Topic: pressed tumblers & goblets

[agincourt17]

Re: RD 274963, registered by John Derbyshire on 8 August 1873 – Parcel 7.

Photos below of a goblet RD 274963 (with registry date lozenge, JDanchor mark and number 258) , as shown in the design representation, and Neil shows another example at
https://sites.google.com/site/molwebbhistory/Home/registered-designs/derbyshire-brothers-designs-by-date/derbyshire-brothers-1873-1874

Despite the factory drawing describing this as 'Goblet and Service in Glass', I've not seen any other shapes from the design.

Fred.

[Paul S.]

many thanks Fred for the additional information.

During the process of adding posts for this thread, I refer almost always to Ray Slack's book for dates and names as a quick and, usually, reliable source of information, though I am aware there are errors in the book.
I've looked him up again - for 204182 and 279535 - and it does appear that he copied TNA information accurately - for spelling etc. - for these two Registrations, and just for interest have now attached copies of my original pix taken from the Kew Register.                     I think these are legible but if not hope you're good at reading C19 handwriting  -  I assume that in the early 1870s the Registration clerks had access to dip pens only, though the more affluent might have owned an eyedropper.

[Paul S.]

am posting this item separately which keeps it in sequence with other Registered Nos., though it's neither a tumbler nor goblet but it's CLASS III - the Registration No. occurs in both Slack and Thompson, and the  factory drawing includes the word drinking cup.                  It's obviously a curiosity item - I've never seen one, and it really doesn't belong with this thread but it's just a little bit of interest in these difficult times.
Of course, if someone has a picture to show of the real thing it would be great to share here, though I'm not holding my breath.
The full factory drawing description reads:-

'Drinking cup, or mustard pot, or matchbox, or spill cup'.

Reg. 320330 dated 12th April 1878  -  William Frederick Williams, London.               Have we previously had this Registrant, or is this an entirely new name  -  sorry, know nothing about them.

Sorry pix aren't too clever, and as usual nothing unfortunately to indicate size.

[Paul S.]

back to more typical items:-

one .....................Regs. Nos. 326775 and 326776 dated 23rd September 1878  -  George Davidson, Gateshead.                
These manufacturers - much like Sowerby - Registered some of the most memorable designs (non-drinking glass shapes) during the whole of the pressed glass period, though their attitude toward the Registration of tumblers and goblets runs (like Sowerby), quite the opposite i.e. very few.                Sowerby's output in terms of tumbler design was truly prodigious - scores of different shapes and designs which included many of the pteridomania (ferny) decorated pieces, but for whatever reason almost nothing in the way of drinking glasses was Registered  -  in fact it may be that they didn't Register a single design of drinking glass  -  perhaps someone can comment on that for me.

two....................  Regs. Nos. 327641 and 327642 dated 15th October 1878 - the Registrant was entered with the BoT as :-
'James Webb, Joseph Hammond & Henry Fitzroy Webb Trading as the Executors of the late Joseph Webb, Stourbridge.
'Thompson includes both Nos. for the reason that the lady simply photographed the pages of the BoT Register which were then reproduced in her book -  Slack on the other hand relied on his own handwriting to copy out every CLASS III item, and for some he reason omits 327642, and it may be that he considered these designs too similar to warrant inclusion of both. 
Looking at the factory drawings it's difficult to determine quite how the decorative element was created - threading, moulded lines, wheel cut lines  -  the only apparent difference between the two designs is the quantity and placing of the decorative lines.                                       Neither author included pix of these designs.

In the absence of any dimensions actual size is guesswork but in view of overall shape it's not unreasonable to suppose these were typical of C19 sherry glasses from the period 1860 onwards  -  very similar examples, contemporary with this period appear in S. & F. (published originally c. 1880).

Typically, stemware of this shape is hand made i.e. they are generally described as three part glasses  -  bowl, stem and foot made separately then joined, so assume that's the case here, but assumptions can be dangerous things  -  would it be possible to mould such a shape?

As an aside and possibly nothing at all to do with these two designs - but just thrown in for interest    ..................…   we're accustomed to seeing similar shapes commonly in green, red, blue and clear, though no idea what might have been intended for these two - possibly just clear.
Mark West ('Miller's Glass Antiques Check List) suggests that the commonly seen coloured pieces made 1860 - 1880 are characterized by having a collar immediately under the bowl, and that such examples without a collar are post this period.
How hard and fast a rule is unclear, but it's a fact that like all good things there are zillions of coloured pieces out there - with and without collars - made, I'm sure in the C20.
Picture attached showing a blue 'collared' glass, together with a collarless uranium example - no idea when they were made, unfortunately.

