come in red, light blue, or orange. 

Once again, the top car is the correct Hubley. In this case it is the correct one entirely.

The bottom car is an A.C.Williams.You have to compare the 2 foir a while to see the differences,specially when there is only 1 photograph.

1. The Hubley nickel-plated grill has a projection on top

2. The Hubley had air vents on the side of the hood (facing you)

3. The Hubley has a black  trunk on the back of the car.

4. The A.C.Williams has a fine line around the window frame.

I'm not sure when the toys below were made. However right away, the colours are not from the 1934 catalogue.  I do know that these 2 toys were take-apart toys. You could buy them individually or in kits, You could take the toy apart  (notice the thin spring part on the undercarriage of the smaller car). Also, the passenger compartment is "boxier" compared with the rounder 1934 model.

You can see that with this toy,, it's not so easy to accurately identify it. Fortunately, these smaller cast iron cars are not that expensive, and even if you bought an A.C.Williams, Kenton, Dent, or Hubley, you couldn't go wrong with  your purchase. So there would be good news even if you thought you purchased a Hubley!

So this is a "short but sweet" post. I'm going to be working on another one for today just after I post this one. I missed a few days of the "dog days of summer", and I'm in a mood for 2 posts today, before I get on my road bike for a 40 km (25 mile) ride!

Thanks for visiting,

and as always, have a great part of the day,

wherever you may be.

Stacey

toysearcher@gmail.com