Topic: Hailware Hailwood & Ackroyd advertising pressed glass bowl

[nigel benson]

Yep, that's the chappie

Thanks Frank.

Nigel

[Frank]

Intriguing that the one in that Make an offer shop appears to have an inscription added to it, have asked the seller.

I thought pugilist was a boxer, but other said wrestler?

As to maker, I would not be surprised if H&A did make the bowl but equally not surprised if they did not. There were companies specialised in producing promotional glass through all times and it would probably be cheaper to source to them even if AH made or designed the plate insert. But that would have made the bowl shape recognisable and no-one has mentioned this with another design or just plain.

Of course there is also the aspect of the firm using such a promotion to show the quality of their own glassware to customers and for this purpose it would be to their advantage to make it in house.

In support of the first theory the design is clearly a panel one where a design plate is inserted for the customisation and the quality is not as good as could be achieved in hand pressing. But ths should be ´possibly'  provable by finding a different design base in the same bowl shape.

Supporting the second... I see very little as the quality would not leave me impressed - but I am no expert on the quality of pressing at the period in question. But considering the 1890 US pressed dish I just sold on eBay was a 1000 times better I would say this ashtray is not best in any way. For arguments sake H&A could also have offered a promotional glassware service too and thus make their own.

Toss a coin I guess.

[nigel benson]

I thought pugilist was a boxer

Yes, of course you are right pugilist equals boxer, not wrestler. I was dragging info out from the recesses of what passes for my brain, hence not remembering he was a wrestler

As for the ideas about glass production - anyone's educated guess could be correct at this stage, since despite having met direct descentants of Ernest Hailwood, I found that although they have examples of glass, they had no factory information or records (other than family). This of course fills a gap in the background, but not the detail we tend to be looking for.

I have built up a lot of information about their lighting production, both commercial and domestic, all of which suggests that they continued the production that began under the previous Best & Ackroyd incarnation of the company.

There are over three hundred registered designs for glass for H&A alone. I wonder, would it all have been made outside their own glassblowing workshop?

Nigel

[David E]

I imagine H&A would have had one or two small hand presses installed. With over 300 registered designs to its name I would find it a little odd that they farmed out all its pressed glass production. Going by Chance's own hand-pressed glass production records, this indicated production figures amounting to between 150 and 200 pieces per hour, or up to 8,000 per week, although I have to admit that I'm not sure if it is possible to hand press three items in a minute.

However, for pressing "Round Rooflamp" with a diameter of 3-ins. the figure of 215 per hour was achieved in Dec. 1952 and it does mention:
Press on small side lever press.     4 bodies.

I think that means there were four moulds on a turntable, so that would have sped up production (one guy with 'gob' of glass, one pressing the item and then rotating the table, one removing item from mould onto annealing lehr?) In any event, I'm sure a couple of guys could have knocked out several thousand of these in an hour with relatively simple machinery.

Taking this further, without a pneumatic press (up to 20,000 per hour quoted for a 3-in convex Roundel) ) the quality of the pressing may not have been as high, and the quality of the mould making would have an impact too, of course.

[David E]

Just to amend this:

... the figure of 215 per hour was achieved in Dec. 1952

The quoted figure was the estimated yield, not an achieved figure - I made it sound like a target... 

[nigel benson]

a lot of information about their lighting production, both commercial and domestic

There are over three hundred registered designs for glass for H&A alone.

Sorry, I was not trying to imply that this was pressed glass production, just pointing to their production of glass lighting and their running of a glass making section within the factory. The lighting was made in a variety of ways, since it included blown globes through to architectural panels.

Very few pressed, cut or art glass pieces have been recorded to date. Does this mean little was produced using those methods; that they were farmed out (as Bernard suggests); that very little was made; or, that they were largely unmarked?

To quote a BBC panel game - "Nobody knows".

However, it has been a goal of mine to find out. At least I have an amount of information under my belt, but saldy, no where near enough to publish since there are still threads to be followed through. I still find it strange that an apparently prolific factory from the twentieth century has so little known about its history and production. But then that has been the case with so many 

Nigel

[Frank]

300 is not a lot particularly for those involved in lighting as a primary concern which is how H&A were listed in Gazette. I would think it a certainty that they had a hand press at the very least as lighting often needs components that are best pressed.

Knowing what a company produced is often a big unknown for even well documented ones. Edinburgh Crystal offered pressed glass at the turn of the century (1900) too, but what did they press at that period. It might be more pertinent to wonder what a glassworks did NOT make. Certainly lampshades would have come out of just about every glassworks except flat glass plants. Moncrieff also made about everything possible in glass not to mention packaging some of it to be indistinguishable from Corning US production, as Corning did in the US for Moncrieff! People have only just got used to UK reg Nos from other countries and moulded "Made in XYZ" from ABC. If there was money to be saved from simple agreements between businesses then so it was done. But it does create all sorts of lovely puzzles to be solved by us as such practises were done quietly and largely undocumented for obvious reasons.

Nigel did you email those two women with family working at H&A ?

[Bernard C]

...   Very few pressed, cut or art glass pieces have been recorded to date. Does this mean little was produced using those methods; that they were farmed out (as Bernard suggests); that very little was made; or, that they were largely unmarked?   ...

Nigel — Like you and most others on the GMB, words are not my strongest point and could have been better chosen.   Seven years of enforced illiteracy (maths, maths and maths with a touch of computing) didn't help.   However, as you well know, I was not saying that this ashtray was farmed out — just that it was a very real and quite likely possibility.   You will probably agree that it is unlikely that H&A made the windows in their factory, the insulators in their electricity supply, and the tumblers in their works canteen.   Why a promotional ashtray?   It wasn't their business.

Frank's suggestion that the ashtray mould was made to be capable of changing the central design is something I had not considered, but does strongly suggest manufacture by an outside specialist, who would have designed the mould this way automatically.   Why would H&A have designed it this way?   Do you think they were planning to enter the advertising / commemorative ashtray business?

Bernard C. 

[nigel benson]

Like you and most others on the GMB, words are not my strongest point

Way to go Bernard I think you've conclusively proved the contrary with this one posting.

.....,but does strongly suggest manufacture by an outside specialist,...

Please note that this is purely a supposition at this point in time. Maybe the other ash trays under the H&A name should also be taken into consideration??

Why a promotional ashtray?   It wasn't their business.

Really? How do you know that?

Again, you are making a supposition, that at this stage of research into a company, is unproven, so apparently closing a door unnecessarily.

You will probably agree that it is unlikely that H&A made the windows in their factory, the insulators in their electricity supply, and the tumblers in their works canteen.

You really don't want to hear my comment about this oblique observation

My position regarding the company's production is purely to ensure that urban myths don't spring up and take root. Your observations are perfectly valid, but I'm concerned about what is effectively guess work becoming fact on the Internet making it difficult to refute should it later be proved wrong. Therefore to write something as if fact, without proof, at this stage seems somewhat precipitous.

You may indeed be proved right in the fullness of time, but it may be that that proof will never be found. Watch this space, but don't expect an answer too soon

Nigel

PS. Yes, I have emailed them Frank - thanks

[Bernard C]

Nigel — You may have meant "urbane".   You have to remember that one as it doesn't get picked up by spellcheckers.

... so, if I understand it correctly, my observations are ill-considered precipitous guesswork, whereas yours, presumably, are judicious conclusions.   I will write that down on a Post-It note to put on my fridge door to remind me.   

Thank you, and Frank, for a most enjoyable debate.   We don't seem to have so many these days.

Bernard C.