Would be of interest if anyone is able to expand on the title of the Registrant for these two 'sherry' designs - quite why was the word executors being used, and presumably the ownership of this design belonged originally to Joseph Webb?

Also good to see any of these Registrations in the flesh, though appreciate not easy with such old glasses, but who knows, maybe someone has the Davidson pieces.

[agincourt17]

Re:

Regs. Nos. 327641 and 327642 dated 15th October 1878 - the Registrant was entered with the BoT as :-
'James Webb, Joseph Hammond & Henry Fitzroy Webb Trading as the Executors of the late Joseph Webb, Stourbridge.
Would be of interest if anyone is able to expand on the title of the Registrant for these two 'sherry' designs - quite why was the word executors being used, and presumably the ownership of this design belonged originally to Joseph Webb?

Sorry to have this reply somewhat out of order but I do have the answer easily to hand at the moment.

There is a whole topic thread:
"Design registrations by Jane Webb & others, acting as executors for Joseph Webb" at
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,54643.msg309604.html#msg309604

Joseph Webb purchased the Coalbourn Hill Glass Works, Wordsley in 1850 (having previously been in business with his cousin Edward). He died on 1 May 1869, aged 56. Initially, Jane Webb, Joseph's wife, and Joseph Hammond, Jane's brother, took over as executors (because his 2 sons, Henry Fitzroy and Joseph Junior were still minors). Jane, along with various others, continued trading in the business from the Coalbourn Hill Glass works (acting as Joseph Webb’s executors) until 13 September 1887. The site of the Coalbourn Hill Glass Works now lies beneath Stourbridge’s Ruskin Centre.
Joseph Webb (and later Jane Webb and his other executors) were the only glass works in the Stourbridge area producing significant amounts of pressed glass wares in comparison to the other local glass works (who were predominantly producers of traditional hand-blown glass wares). The story of Webb’s business and pressed glass output is poorly documented, and their role and status as glassware manufacturers in the area has, in my opinion, been very undervalued. I hope to be able to rectify that situation eventually.
Between July 1872 and January 188, Jane Webb and various other executors registered 15 designs for glass as follows: ......…

and also more about the 'Executors' matter at https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,54638.msg309575.html#msg309575

Joseph Webb purchased the Coalbourn Hill Glass Works, Wordsley in 1850 (having previously been in business with his cousin Edward). He died on 1 May 1869, aged 56.
There's a whole chapter on the Coalbourn Hill Glass Works from 1691 to 2000 in Jason Ellis's 'Glassmakers of Stourbridge and Dudley 1612-2002' (ISBN 1401067999), and lots of biographical details about the Joseph Webb connection  from 1850 to 1892:
When his executors (Jane Webb, Joseph's wife, and Joseph Hammond, Jane's brother) took over (because his 2 sons, Henry Fitzroy and Joseph Junior were still minors) the business had a stock over over 234,000 items, of which over 140,000 were pressed. Most of the stock was tableware, from knife rests to decanters. A few hundred lamps plus a thousand presed miners lamps, but virtually no ornamental glass. There were 180 moulds, one stopper shop and three cutting shops, with a total of 56 frames. Joseph Hammond had previously run a cutting shop at Dennis, either as a partner or tenant of his brother-in-law, Richard Webb.
 Joseph Hammond's management proved not to be successful, and the business absorbed much of Jane Webb's assets. Hammond was eventually forced out, and on 15 January 1881 it was announced that he was now wholly unconnected with the business, which was to be carried on by Mrs Jane Webb and HF Webb with assistance from Joseph Webb Jr. and Benjamin Robinson.  Shortly afterwards, Joseph Jr. renounced all interests in his father's estate and emigrated to Philadelphia, US in 1881 where he worked for the Phoenix Glass Company. 
From that time on, pressed glass production was gradually phased out in favour of more ornamental glassware, including chandeliers and  incredibly ostentatious cut glass furniture to rival that of Osler (much of which went to wealthy Indian customers).  A downturn in trade brought an end to the company in 1886. The works and adjoining house were put up for sale in January 1886 but failed to attract a single bid. THE MOULDS THAT JOSEPH WEBB AND HIS SUCCESSORS HAD USED TO PRODUCE PRESSED GLASS WERE SOLD TO EDWARD MOORE [my emphasis]. Henry Fitzroy Webb became a commercial traveller in the glass trade.
 Unable to sell the works, Jane Webb leased it to Thomas Mitchell from 14 September 1887 for 14 years. Jane Webb died on 25 May 1899.

