Topic: Uranium glass celery with reg mark ? - ID = Bagley Carnival RD No. 849118

[Paul S.]

tut tut Julie  -  fancy you asking for a value..........  after all the replies we've given explaining why we don't

If you look in the Board's Glass Gallery under '06 Registered Designs', you'll see a bowl in 'Carnival' that Anne (Mod.) posted with some data on this pattern.
You are correct with the Rd. No. of 849118 -  unfortunately the Blue Book ends at August 1945, so can't be more precise than Anne's comment of November 1946 - but others may know the exact date of Registration.

[Anne]

Awwww Paul, be nice to Julie, it was 6 years ago that she asked not recently   My update was recent which is why it popped back up again. 

I should have also mentioned that my blue vase carries the RD number on the base as well.

I can't pin down the date closer as the Bagley Glass book (Bowey, Parsons and Parsons) says Nov 1946, whilst the Nat. Archives catalogue just gives:

Reference:   BT 52/2375
Description:   
Designs 849113-849294
Date:   1946-1947
Held by:   The National Archives, Kew
Legal status:   Public Record(s)
Closure status:   Open Document, Open Description

but unlike earlier entries there is no detail for the individual rd nos. - "not digitised" it says.

The only way to pin it closer would be to ask you to look it up on a future visit to the NA Paul, if thought necessary. 

[Paul S.]

you're quite right, it was six years ago - I hadn't seen that             Julie won't forgive me and probably won't buy me another coffee in town either              big apologies Julie

I will include this one when I next visit  -  and I've also checked the details and you are correct with BT 52/2375 covering '46/'47.           If nothing else it will be interesting to see which pattern/shape in the Carnival range the Registration was based on.

Carnival is one of the more common pressed glass designs I see when ferreting around - bowls in particular.

[ju1i3]

It was a while ago - probably one of my first posts! (I joined July 2010) I know now this pattern very well now and how common it is. I gave this vase to the school where my husband teaches.

[Paul S.]

the attached pix show that the original shape on which this Registration was based was a bowl.            I do have the Register page taken in higher magnification, but split over two photographs - so if anyone can't read the Register page details from the attached photo, shout and I'll post the split pix.

The Register page shows clearly that the Registration for this 'Carnival' design was extended for a second period of five years - so obviously Bagley thought this design worth protecting beyond the usual first five years.

[SNJ]

Coming back to this to add that a while back I found a blue one of these which does have the word CELERY on it on the side! 

As a slight aside from the topic, I've seen mention of labelling vases 'Celery' a convenient way of circumventing wartime 'fancy goods' regulations, which seems reasonable given that the wording seems to be invariably faintly etched. Is there any proof of this assertion or is it merely apocryphal?

[Paul S.]

Is the word etched? - I thought it was in relief, but memory could now be unreliable  ....  I've had one in the past but not now.

Am certain the comments informing that there was less purchase tax on items with 'Celery' on them is very factual and not just some old wives tale, although regrettably can't point you in the direction of provenance for this............    hope someone else can, or alternatively you can search for yourself on line.

[Lustrousstone]

It's true. Luxury goods like vases were taxed. Tableware like celery "vases" wasn't.

[SNJ]

Thanks, both. I've never had any before but rather strangely have found three in the last couple of months, two of them this week. All are different makers - two Czech and the other Webb - but all have etched not moulded lettering.

[Paul S.]

my comments were referring to the Bagley celeries only  -  you won't find the word on any C19 examples, and I doubt on anything made before WW II  -  it seems to have been a wartime ploy to use the word to avoid aspects of luxury tax, and as you say there are Czech. examples from the 1940s that do carry the word.                  They were still part of popular weekend tea table items even in the late 1940s and early 1950s.     Does anyone still use them now  -  possibly not, since most of us sit on the sofa with a plate on our laps watching tv
This situation my mother would never have allowed  -  you always sat at table, butter was in a dish, milk in a jug, jam in a pot and celery in a celery.