30 Cubic feet (2718 photographs: black and white; 450 glass lantern slides; 41 glass negatives; color records; plant patents; publications. )
Type:
Collection descriptions
Archival materials
Photographs
Black-and-white photographs
Lantern slides
Place:
Breeze Hill (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania)
Pennsylvania -- Harrisburg
Date:
1899-1974
Summary:
The J. Horace McFarland Collection includes over 3,100 photographic images of private and public gardens throughout the United States, as well as some from foreign countries, dating from 1899 to 1963. Many of these images, generated for Mount Pleasant Press (later the J. Horace McFarland Company), were used to illustrate trade catalogs published by the firm as well as journal and newspaper articles. The collection also contains color records that were used as reference aids during the printing process, plant patents, and various publications of the McFarland Company.
Scope and Contents note:
The J. Horace McFarland Collection includes over 2,700 black and white mounted photographs, 448 glass lantern slides, and 41 glass plate negatives of gardens throughout the United States dating from 1899 to 1963. A small number of images show gardens in Austria, Canada, England, Mexico, Scotland and Wales. Many of the images, which were generated and used by the J. Horace McFarland Company to illustrate trade catalogs and journal and newspaper articles, indicate the publication(s) in which they appeared. A series of portraits of rosarians, many of them featured in Modern Roses 6, rounds out the image collection. The McFarland Collection also includes color records, plants patents, and miscellaneous publications. Color records are plant 'portraits' that were painted by McFarland Company staff artists in watercolor. They were referenced by the printing department in order to render illustrations of plants in colors as close to the originals as possible. The plant patents are patents for plants issued by the United States Patent Office. They include the plant name, source, filing and patent dates, patent number, and growth characteristics. Most are accompanied by a colored image of the plant identified in the patent. The miscellaneous publications are various pamphlets and booklets published by the J. Horace McFarland Company.
Dr. J. Horace McFarland (1859-1948) was an influential civic leader, author, publisher, horticulturist, and authority on roses. His printing company, Mount Pleasant Press (later the J. Horace McFarland Company), was based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. It published many of the seed and nursery trade catalogs in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century and was one of the first to apply color processes to commercial print applications. J. Horace McFarland Company staffers photographed thousands of different gardens and plant specimens throughout the United States. These images were used to illustrate numerous nursery and seed catalogs, journals and books. Among its many services, the firm sold various themed lectures illustrated by sets of hand-colored glass lantern slides.
McFarland wrote over 200 articles in popular journals as well as a dozen books on roses and gardening. He served as the first president of the American Civic Association from 1904-1924 and led several local and national campaigns to protect communities and scenic areas from urban blight and overdevelopment including the city of Harrisburg and Niagara Falls. McFarland, who served as the president of the American Rose Society (1930-1932) and helped establish a standardized rose identification and registration method, used the gardens on his own 2.5 acre property in Harrisburg, "Breeze Hill," to test hundreds of varieties of roses and plant cultivars. "Breeze Hill" was used as the backdrop for many photographs taken by McFarland's firm.
Related Materials:
The Pennsylvania State Archives in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania includes the J. Horace McFarland Company Records (Manuscript Group 453) and the J. Horace McFarland Papers (Manuscript Group 85).
The Historical Society of Dauphin County in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania includes the J. Horace McFarland Collection (MG 229).
Separated Materials note:
The Smithsonian Institution's Botany and Horticulture Library includes seed and nursery trade catalogs, books, and published materials from the J. Horace McFarland Company.
The United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Library in Beltsville, Maryland has various photographic images, nursery catalogs, publications and miscellaneous records from the J. Horace McFarland Company in its J. Horace McFarland Collection.
Provenance:
Donated in 1992 by James W. Walsh, who purchased the J. Horace McFarland Company from its founder's heirs. (The business was later renamed the Roebuck Printing Company.)
Restrictions:
Access to original archival materials by appointment only. Researcher must submit request for appointment in writing. Certain items may be restricted and not available to researchers. Please direct reference inquiries to the Archives of American Gardens: aag@si.edu.
Rights:
Archives of American Gardens encourages the use of its archival materials for non-commercial, educational and personal use under the fair use provision of U.S. copyright law. Use or copyright restrictions may exist. It is incumbent upon the researcher to ascertain copyright status and assume responsibility for usage. All requests for duplication and use must be submitted in writing and approved by Archives of American Gardens. Please direct reference inquiries to the Archives of American Gardens: aag@si.edu.
Material is subject to Smithsonian Terms of Use. Should you wish to use NASM material in any medium, please submit an Application for Permission to Reproduce NASM Material, available at Permissions Requests.
Collection Citation:
Early Aeronautical Newsclippings (Alexander Graham Bell) Collection, Acc. NASM.XXXX.0086, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution.
Material is subject to Smithsonian Terms of Use. Should you wish to use NASM material in any medium, please submit an Application for Permission to Reproduce NASM Material, available at Permissions Requests.
Collection Citation:
Early Aeronautical Newsclippings (Alexander Graham Bell) Collection, Acc. NASM.XXXX.0086, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution.
Collection documents the Coxe Brothers and Company Inc., an anthracite coal producer in Pennsylvania.
Scope and Contents:
The collection contains primarily drawings of mine machinery and buildings, including buildings within the company town such as worker housing and churches and maps, including real estate maps, contour and topographical maps, maps of highways and roads, insurance maps and others. There are some photographs, including glass plate negatives, of mining machinery and operations; deeds, leases, and agreements and papers relating to Eckley B. Coxe's patents and legal matters.
Arrangement:
The collection is arranged into seven series.
Series 1: Eckley B. Coxe, Jr. Estate Materials, 1891-1969
Series 2: Patent Material, 1871-1902
Series 3: Agreements, Deeds, and Leases, 1882-1949
Series 4: Miscellaneous Documentation, 1866-1950
Series 5: Glass Plate Negatives and Photographs, 1890-1937
Series 6: Drawings, 1885-1991
Series 7: Maps, 1830-1997
Historical:
The Coxe family's connection with Pennsylvania's anthracite coal region is rooted in the prescience of the statesman, author and land speculator Tench Coxe. Recognizing the significance anthracite would play in the development of the newly founded Republic, Tench purchased nearly 80,000 acres of land surrounding outcroppings of anthracite coal in Carbon, Luzerne and Schuylkill counties. He hoped that future generations of the family would profit from the land when the anthracite industry came of age. Indeed, his purchase would secure wealth for the Coxe family and all their mining enterprises well into the twentieth century.
Tench Coxe was born in Philadelphia on May 22, 1755, to William and Mary Francis Coxe, members of a family with a long tradition of land ownership. Tench's great-grandfather, Dr. Daniel Coxe, personal physician to King Charles II and Queen Anne of England, held large colonial land grants in New Jersey and the Carolinas. Though he never visited his property in the new world, Dr. Coxe would eventually acquire the title of Governor of West Jersey. Upon his death, he passed the whole of his North American land holdings to his son, Colonel Daniel Coxe. The Colonel was the first Coxe to leave England for life in America, settling in Burlington, New Jersey in 1702. Inheriting a passion for land, Colonel Coxe distinguished himself by publishing "A Description of the Provinces of Carolana," which in 1722 proposed one of the earliest plans for political union of the British colonies of North America. Tench Coxe explored various career options in his struggle to establish his name in the United States. After considering a profession in law, Tench chose instead to join his father's import-export firm, Coxe & Furman, in 1776. The renamed firm of Coxe, Furman & Coxe operated for fourteen years but was dissolved by mutual agreement after experiencing financial difficulties.
Soon after, Tench and a business partner from Boston established a new commercial enterprise under the name of Coxe & Frazier. After several prosperous years, this firm also disbanded, freeing Tench to pursue a career in public service. Tench's Loyalist sympathies during the American Revolution complicated his political ambitions. Following British General Howe's evacuation of Philadelphia in 1778, the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania accused Tench of treason for collaborating with the enemy. Although he swore an oath of allegiance to the United States of America, his Tory leanings would be used repeatedly to undermine his political influence. Despite his Loyalist past, Tench retained the respect of his patriot neighbors. He was selected as the sole Pennsylvania delegate to the Annapolis Convention in 1786, and then selected to the Second Continental Congress in 1788. After the war, Tench became an advocate for the Whig Party, although his politics were often in direct support of the Federalist cause. This was apparent from a pamphlet he wrote in 1788 titled, "An Examination of the Constitution of the United States," which revealed his strong support for the ratification of the United States Constitution.
With the new government in place, Tench received a variety of appointments to public office under George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. He was named Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in 1790, Commissioner of the Revenue of the United States in 1792 and Secretary of the Pennsylvania Land Office in 1800. After switching his affiliation to the Republican Party in 1803, Tench accepted an appointment from Thomas Jefferson as Purveyor of the Public Supplies, an office that he held until 1812. The duties of his various posts ultimately made Tench an authority on the industrial development of the nation. In 1794 he published a collection of essays under the title, "A View of the United States of America," in which he contemplated the development of commerce and manufacturing in America. These essays reveal his early awareness of coal in Pennsylvania, as he remarked:
"All our coal has hitherto been accidentally found on the surface of the earth or discovered in the digging of common cellars or wells; so that when our wood-fuel shall become scarce, and the European methods of boring shall be skillfully pursued, there can be no doubt of our finding it in many other places."
Anthracite coal was discovered around the year 1769 in Pennsylvania. It is the hardest of the known types of coal, with an average 85%-95% carbon content, as compared to the 45%- 85% range of the bituminous coal found in the western part of the state. The high carbon content in anthracite allows it to burn at much higher temperatures than bituminous coal and with less smoke, making it an ideal fuel for home heating. The only anthracite deposits of commercial value in the United States are located within four major fields in Eastern Pennsylvania and are confined to an area of 3,300 square miles. These four coalfields are commonly referred to as the Northern, Eastern-Middle, Western-Middle and Southern fields. Tench Coxe's awareness of the promise of anthracite coal, coupled with his tenure in the Pennsylvania land office and a family tradition of land speculation spurred him in 1790 to begin purchasing promising acreage. Though he acquired land throughout the country, he particularly focused on land in Carbon, Luzerne and Schuylkill counties in Northeastern Pennsylvania, which he believed held vast underground seams of coal.
Despite large land holdings, Tench Coxe lived most of his life in debt thanks to litigation, tax problems and complications with business partners. Realizing that he would not be able to develop the property in his lifetime, Tench worked diligently to retain the property he believed was enriched with valuable mineral deposits, in hopes that his dreams would be realized by future generations of Coxes. Tench's son, Charles Sidney Coxe, would inherit
from his father a passion for land ownership and for the untapped potential of the anthracite coal region. When Tench Coxe died on July 16, 1824, he left Charles sole executor of his estate, which was composed of approximately 1.5 million acres in eight states. Born July 31, 1791, Charles Sidney Coxe was the sixth of ten children of Tench and Rebecca Coxe. Educated at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University, Charles was admitted to the Philadelphia Bar in 1812. Charles eventually served as District Attorney of Philadelphia and associate judge of the District Court of Philadelphia, but he remained infatuated by his father's vision.
Charles devoted his life to keeping together the large coal properties handed down by Tench to his surviving children. This monumental task involved paying annual taxes on completely unproductive land, fighting a never-ending battle against squatters and timber thieves, and litigating an endless array of boundary disputes. Charles and his family routinely spent their summer months in Drifton, Luzerne County a location that would eventually become synonymous with the Coxe name. His son Eckley Brinton Coxe gained his first experience in the coalfields at Drifton, accompanying his father as he traced the geology of the area in search of coal veins. Besides introducing Eckley to the "family business", the surveys gave Charles invaluable detailed knowledge that he used to preserve the coal deposits on his family's property. Deposits that he discovered comprised nearly half of the entire Eastern-Middle field. Even as his knowledge grew, however, Charles was unable to develop the land he retained. He saw the pioneers of anthracite mining lose fortunes as the mining technology of the day struggled to catch up with the new demands.
Regular shipments of anthracite began in the 1820s as canals opened the coal regions of Pennsylvania to markets in Philadelphia. The demand for anthracite remained relatively low during the early years of the industry, but as markets developed and demand increased, railroads began to compete in the trade and would eventually come to dominate as carriers to all of the major markets. As the problems of mining and transporting coal and developing a market for it were worked out, the demand for "hard coal" grew substantially. Coal sales increased from 364,384 tons in 1840 to 3,358,890 tons in 1850 and would steadily increase throughout the century to levels exceeding 40 million tons annually. Charles Coxe's witness to the inception of this industry unquestionably spurred his desire to realize his father's dream, but like Tench, he too would have to defer to his sons.
Charles S. Coxe had married Ann Maria Brinton in 1832 and together they were the parents of seven children, Brinton, Rebecca, Anna Brinton, Eckley Brinton, Henry Brinton, Charles Brinton and Alexander Brinton. The eldest son, Brinton Coxe, followed the career of his father, establishing himself in the legal profession. Brinton was a renowned lawyer and writer of constitutional law and served with prestige as president of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania from 1884 until his death. The remaining four sons would distinguish themselves in the coal business under the guidance of their brother, Eckley B. Coxe. Born in Philadelphia on June 4, 1839, Eckley B. Coxe entered into a family in which his calling was clear. His aptitude for the calling, however, would astonish the entire industry. Eckley's earl surveying excursions with his father introduced him to the mines, machines and collieries of the anthracite industry. His exposure to local miners must also have made a lasting impression, as his knowledge of their customs and sympathy toward their circumstances proved to be one of his greatest assets as an employer.
Eckley Coxe's formal education began in 1854 at the University of Pennsylvania. Although focusing his studies in chemistry and physics, he took additional courses in French and bookkeeping after receiving his degree in 1858. After graduation, Eckley briefly returned to the coalfields where he was engaged in topographic geological work on his family's land, learning a skill that would later earn him a commission to the Second Geological Survey of Pennsylvania. In 1860 Eckley went abroad to polish his technical education, spending two years in Paris at the Ecole Nationale des Mines, one year at the Bergakademie in Freiberg, Germany and nearly two years on a tour studying the practical operations of European mines. Armed with both practical and theoretical knowledge of his craft, Eckley B. Coxe returned to America and embarked on the mission for which his entire life had prepared him. On January 30, 1865, Eckley, his brothers Alexander, Charles and Henry and a cousin, Franklin Coxe, formed the co-partnership Coxe Brothers and Company.
The company began with a combined capital of $120,000, with Eckley investing $40,000 and the other partners investing $20,000 each. The firm was formed for the exclusive purpose of mining and selling coal from the Drifton property, which they leased from the Estate of Tench Coxe. The Estate had begun leasing property as early as 1852 to various companies, which paid royalties to the estate in return for the coal they mined. Coxe Brothers would operate under a similar lease, but they would, in a sense, be paying royalties to themselves as both partners and heirs. Coxe Brothers and Company began operations in Drifton in February 1865, sending their first shipment of coal to market the following June. Once the operations at Drifton were fully tested and proved successful, Eckley moved to consolidate control over all of his family's land, in order to keep all the mining profits in the family.
By 1879 Coxe Brothers and Company had opened collieries at Deringer, Gowen and Tomhicken, adding Beaver Meadow Colliery two years later. The firm's success exceeded all of the partners' expectations, reaching well beyond the goals set forth in the original Articles of Copartnership. Charles B. Coxe died in 1873 and Franklin Coxe retired from the firm in 1878. In 1885, the remaining partners agreed to extend the life of the firm indefinitely and operate for the purpose of developing the land belonging to the Estate of Tench Coxe.
Even more important to the success of the Coxe family mining interests was the organization of the Cross Creek Coal Company in October 1882. The officers of this company included the three remaining partners of Coxe Brothers and Company, along with a Philadelphia partner, J. Brinton White and the Coxe's first cousin Arthur McClellan, brother of the Civil War General, George B. McClellan. Cross Creek Coal Company took over all of the mining operations on the Estate lands, led by Eckley B. Coxe, president of both companies. Coxe Brothers transferred the mining rights to the Coxe property to the Cross Creek Coal Company but retained control of the Coxe collieries where the freshly mined coal was prepared.
Eckley's shrewd and aggressive management of his family's land proved successful. When his father, Charles S. Coxe died in 1879, Eckley assumed an even more direct role in the management of the property. In addition to receiving the inheritance of his grandfather's land, he, along with his three surviving brothers, became executors of the Estate of Tench Coxe. By 1886, Eckley had brought nearly 3/4ths of his family's property under his direct control. Coal shipments from these properties reached an astounding 1.5 million tons in 1890, a vast improvement from the 27,000 tons sold in its inaugural year. Coxe Brothers and Company did not limit itself to mining operations on the lands of the Estate of Tench Coxe. By 1889, the firm was also leasing lands from the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, West Buck Mountain Coal Company, Anspach & Stanton, the Black Creek Coal Company, and the Central Coal Company. In total Coxe Brothers was operating roughly 30,000 acres of coal property.