Sadly, I don't know of any actual documented example of either RD 327461 or RD 327462.

Fred.

[Paul S.]

much appreciate your adding these references Fred - it's good to have the questions and answers at the same location for future research.         Am sure I could have found them, but not as quickly as obviously you have.    thanks

There are only four Designs Regs. remaining to be posted for this thread - tomorrow possibly.

[Paul S.]

and here they are …………….

one …………………….  Reg. 346021 dated 4th February 1880  -  The Rochester Tumbler Co., Pittsburgh, PA, U.S.A.
Part of 'America's centre of glass production, formed in Pittsburgh in 1872 by Henry Clay Fry, they became what might be thought of as the States equivalent of Sowerby - producing vast quantities of pressed material of a quality much of which emulated cut glass - presumably the sand was sourced from local rivers, but nothing specific on that.               Apparently they specialized in tumblers, and are known for having produced much 'vaseline' glass which was popular in the later years of the C19, and beyond.       Tragically, fire razed the factory to the ground in 1901, but Fry was obviously made of stern stuff and he rebuilt a new factory which opened in 1903 in Beaver valley, north Rochester and given the new name of H. C. Fry Glass Company - later, in 1916, Fry produced heat-resistant glass under licence from Corning - presumably the borosilicate stuff we know as 'Pyrex'.
For all the vast quantities produced by The Rochester Tumbler Co., very little seems to find its way onto this Board  -  have I been asleep and missed seeing it, or is the stuff low on the collectibles list nowadays.
Sorry the quality of this picture is less than good  -  these old sepia photos don't reproduce too well.

two  ……………………  Reg. 351024 dated 17th June 1880  -  Percival Vickers, Manchester.
As can be seen, the No. 420 appears on the original factory drawing - possibly just a factory model No., but if anyone would care to comment, it might add a little extra interest.

three .................. Reg. 394205 dated 14th February 1883  -  Percival Vickers, Manchester.
Another example showing the internal pressed outline created by the plunger  -  plus the appearance of a specified capacity - in this case a half pint.

four  .................  Reg. 402690 dated 24th August 1883  -  Percival Vickers, Manchester.
an attractive tumbler with simple pressed design and with what appears to be a neatly finished bevel where the base meets the sides.

this completes the pix I have, taking the date to within about six moths of the end of the lozenge period, after which the numbering system started again, from No. 1, though I'd suggest there's less interest in material post February 1884.             After this date, Registration, if allocated by the BoT, appears as simply a number.

Should there be others from the diamond years, that I've missed, then feel free to add to this thread.              

[neilh]

Number Two:  Yep the 420 is the model number in the Percival Vickers catalogue also. It was a half pint tumbler.

[agincourt17]

Re; reply #72  - RD 320330 of 12 April 1878 -Parcel 1, registrant William Frederick Williams of 3, 4 & 5, Little Windmill Street, Golden Square, London:

TNA design registry summary at
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/results/r?_q=glass+design+320330
shows that the registrant was hedging his bets with this design with its purported multiplicity of uses because  RD 320330 was not only registered in Class 3 (Glass), but also Class 1 (Metal), Class 2 (Wood) and Class 4 (Earthenware) !

The following entry at
http://www.antiquebox.org/index-of-british-makers-and-retailers/#W
in a Directory of British antique dressing case, antique toilet box, antique jewellery box and antique writing box manufacturers and retailers, shows William Frederick Williams  & Co. (also trading as Williams and Co. ) trading at 4 London addresses :

William Frederick Williams & Co – Williams & Co (William Frederick Williams): 8 Broad Street, Golden Square, London – 51 Marshall Street, Soho, London –  3, 4 & 5 Little Windmill Street, Golden Square, London – 21 Heddon Street, Regents Street, London.

