Topic: E.Varnish mercury glass with embossed seal, circa 1849

[KevinH]

And a cople of other links for interest ...

W. Lund Ink Well

Varnish & Co Paperweight

[KevinH]

Just for completeness ...

In Reply #25 Mike said:

Re the number scratched on the bottom, if you look hard you should find the same number scratched on the 'plug', I believe it was a way of matching the two. ...  There is more about this in Manley if anyone has a copy to hand.

And in Reply #35, Paul said, with regard to the numbers:

P.S.     don't think I have Manley any more, so don't know what he wrote about this material.

Having reviewed Manley's book for references to Varnish & Co etc., I can say that I saw no information about "matching numbers" relating to the "plug" used for Silvered Glass items.

So, Mike, were you thinking about a general reference to "bottles and their stoppers" or was it specific to "plugs"?

[KevinH]

Another point to clarify:

From the source material I have been through, it seems that everyone takes it for granted that (Frederick) Hale Thomson was a partner to Edward Varnish, at least in 1849 when the Patent for [whatever] was granted. Is there anything to confirm that?

For example, In the Evans, Ross and Werner Whitefriars" book, it is stated in context of the Crystal Palace 1851 Exhibition:

... Mr Varnish and Mr Mellish, Hale Thomson's second collaborator ..."

This could suggest that we accept that Mr Varnish was Mr Thomson's first "collaborator" and all ties between Thomson and Varnish were broken when Thomson began collaborating with Mellish.

Put another way, do we know when the Hale Thomson impressed plug was first used and was it in collaboration with a) E Varnish b) Mr Mellish c) neither of the preceding?

From the information I have seen I am thinking that "a second Patent of 1850" taken out by Thomson was when his own embossed plug was used. But is that correct?

[Lustrousstone]

Paul you are still confusing design and patent. Design merely concerns its form, patent is about what it is used for or how it is made, i.e., function NOT form.

[Paul S.]

Dear Christine  -  obviously I misunderstood the implication of your words  -  please be gentle with me.          

Kevin  -  does the info. from C.H. -  in my reply in post No. 35 - not help you with the matter of scratched Nos.?

Fieldings description of the maker/type of their 'W. Lund & Co. varnish glass ink well', is surprisingly poor, assuming it was in fact their choice of words  -  no point in contacting them as the item is no longer available, and they seem to have an aversion to replying to my to requests for information.         Perhaps you are intended to fill the ink well with varnish?

Kevin's extract from Tallis's History etc.  ...      " which makes the claim that most of the glass was provided by "Messrs Powell & Co, Whitefriars", could well be the sort of comment that might start the ball rolling and make for permanent mis-attribution.         Not that subsequent researchers all delve back into archives  -  rather it's the usual scenario whereby statements that sound as though they have some legitimacy of fact are simply repeated in later books etc.

[flying free]

I think some digging is needed in terms of who made this glass.
If there is no pattern book or concrete reference then ... well ... too many assumptions have been made in the past.

Do we know for sure that E Varnish and Hale Thomson were dealers/suppliers/retailers etc but NOT makers?
That would be my first question.

If the answer is that they were NOT makers then someone else did the making.  And at the moment there is no concrete evidence as to where they were made.

Also if E Varnish applied for a patent and then H Thomson applied for a patent later, what exactly were they patenting?  What process?  Their names both appear on double walled cased glass.  Not together but as separate patents.

Also, was any English (?)  'mercury' glass made after the pieces with the Varnish or Thomson plugs in them?
If not why not?  I think there was Bohemian 'Bauernsilber' or 'mercury' glass made after the 1850s.  (need to double check my references for that but I'm pretty sure there was).
Also American versions - I'm sure I've seen some dated post 1850s.

I'm not near books or able to research anything for a few days now unfortunately. 

m

[drewfind]

I think the problem I am coming up against, is the fact that all roads will lead back to the V&A, and the information that is there, simply because they would have acquired a piece or pieces after the Great Exhibition 1850, and therefore, the information prior to 1850 would be of very little concern for them?

I have however some news for you ALL, E.Varnish, 48 Berners Street, 1850 Exhibit stall 27!, showing plateaux,vases,salvers in silvered glass, glass globes,ornamental stands and so on........

Powell & Sons, Whitefriars Glass Works, Exhibit stall 31! painted and patent pressed glass for windows. Glass pipes with patent joint. Chandelier with glass pump and same joint.

 This is taken from the list of exhibitors and CLEARLY shows that they are not only unaffiliated but manufacture completely different products.

I WILL state that E.Varnish not only invented and patented it ,with Thomson at first, whom he seperated from after the 1849 patent, to then register his OWN patent, to allow him to manufacture and display at the 1850 exhibition.
This will also explain why some have Hale Thomson and some Varnish seals, the difference in some people saying there are numbers inscribed and others letters.

I apologise to the V&A, and all others who were under the impression it was James Powell who manufactured for Thomson and Varnish!!

But, I solved a riddle

Any comments peeps?

[Lustrousstone]

I'm not sure you have clarified anything because the address for Varnish, 48 Berners Street, was Hale Thomson's address in 1845 and he was a surgeon and presumably an investor! See  here

[drewfind]

Of course I have,lol, If Thompson-Halewood & Varnish were working together as a company in 1849, they would have exhibited as that in the Great Exhibition 1850.

Varnish exhibits on his own, under his own company name
 
I think that's a little more definitive than "possibly by" or "attributed to"

This can all be checked.

Actually, I could not find Thompson exhibiting anywhere

[drewfind]

I tried to find Varnishs partner in crime, and this is all I could come up with

F.H.Thompson, 10 Brandon Pl, Glasgow....Works in precious metals, South Gallery, stall 25, but it's a Thompson with a P, and an address in Scotland, so either they had 2 shops and a misspelled name or Hale-Thomson did NOT exhibit at the Great Exhibition.

I have only looked at the two areas I would think would be reasonable to achieve the end product, maybe Thomson is somewhere else, but he is not in Glass, nor Precious metals.

There were over 15000 exhibits.