Just over twenty years after its inception, Coxe Brothers and Company established itself as the largest individual anthracite producer that was not associated with a major railroad. This distinction, however, made them an obvious target for the expanding railroad industry. Realizing the value of anthracite as freight, railroads entered into a land scramble throughout the region, securing their coal freight by purchasing it before it was mined. This point is perhaps best illustrated by the actions of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which in 1872 purchased 28,000 acres in the anthracite fields. Of the roughly 38 million tons of coal produced in 1888, 29 million had been mined by coal companies linked with the railroads.
The remaining independent producers were forced to negotiate with the railroads to have their coal shipped to market. It was the practice of the railroads to charge exorbitant fees to the independent producers, which in effect reduced the railroads' competition in the coal sale yards. In order to survive, many independent producers were either forced to sell their coal directly to the railroads at the mines or to sell their operation completely to the railroad. Eckley B. Coxe, however, pursued an altogether different means of survival. In 1888, the partners of Coxe Brothers and Company petitioned the Interstate Commerce Commission for relief from the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company (LVRR). They argued that the Lehigh Valley Coal Company (LVCC), entirely owned by the LVRR, sold coal at a price that did not net them sufficient funds to pay the fees that were being charged to Coxe Brothers and Company for the same shipping service. The railroads were willing to operate their coal companies at a loss, since they were more than able to absorb the losses with increased railroad freight. As a result of discriminating between the companies it owned and independent operators, the LVRR was found in violation of federal law and was forced to lower its rates in 1891.
The lengthy trial, however, inspired Eckley to build his own railroad, which began operations in 1891. Incorporated as the Delaware, Susquehanna & Schuylkill Railroad, its tracks linked all of the Coxe collieries with connections to most of the major rail lines in the region. With sixty miles of single gauge track, twenty-nine locomotives and 1,500 coal-cars, they forced the railroads to compete for the immense freight being produced by their coal companies. By compelling his adversaries to come to fair terms with victories in both the courts and in the coalfields, Eckley succeeded in securing Coxe Brothers' position as the largest independent anthracite producers in Pennsylvania. In June 1893, Ezra B. Ely and Eckley Brinton Coxe, Jr. were admitted to the firm of Coxe Brothers and Company. Ezra, a long-time business associate and general sales agent of Coxe Brothers and Company and Eckley, Jr., son of the deceased Charles Brinton Coxe, joined the firm just weeks prior to the establishment of two more Coxe mining enterprises.
On June 19,Coxe Brothers and Company, Incorporated was organized as the selling agency for Coxe coal and purchased from the firm their supply headquarters in New York, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Milwaukee and Philadelphia. This same day also saw the formation of the Coxe Iron Manufacturing Company, which took control of the firm's machine shops in Drifton. In addition to being responsible for the construction and repair of Coxe mines and railroads, this company also filled large outside orders for machinery. It was in these machine shops that Eckley proved himself as one of the most brilliant mining engineers of the day. The United States Patent Office records 111 patents either issued directly to Eckley B. Coxe or as a supervisor of employees who worked under his instructions at the Drifton Shops. Seventy-three of these patents pertained to the details of the Coxe Mechanical Stoker, which introduced the first practical means of burning small sizes of anthracite coal. This innovation put an end to the financial loss associated with large culm banks of fine sized coal that plagued collieries as waste. The subject of waste seems to have driven the business and personal endeavors of Eckley B. Coxe.
As a founder and future president of the American Institute of Mining Engineers, Eckley was appointed to chair a committee to investigate waste in coal mining, which he did thoroughly. His report outlined the waste associated with the extraction, preparation and transportation of anthracite coal. To combat waste in the preparation of coal, Eckley designed and erected the world's first coal breaker made of iron and steel. This fireproof structure, used to separate coal into uniform sized pieces, was also equipped with numerous innovative labor-saving devices, including an automated slate picking chute, improved coal jigs, corrugated rollers for breaking coal and electric lighting for nighttime operations. The breaker at Drifton stood as one of the most revolutionary coal structures in the region until Eckley erected an even more magnificent iron and steel coal breaker at Oneida. In creating more economical methods for preparing and consuming coal, Eckley helped boost the anthracite industry to remarkable levels. Although he secured many of his inventions by patent, Eckley licensed his improvements to many coal operators and created an agency to help install and maintain the complicated machinery at the various collieries. This service reflected Eckley's conviction that the mutual exchange of knowledge in engineering matters would benefit the whole anthracite industry, and in turn would benefit each individual company. That attitude appears to have carried over in his interactions with consumers, as is evidenced by a paper Eckley read before a meeting of the New England Cotton Manufactures, acknowledging that, "It may seem curious that a person whose life has been spent in mining and marketing coal should appear before this association to discuss the economical production of steam, involving, as it does, either the use of less fuel or fuel of less value. But I am convinced that the more valuable a ton of coal becomes to our consumers, the more in the end will be our profit from it."
Eckley recognized, however, that the increased demand for anthracite would subvert his battle against waste. The abundance of coal beds in the region gave rise to numerous operators who often sacrificed long-term efficiency for low-overhead and quick profits. Using cheap machinery and incompetent labor, these operators mined only the most valuable and easily available veins, leaving large amounts to waste. Mining practices like these were prohibited in many European countries, where the right to mine had to be obtained from the government. In many countries, mining operations were required to work to full capacity, so long as they did not compromise the safety of the men or the mine. Having witnessed European laws in practice, Eckley was an advocate for comparable laws in this country, calling for a well-educated corps of experts to inspect the mines and manufactories to ensure the protection of life and property. In later years, mining foremen would be required by Pennsylvania law to pass an extensive exam, demonstrating not only practical experience but also specific knowledge of the principles of ventilation. Eckley was also aware that mining legislation alone could not prevent careless miners.
As an employer of skilled labor and a trustee of Lehigh University, Eckley gave a great deal of thought to the issue of technical education. In concluding a paper titled, "Mining Legislation," read at the general meeting of the American Social Science Association in 1870, Eckley insisted "upon the importance of establishing schools for master miners, in which anyone who works in the mines could, while supporting himself by his labor, receive sufficient instruction in his business to qualify him to direct intelligently the underground workings of a mine." His exposure to the finest technical institutions of Europe made Eckley keenly aware of the shortcomings in America of giving its students an equivalent education. In order to prevent future mining foremen and superintendents to grow up without a theoretical knowledge of their work, Eckley established the Industrial School for Miners and Mechanics in Drifton. The school opened its doors on May 7, 1879, providing young men employed by Coxe Brothers and Company with an opportunity to educate themselves outside of working hours. This unique opportunity gave the young miners a chance to combine the scientific knowledge of various disciplines, including trigonometry, mechanical drawing, physics, mineralogy and drafting with the experience gained in their daily toil. Classes were held free of charge at night and during idle days in the mines in a two-story building erected by Eckley Coxe, known as Cross Creek Hall.
In addition to comfortably seating 1,000 people and housing a library and reading room for the residents of Drifton, it also furnished classrooms for the eleven students who enrolled in the school during its first year. The school succeeded in delivering a first-class technical education to its students for nearly ten years before a fire completely destroyed the Hall in 1888. Five years later the school reorganized under the name Miners and Mechanics' Institute of Freeland, Pennsylvania, which soon after changed its name to the Mining and Mechanical Institute of Freeland. The school continues to operate today as the MMI Preparatory School and stands as a testimonial to Eckley's achievements in promoting technical education.
Eckley and the Coxe family gave generously to the people of the anthracite fields. They donated estate lands for churches and cemeteries of various denominations, as well as schools, parks and baseball fields. Eckley also established a scholarship prize of $300 for the best student at his mining school, which would continue for the term of four years if the recipient chose to pursue higher education. Eckley made a point, however, not to confuse business with charity and confined his donations predominantly to gifts of opportunity and knowledge. But, as the people of Drifton affirmed during the opening ceremonies for Cross Creek Hall, "For relieving those who have been disabled by accidents, providing for the widows and orphans, visiting our homes in times of sickness, taking an interest in the education and welfare of our children and providing a free library, to promote our intellectual culture you are worthy of the highest praise we can bestow." One of the most deplorable circumstances in the coalfields was the scarcity of adequate hospitals. Nineteenth century anthracite mining was extremely dangerous, with miners facing hazards from explosions, suffocation, cave-ins and floods.
By 1881, Coxe Brothers and Company employed 1,171 people, who endured their share of accidents, despite the sound mining methods initiated by the company. The closest hospital was in Bethlehem, which was over two hours away. To remedy the situation, at least for his own workers, Eckley established the Drifton Hospital on September 1, 1882, for the benefit of Coxe Brothers and Company employees. The building could accommodate thirty-five patients and in its first sixteen months of operation treated eighty-five people. In later years, a state hospital at Hazleton was built for the miners of the Eastern-Middle field. Eckley was an obvious candidate for the Board of Commissioners of the state hospital, an appointment he received in 1891.
The company also maintained an accident fund for its employees. In the event a Coxe Brothers employee died, the fund contributed fifty dollars to the family to defray their funeral expenses. It also provided the widows of employees with three dollars a week for one year, allowing an additional dollar per week for each child less than twelve years of age. In cases where the employees were disabled, men were given five dollars a week until they were able to perform light work.
In all his endeavors, Eckley B. Coxe held himself to a high standard of honor. His standard of personal integrity created unusual circumstances when he was elected to the Pennsylvania State Senate in November 1880. Elected a Democrat from the 26th senatorial district, comprised of parts of Luzerne and Lackawanna counties, he declined to take the oath prescribed by the state constitution, thereby forfeiting the office. In an address to his constituents in January 1881, he explained that he was not able to swear to the fact that all his campaign funds had been contributed as "expressly authorized by law." He further stated, "I have done nothing in this campaign that I am ashamed of, or that was inconsistent with strict honesty." A detailed examination of his accounts shows expenses that were not considered "expressly authorized," but were also not uncommon for most of the political candidates in Pennsylvania. In holding himself to the strict letter of the law, he earned the respect of both Democrats and Republicans alike. The next year Eckley B. Coxe was again elected to the Senate, this time with a majority three times as large as the previous year.
Eckley's personal character made him a model senator and he took advantage of the opportunity to spread his opinions across the entire commonwealth. Belonging to the minority party in the Senate, Eckley was unable to initiate any legislation, but did remain vocal concerning many of the major issues of the day. He was particularly interested in the "Voluntary Trade Tribunal Statute," which dealt with the vexed topic of labor organizations. In addressing the Senate, Eckley argued, "Though not pretending to be a workingman, or in any way his representative, but, on the contrary, a large employer of labor of all kinds, I feel and admit that he has equal rights with me. What he properly demands, and what he will have, is justice. To be satisfied, he must feel that the bargain is fair, and that it has been reached in an honorable way, without any resort to coercion. He cares more for this than a slight addition to or a deduction from his daily pay. Where the workingman does not get his dues, trouble must ensue, and capital must pay its share of the bill, which is often a large one." Eckley made every attempt to treat his men with the respect they demanded. Even so, he was not immune to strikes, which brought his collieries to a halt on several occasions. When demands for increased wages by a joint committee of the Knights of Labor and the Miners' and Laborers' Amalgamated Association brought operations in the anthracite fields to a standstill in 1887, Eckley remained open to hearing the grievances of his men, but like many coal operators, refused to meet with organizations, as he did not believe they represented the best interest of his men. As labor struggled to organize in the latter part of the century, workingmen were as determined to stand by their unions as operators were to ignore them.
This state of affairs resulted in repeated struggles between labor and capital throughout the country, struggles that were especially bitter in the coalfields. When a congressional committee was appointed to investigate the labor troubles in Pennsylvania in 1888, Eckley testified, "It does not make any difference to us whether the men belong to any association or not. I do not care what association they belong to or what politics they have; it is none of my business; but when it came to the question, I was always willing and anxious to deal with my own men, and I expect to always; but I want to deal with the men who are interested to the particular question that I have got to settle." Eckley continued to remain active in the mining profession through his associations with numerous professional organizations, including the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Engineer's Club of Philadelphia, the American Chemical Society, the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, to name just a few. In 1870, Eckley published a translation of Julias Weisbach's treatise, "A Manual of the Mechanics of Engineering and of the Construction of Machines, with an Introduction to the Calculus." Weisbach was a former professor of Eckley's at the Bergakademie in Freiberg, and an influential voice in the field of mechanics. This capacious volume, used primarily as a textbook, was completed at a monetary loss, but would, however, associate Eckley's name with one of the leading mechanical engineers in the world.
As Eckley continued to advance his own career and the anthracite industry as a whole, he never lost sight of his principal commitment to developing the lands of the Estate of Tench Coxe. In an effort to fully exploit the resources of his family's land, Eckley organized four additional companies in June 1893. The Drifton, Oneida, Tomhicken and Beaver Meadow water companies were organized to supply water to the industries and citizens of Hazle, East Union, Black Creek and Banks Township, respectively. On June 20, 1893, the capital stock of the four water companies, along with the stock of the Cross Creek Coal Company, Coxe Brothers and Company, Incorporated, the Delaware, Susquehanna and Schuylkill Railroad Company, and the Coxe Iron Manufacturing Company were placed into a trust under the control of Eckley B. Coxe, who served as president of them all. The trust was created to secure the continuation of the companies in the case of the death or sale of interest by any of the partners. The ownership of these companies was held in the same interest as that of the firm of Coxe Brothers and Company, being 4/15ths each with Eckley and Alexander Coxe, 3/15ths each vested in Henry B. and Eckley B. Coxe, Jr., and a 1/15th interest with Ezra B. Ely.
With the establishment of the various new Coxe enterprises, the business of the original firm (Coxe Brothers and Company) became limited to the operation of company stores at Fern Glen, Eckley and Drifton. This was no small point, however. By remaining a partnership, the Coxe family was not bound by the corporation laws of Pennsylvania, which prohibited the operation of company stores. But Coxe Brothers and Company stores respected the spirit of the anti-company store legislation. All Coxe employees were paid in cash that they could spend anywhere and not company script, which they would have to spend on overpriced goods at company stores. Eckley instructed his stores to sell goods as cheaply as possible and at no point were store debts deducted from an employee's wages. The various Coxe-owned enterprises remained in Eckley's charge till May 13, 1895, when at the age of 55, Eckley Brinton Coxe died of pneumonia. His death was mourned across the region as the buildings of Drifton were draped in black and Coxe collieries went idle. On the occasion of his funeral, every mine in the region suspended operations as a tribute to their deceased colleague.
Although Eckley was gone, his benevolence lived on through his wife of twenty-six years, Sophia Georgiana (Fisher) Coxe. Sophia undoubtedly served as Eckley's guiding light in his many altruistic endeavors. She was collectively known throughout the region as the "Angel of the Anthracite Fields" and the "Coxe Santa Claus." Sophia earned the latter title by providing the children of the Coxe mining towns with gifts and candy at an annul Christmas Party held in Cross Creek Hall. With the income guaranteed to her in Eckley's will, Sophia embarked on numerous acts of charity, funding additions to the Hazleton State Hospital, White Haven Sanitarium and the Philadelphia Children's Hospital. Sophia also advanced Eckley's work in education as a faithful benefactor of the Mining and Mechanical Institute of Freeland. She endowed the school with a new gymnasium and a trust fund to keep the school operating after her death, which occurred in 1926.
As Eckley's benevolence continued after his death, so too did his mining enterprises. His two surviving brothers, Alexander and Henry Coxe remained active in the business affairs of the Coxe mining companies, as Alfred E. Walter, a business associate, took control of the trust and presidency of the Coxe companies. The trust would subsequently pass to Irving A. Stearns from 1901 to 1905, when the trusteeship was canceled. The mining enterprises continued to expand through the turn of the century under the administration of Alexander B. Coxe. A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, Alexander had distinguished himself in the Civil War, serving on the staff of Major-General George Meade. After the war, he played a major role in the financial management of Coxe Brothers and Company as the only Coxe partner, other than Eckley, who resided in Drifton. He continued to live near the collieries for nearly forty years.
In March 1900, Alexander initiated a series of business maneuvers to streamline the management of the various Coxe companies. He purchased the entire capital stock of the Coxe Iron Manufacturing Company and the selling agency, Coxe Brothers and Company, Inc. for the Cross Creek Coal Company. Now representing the combined capital of three companies, the Cross Creek Coal Company officially changed its name to Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. The new company name distinguished only by the replacement of "and" by "&". Days later, the original firm of Coxe Brothers and Company was dissolved by agreement, with the remainder of its property and assets being assigned to the Cross Creek Coal Company for the sum of $300. The business of the firm would be continued by Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. and the Delaware, Susquehanna & Schuylkill Railroad, both of which were owned in the same interest as the original firm. As both the executor of the Tench Coxe Estate and partner of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc., Alexander was in a unique situation to further consolidate the management of the Coxe properties. On June 24, 1904, the numerous individual leases from the Estate of Tench Coxe to Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. were consolidated into one blanket lease. The lease granted exclusive mining rights to the latter on the Drifton, Eckley, Stockton and Beaver Meadow properties, as well as on portions of the Tomhicken, Derringer and Oneida properties. The terms of the lease were agreed to continue until the coal was exhausted from the property or mining operations became unprofitable.
