Topic: Mould-blown decanter with Australia + no. 360410 on base

[agincourt17]

Moulded decanter for ID, please:

360410 (around July 1900). Also marked 640  LH5 to base

[Paul S.]

Would seem that the moulded decanter Registration given above, may possibly have been mis-read.
I've checked 360410 with the Kew Archives, and it's not a piece of glass, but looks like lace of some kind - although not sure why the Register is showing Class IX (which is Yarn), since there is a Class 13 especially for Lace - but have to admit I don't know the difference, technically.                      Perhaps it's the shamrock causing confusion
The date of Registration - for this 360410 - appears to be 17th July 1900  -  and Kew references are......... 
BT 51/162.......for the Register   -     and  BT 50/395 for the Representations.

So.............not a decanter   and since this isn't glass, then feel free to delete.

A few more answers coming, hopefully tomorrow.             

[agincourt17]

Thank you, as always, for your efforts, Paul.

[Paul S.]

so - you're into lace then            do you know what the correct No. is??

[Anne]

Would seem that one of the moulded decanter Registrations given above, may possibly have been mis-read.
I've checked 360410 with the Kew Archives, and as you can see it's not a piece of glass, but looks like lace of some kind - although not sure why the Register is showing Class IX (which is Yarn), since there is a Class 13 especially for Lace - but have to admit I don't know the difference, technically.                      Perhaps it's the shamrock causing confusion
The date of Registration - for this 360410 - appears to be 17th July 1900  -  and Kew references are......... 
BT 51/162.......for the Register   -     and  BT 50/395 for the Representations.

So.............not a decanter   and since this isn't glass, then feel free to delete.

Couple of pix of TNA showing it's attractive landscaping, also good restaurant, museum and shop - and really not too dusty Anne.

A few more answers coming, hopefully tomorrow.             

I wonder if the person with the 360410 decanter has a picture of the RD no. as well - it might be worth asking, as sometimes the numbers are hard to make out for sure?

Thanks for posting the pics Paul, whilst living in London it was one place I didn't manage to visit, although I was a regular searcher at both SOG and the Chancery Lane offices. One day, one day, I'll get to Kew too!

[Paul S.]

good idea Anne, although I don't know where Fred got this one from - was it his or someone else's?

[agincourt17]

Paul, the RD 360410 photo is mine but the decanter belongs to someone else. I'm currently waiting for confirmation of the number from the owner, and am hoping to get a photo of the base markings too.

[agincourt17]

The mystery of the "perhaps-misread" RD 360410 seems to have been solved (at least in part).

The owner has rechecked the number (having been told that it may have been misread) but is still unable to read the number clearly beyond the fact that it could be a 3 or an 8 (or perhaps a 5 or 6).  What is apparent, thought, is that the reg. no. seems to be an AUSTRALIAN one, which certainly explains why it doesn't appear in its supposed place in the British design registry.

They have sent me a photo of the marks but its quality is so poor that it isn't worth showing.

[Paul S.]

I don't know if the Aussies used a similar numbering sequence?  -  I'm aware that Davidson incorporated both U.K. and Australian Rd. Nos. on some of their glass - possibly for material that was exported - but really not sure.

What do you mean by..........'the reg. no. seems to be an AUSTRALIAN one'  -  does it say that?

[agincourt17]

Paul, although the 'RD 360410' decanter photo is difficult to read, I interpret the impressed mark as 'Australia [or Australian] Reg. No. ?60410', and the owner concurs.