The Post Office London Directory, 1882, page 464
http://specialcollections.le.ac.uk/digital/collection/p16445coll4/id/38745
describes William F. Williams & Co. as "dressing case makers".

Furthermore,
https://www.sothebys.com/en/articles/a-silver-menagerie-of-majestic-beasts
shows, among  items from a sale in May 2019, "A VICTORIAN SILVER NOVELTY SMOKER'S LIGHTER, WILLIAM FREDERICK WILLIAMS & CO., LONDON, 1879. ESTIMATE: £3,000–5,000" with the comment:

During the Victorian age, silver novelty animals were produced in a different context, made to mirror social and political events of the time, as well as providing an interesting talking point. Lot 354, as an example of the former, was most probably made in response to Charles Darwin’s provocative and often lampooned On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, first published in 1859. The controversy stirred by the book was still alive in the 1870s and in May 1874 The London Sketch Book, a short-lived illustrated magazine, published a caricature of a monkey-like Darwin holding a hand mirror up to the face of his companion, an actual monkey. The latter’s head and features are uncannily like those depicted by this unusual lighter.

So it would appear that William Frederick Williams was a high end retailer and/or manufacturer of a variety of (sometimes very expensive] wares.

Little Windmill Street, Haymarket, was renamed in 1885, when along with Cambridge Street it became part of Lexington Street. Numbers were changed, so the  Site Nos. 3, 4 & 5  Little Windmill Street is now occupied by the modern buildings of 6-10 Lexington Street (on the eastern side of the road just up from the junction of Lexington Street with Brewer Street).
Little Windmill Street lay about 75 metres NE  from Golden Square, which is bounded on the NE side by Bridle Lane (separated from it by, and running parallel to, Great Pulteney Steet. (see photo below of a map of Little Windmill Street from the 1790s showing  #s 3, 4 and 5).

Golden Square, Soho, London, in the City of Westminster, is one of the historic squares of Central London. The square is just east of Regent Street and north of Piccadilly Circus. it is in the heart of Soho and next door to Mayfair: the two most vibrant districts in the West End.
Until its surrender to the Crown in 1536 for the formation of the Bailiwick of St. James the site of Golden Square and the adjacent streets  had formed part of the lands belonging to the Mercers' Company. In 1548  in January 1559/60 it was included in Queen Elizabeth's freehold grant of some sixty acres in the parish of St. Martin in the Fields (together with other lands elsewhere) to William Dodington of London, gentleman. By 1585 the windmill from which Great Windmill Street (and in which now stands the famous Windmill Theatre) and Little Windmill Street take their names had been erected, and the site of Golden Square formed part of the wide area loosely referred to as Windmill Fields. (The famous Windmill Theatre on Great Windmill Street) also takes its name from the same Windmill Fields). By 1670, part of the lands of Windmill fields were known as Gelding Close, presumably so-called as a pasture for geldings, but the name Golden Square, which was in use by the end of the seventeenth century, was evidently a refined corruption. By then it had become valuable as building land, for houses were already going up to the south and east of it. Planned development Golden Square had been designed to contain 'such houses as might accommodate Gentry', and by 1707, thirty-nine houses (in 4 ranges) had been completed and occupied in 1707, there were living in the square a duchess, six peers or future peers (including a future duke), a bishop, six army officers and a number of other residents of title. It very rapidly became the political and ambassadorial district of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, housing the Portuguese embassy among others. It was bounded by Silver (now Beak) Street, Bridle Lane, Brewer Street and Warwick Street.

Fred.

[Paul S.]

thanks for the confirmation Neil.

Fred - your replies are exhaustive to the point of perfection, almost    -  seriously, a very big thanks as always.

Well, that was the end of the line for goblets and tumblers  -  I'd like to be able to say …. "I'm left with nothing to do, but that wouldn't be true  -  it's back to bookbinding, the stamp collection, woodwork, replacing the roof on the shed, and pondering if there might be another subject matter from 1842 - 1884 that we might explore.
suggestions on a postcard to ...…………….     

P.S.    I snapped the attached today - for me the quality is exceptional but more luck than judgment - a small supplementary lens hand held between the camera and subject - trying to kneel whilst holding lens, camera in the other hand, and trying not to frighten what in fact was a pair in cop., although you don't see the other one in the picture.
Apart from knowing that it's probably a damsel fly, I've no idea of the species  -  it's the bright blue ones that are usually in the garden.