In 1904 Coxe Brothers was operating roughly 30,000 acres of land, although not all of it came from family leases. In addition to owning small portions of land, they still held leases on additional property from the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, West Buck Mountain Coal Company, Anspach & Stanton, Black Creek Improvement Company and the Central Coal Company. The year 1904 also marked the death of Henry B. Coxe, leaving the sole responsibility of the company and the estate in Alexander's charge. With most of the family leaving the coalfields for homes in Philadelphia and nobody in the family willing to take the reins of the family business, the aging Alexander contemplated giving in to the railroads and selling off the mining operations. The Pennsylvania Railroad approached Alexander with an offer to purchase the entire operation of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc., in an attempt to secure the valuable freight being produced at Coxe collieries. This freight totaled over one 1,500,000 tons of anthracite with 1,000,000 tons being mined directly from Coxe land. The LVRR, however, was not willing to lose its principal independent coal shipper and made Coxe Brothers a matching offer. Fortunately for the LVRR, Alexander Coxe served on its board of directors and in 1905 agreed to sell the whole of the Coxe mining enterprises to the LVRR.
The sale was completed on October 7, 1905, and included all of the property and assets of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. comprising, 1100 miners' houses, real estate in Chicago and Milwaukee, floating equipment in New York harbor, all the mined coal on hand as well as the leasehold rights covered in the 1904 lease. Also included in the sale were the Delaware Susquehanna & Schuylkill Railroad and the four Coxe subsidiary water companies. In return the LVRR paid a total of 18.4 million dollars, $6,400,000 being paid in cash and $12,000,000 in collateral trust four percent bonds, which could be redeemed in semi-annual payments of $500,000. The bonds were issued by the Girard Trust Company, which secured payment with Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. stock, pledged by the LVRR. These bonds would mature in February 1926 at which time the stock was to be transferred back to the LVRR. The sale had the effect of taking the Coxe family out of the mining industry after forty years of successful operations.
The sale also marked the last major land acquisition by the LVRR, which competed in an industry that by some estimates controlled as much as 78% of the entire anthracite output. Nearly all of the other large independent operators had sold-out years ago, leaving the Coxe family operations as a relic of a day gone by. The family, however, would not forget the employees who gave the better part of their lives in service to the company. The Coxe Relief Fund was created by a resolution of the former stockholders of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. on October 31, 1905, and was funded by contributions from the Coxe family. In addition to paying off the sundry debts of the company, the fund provided a pension to numerous Coxe employees. The Coxe family benefited greatly from Alexander Coxe's management of the company. In addition to providing the estates of his former partners with an $18.4 million dollar sale, he secured the Heirs of Tench Coxe a steady income of coal royalties for years to come. The stress and anxiety of such an endeavor, however, had an adverse effect on his health. Just four months after completing the sale to the LVRR, Alexander B. Coxe died.
With all of the original Coxe partners dead, a new generation of Coxe heirs stepped in to manage the affairs of the Estate of Tench Coxe. In January 1906, Henry Brinton Coxe, Jr. and Alexander Brown Coxe, both sons of Henry B. Coxe, became the Estate Agents. The management of the estate's property remained in the hands of agents and attorneys-in-fact for its entire existence, one member of which was always a descendant of Tench Coxe.
Although selling all of its direct interests in mining, the Coxe family retained ownership of the land it leased to Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc., now a subsidiary of the LVRR. Indirectly having control of the leases to the Coxe property, the LVRR subleased the mining rights of the Coxe land to the Lehigh Valley Coal Company, placing Coxe Brothers in the business of preparing coal at the breakers.
For years Federal law had prohibited railroad companies from owning their own coal properties, a law that was easily avoided by placing control of their properties with a coal company whose stock they owned entirely. Laws seeking to put an end to monopolistic trusts were becoming increasingly more stringent, however, placing all of the major rail lines in the anthracite field at risk of prosecution. In June of 1906, the Hepburn Act passed into law. Containing a commodities clause, it explicitly forbade the interstate shipment by railroad companies of any mining product in which they held a direct or indirect interest.
The LVRR became an easy target for the law. The railroad could not readily disguise its ownership of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. because it was paying for the purchase with railroad bonds. A decision in 1911, by the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, affirmed that the LVRR was in violation of the Commodities Clause of the Hepburn Act by its stock ownership of both the LVCC and Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. To evade the clause the Lehigh Valley Coal Sales Company was organized in an attempt to distance the railroad from its mining operations. The sales company purchased Coxe Brothers and Lehigh Valley coal at the breakers and distributed it to the various dealers.
The Lehigh Valley Railroad Company's entanglement with its coal properties remained obvious nonetheless and in March 1914, the Federal Government filed suit against the railroad for trust evasion, charging it with violations of both the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and the Hepburn Act. After six years of litigation, a decision was handed down ordering the dissolution of the Lehigh Valley mining combination. The final decree of the court was handed down in November 1923, outlining the exact steps the court required. The decree called for the creation of a trusteeship that would hold the complete voting power of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. stock. The trustee was further ordered not to vote the stock in any way that would bring about a unity of interest or a suppression of competition between the two companies. Under the direction of the Coxe trustee, Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. went through a series of changes in the operation of their property. In 1929 management of the Coxe properties was turned over to the Jeddo-Highland Coal Company, operated by Donald Markle, son of the highly successful retired anthracite operator, John Markle. The change in management took control of the Coxe Brothers property out of the hands of the LVCC, severing the remaining links with the LVRR. The agreement with Jeddo-Highland had been in place for seven years when, in 1936, Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. was given direct control of its mining operations, placing them back in the business of mining coal for the first time since the company was sold in 1905.
Management by Coxe Brothers did not prove to be very sound, as strikes repeatedly shut down operations. During a strike in 1938, an operative employed by the company to spy on the men reported, "They say the company is not providing and using props at any place – that no effort is being made to save the roof. They say no coal is being taken which entails the expenditure of anything but the minimum amount of money. This they interpret to mean the abandonment of the company's operations there in the near future is a certainty. This is now the basis for the strike." The poor management of Coxe Brothers under the control of its board of directors, many of whom were directors of the LVRR, did not go unnoticed by the Coxe trustee and in 1940 management of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc., once again, was turned over to the Jeddo-Highland Coal Company. Management of portions of some properties were also granted to the Gowen Coal Company, Wolf Collieries Company, Pardee Brothers and Company, Inc., Sterrick Creek Coal Company and the Haddock Mining Company.
The year 1940 marked the last year that Coxe Brothers had any direct or indirect control concerning mining, selling or transporting coal from its leased property. The anthracite industry saw peak years of production during World War I, but then began a steady decline from which it would never recover. By the 1940s coal operators were becoming increasingly scarce giving the LVRR an opportunity to regain control of the capital stock of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. In 1942 they petitioned the United States Government to end the trusteeship, arguing that Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. acted strictly as a property agent without any control of the operators' policies. They further argued that 82% of the coal on Coxe Brothers property had been removed since the trusteeship was created and with the decreased market for anthracite coal, finding a buyer of the Coxe Brothers stock would be nearly impossible.
The courts handed down a decision in favor of the railroad and ordered the stock of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. returned to the LVRR. The return of Coxe Brothers' stock was authorized by the courts with the explicit requirement that quarterly reports concerning the financial condition and conduct of business be submitted to the office of the Attorney General of the United States. The approval of the Attorney General's office was also required before Coxe Brothers could change the terms or execute any new lease. In its petition to the courts the LVRR alluded to the "short prospective life of Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc." This attitude appears to be confirmed upon the latter's return to LVRR control. A memo from C.E. Hildum, Vice President of the LVRR, in June 1943, stated, "Coxe Bros. presumably could use its cash to continue mining operations, either by its own organization or through management agreements, until its working funds were exhausted, or until its operating leases exceeded the Railroad Company profits from the movement of coal."
The LVRR was once again mining for freight, a practice that ultimately brought about a significant decrease in coal royalties for the Heirs of Tench Coxe. In 1943, Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. leased over 19,000 acres of land, 79% of which was leased from the Estate of Tench Coxe. The remaining portions were either owned in fee or leased from the Deringer Estate, LVCC or the Estate of Charles S. Coxe. For the next seven years Coxe Brothers did not operate any of its collieries but was still required to obtain the heirs' consent before subleasing to tenants. The Estate Agents, however, were unhappy with the way Coxe Brothers was managing their property. The agents believed that Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. was mainly interested in obtaining freight for the railroad rather than obtaining the maximum income from the properties.
Coxe Brothers was further criticized for allowing the Haddock Mining Company to operate the Beaver Meadow, Deringer and Tomhicken properties without paying royalties or taxes for a period of nine months. In 1938, an amendment was made to the 1904 lease in which royalties were to be paid to the estate on a profit-sharing basis, with 2/3 of the net income being paid in royalties. The estate was then permitted to employ accountants to examine the records of Coxe Brothers. The accountants found numerous discrepancies in Coxe Brothers' accounts and in February 1949 the Heirs of Tench Coxe filed a lawsuit against Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. to recover $350,000 due them in royalties. The heirs charged that Coxe Brothers took unauthorized deductions in computing their net income, the basis for establishing royalty payments. The lawsuit, however, was just an example of the animosity that existed between the two interests. It eventually became the clear desire of the Estate Agents to eliminate Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. as a "middleman" by canceling the terms of the 1904 lease.
In 1950, the Estate Agent, Daniel M. Coxe, called a meeting of the Coxe heirs to discuss the canceling of their lease with Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. It was agreed by all parties involved that the result of such an action would create considerable savings on overhead and increased royalties to the Estate. As part of the settlement agreement from the lawsuit filed a year earlier the terms of the 1904 lease were canceled. In addition, Coxe Brothers assigned all of its subleases, titles to culm and refuse banks, its fee land, mining equipment, drainage tunnels and miners houses to the Estate of Tench Coxe. Of particular significance in this agreement was the stipulation that all of the maps, leases, surveys, correspondence and records of every nature relating to the property be transferred to the Estate. The ownership of these records were retained by the Estate until 1968 when they were transferred to the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, as a portion of this collection. The courts approved the settlement agreement in July 1950, having the effect of putting Coxe Brothers & Company, Inc. out of business and in line for liquidation. Coxe Brothers was officially dissolved in July of the following year with distribution to its stockholders, the LVRR. The settlement also placed the Coxe family in direct control of its landholdings for the first time in forty-five years.
By 1950, the anthracite industry was a shell of its former self. A deflated market for anthracite led to decreased income for the estate. Under the direction of the agents, new leases were granted to mining operations, including the Jeddo-Highland Coal Company, but finding additional tenants proved to be extremely difficult. Given the state of affairs in the anthracite fields it soon became the clear intention of the Tench Coxe Estate to divest itself of its land holdings.
In 1956, the first major land sale was completed for 2,000 acres, to the Beryllium Corporation of Reading to establish the firm's new Nuclear Division. The land sale trend continued in 1959 with the sale of the Drifton Village and again in 1960 with the sale of Tomhicken. Coal production on estate lands was down to 62,744 tons in 1960 without any hope of future improvements. Facing the prospect that the majority of accessible coal deposits had been exhausted and profitable leases were no longer available, Daniel urged to the heirs to liquidate the real estate of the Estate of Tench Coxe. The large number of individuals, estates and trusts holding an interest in the Tench Coxe Estate, however, made property sales extremely difficult.
With over fifty-seven distributees, representing 108 heirs on two continents, the fractional interests of the estate were getting smaller as the number of heirs multiplied with each generation. To avoid the lengthy task of securing consent from all of the individual family members, the heirs and owners of the Tench Coxe properties executed a trust agreement, which conveyed their authority to sell the family property to a group of trustees, which included Daniel M. Coxe, Eckley B. Coxe, III and Tench C. Coxe, Jr. The trust was organized under the name Tench Coxe Properties Liquidating Trust in December 1961.
Initially, the trust was able to sell only small portions of the property, but nonetheless actively pursued a buyer for the large acreage that remained. The trust liquidated the last remaining portions of the estate lands in 1966, with the sale of 16,400 acres to Butler Enterprises, Inc., owned by the prominent Philadelphia real estate developers, Philip and Nathan Seltzer. Butler Enterprises was drawn to the area due in large part to the efforts of Can-Do, Inc., (Community-Area New Development Organization). This citizen-sponsored organization was established in 1956 with the intention of drawing new industries to the Hazleton region, which Philip Seltzer described as being one of the "great progressive areas of Pennsylvania." Can-Do, Inc. functioned with assistance from the Coxe family, which had a great deal to gain from increasing the vitality of the region.
The assistance was also very much characteristic of the Coxe family's tradition of providing support for the social and economic development of the region. The transfer of title to Butler Enterprises marked the end of an era for the Coxe family, an era spanning over 150 years of direct involvement with the people and geology of the area. An example of this relationship between labor and capital can be seen today at Eckley Miners Village, a historic site representing a nineteenth century company mining town or "patch town." The site is maintained by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, on land once owned by the Estate of Tench Coxe. The family's impact will also continue to be felt at MMI Preparatory School, which continues to benefit from contributions from the Heirs of Tench Coxe and the Sophia Coxe Charitable Trust.
Although the Coxe family has long since left the coalfields of Northeastern Pennsylvania, the potential still exists for the Coxes to return to the region, through the auspices of Tench Coxe, Inc. Established in 1968, this company holds the gas and oil rights to roughly 13,000 acres of property included in the sale to Butler Enterprises. Although the prospect of discovering gas and oil may not be substantial, large domes discovered on the property in the 1950's may prove to be valuable storage sites for natural gas surpluses pumped into the Northeast during summer months. The domes are situated at depths of 18,000 feet, which do not make them economically useful to date.
Source
Coxe Family Mining Papers, Background Notes, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 2001. (last accessed February 28, 2022, http://www2.hsp.org/collections/coxe/findingaid.html)
Related Materials:
Materials at Other Organizations
Historical Society of Pennsylvania
Coxe Family Papers, 1638-1970 (inclusive), 1730-1900 (bulk)
The collection is broken into three major series of papers. They include the Tench Coxe section, 1638, 1776-1824, 1879; the Charles Sidney Coxe, Edward Sidney Coxe, and Alexander Sidney Coxe legal papers section, circ 1810-1879; and Third Party Papers, circa 1722-1815. The Tench Coxe Section is broken down further into four series: Volumes and printed materials; Correspondence and general papers; Essays, addresses and resource material; and Bills and receipts
Coxe Family Mining Papers, 1774-1968
The Coxe family mining papers document the history of what once was the largest independent anthracite coal producer in the United States
The William J. Wilgus Collection, 1915-1916
Documents the valuation conducted by William Wilgus during 1915 and 1916 on land and property either owned or leased by Coxe Brothers and Company, Inc. Coxe Brothers was a company that mined and leased anthracite coal lands in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Provenance:
The collection was donated by Tench Coxe Properties through Daniel M. Coxe, Senior Trustee to the Division of Extractive Industries, National Museum of History and Technology (now the National Museum of American History). The exact date of the acquisition is unknown, but it is presumed to be pre-1978.
Restrictions:
The collection is open for access. Unprotected photographs and negatives must be handled with gloves.
Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Statistical atlas of the United States based on the results of the ninth census 1870 with contributions from many eminent men of science and several departments of the government. Comp. under the authority of Congress by Francis A. Walker, M.A., superintendent of the ninth census ..
Author:
United States Census Office 9th census, 1870 Search this
The collection contains business records and photographic materials documenting the International Salt Company. The business records include correspondence, account and ledger books, a payroll book, patent and trademark information, print advertising and marketing materials, and a salesman salt display kit. The photographic materials include a series of photographs by William M. Rittase, a series of photographs by Harold Haliday Costain, a small photograph album, snapshots, and slides. The images cover all facets of the salt manufacturing and packaging operations, and include photographs taken in New York State, Michigan, and Louisiana.
Scope and Contents:
The collection contains business records and photographic materials documenting the International Salt Company. The business records include correspondence, account and ledger books, a payroll book, patent and trademark information, print advertising and marketing materials, and a salesman salt display kit. The photographic materials include a series of photographs by William M. Rittase, a series of photographs by Harold Haliday Costain, a small photograph album, snapshots, and slides. The images cover all facets of the salt manufacturing and packaging operations, and include photographs taken in New York State, Michigan, and Louisiana.
The scrapbooks contain advertisements for the International Salt Company's Sterling Salt label and other leading salt companies, especially Morton's. Much of the ephemera consists of labels, but there are also small pamphlet cookbooks. The cookbooks, prepared and marketed by various salt companies, tout recipes for tasty dishes using specific salts and expound upon the merits of salt in general, especially the medical benefits. Other clever salt-related advertising appears in conjunction with maps, buttons, song books, calendars, and health exercises.
Series 1, Business Records, 1894-1937, consists primarily of financial materials--ledgers, cash books, monthly statements, timekeeping and payroll information--for the Avery Rock Salt Mining Company (A.R.S.M.Co.), Detroit Rock Salt Company, Detroit Salt Company, International Salt Company, and the Restof Mining Company. Additionally, there is one annual report for the International Salt Company (1957) and the newsletter Saltmaker, 1964.
There are two A.R.S.M.Co. ledgers, 1898-1907 and 1907-1922. The first ledger, 1898-1907, predates the founding of the International Salt Company, and it is likely that A.R.S.M.Co was absorbed by International Salt during a merger. Documentation recorded including inventories, merchandise, labor, surplus, insurance, office expenses, legal expenses, taxes, bills receivable, directors' committee fees, fuel, candles, oil, waste and packing, rental, repairs and maintenance, interest, labor, feed, outside salary account, Cuban consignment account, and loan account. Specific persons, such as superintendents F. Rundio and Sidney Bradford, are mentioned and specific companies including Restof Mining, Joy Morton Company, Havana Mill, G. Lawton Childs & Company, International Salt of New York and various others (pages 193-212), are listed with expenses.
The Detroit Salt Company (general ledger), 1911-1913, consists of one bound volume documenting the company's assets, liabilities, expenses, earnings, advance accounts, and old accounts.
Detroit Rock Salt Company (cash record), 1912 October-1913 January, consists of one bound volume documenting cash received and cash disbursed.
International Salt Company, Inc., Independent Salt Company Division (monthly statements), 1933 October-1937 December, consists of one bound volume of general ledger trial balance sheets organized chronologically. Detailed documentation includes general expenses, assets, capital assets, liabilities, special reserves, net worth, profit and loss statements, warehousing costs and tonnage purchased.
Restof Mining Company (time and payroll), 1894 July 1-1895 March 31, consists of one bound volume of 400 pages, documenting the time and payroll for employees. The volume contains the name of the employee, the number of days worked, hourly wage earned per day, the amount earned, advances, board due, store (supplies due), rent, and any balances due. A portion of the volume is severely water-damaged.
Series 2, Trademarks, 1881-1935, consists of copies of issued trademark declarations from the United States Patent Office. The trademarks are for company names, logos, salt containers and packages, and various salt products. The trademarks are arranged alphabetically by the name of the trademark. For example, Amaessa, a trademark for baking powder and salt is filed with other trademarks beginning with the letter "A." Additional materials consist of one file folder of correspondence and printed materials about patents, trademarks and copyright laws. The correspondence relates specifically to the ownership of certain trademarks by International Salt Company, and there is correspondence from John L. Ryon, assistant sales manager and W.T. Chisolm, vice-president of International Salt Company. There are compiled lists of brand names, trademarks, and package designs for which International Salt registered at the United States Patent Office, 1926-1927. There are two examples of small cloth bags branded with "Ideal Salt" and some packaging, such as "White Lily High Grade Salt" and labels such as "Purex Free Running Table Salt." The Peter J.L. Searing trademark for salt (No. 52,963) and Chicago Sawed Salt-Block Company (No. 15,174) provide examples of ethnic imagery. A trademark is a brand name. A trademark or service mark includes any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination used or intended to be used to identify and distinguish the goods/services of one seller or provider from those of others, and to indicate the source of the goods/services. Although federal registration of a mark is not mandatory, it has several advantages, including notice to the public of the registrant's claim of ownership of the mark, legal presumption of ownership nationwide, and exclusive right to use the mark on or in connection with the goods/services listed in the registration.
Series 3, Photographs, 1934-1993, is divided into five subseries: Subseries 1, Harold Haliday Costain, 1934; Subseries 2, William Ritasse, circa 1934; Subseries 3, Loose Photographs, 1969-1993; Subseries 4, Slides, circa 1970s; and Subseries 5, Album (unidentified), undated.
Subseries 1, Harold Haliday Costain, circa 1934, consists of three photographs (approximately 10 1/2" x 13") black-and-white prints mounted to 16" x 20" boards. The prints are numbered #6, #42, and #44 and depict a salt mine and equipment used in salt manufacturing located in Avery Island, Louisiana.
Subseries 2, William Ritasse, circa 1934, consists of black-and-white prints (10" x 14") signed by Ritasse which are mounted on 18 1/2" x 20" boards. The photographs are arranged numerically from #350 to #480. Many of the photographs are captioned. American photographer William Rittase (1887-1968), active in the 1920s-1930s, is known for his industrial photography. Rittase's images provide insight into International Salt Company activities such as salt manufacturing, packaging operations, general factory processes, printing salt bags, can labeling, brine storage, exteriors of buildings, crushing salt, men in the salt mines, machine shop views, and equipment.
Subseries 3, Loose Photographs, 1969-1993, consists of black-and-white and color prints, as well as transparencies depicting salt mines and related activities. Some of the photographs document a visit by International Salt Company executives to the Jefferson Island, Louisiana salt plant.
Subseries 4, Slides, circa 1970s, consists of seventeen color slides documenting salt plants, equipment and salt miners.
Subseries 5, Album (damaged mine), undated, consists of twenty-two 4" x 6 1/2" black-and-white photographs documenting the damage to a salt manufacturing plant. The photographs are captioned, but there is no indication of the geographic location of the salt plant.
Series 4, Advertising and Marketing Materials, 1920-1948, consists of two scrapbooks (14" x 17" and 11" x 16") that contain primarily tear sheets, unbound periodical pages showing an advertisement as printed, or as a proof, newspaper clippings, magazine clippings, correspondence, pamphlets, price lists, recipes, labels, periodicals, and other ephemera.
The scrapbook, 1920-1931, consists primarily of advertisements and newspaper clippings related to advertising salt products, especially for Morton's Salt and Diamond Crystal Salt. Other companies represented include Colonial Salt Company, Carey Salt Company, Jefferson Island Salt Company, Kerr Salt Company, Mulkey Salt Company, Myles Salt Company, Ohio Salt Company, Pennsylvania Salt Manufacturing Company, Remington Salt Company, Star Salt Corporation, Union Salt Company, Worcester Salt Company, and Watkins Salt Company.
The scrapbook from 1945-1948 is devoted to advertisements for the International Salt Company and Sterling Salt, which promoted salt uses for the home (table salt, curing meats, and brines), industry (rock salt for winter weather) and agriculture (killing weeds). Many of the advertisements were part of the "Pass the Salt" campaign and were featured in publications such as Woman's Day, National Provisioner, Food Industries, Hide, Leather and Shoes, Chemical Previews, and Public Works. The scrapbook is divided into three sections: institutional, weed prevention, and Lixate, a process developed by the International Salt Research Laboratory for making brine. Many of the advertisements were prepared by J.M. Mathes Incorporated.
Also included is a traveling salt kit for Sterling Salt Company salesmen, undated, featuring small glass vials of sterling salt from mines in Detroit, Avery Island, Louisiana, and Restof, New York. Each vial notes the types of salts--purified, softener, iodized, medium flake, coarse flake, granular flour, and meat.
Series 5, Posters, circa 1920s, consists of oversize advertising posters for Worcester Salt Company. There is one set of labels from an exhibit titled "I Eat Rocks! Salt of the Earth."
Arrangement:
The collection is divided into five series.
Series 1, Business Records, 1894-1937
Series 2, Trademarks, 1881-1935
Series 3, Photographs, 1934-1993
Subseries 1, Harold Haliday Costain, circa 1934
Subseries 2, William Ritasse, circa 1934
Subseries 3, Loose Photographs, 1969-1993
Subseries 4, Slides, circa 1970s
Subseries 5, Album (damaged mine), undated
Series 4, Advertising and Marketing Materials, 1920-1948
Series 5, Posters, circa 1920s
Biographical / Historical:
The International Salt Company incorporated on August 22, 1901, and in 1902, the company purchased the stock and assets of the National Salt Company, which had failed. By 1934, International Salt was a holding company for six subsidiaries: Avery Salt Company (West Virginia), Detroit Rock Salt Company (Michigan), Eastern Salt Company (Massachusetts), Independent Salt Company (New York), International Salt Company, Inc. (New York), and Retsof Mining Company (New York). All of the subsidiaries operated rock salt mines and evaporated salt plants and distributed salt. In 1940, the International Salt Company decided to sell four of its subsidiaries--Avery Salt Company, Detroit Rock Salt Company, International Salt Company, Inc., and Retsof Mining Company.
John M. Avery discovered rock salt at Petite Anse, Louisiana in 1862. Petite Anse Island was renamed Avery Island in the late 19th century. Ownership and mining of salt at Petite Anse involved numerous parties until 1886, when New Iberia Salt Company took over operations. In 1896, the Avery family began operating the mine, and they founded the Avery Rock Salt Mining Company. In 1899, the International Salt Company leased the mine.
The Detroit Salt and Manufacturing Company was founded in 1906. The company quickly went bankrupt during construction of a shaft and was acquired in 1910 by the Watkins Salt Company, which incorporated the new organization under the name Detroit Rock Salt Company. The company experienced success and the International Salt Company purchased the mine circa 1914. In 1983, International Salt closed the mine's operations and in 1985, Crystal Mines, Inc., purchased the mine as a potential storage site.
In 1885 the Empire Salt Company of New York was renamed the Retsof Mine Company, and the Village of Retsof was founded near the mine shaft. During the next 110 years, the mine grew to become the largest salt-producing mine in the United States and the second largest in the world. Before the initial collapse in March 1994, the mine encompassed an underground area of more than 6,000 acres, and the mine footprint (outer edge of mined area) extended over an area of nearly ten square miles. At the time of the collapse, the Retsof Mine was owned by Akzo-Nobel Salt Incorporated (ANSI) and, during the winter of 1993--994 operated at full capacity to meet demands for road salt throughout the northeastern United States. The Retsof Mine ceased operations on September 2, 1995, and by December, twenty-one months after the initial collapse, the mine was completely flooded.
Related Materials:
Materials held at the Smithsonian Institution
Smithsonian Institution Libraries, National Museum of American History
Trade catalogs from International Salt Company Inc., 1900s
Materials held at Other Organizations
Harvard University Archives
Ritasse, William M., 1894-1968. Photographs of Hardvard University campus and environs taken by William M. Ritasse, circa 1930.
Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs
Avery Rock Salt Mining Company, Plan. June 16, 1924 (AKZO No. 7-77-02) - Avery Island Salt Works, Akzo Salt Incorporated, Avery Island, Iberia Parish, LA
Salt Mine Village, Salt Workers' Houses No. 6, Avery Island, Iberia Parish, LA
Avery Island Sugarhouse, Avery Island, Iberia Parish, LA
State Library of Louisiana
Historic Photograph Collection contains images of salt mining at Avery Island, Louisiana.
University of North Carolina, Southern Historical Collection at the Louis Round Wilson Library
Papers for the Avery Family of Louisiana, 1796-1951
Provenance:
Tom Maeder donated the collection on June 13, 2009.
Restrictions:
The collection is open for research.
Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
The records document the development and use of Reddy Kilowatt, a cartoon figure trademark created in 1926 by Ashton B. Collins, Sr. More than 150 investor-owned electric utilities in the United States and at least twelve foreign countries licensed the use of the Reddy Kilowatt trademark. The records include a wide range of textual and visual materials and sound and moving image recordings.
Scope and Contents:
The collection consists of approximately thirty cubic feet of material created or compiled by Ashton Collins, Sr., and the Reddy Kilowatt Service; Reddy Kilowatt, Inc.; and Reddy Communications, Inc. Materials include publications, advertisements, clip art, photographs, drawings, sketches, correspondence, small artifacts, ephemera, and audio-visual material. It is divided into eight series: Series 1, Background Materials, 1926-1977; Series 2, Ashton Collins, Sr., Materials, 1926-1974; Series 3, Client Services and Publications, 1935-1999; Series 4, Advertising Materials, 1939-1997; Series 5, Scrapbooks, 1935-1960; Series 6, Copyright, Trademark and Other Legal Materials, 1926-1994; Series 7, Reference Materials, 1926-1992; Series 8, Audio-Visual Materials, 1939-1989.
Throughout its history, the Reddy Kilowatt firm was particularly thorough in keeping records of its publications and services. In addition to materials generated by the company itself, there is a significant amount of material accumulated through efforts in market and legal research activities. Particular strengths of the collection include a wide variety of Reddy Kilowatt publications and ephemera; trademark and legal files; files kept on other trademark characters; audio-visual materials; and materials relating to the public debate over atomic energy. The audio-visual materials are unusual because of the amount of textual documentation retained. There is also a significant portion of material documenting the company's involvement in the 1964-1965 World's Fair. The collection is also particularly rich in correspondence and memoranda. The reach of possibilities involving the appearance of the Reddy Kilowatt character in a variety of poses, media, and merchandise should not be underestimated.
Series 1, Background Materials, 1926-1977
This series is divided into three subseries: Subseries 1, Articles of Incorporation, 1953; Subseries 2, Histories and Origins of Reddy Kilowatt, 1926-1977; and Subseries 3, Reddy Remarks, 1935-1936. Series 8, subseries 6, consists of five hours of oral history interviews with Mrs. Ashton Collins Sr. and her son Ashton Collins Jr.
Subseries 1, Articles of Incorporation, 1953, contains the packet of legal information mailed to licensees including the certificate of incorporation, Collins's letter of transmittal, a summary of the corporate structure, the joint tenancy agreement, the corporate by-laws, and copies of a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The packet also includes the Reddy Kilowatt Guide Book, which directed licensee companies on correct and incorrect methods of depicting Reddy Kilowatt. Upon incorporation, Collins retained 80 percent of the company's stock; the remaining 20 percent was available only to Reddy Kilowatt licensees. The Reddy Kilowatt Service begun by Ashton Collins, Sr., in 1934, was wholly owned by him until the formation of Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., in 1953.
Subseries 2, Histories and Origins of Reddy Kilowatt, 1926-1977, contains a variety of documents that illustrate the origins and development of both the Reddy Kilowatt character and the company that promulgated his use. A photo album and newspaper clippings from the First Alabama Electrical Exposition document the first appearance of Reddy Kilowatt. Newspaper clippings, graphics, and ephemera from 1926 to 1934 illustrate the adoption of Reddy Kilowatt into advertising use by a handful of eastern and southern electric utilities. Files of press clippings spanning 1937 to 1977 consist largely of utility company newsletters and articles from trade publications. Correspondence is also included. The press clipping files document a carefully developed and tightly controlled company mythology about the emergence of the Reddy Kilowatt character and the success of Collins's endeavors.
Subseries 3, Reddy Remarks, 1935-1936, includes promotional materials that describe Collins's advertising program to prospective clients as well as a series of newspaper advertisements from three electric utilities. This subseries represents Ashton Collin's initial attempt to design an entire advertising program in conjunction with promoting a trademark figure.
Series 2, Ashton Collins, Sr., Files, 1926-1974
This series is divided into four subseries: Subseries 1, Correspondence, 1926-1964; Subseries 2, Speeches, 1942-1974; Subseries 3, Articles, 1933-1951; and Subseries 4, Miscellaneous, 1933; 1953.
Subseries 1, Correspondence, 1926-1964, includes letters discussing Collins's original attempts to set up the Reddy Kilowatt program, as well as Collins's later revitalization of the Reddy Kilowatt/lighting bolt connection. Also included are thank you letters following the Edison Electrical Institute's tribute to Collins and a few holiday cards. Collins's correspondence is also distributed throughout the collection in conjunction with specific topics.
Subseries 2, Speeches, 1942-1974, includes transcripts and notes from speeches given by Collins to various electrical industry forums. Subjects include trends in the electrical consumer market, political situations involving electric utilities, and recommendations for electric utility advertising. Themes include calls for action against government regulation of public utilities and the need for specific advertising directed toward youth and women. Correspondence and event programs are included, as well as a reference file containing material about public speaking and relevant issues in the electrical industry.
Subseries 3, Articles, 1933-1951, contains seven short editorials submitted to Electrical Worldin 1933 and two articles written by Collins for investor-oriented magazines (1947 and 1951).
Subseries 4, Miscellaneous, 1933; 1953, contains a hotel bill and a sheet of the Reddy Kilowatt letterhead used by Ashton Collins.
Series 3, Client Services and Publications, 1935-1999, encompasses the range of publications and services provided to licensees of the Reddy Kilowatt trademark. Publications range from clip art illustrations to detailed program guides. Services include wiring certification, portable talking figures for exhibition, comprehensive advertising plans, access to demographic surveys, special informational mailings, and access to trademark merchandise. The first seven subseries are publications arranged alphabetically; the remaining eight subseries are specific service programs, also arranged alphabetically: Subseries 1, Clip Art, 1936-1978; Subseries 2, Communications in Environment/Youth, 1971-1972; Subseries 3, Reddy Bulletin, 1935-1964; Subseries 4, Reddy Kilowatt Activities, 1934-1935; Subseries 5, Reddy Kilowatt Ink, 1986-1993; Subseries 6, Reddy Kilowatt's Review, 1936-1940; Subseries 7, Reddy News, 1942-1999; Subseries 8, Environmental Program, 1960-1974; Subseries 9, Grass Roots Impact Plan, 1950-1952; Subseries 10, Reddy-Items Merchandise, 1947-1994; Subseries 11, Reddy Kilowatt Talking Figure, 1949-1970; Subseries 12, Reddy Kilowatt Youth Program, 1938-1987; Subseries 13, Reddy Wiring Program, 1955-1963; Subseries 14, Special Executive Mailings, 1950-1994; and Subseries 15, Subject Files, 1952-1988.
Subseries 1, Clip Art, 1936-1978, includes mat service sheets, original sketches, and layout boards. The mat service sheets were sent regularly to client companies for use in advertisements. They include Reddy Kilowatt in a variety of poses and activities meant to illustrate a wide variety of uses for electricity as well as the benefits of investor-owned utilities. Subjects include but are not limited to household appliances, farm uses, atomic energy, national defense, electric rates, power outages, safety, voting, famous Americans, holidays, the New York World's Fair (both 1939 and 1964-1965), and the Beatles. One noteworthy theme is the potential of electrical appliances to alleviate household chores, specifically targeted toward women. The sketches included in the subseries originate from Ray Crosby, longtime art director for Reddy Kilowatt. Included among the layout boards are the original designs for a series of 1940s advertisements concerning American mobilization for war. The subseries also contains the Reproduction Proof Index, which cross-references a detailed list of subjects with corresponding service sheet numbers. The index incorporates mat service sheets from approximately 1955 to the indexes' publication dates, 1970-1972.
Subseries 2, Communications in Environment/Youth, 1971-1972, contains issues of the newsletter, Communications in Environment/Youth, and related correspondence. Communications in Environment/Youth informed client companies of issues of public concern related to utility companies, including environmental issues, and provided information about successful public programs. These include topics such as plant siting, interactions with public school systems, information about nuclear plant safety, efforts to switch to recycled paper, and youth safety programs. The correspondence includes internal memoranda discussing connections between youth culture and environmental concerns, and promotional letters sent to client companies.
Subseries 3, Reddy Bulletin, 1935-1964, contains issues of the Reddy Bulletin, a promotional device for the Reddy Kilowatt Program and a means to communicate industry-wide information. It contains advertisements for Reddy Kilowatt merchandise, comic books, films, television commercials and other promotional materials. Promotional merchandise includes items such as ashtrays, balloons, candy, soap, decals, patches, scorebooks, notepads, aprons, canning labels, pens, safety posters, dishes, coasters, clocks, playing cards, poker chips, bill inserts, calendars, billboards, correspondence cards, and plywood display figures. Examples of many of the items were included with the Reddy Bulletin. Where possible, these items have been left in situ. The Reddy Bulletin also includes general information relevant to electric utility advertising executives.
Subseries 4, Reddy Kilowatt Activities, 1934-1935, contains issues of the earliest client-oriented publication from the Reddy Kilowatt Service. A one-page sheet, Reddy Kilowatt Activities described usage of the Reddy Kilowatt trademark by the initial licensees of Reddy Kilowatt.
Subseries 5, Reddy Kilowatt Ink, 1986-1993, contains issues of the quarterly newsletter, Reddy Kilowatt Ink. Begun in 1986, the newsletter included two pages of clip-art along with suggestions for use in advertisements. It filled the former function of Reddy News, which was reformatted into a magazine-style industry publication in the 1970s.
Subseries 6, Reddy Kilowatt's Review, 1936-1940, contains issues of Reddy Kilowatt's Review, which combined advertisements by licensees with commentary by Ashton Collins. Anecdotes of consumer response to Reddy Kilowatt and testimonials from clients appear sporadically.
Subseries 7, Reddy News, 1942-1999, contains issues of Reddy News and a thorough index. Initially, Reddy News was a collection of advertisements by clients, released biannually. It was meant to stimulate advertising ideas among licensee companies and included explanatory copy that underscored the goals of the Reddy Kilowatt Program . Reddy Newswas reformulated in the 1970s as a bi-monthly trade publication focused on the business concerns of investor-owned utilities, though examples of advertisements were still included. The hand-written index was compiled by Mrs. Collins, Sr., and cross-references detailed subject headings with Reddy News issues from 1942 to 1970.
Subseries 8, Environmental Program, 1960-1974, includes consumer brochures, clip art, and a program guide titled Environment: A Reddy Kilowatt Program. There is also a notable 1973 study, "Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power-Analysis and Approaches," complied by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., and released only to client companies. This series represents Reddy Kilowatt, Inc.'s response to increased public scrutiny of the environmental impact of power plants in the 1960s and 1970s, especially atomic energy facilities. More information about the public relations strategies developed by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., in relation to atomic energy is contained in Series 4, Advertising Materials, 1939-1997; Subseries 1, Bernard J. Bachem Files, 1959-1980. The firm's market research on the public debate concerning atomic energy is reflected in a series of audio recordings located in two sub-subseries located in Series 8, Audio-Visual Materials, 1939-1989; Subseries 4, Sub-subseries 3, News Programs, 1976-1979 and Sub-subseries 4, Speeches, 1975-1980, undated.
Subseries 9, Grass Roots Impact Plan, 1950-1952, contains a series of brochures, clip art and promotional documents. The Grass Roots Impact Plan was an advertising program designed to "fight creeping socialism" by promoting the benefits of investor-owned utilities. The plan also promoted the use of atomic energy. The brochures were mailed out to participating companies in intervals to be kept in a binder for a complete program guide.
Subseries 10, Reddy-Items Merchandise, 1947-1994, includes catalogs, supplier information and publicity material related to the Reddy-Items Merchandise Program. Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., contracted for a wide variety of merchandise items to distribute through its client companies. There is little information or correspondence within the collection about the actual process of ordering such materials. The catalogs provide an overview of merchandise available for specific years. Interested researchers may wish to refer to the artifact collection for actual examples of Reddy-Items merchandise and to examine the Reddy Bulletin, used primarily to advertise these products to clients. See Series 3, Client Services and Publications, 1935-1999, Subseries 3, Reddy Bulletin, 1935-1964.
Subseries 11, Reddy Kilowatt Talking Figure, 1949-1970, consists of correspondence, design proposal, design specifications, display kit instructions and publicity materials related to a three-dimensional Reddy Kilowatt figure used at expositions and fairs. The figure was wired to an external microphone and speaker, so that the figure could talk to the audience and answer questions. A script is included with the display kit instructions, along with explanatory photographs. Multiple photographs of the figure in use are included with the textual materials.
Subseries 12, Reddy Kilowatt Youth Program, 1938-1987, includes a program guide, presentation binder, promotional materials, pen and ink illustrations, poetry, documentation of two Reddy Kilowatt youth clubs, business presentation scripts, and a government anti-communist brochure. The "Mother Juice" rhymes illustrate Ashton Collins, Sr.'s early interest in focusing advertising attention on youth populations in order to inculcate appreciation of electricity and its applications. The confluence of the baby boom and the post World War II anti-communism movement made this focus a mainstay of the Reddy Kilowatt Program, providing Collins with an opportunity to combine capitalist economic values with consumer electricity usage. The script for "Fission, Fertility, and the Future" spells out Collins's reasoning behind his interest in influencing youth populations, and the accompanying program guide and presentation binder illustrate the mechanics of his youth-oriented advertising plan for electric utilities. Of particular note is the 1964 survey of adults and adolescents testing for trademark recognition and attitudes about electricity. The survey was commissioned by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., and performed by Gilbert Youth Research Organization in five cities across the United States. Another notable item in the subseries is Communist Target, a 1960 report by J. Edgar Hoover to the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Subseries 13, Reddy Wiring Program, 1955-1959, includes brochures, ephemera, and photographs related to the Reddy Wiring Program. This program promoted a specific standard of electrical wiring in new homes. Participating builders were then allowed to designate their products as "Medallion" or "Gold Medallion" homes.
Subseries 14, Special Executive Mailings, 1950-1994, consists of letters and press releases sent to a list of advertising and public affairs executives of Reddy Kilowatt client companies. Topics include, but are not limited to, requests for information, legal updates, personnel changes, promotions of specific advertising programs, and reprints of articles.
Subseries 15, Subject Files, 1952-1998, are arranged alphabetically by subject heading. Subjects include, but are not limited to, sports trophies, ventriloquist acts, brochures about the 1976 Bicentennial, consumer information brochures, and the Annual Report competition. Of note is the 1953 Artist Guide, which explains the particulars of drawing Reddy Kilowatt.
Series 4, Advertising Materials, 1939-1997, is divided into three subseries: Subseries 1, Bernard J. Bachem Files, 1959-1980; Subseries 2, Business Advertising, 1940-1997; and Subseries 3, Client Advertising, 1939-1977.
Subseries 1, Bernard J. Bachem Files, 1959-1980, consists of files generated and maintained by Bernard J. Bachem, the vice-president in charge of audio-visual media and the Reddy Kilowatt Environmental Program from approximately 1958 to 1972. The files are arranged alphabetically by subject heading. Topics include production and syndication of television commercials, nuclear energy public relations strategies, radio scripts, and the Reddy and Mr. Toot children's show. Of note is a file of correspondence with Terrytoons, which contracted with Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., to produce television commercials.
Subseries 2, Business Advertising, 1940-1997, consists of brochures and presentation materials developed for advertising to business clients. The subseries includes several "presentation binders" used at meetings with potential clients to describe the Reddy Kilowatt Program. In 1940, Ashton Collins, Sr., began collecting testimonials from executives at licensee companies for use in approaching new clients. These became a mainstay of his business advertising approach until the 1960s, when the company began developing a series of glossy brochures. Slide-shows and filmstrips also became a key advertising tool; scripts and related memoranda are contained within this subseries, and are also found in Series 8, Audio-Visual Materials, 1939-1989, Subseries 1, Supplementary Materials, 1945-1984; and Subseries 5, Filmstrips, 1939-1984.
Subseries 3, Client Advertising, 1939-1977, contains advertisements created by licensees of the Reddy Kilowatt trademark. Materials are organized alphabetically by subject and include newspapers, bill inserts, notices, brochures, employee handbooks, annual reports, comic strips, signs and posters. More examples of client advertisements can be found in Series 3, Client Services and Publications, 1935-1999, Subseries 3, Reddy News, 1942-1999.
Series 5, Scrapbooks, 1935-1960, undated, consists of eight scrapbooks: Plant Openings, Publicity, Reddy on Display, Reddy Made Magic, Transportation, Use of Reddy on Trucks; and Reddy news Launchings. The Plant Openings, 1948-1949, details when a plant opened and contains the associated advertising for the plant dedication typically with photographic collages. The Publicity Scrapbook, 1935-1950, contains newspaper clippings about Reddy Kilowatt and articles from trade publications such as the Advertisers Digest. Reddy on Display Scrapbook, 1948, depicts window displays of Reddy Kilowatt at various public service and gas companies across America. The Reddy Kilowatt Scrapbook tells the story of Reddy Kilowatt's daily activities starting at 6 a.m. and ending at 2 a.m. The Reddy Made Magic Scrapbook, 1948, contains publicity for the Technicolor motion picture film, Reddy Made Magic, which tells the story of electricity. The majority of the publicity consists of announcements for the showing of the film. The Transportation Scrapbook, 1947, contains advertising for electric and gas powered buses, trolleys, and trams. Reddy Kilowatt is cast as the servant for electricity, gas, and transportation. Use of Reddy on Trucks Scrapbook, undated, consists of black-and-white photographs of electric companies using the Reddy Kilowatt logo and clippings from the Reddy Bulletin of trucks. Reddy News Launchings Scrapbook, 1942-1960, consists of pages from the Reddy News presumably used for developing news releases.
Series 6, Copyright, Trademark and Other Legal Materials, 1926-1994, is divided into six subseries: Subseries 1, Copyright Materials (general), 1926-1953; Subseries 2, Trademark Materials (general), 1932-1953; Subseries 3, United States Trademarks, 1933-1989; Subseries 4, Foreign Trademarks, 1937-1994; Subseries 5, Reddy Kilowatt v. Mid-Carolina et al., 1937-1976; Subseries 6, Trademark Character Files, 1937-1976; and Subseries 7, Reference Materials, 1945-1980.
Subseries 1, Copyright Materials (general), 1926-1953, contains general copyright information and compiled lists of copyrights for various Reddy Kilowatt activities, such as the Reddy News, Reddytoons, and bulletins, and correspondence between the Alabama Power Company and the Library of Congress Copyright Office about copyrighting the basic figure and name of Kilowatt and such prefixes as "Reddy," "Happy," and "Handy." The Alabama Power Company initiated this correspondence in 1926 to protect its symbolic character "Reddy Kilowatt" for appliance sales and general advertising.
Subseries 2, Trademark Materials (general), 1932-1953, includes general correspondence about trademarks, trademarks not granted, trademark renewals and re-publication, trademark assignments, and infringements cases. The trademark assignment file also contains a patent assignment (United States patent # 2,349,706) from Ashton B. Collins to Reddy Kilowatt, Inc. The patent is for a display device designed primarily to hold advertising matter. The infringement materials relate to improper uses of Reddy Kilowatt and clients seeking permission or clarification on the proper use of the trademark.
Subseries 3, United States Trademarks, 1933-1989, consists primarily of registered trademarks, certificates of renewal, correspondence about the registration process with the United States Patent Office and examples of the trademark being used by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc. The bulk of the correspondence is from C.A. Snow and Company, registered patent attorneys, and Louise M. Bender, corporate secretary for Reddy Kilowatt, Inc. Examples of the trademarks are found in the Reddy News, "clip sheets" of trademark symbols , on business letterhead, stickers, playing cards, calendars and other ephemera. Trademark file #651,768, contains a copy of the Reddy Kilowatt Handbook of Trademark Usage, 1958. This handbook was intended to guide electric light and power companies licensed to use Reddy Kilowatt trademarks. Trademark file #827,151, contains a small binder of Reddy Kilowatt small appliance advertisements, 1938 to 1965, not inclusive. This subseries is arranged chronologically by registered trademark number.
Many of the materials in this series were filed under the provisions of the Lanham Act, named for Representative Fritz G. Lanham of Texas, passed on July 5, 1946, and signed into law by President Harry Truman to take effect "one year from its enactment," on July 5, 1947. The Lanham Act is found in Title 15 of the U.S. Code and contains the federal statutes governing trademark law in the United States. The Act prohibits a number of activities, including trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false advertising.
Subseries 4, Foreign Trademark Materials, 1937-1994, consists of registered trademarks, correspondence and examples of the Reddy Kilowatt trademarks in foreign countries such as Australia, Barbados, Mexico, Kenya, the Netherland Antilles and South Korea. The Kenya file contains specific information about trademark law and policies in Kenya. Several publications of note are Law of KenyaTrademarks Ordinance Chapter 506, 1962; The Merchandise Marks Ordinance Chapter 505, 1963, detailing the specific Kenyan laws and information on the electricity industry in Kenya; the East African Power and Lighting Company's The East African Power and Light Company, Directors Report and Accounts, 1965; and The Power Supply Industry in Kenya, 1966.
Subseries 5, Reddy Kilowatt v. Mid-Carolina et al., 1926-1960, includes correspondence and legal documents related to the trademark infringement lawsuit filed by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., against Mid-Carolina Electric Cooperative and the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA). The lawsuit was filed in 1953 and resolved by Judge Harry E. Watkins in 1956. The subject of the dispute was "Willie Wiredhand," an advertising trademark character used by the NRECA. Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., alleged that the character was drawn similarly to Reddy Kilowatt and used in comparable ways, thus confusing consumers' ability to discern between the two. Judge Watkins's decision hinged on the legal boundaries drawn between service areas of investor-owned utilities and electric cooperatives. Because electric cooperatives were prevented from competing for investor-owned consumer audiences, Judge Watkins deemed that the trademarks also were not in competition. Ashton Collins, Sr., was greatly disappointed by the decision, and this is reflected in the post-decision correspondence files. Other files of note concern consumer surveys in South Carolina and Iowa commissioned by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., with the aim of finding evidence to bolster the lawsuit; depositions from participants are included in the files. Ashton Collins, Sr.'s affidavit and documentation of the Willie Wiredhand trademark also are included in the subseries.
Subseries 6, Trademark Character Files, 1937-1976, contains the reference files developed by Ashton Collins, Sr., and Reddy Kilowatt, Inc. concerning other trademark characters. The correspondence reflects an interest in factors leading to success of other trademark characters as well as an active concern with trademarks that might infringe on Reddy Kilowatt's success. Files include early characters such as the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroads' Chessie the Cat and Borden's Elsie the Cow. A large file on Smoky Bear contains advertisements including Reddy Kilowatt. Files that reflect infringement concerns include Willing Water, Bill Ding, Mr. Wirewell, and Genie.
Subseries 7, Reference Materials, 1945-1980, contains files developed on topics relating to non-character corporate trademarks. Materials include brochures, articles, advertisements, publications and correspondence. Files on efforts by Xerox Corporation, Coca-Cola Company and Dow Chemical Company to regulate language about their trade names are included. Other notable files include Bakelite advertisements and a file of correspondence and articles concerning Isadore Warshaw, who testified on behalf of the NRECA during the Reddy Kilowatt v. Mid-Carolina et al., hearings.
Series 7, Reference Materials, 1926-1992, consists of general files maintained by Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., for internal reference. It is divided into five subseries: Subseries 1, Client Use of Services, 1977-1984; Subseries 2, New York World's Fair, 1938-1939, 1961-1966; Subseries 3, Subject Files, 1940-1992; Subseries 4, Testimonials, 1939-1977; and Subseries 5, Empty Binders, 1926-1987.
Subseries 1, Client Use of Services, 1977-1984, consists of files maintained during the incarnation of the company as Reddy Communications, Inc. During this period, the firm was emphasizing its usefulness as an information clearinghouse for the electric utility industry. These files include monthly reports on client use of services as well as more detailed reports on steps taken to meet client requests for information.
Subseries 2, New York World's Fair, 1938-1939; 1961-1966, contains files largely accumulated during the participation of Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., in the 1964-1965 New York World's Fair, with some documentation surviving from the 1938-1939 New York World's Fair. Reddy Kilowatt was used prominently in "Tower of Light," the investor-owned electric utility exhibit. The 1964 exhibit included a musical show which met with some initial criticism and was revised for the 1965 fair to become "Holiday with Light." Materials include press releases from production companies and Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., scripts, photographs and production documents for the shows; correspondence with the production company; and electrical industry trade publications.
Subseries 3, Subject Files, 1940-1992, includes files on unique uses of Reddy Kilowatt, Reddy Kilowatt-themed apparel, verses written by consumers, World War II-era advertisements, and files used by company staff for market research.
Subseries 4, Testimonials, 1939-1977, contains letters from executives at licensee companies attesting to the benefits of receiving the Reddy Kilowatt Service. The letters were occasionally edited and compiled for use in business presentations.
Subseries 5, Empty Binders, 1926-1987, includes the original binders and albums used for presenting Reddy Kilowatt programs.
Series 8, Audio-Visual Materials, 1939-1984, undated
The series is divided into five subseries: Supplementary Materials, 1945-1984; Animation Cels, 1946; 1985; Moving Images, 1940s-1989; Audio, 1946-1980; and Filmstrips, 1939-1984.
Subseries 1, Supplementary Materials, 1945-1984, contains scripts, production documents, promotional materials, correspondence and memoranda related to the audio-visual materials in this series. Of particular note are the files containing production documents and correspondence related to The Mighty Atom. These files track the decision-making process within Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., concerning the inclusion of previous footage from Reddy Made Magic. Other materials relating to this subseries may be found in Series 4, Advertising Materials, 1939-1997, Subseries 1, Bernard J. Bachem Files, 1959-1980.
Subseries 2, Animation Cels and Sketches, 1946; 1985, contains mylar animation cels and paper sketches used in the production of Reddy Made Magic and the "Adventure Kid" television commercial.
Subseries 3, Moving Images, 1940s-1989, contains all film (excluding the filmstrips) and video in the collection and is organized chronologically. The films and videos include animated educational films, commercials, television shows, home movies, an informal instructional video, and an employee appreciation video.
Subseries 4, Audio, 1946-1980, undated
This series contains all the audio (excluding those items associated with filmstrips) and is divided into 5 subseries.
Sub-subseries 1, Music, 1954-1960, undated, contains Reddy Kilowatt theme songs and promotional music used by Reddy Communications and is organized chronologically, with undated materials last.
Sub-subseries 2, Promotional, 1946-1979, undated, consists of promotional audio such as radio commercials and informational spots. The items are organized chronologically, with undated materials last.
Sub-subseries 3, News Programs, 1976-1979, consists of recordings on cassette tapes. The cassette tapes are organized chronologically.
Sub-subseries 4, Speeches, 1975-1980, undated, contains recordings of speeches and presentations given by important figures in and outside of the electrical industry. The items are organized chronologically, with undated materials last.
Sub-subseries 5, Corporate Interviews, circa 1974-1977, consists of informal interviews conducted by Reddy Communications, Inc. employees. The interviews are organized chronologically.
Sub-series 6, Oral Histories, 1983, consists of five hours of audio cassette recordings with Mrs. Ashton Collins, Sr. and Ashton Collins, Jr. at the initial stages of collection acquisition. The oral histories were conducted by John Fleckner, Archivist with the Archives Center, National Museum of American History. Topics discussed include biographical information about Ashton Collins, Sr.; the early history of the Reddy Kilowatt Service; Mrs. Ashton Collins, Sr.'s experiences in the Reddy Kilowatt, Inc. office; her participation in electric industry conventions; Cuba's ousting of Reddy Kilowatt; and the transition in the company's services during the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Sub-subseries 7, Reference CDs, consists of all reference copies made of the audio. Multiple titles are contained on each disc.
Subseries 5, Filmstrips, 1939-1984, consists of filmstrips and their associated audio and elements (negatives, A and B roll, etc.), paired together by title. The filmstrips are organized chronologically.
Arrangement:
Collection is arranged into eight series.
Series 1, Background Materials, 1926-1977
Subseries 1.1, Articles of Incorporation, 1953
Subseries 1.2, Histories and Origins of Reddy, 1926-1977
Subseries 1.3, Reddy Remarks, 1935-1936
Series 2, Ashton Collins, Sr., Materials, 1926-1974, undated
Subseries 2.1, Correspondence, 1926-1964
Subseries 2.2, Speeches, 1942-1974, undated
Subseries 2.3, Articles, 1933-1951
Subseries 2.4, Miscellaneous, 1933; 1953
Series 3, Client Services and Publications, 1935-1999, undated
Subseries 3.1, Clip Art, 1936-1978, undated
Subseries 3.2, Communications in Environment/Youth, 1971-1972
Subseries 8.2, Animation Cels and Sketches, 1946; 1985
Subseries 8.3, Moving Images, 1940s-1989
Subseries 8.4, Audio, 1946-1980, undated
Biographical / Historical:
Ashton B. Collins, Sr. (1885-1976), the commercial manager of Alabama Power Company, created the trademark character Reddy Kilowatt in 1926 in an attempt to humanize electric utility service for marketing and other corporate communications purposes. Reddy Kilowatt first appeared publicly at the 1926 Alabama Electrical Exposition in a display for the Alabama Power Company, which also ran supporting newspaper advertisements. The original figure had five arms to illustrate the many capabilities of electric service. Though Collins originated the idea of Reddy Kilowatt, he asked an engineer from the company's drafting department, Dan Clinton, to create a usable sketch of the character. After the exposition, Collins retained the copyrights to Reddy Kilowatt. In 1932, he recruited a friend, Dorothea Warren, to develop several sketches of Reddy Kilowatt in an attempt to sell what Collins called "The Reddy Kilowatt Program." At the time, Collins was employed by Edison Electrical Institute to travel the country promoting electrical household cooking appliances. He used the opportunity to network with electric utility managers and to promote his idea of using Reddy Kilowatt to humanize electric service in the home. Collins convinced his first clients in 1933. By the end of 1934, at least six other electric utility companies had adopted the "Reddy Kilowatt Program."
Subscribers to the Reddy Kilowatt Service received sheets of clip art for use in advertisements. The mechanism for this distribution was called a "mat service." The Reddy Kilowatt mat service was the backbone of the licensee program from the 1930s until the late 1960s. The mat service offered various poses of Reddy Kilowatt to be included in advertisements for the licensee companies, as well as complete advertisements to which the licensee companies could simply add their name. Another publication, Reddy News, was soon developed to reinforce the program. Published biannually, it was sent to licensee companies to provide ideas about ways to use the Reddy Kilowatt trademark.
As the mat service evolved, the Reddy Kilowatt figure found many uses. Common themes were the benefits of electrical appliances for farms and homes, safety, and holidays. The descriptions of electrical appliances emphasized gender roles in alluding to the potential new freedom for women from household chores. Farm-oriented advertisements underscored increased farm productivity through electrical innovations such as incubators and automated milking machines. As electric usage increased, the mat service added advertisements pointing out the need for updated wiring in order to maintain safety. More mundane concerns included electric service issues such as power outages, vandalism and timely bill payment. A wide variety of Reddy Kilowatt holiday poses became available, ranging from the Easter Bunny to President's Day and Halloween. Christmas was especially well illustrated, accenting the possibility of electrical appliances as gifts.
The Reddy Kilowatt Service was only available to investor-owned utilities, and the mat service reflected this by emphasizing the benefits of this economic structure. Other economic themes included the inexpensiveness of electric service and payment of taxes by investor-owned utilities. The service also began to express a specific political agenda in response to public ownership of utilities and rural electrification cooperatives. Bolstered by post-World War II anti-communist sentiments, the Reddy Kilowatt Service began issuing advertisements promoting free enterprise which linked public and co-operative utilities with the road to socialism. In 1950, Collins launched the Grass Roots Impact Plan, a comprehensive advertising plan incorporating these themes.
Ashton Collins consistently emphasized to his licensees the need to begin the consumer education process early. Youth education was a clear priority for the Reddy Kilowatt Service and was even included in Collins's initial "Reddy Remarks" program via a bedtime story booklet. Licensee companies sponsored Reddy Kilowatt Youth Clubs in the late 1940s, inspired by Collins's speeches emphasizing the importance of youth programming. In the mid-1960s, Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., developed a comprehensive youth program for client companies that incorporated youth education with capitalist economic values. Collins developed a supporting slide presentation titled "Fission, Fertility, and the Future." Tailored to an audience of business executives, the presentation emphasized the importance of reaching youth during a period of social upheaval in order to protect the interests of investor-owned utilities.
Film and television programs developed by the company also reflected the emphasis on youth outreach. Since the company's business revolved around a cartoon character, the transition into animation seemed fairly simple. Reddy Kilowatt, Inc., entered into a partnership with Walter Lantz Productions to produce Reddy Made Magic, a 1946 cartoon about the history of electricity. However, producing audio-visual media turned out to be too expensive and the experiment with animation remained limited. In 1957, Collins tested the waters again by contracting for a commercial with Terrytoons, a low-budget animation company and, in 1959, the company hired John Sutherland to update Reddy Made Magic for the atomic age. The Mighty Atom recycled the historical sequence from the previous film and added a new sequence promoting the use of atomic energy. Collins already had used the cheaper media of filmstrips and slide presentations for business presentations, and this format also was incorporated into the youth program. Licensee companies were encouraged to use Reddy Kilowatt in their own sponsorship of radio and television programs, and some used Reddy Kilowatt in locally produced commercials.
Ashton Collins was an aggressive and skillful promoter of Reddy Kilowatt, and the range of the program was not limited to the United States. Collins began registering his trademarks in prospective markets early on, and soon received trademarks in Canada (1934), Argentina (1937), Great Britain (1938), and Mexico (1938). Trademarks were also granted in Australia, Barbados, Kenya, Mexico, South Korea, Venezuela and the Netherlands Antilles. Though no official list of international licensee companies is available, materials within the collection indicate lively usage of Reddy Kilowatt in South America and Australia.
Ashton Collins, Sr. was married in 1931 to Mrs. Ashton Collins, Sr. They had two sons, Ashton, Jr., and Beatty. Each member of the family became involved in the business over time, though that was not required by Ashton Collins, Sr., at any time. After the two boys left home, Mrs. Collins began volunteering at the office; her work included filing, photocopying, and assembling indexes and scrapbooks. After his release from the Air Force, Ashton Collins, Jr., approached his father about working in the company. Ashton Collins, Sr., met with him over the course of a day and outlined a program for him to work his way up through the company. Collins, Jr., agreed and began work in the mailroom. In 1962, he became president of the company and his father became chairman of the Board of Directors. Beatty Collins's involvement in the company was limited to service on the Board of Directors.
By the late 1960s, the business climate for investor-owned utilities had changed significantly. Public concern over the environmental impact of power plants resulted in greater scrutiny of new plant construction, particularly in regard to nuclear energy facilities. Electric utilities no longer desired to sell increased output, as building new plants became too costly to justify their expense. The Reddy Kilowatt Program reflected these changes in several ways. An environmental program was developed to help electric utilities navigate their way through the increasingly complicated public and business climate. This included a number of services specifically targeted toward the issue of atomic power such as consumer advertising meant to demonstrate the minimal output of radioactive waste and a low-profile consulting service focusing on atomic plant siting issues. As companies moved away from blanket advertising for electric usage, the Reddy Kilowatt character was relegated to children's programming. As Ashton Collins, Sr.'s, influence in the company began to wane, the youth program moved away from economic education and shifted to conservation issues and electrical safety. The company changed its name to Reddy Communications, Inc., at some point before 1982 and began to market itself as an information clearinghouse and consulting service.
In 1998, the company was bought by Northern States Power, which had recently become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Xcel Energy.
Related Materials:
Related Archival Materials: See Louisan E. Mamer Rural Electrification Administration papers, 1927-2002 (AC0862).
Related Artifacts: The Division of Information Technology and Communications holds artifacts related to this collection (Accession #: XXXX-XXXX).
Provenance:
Donated to the Archives Center by Xcel Energy in 2005.
Restrictions:
Collection is open for research but is stored off-site and special arrangements must be made to work with it. Contact the Archives Center for information at archivescenter@si.edu or 202-633-3270.
Researchers must use reference copies of audio-visual materials. Reference copies are ½ inch VHS, audio cassette, or compact disc. When no reference copy exists, the Archives Center staff will produce reference copies on an "as needed" basis, as resources allow. There are no reference copies on VHS or DVD for the filmstrips, and the Archives Center does not have a filmstrip projector.
Technical Access: Titles on Beta Max video tape and all picture and audio elements for Original Film (OF) 913.7 cannot be viewed. Viewing the film and filmstrip portion of collection requires special appointment.
Rights:
Collection items are available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions.
Collection is open for research but is stored off-site and special arrangements must be made to work with it. Contact the Archives Center for information at archivescenter@si.edu or 202-633-3270.
Researchers must use reference copies of audio-visual materials. Reference copies are ½ inch VHS, audio cassette, or compact disc. When no reference copy exists, the Archives Center staff will produce reference copies on an "as needed" basis, as resources allow. There are no reference copies on VHS or DVD for the filmstrips, and the Archives Center does not have a filmstrip projector.
Technical Access: Titles on Beta Max video tape and all picture and audio elements for Original Film (OF) 913.7 cannot be viewed. Viewing the film and filmstrip portion of collection requires special appointment.
Collection Rights:
Collection items are available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions.
Collection Citation:
Reddy Kilowatt Records, 1926-1999, Archives Center, National Museum of American History
Fibre Can Machinery Corp. (Rutland (Vt.) Search this
Extent:
3 Cubic feet
Type:
Collection descriptions
Archival materials
Professional papers
Photographic prints
Photographs
Date:
circa 1924-1973
Summary:
A collection of correspondence, photographs, and copies of patents issued to inventor Robert Scofield Condon.
Scope and Contents:
The approximately 3 cubic feet of material contain copies of patents issued to Robert Scofield Condon for pencil lead pointers, pencil sharpeners, milling machines, gear cutting machines, and similar devices, as well as correspondence related to the patents from the United States Patent Office and with attorneys. Photographs depict Condon designs and inventions. The collection includes a very interesting example of Condon's actual pencil sharpener attached to a photograph, showing the pencil sharpener in use.
Arrangement:
The collection is divided into six series.
Series 1: Correspondence, 1936-1942, 1961-1962
Series 2: Patents, 1931-1973
Series 3: Subject Files, 1955-1965
Series 4: Bills and receipts, 1946-1948
Series 5: Articles, 1924-1927
Series 6: Photographs, 1945
Biographical / Historical:
Robert Scofield Condon, born in Bloomington, Illinois, March 5, 1896, attended Bloomington, Ill., Normal School, and was a schoolteacher for several years to earn money for college tuition; he was graduated as a mechanical engineer from the University of Illinois, 1924. He married Catherine Behren in 1924, but she died in 1958. Condon was employed by the Kearney & Trecker Corp., Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1924-1929, then the Gleason Gear Works, Rochester, New York, 1929-1936. He was one of eighty engineers when he joined the engineering department of the Gleason Gear Works, but was one of only two remaining in 1934. The Condons spent fifteen years in Rutland, Vermont (1936-1946), where he was a founder of the Fibre Can Machinery Corp., which was later sold to the Continental Can Co. He was employed by the Continental Can Corp. from 1946 to 1960 (the Rutland plant closed in the early 1950s, but Condon continued working for the firm in other locations). After his retirement in 1960, he continued to work on projects and did consulting work. His last project was the small "Marvel" pencil pointer (sharpener). Documents in the papers bear the name and address, "Robert S. Condon Laboratories, 112 Cindy Lane, Berlin, Connecticut 06037."
Condon's second wife was Ilza de Souza. He died on April 22, 1973, leaving his son, Robert B. Condon, and two grandchildren.* The professional papers in this collection apparently were in Robert S. Condon's possession until his death, when his son acquired them and donated them to the Smithsonian in 1991.
* An obituary appeared in the Bennington Banner, April 26, 1973. The donor provided notes from this obituary, with additional biographical material and a collection inventory
Related Materials:
Objects accompanying these archival materials were acquired by the Division of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (now Division of Work and Industry) , also donated by the inventor's son.
Provenance:
Collection donated by Robert Condon November 5, 1991.
Arthur Ehrat invented and patented a breakaway basketball rim, fashioning his prototypes from bolts, metal braces and one key part: a piece of the heavy-duty coil spring on a John Deere cultivator. His invention helped to revolutionize the way basketball is played because players could slam dunk the ball with fewer injuries and without bending the rims or breaking backboards. This collection includes correspondence, legal documents --such as patent papers, litigation files and licensing agreements --photographs and sketches that relate to the basketball invention, as well as materials regarding his two field spreader patents and other invention ideas.
Scope and Contents:
The collection is divided into five series and consists of approximately seven cubic feet.
This collection includes correspondence and legal documents--such as patent papers, litigation files and licensing agreements--that relate to Arthur Ehrat's basketball goal, as well as materials regarding his field spreader patents and other invention ideas. The bulk of the collection is made up of attorney correspondence, patent infringement documents, and patent licensing documents. The collection also contains handwritten notes by Arthur Ehrat and his attorneys, sketches of his inventions, an oral history interview, and photographs.
Attorney McPherson Moore sent many of the legal documents and correspondence to Ehrat. These documents were assembled by the law firms for which Moore worked. The original order has been preserved.
The correspondence consists of letters from attorney McPherson Moore to Ehrat and from Moore or his associates to other attorneys regarding litigation, pending licensing agreements, and other actions. The correspondence contains handwritten notes, promotional materials for sporting goods companies, drafts of legal documents, copies of patents and other enclosures. The majority of the correspondence is copies.
Correspondence found throughout the collection is key to understanding the legal documents because it provides insight into the legal negotiations behind the settlement and licensing process, and the diligence necessary to protect a viable patent from infringement. Correspondence should be read in conjunction with litigation and licensing documents to gain a better sense of the negotiations between attorneys and how and why the legal documents were created.
Throughout this collection, reference is made to legal terms, including pleadings, production documents, discovery, patent infringement, file histories, and Bates numbers. Series 3, Civil Action and Settlement Records has numerous sets of pleadings, which are the legal documents filed in a lawsuit. These documents encompass complaints, petitions, answers, motions, declarations, and memoranda.
The discovery process is the effort of one party to a lawsuit to get information from the other party prior to a trial. This is done through depositions, requests for or production of documents, and interrogatories (written questions to the other party).6
Bates numbers --named after the Bates Automatic Numbering Machine patented in the late 1800s --are used to identify documents with a unique number. The parties to a lawsuit use these numbers to keep papers in order when they are sent to the other party during discovery. This collection contains sets of production documents stamped with Bates numbers. (See Series 3, Subseries 8: Ehrat v. Icon, Proform and K's Merchandise, 1984-1996)7
Patent infringement is "the manufacture and/or use of an invention or improvement for which someone else owns a patent issued by the government, without obtaining permission of the owner of the patent by contract, license or waiver."8
A patent file history (also called a file wrapper) is a folder maintained by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. It contains all of the correspondence and documents from a patent application.9 See Series 2, Subseries 2 for the file history of Ehrat's United States Patent No. 4,365,802.
Series 1: Background Materials, 1968-2005, 2011
This series, which is further divided into three subseries, comprises oral history interviews, early sketches of Ehrat's basketball goal, articles about slam dunking, Ehrat's breakaway rim, correspondence and notes, income and expense records (including legal expenses), photographs and facsimiles of photographs, and invoices from the components Ehrat purchased when he created prototypes. One receipt documents the heater Bob Copelin purchased for his new shed in 1975, around the time Ehrat began inventing. This was significant when Ehrat was trying to prove to the United States Patent Office that he had his idea before Frederick Tyner.
Subseries 1: Ehrat History, 1968-2005
Correspondence in this subseries includes a handwritten list of possible names for the basketball rim, one which Ehrat titled, "The Rebounder Has Been Tested." The correspondence also contains copies of letters sent to the United States Patent Office intended to prove that Ehrat's rim was unique; a letter from National Basketball Association saying that, after testing, it is going to use Kenneth Mahoney's (Toss Back) rim instead of Ehrat's; letters from basketball halls of fame; and copies of e-mail from the Smithsonian. This subseries has an original sketch of Ehrat's basketball goal with annotations. Also included is a 1 D2" VHS tape of Ehrat explaining the components he used to fashion his first breakaway rim prototypes and a news segment in which Ehrat was interviewed about his invention at the Chicago Board of Trade. The audio and video recordings contain some repetition of information.
Subseries 2: Photographs and Clippings, 1973-2005
Color photocopies of photographs depicting early rims; a birthday gathering for Ehrat's father, William Ehrat, circa 1974-1975 (used to help prove that he was working on the rim before Frederick Tyner); Ehrat giving a rim to Virden High School; Ehrat with sportscaster Dick Vitale; and a studio shot of his daughters, Rose, Jo, Sharon, Jane, and Linda.
Three photographs in this subseries show prototype rims with coil springs. Ehrat holds up one of these photographs in the video history, but he does not discuss the photographs' origin. There are no markings of any kind on the photographs.
Subseries 2 also contains field photographs taken by John Fleckner, National Museum of American History staff, in May 2005. Field photographs include: the grain elevator Ehrat managed; rim prototypes; and a donated rim hanging on the gym wall at Virden High School.
Articles in this subseries are from the Virden Recorder, The State Journal-Register, Chicago Tribune, The Wall Street Journal, and Kentucky Living. The topics covered include collapsible rims and breakaway rims; Ehrat and his invention; and the Smithsonian Institution's interest in the breakaway rim. Also included is a clipping from Farmers Elevator Co.'s meeting minutes from December 15, 1973, in which the board voted to relinquish rights to any patent or product created by Ehrat.
Subseries 3: Oral History Interview, 2005
A May, 2005, interview of Ehrat by John Fleckner at Ehrat's home in Virden, IL. Ehrat discusses his background, attorney Ralph Staubly, basketball rims he built, and a slam dunk contest that his nephew Randy Albrecht helped organize in the early 1980s at St. Louis Community College. Subseries 3 also contains Digital video disks (DVD) in which Ehrat discusses the documents he sent to the Archives Center, National Museum of American History. There is some repetition of topics discussed in the audio and video recordings.
Series 2: Patent Records for Basketball Rim, 1865-1984 (bulk 1970s-1984)
This series, divided into four subseries, contains copies of patents used as research or as prior art for Ehrat's patent application, a file history of the patent, correspondence/notes from Ehrat and his attorneys, and legal papers sent from Ehrat's first attorney, Ralph Staubly, to McPherson Moore.
Subseries 1: Ehrat and Dittrich Patents, 1979-1984
Copies of Ehrat's United States Patent No. 4,365,802, deformation-preventing swingable mount for basketball goals and William Dittrich's two patents, United States Patent No. 4,151,989, basketball practice device and United States Patent No. 4,465,277, basketball goal structure.
Subseries 2: Research and File History, 1865-1984
The complete patent file history consists of a list of actions taken (rejections, appeals, civil action filed) on the patent application for United States Patent No. 4,365,802. Pages 19-23 are copies of letters sent to United States Patent Office to establish the rim's unique qualities after the examiner's interference search found Frederick Tyner's patent (United States Patent No. 4,111, 420, Energy-absorbing basketball goal/backboard unit) and ruled Ehrat's invention was too similar.
Subseries 3: Correspondence and Notes, 1976-1984
Two sets of letters from acquaintances. The first set, 1977-1978, was sent to the United States Patent Office and provide a sense of the invention's unique quality. The second set, 1983-1984, consists of letters written by Ehrat's friends and was used in Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Mt. Vernon School District and Porter (Series 3, Subseries 1) to establish that Ehrat had his breakaway rim idea before Frederick Tyner. A letter in the correspondence folder for this litigation, dated February 23, 1984, mentions that copies of these letters were sent to Basketball Products International. Also in this subseries is a transcript of a phone conversation between Ehrat and attorney McPherson Moore about when Ehrat had the idea for a breakaway rim and who knew about it.
Subseries 4: Files from Ehrat's First Attorney, Ralph Staubly, 1976-1982
Includes the file about Ehrat sent from Ralph Staubly to McPherson Moore when Ehrat changed legal representation in 1983. The folder contains originals, copies, and drafts of documents sent to the United States Patent Office, some with annotations. Also included is a high school basketball rulebook, 1977-1978, and the notes Ralph Staubly used to write an affidavit for Ehrat's patent application in which Ehrat swears he invented before Frederick Tyner.
Series 3: Civil Action and Settlement Records, 1984-1996
This series is divided into eight subseries. It contains full and partial sets of case pleadings, with pleadings indices, from eight court cases, attorney correspondence and notes, depositions of Ehrat and Frederick Tyner, case judgments, and signed settlements.
In 1984, Ehrat and Basketball Products International were plaintiffs or defendants together in five civil action lawsuits that involved sporting goods companies, including Porter Equipment Company, Gared Company, and Toss Back. These lawsuits and their correspondence should be consulted in conjunction with one another.
Subseries 1: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Mt. Vernon School District and Porter, 1984
Civil action, February 1984-June 1984: The complaint alleges patent infringement by sporting goods company Porter for manufacturing products embodying the invention, and infringement by Mt. Vernon School District (WA) for purchasing Porter basketball goals. Action dismissed June 11, 1984. This subseries contains the subpoena and deposition of Frederick Tyner regarding United States Patent No. 4,111, 420, Energy-absorbing basketball goal/backboard unit. It also contains plaintiff's exhibits, numbered 1-31, which include Tyner's notes, documents, and facsimiles of photographs related to his patented basketball goal.
Subseries 2: Porter Equipment Company v. Basketball Products International and Ehrat, 1984
Civil action, April 1984-June 1984: The complaint alleges that Ehrat's and Basketball Products International's patents are invalid and unenforceable and that Porter and Mt. Vernon School District did not infringe. Porter calls for dismissal or transfer of the case. The pleadings index for Vol. 1 has a note at the bottom that says "Start Vol. 2," but Vol. 2 is not in the collection.
Subseries 3: Gared Company v. Basketball Products International and Ehrat, 1984-1988
Civil action, March 1984-October 1984: This action is in response to letters sent by attorney McPherson Moore threatening a lawsuit if Gared Company does not cease manufacture of infringing goals. Gared Company files a complaint for declaratory judgment, calling the patent invalid and alleging unfair competition. A stipulated dismissal of complaint was signed by Moore and Ralph Kalish, Gared Company's legal counsel. Declaratory judgment is the judgment of a court which determines the rights of parties without ordering anything be done or awarding damages.
Of note in this subseries is the deposition of Ehrat regarding his involvement with Gared Company and the city of St. Louis, where the company is based. Gared Company's counsel, Ralph Kalish, asks Ehrat questions about his nephew, Randy Albrecht. Ehrat purchased 12 rims from Gared Company, on the advice of his nephew, for the purpose of building and testing his releasable basketball goals. Kalish tries to assess whether there was a profit motive and how Gared Company's goals factored into that.
Subseries 4: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Gared Company, 1984
Civil action, April 1984-June 1984: Complaint filed against Gared Company and Athletic Supply (which purchased Gared Company goals) for patent infringement. The case was dismissed.
Subseries 5: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Toss Back
Civil action, May 1984-June 1984: Complaint filed against Toss Back and the cities of Seattle and Tacoma (which purchased Toss Back basketball goals) for patent infringement. There is no evidence of a settlement or of court action. Toss Back signed a licensing agreement with Ehrat in 1985 (See Series 4, Licensing Agreements).
Subseries 6: Ehrat v. Gared Company and Nixdorff-Krein Industries, 1982-1990 (bulk 1987-1990)
Civil action, 1988-1990: Complaint filed against sports equipment company Gared and its parent company, Nixdorff-Krein Industries, for patent infringement. Request for passing case for settlement filed by Ehrat's attorney, McPherson Moore, and granted by the court. The signed settlement is in this subseries. This subseries has file histories of Gared Company patents. A file history (or file wrapper) is a folder kept at the United States Patent and Trademark Office that has all of the correspondence and documents from a patent application
Subseries 7: Ehrat v. Diversified Products, 1989-1994
Civil action, 1993: A complaint was filed against Diversified Products after a series of letters calling for the company to cease manufacture and sales of infringing basketball goals went unheeded. The parties were granted a consent judgment to settle out of court. The signed settlement is in this subseries.
Subseries 8: Ehrat v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc., Pro Form Fitness Products Inc., and K's Merchandise Mart, 1984-1996 (bulk 1994-1996)
The Icon Health & Fitness Inc. (hereinafter Icon) pleadings consist of two volumes, Vols. 2 and 3. Vol. 1 is missing. There is a draft of the first page of Ehrat's complaint against Icon in Box 9, Folder 3. A consent judgment was entered, and the parties settled out of court. The signed settlement is in this subseries.
There are two categories of production documents in this subseries, those for the plaintiff (three folders) and those for the defendant (seven folders), that have Bates numbers affixed to or printed on the bottom of the pages. Bates numbers are used to identify documents with a unique number. The parties to a lawsuit use these numbers to keep papers in order when they are sent to the other party during discovery.
The plaintiff's production documents include Bates numbers 1-205. Numbers 1-105 contain Ehrat's patent file history; numbers 107-205 are copies of Ehrat's licensing agreements through 1993.
In the defendant's production documents, one folder has Bates # I10001 and other numbered pages that are not in a particular order. Bates numbers I10068- I10882 include the file history for United States Patent No. 4,365,802, deformation-preventing swingable mount for basketball goals; correspondence among defendant's attorneys; copies of patents; and copies of licensing agreements through 1993.
Series 4: Licensing Agreements, 1982-2000 (bulk 1980s-1990s)
This series is divided into twenty-six subseries and encompasses materials pertaining to Ehrat's relationships with numerous companies that manufacture or sell sports equipment. These materials include correspondence and notes, licensing agreements and drafts of agreements, Dun and Bradstreet financial reports, catalogs, pamphlets, and other promotional materials. Ehrat and attorney McPherson Moore used the promotional materials to determine whether the companies were marketing or selling basketball goals that infringed on Ehrat's patent, then contacted the companies about licensing Ehrat's patent. With the exception of Subseries 1: Correspondence and Subseries 6: William Dittrich Patents, each subseries represents a different company.
To better understand Ehrat's relationships with these companies, researchers should consult Subseries 1: Correspondence, as well as the correspondence within specific subseries, in conjunction with licensing agreements and other documents in this series.
There are thirteen signed licensing agreements in this series, some of which bear original signatures. Ehrat's first licensee was with Basketball Products International, which signed an exclusive agreement in 1983. In November, 1984, after five civil action lawsuits in which Ehrat and Basketball Products International were either co-plaintiffs or co-defendants, the company signed a nonexclusive licensing agreement. Drafts of the agreements exist for some companies, but there is no evidence that the agreements were signed. In some cases, correspondence indicates which companies were not interested in entering into an agreement.
Ehrat's licensees include Huffy (signed May 1988); Basketball Products International, exclusive license (signed July 1983), nonexclusive license (signed November 1984); Toss Back (signed January 1985); Porter Equipment Company (signed 1985 and 1989); RDH Enterprises/Schutt (signed August 1991); Industrial Machine Specialties/Bison (signed January 1987); Lifetime Products (signed March 1989); Fisher-Price (owned by Quaker Oats, signed April 1988); Indian Industries/Harvard Sports (signed June 1991); McCullough (signed April 1990); and Sure Shot (signed March 1991).
Companies in this series without signed licensing agreements include Medart; Blazon-Flexible Flyer; Spang/Today's Kids; Sports and Leisure/Ideas That Sell; Wilson Sporting Goods; Hutch Sporting Goods; Aalco; Bergfeld Recreation; Future Pro; MacGregor; Pro-Bound; Architectural Design Products; and Hyland Engineering.
Settlements and licensing agreements that Ehrat signed with Gared Company, Diversified Products, and Icon appear only in Series 3, Civil Action and Settlement Records.
Subseries 6, William Dittrich Patents, contains correspondence and documents relating to the patent and royalty agreement Dittrich made with Ehrat in 1987. Dittrich had two basketball-related patents but had difficulty getting companies to license with him because there was confusion about his patents and those of Ehrat and Frederick Tyner. Dittrich contacted Ehrat's attorney, McPherson Moore, and they worked out an agreement. Ehrat acquired Dittrich's patents and they joined forces to attract licensing agreements and to split royalties and litigation settlements. Subseries 6 also has the transcript of a 1986 phone conference between William Dittrich and McPherson Moore regarding a possible joint agreement with Ehrat and the patent file history for United States Patent No. 4,151,989, basketball practice device. There is no file history for Dittrich's other patent, United States Patent No. 4,465,277, basketball goal structure, but there are pieces of the file history in this subseries. Subseries 6 also includes drafts and signed patent assignment papers and a signed licensing agreement between Ehrat and Dittrich, 1987.
Subseries 9, Lifetime Products, consists of itemized lists of attorney's fees from McPherson Moore for November 30, 1987, to February 28, 1989. The fees are for research, phone calls, photocopies, correspondence, and litigation documents for Ehrat v. Gared Company. The companies listed in these papers include Gared Company, Lifetime, Huffy, Fisher-Price, Sports and Leisure, Today's Kids, Toss Back, and Blazon.
Subseries 16, McCullough contains a Dunk-Kit (see Box 18), which Ehrat purchased in 1989. The Dunk-Kit is a set of springs and bolts that turn a set basketball goal into a breakaway goal. According to attorney McPherson Moore, the springs and bolts constituted an infringement of Ehrat's patent. McCullough disagreed with this assessment but eventually agreed to a monetary settlement.
Series 5: Field Spreader Patents and Other Ideas, 1977-2003
Subseries 1: Field Spreader Patents, 1977-2003
This subseries contains copies of Ehrat's two field spreader patents: United States Patent No. 4,358,054, field-sprayer tank-vehicle having means for on-site metering and mixing of soil-treating chemicals and United States Patent No. 4,588,127, material-spreading field vehicle having means for on-site metering and mixing of soil-treating chemicals. It also contains magazines, articles, and pamphlets on agricultural equipment and litigation documents between SoilTeq and Ag-Chem.
Subseries 2: Other Ideas, 1971-1998
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Ehrat came up with ideas for other inventions, but none of them were patentable. This subseries has original sketches for "electric clippers with box for holding clippings;" a beverage can with multiple containers; and an "automobile refreshment temperature control." Included in the folders are letters that outline the ideas behind the inventions and the reasons they were not patented. Also included are copies of patents that relate to Ehrat's ideas.
Series 6: Toby Dittrich Files, 1889-1997
This series, which is further divided into five subseries, contains administrative records, prior art, patent records, correspondence, litigation materials, financial records, marketing and sales materials, photographs, and newspaper clippings from William A. (Toby) Dittrich. Dittrich invented the "Dunk King" break-away basketball rim in the mid 1970s while he was a physics professor at Pacific Lutheran University in Washington State. Dittrich patented and marketed his rim with mixed success before selling the rights to his patents to Arthur Ehrat in the mid 1980s. The two agreed to market and license their products independently, and cooperatively share royalties and settlements from patent infringement cases.
Arrangement:
The collection is divided into five series.
Series 1: Background materials, 1968-2005
Subseries 1: Ehrat History, 1968-2005, 2011
Subseries 2: Photographs and Clippings, 1973-2005
Subseries 3: Oral History, 2005
Series 2: Patent records for basketball rim,1865-1984
Subseries 1: Ehrat and Dittrich Patents, 1979-1984
Subseries 2: Research and File History, 1865-1984
Subseries 3: Correspondence and Notes, 1976-1984
Subseries 4: Files from First Attorney, Ralph Staubly, 1976-1982
Series 3: Civil action and settlement records, 1984-1996
Subseries 1: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Mt. Vernon School District and Porter Equipment Company, 1984
Subseries 2: Porter Equipment Company v. Basketball Products International and Ehrat, 1984
Subseries 3: Gared Company v. Basketball Products International and Ehrat, 1984-1988
Subseries 4: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Gared Company --Pleadings, 1984
Subseries 5: Basketball Products International and Ehrat v. Toss Back, 1984
Subseries 6: Ehrat v. Gared Company and Nixdorff-Krein Industries, 1982-1989 (bulk 1987-1989)
Subseries 7: Ehrat v. Diversified Products, 1989-1994
Subseries 8: Ehrat v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc., Pro Form fitness Products, Inc. and K's Merchandise Mart, 1984-1996 (bulk 1994-1996)
Series 4: Licensing agreements, 1982-2000 (bulk 1980s-mid-1990s)
Subseries 5: Other Inventions and Ideas, 1978-1980
Biographical / Historical:
Arthur Henry Ehrat was born December 20, 1924. He grew up on a farm near Shobonier, IL, east of St. Louis. Ehrat had four sisters and a brother: Dorothea, Ruth, Bernice, Grace and Walter. Growing up on a farm during the Great Depression, Ehrat learned farming skills, including milking, baling, and operating heavy equipment such as threshing machines. After graduating from Vandalia High School he moved to Wheaton, IL, to work on a farm. From the latter part of 1945 until 1947, Ehrat was an Army medic, stationed in Fort Sheridan, IL; Camp Atterbury, IN; Fort Meade, MD; and Manila, Philippines. After his Army service, Ehrat moved back to Illinois and spent a few years farming with his brother.
In the early 1950s Ehrat lived with his sister Bernice and her family in Minneapolis while attending a two-year course at Minneapolis Business College. Upon completion of the course, he returned to Virden, IL and worked at a grain elevator. Ehrat met Mary Mardell Worth in Virden. They were married June 27, 1954, and had five daughters: Rose, Jo, Sharon, Jane and Linda. Ehrat managed the grain elevator at Farmers Elevator Co. in Lowder, IL for nearly 30 years.
In the mid-1970s, Ehrat's nephew, Randy Albrecht, a coach at St. Louis University, mentioned that basketball players were slamming the basketball ball through the rim and hurting themselves, as well as bending or breaking the rims, which were affixed directly to the backboard. The bent rims had to be straightened, causing a delay of game. While Ehrat never had a strong interest in the game of basketball, Albrecht suggested his uncle, who was known as a tinkerer, come up with a safer basketball rim. The conversation sparked a few ideas. Ehrat bought a flimsy $20 basketball rim and began building a prototype.
Basketball fans during the 1940s and 1950s didn't see many slam dunks. Despite the leaping ability of stars Bob Kurland, George Mikan, and James Clifford Pollard, aka "the Kangaroo Kid," the dunk shot was considered showboating and was often done only in practice. Basketball players, whose average size was smaller in the mid-20th century, viewed the dunk as a low-percentage shot compared with the ubiquitous jump-shot.
In 1967, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) outlawed dunking. A few years later, Julius "Dr. J" Erving, who played professionally for the American Basketball Association's Virginia Squires, re-ignited excitement about basketball with his high-flying slams. In the first half of 1976, a few months before Ehrat first applied for a patent, the dunk was reinstated in college basketball.
At the professional level, flamboyant hoops star Darryl "Dr. Dunk" Dawkins shattered some glass backboards in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which prompted the National Basketball Association (NBA) to ban the shattering of backboards and make collapsible rims mandatory. The NBA's call for collapsible rims, along with the NCAA's reinstatement of the dunk, opened the door for innovations in basketball rims.
Collapsible rims, which folded down when pressure was applied to them, were the precursor to breakaway rims and had to be manually put back in place. Ehrat created a safer basketball rim that automatically snapped back after a slam dunk.
Ehrat's first rim, used a door spring. It was bolted to two plates, one that remained fastened while the other flexed down under pressure. The hinge was not strong enough, so he focused on creating a detent. A detent is a device that holds one mechanical part in relation to another so the device can be released when force is applied. If someone slam dunks a basketball and pulls on the rim, a detent would allow the rim to flex downward with minimal pressure on the backboard. Ehrat fitted some heavy-duty magnets between metal plates on the rim, but this did not work as he envisioned.
The turning point came when Ehrat decided to use a spring mechanism. Drawing upon his agricultural background, he pulled a spring from a John Deere cultivator, cutting it to fit the basketball rim. The thick, sturdy coil was able to withstand more than a hundred pounds of pressure before yielding downward and would push the rim back into place. In addition to the spring, he tested ball bearings, bolts, and corner braces before finding the right combination that would hold at least 150 pounds of pressure.
Once he had viable prototypes, Ehrat tested their durability. He sent one to Virden High School and enlisted Randy Albrecht, to test the other prototypes. Albrecht used his connections as a basketball coach at St. Louis Community College at Meramec to have prototypes installed at the schools where he worked. The rims were sent to other high schools and colleges by Ehrat. For more information on where the prototypes went, see his deposition in Series 3, Subseries 3. Ehrat estimated in his deposition that he built approximately 36-40 prototype rims.
It took six years, from July 1976 to December 1982, for Ehrat to receive the patent on his basketball goal (United States Patent No. 4,365,802, Deformation-preventing swingable mount for basketball goals). His application was rejected twice, with patent examiner Paul Shapiro noting that Frederick C. Tyner held a patent for a similar basketball goal (United States Patent No. 4,111, 420, energy-absorbing basketball goal/backboard unit).
Ehrat and his attorney, Ralph Staubly, pursued an appeal of the rejection. Staubly, a retired patent examiner had moved to Springfield, IL, in the 1970s to open a private practice. A major part of the appeal involved notarized letters from acquaintances who said that Ehrat's invention was unique and would be an asset to the sport of basketball. He also proved, through copies of canceled checks and a rough sketch of his invention, that he was working on his breakaway basketball goal in 1975 before Frederick Tyner conceived of his. In a 1984 deposition (Series 3, Subseries 1), Tyner placed the date of his invention near the last week of March or first week of April 1976, not long after he heard that the NCAA had reinstated dunking.
Ehrat won the appeal, effectively rendering the Tyner patent invalid. After Staubly fell ill and moved to Texas, and in early 1983, Ehrat found a new patent attorney,McPherson Moore of the St. Louis firm Rogers, Eilers and Howell, who became Ehrat's main legal counsel for approximately 20 years.
In February, 1983, two months after Ehrat received his patent, his attorney McPherson Moore sent certified letters to more than 60 sporting goods companies to announce the patent. The letters were sent to alert companies of possible infringement and to garner interest in licensing agreements.
During the basketball goal patent's 17-year lifespan, Ehrat obtained a dozen companies as licensees. Only Fisher-Price and Schutt Manufacturing signed without much difficulty. Ehrat worked to get the other companies licensed, in some cases filing patent infringement lawsuits or threatening to file them. Ehrat's first licensing agreement, signed in 1983, was with Basketball Products International.
Ehrat was involved in eight civil action lawsuits, five of which took place in 1984, when he had to prove for a second time that he had his idea for a breakaway goal before Tyner. Ehrat also defended his patent against other, similar patents issued to sporting goods companies in the early 1980s. Kenneth Mahoney of Toss Back, Charles Engle of Gared Company, and the Porter Equipment Co. all received patents for basketball goal devices, citing Ehrat's patent as prior art. Ehrat was involved in lawsuits with all three companies.
In 1986, Ehrat and attorney McPherson Moore were contacted by William "Toby" Dittrich, who held two patents --United States Patent No. 4,151,989, basketball practice device and United States Patent No. 4,465,277, basketball goal structure. Dittrich was having difficulty licensing his patents to companies because of the confusion over Ehrat's and Tyner's patents. Dittrich assigned his patents to Ehrat in 1987 and they signed a joint licensing agreement to split royalties and settlement money.
In addition to his basketball goal patent, Ehrat also holds two patents for agricultural inventions: United States Patent No. 4,358,054, field-sprayer tank-vehicle having means for on-site metering and mixing of soil-treating chemicals; and United States Patent No. 4,588,127, material-spreading field vehicle having means for on-site metering and mixing of soil-treating chemicals.
Arthur Ehrat died on July 9, 2015.
Related Materials:
Artifacts related to this collection were donated to the Museum's Division of Music, Sports and Entertainment, now the Division of Culture and Arts.
Provenance:
Donated to the Archives Center in 2005 by Arthur Ehrat. An addenda of materials related to Toby Dittrich was donated by Toby Dittrich in 2014.
Restrictions:
The collection is open for research.
Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Globe Iron Works (Boston, Massachusetts) Search this
Container:
Box 1, Folder 6
Type:
Archival materials
Date:
1891 September 15
Scope and Contents:
Issued by the United States Patent Office, acknowledging a "Scow" patent issued to Charles H. Souther and James E. Chapman.
Collection Restrictions:
Collection is open for research.
Collection Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Collection Citation:
John Souther Collection, 1867-1918, Archives Center, National Museum of American History
Collection is open for research. Unprotected photographs must be handled with gloves.
Collection Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Collection Citation:
Edwin Rust Papers, 1899-1922, Archives Center, National Museum of American History.
United States Patent office, N.Y., Interference No.27,074, William J. Hammer's sworn statement re. the tungsten Filament
Collection Creator:
Hammer, William J. (William Joseph), 1858-1934 (electrical engineer) Search this
Container:
Box 27, Folder 5
Type:
Archival materials
Date:
Oct. 18, 1907
Collection Restrictions:
Collection is open for research.
Collection Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Collection Citation:
William J. Hammer Collection, Archives Center, National Museum of American History
United States Patent Office, Sawyer and Man vs. Thomas A. Edison
Collection Creator:
Hammer, William J. (William Joseph), 1858-1934 (electrical engineer) Search this
Container:
Box 27, Folder 6
Type:
Archival materials
Date:
June 10, 1881
Collection Restrictions:
Collection is open for research.
Collection Rights:
Collection items available for reproduction, but the Archives Center makes no guarantees concerning copyright restrictions. Other intellectual property rights may apply. Archives Center cost-recovery and use fees may apply when requesting reproductions.
Collection Citation:
William J. Hammer Collection, Archives Center, National Museum of American History
The years before World War I were spent in patent litigation for aviation pioneers Glenn Curtiss and Orville and Wilbur Wright.
Scope and Contents:
The Curtiss-Wright Corporation Archives - Patent Files collection consists primarily of materials relating to patents issued to and maintained by the Curtiss-Wright Corporation and its subsidiaries from the 1910s to the 1950s, though the bulk of the materials pre-date World War II. The majority of the collection is original patent certificates. Other materials include records of litigation proceedings, correspondence, memoranda, aircraft drawings and blueprints, reports, sales brochures, meeting minutes, and annual reports.
Arrangement:
The collection is arranged in four series: Patents, Patent File Wrappers, Patent Litigation, and Curtiss-Wright Corporation Records. Series I contains original patents and related materials issued or assigned to the Curtiss-Wright Corporation and related organizations. Covering the years between 1911 and 1939, the series is further divided into two subseries: United States Patents and International Patents. Series II consists of file wrappers prepared by the United States Patent Office, containing a complete record of the patent's history. The third series includes materials from Curtiss-Wright's numerous litigation proceedings in defense of its patents. The fourth series contains business records created by the Curtiss-Wright Corporation including photocopies of historic patent and stock documents, division minutes, and reports for the U.S. Navy Department.
Series I - Patents, 1911-1939
Subseries I - United States Patents, 1911-1939
Subseries II - International Patents, 1916-1935
Series II - Patent File Wrappers, 1916-1930
Series III - Patent Litigation, 1916-1947
Series IV - Curtiss-Wright Corporation Records, 1906-1945
Historical Note:
The years before World War I were spent in patent litigation for aviation pioneers Glenn Curtiss and Orville and Wilbur Wright. The Wright brothers claimed wing warping patents and sought to prevent Curtiss and others from manufacturing and selling aircraft and products based on these patents. During World War I, the aircraft manufacturing industry set up the Manufacturer's Aircraft Association, a patent pool in which all participants were allowed to use any patents to build aircraft for the war effort. After the war, Wright Aeronautical Corporation and the Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company continued to be major players in the aircraft industry, long after Curtiss and the Wrights ended association with their namesakes.
In 1929, the Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company merged with the Wright Aeronautical Corporation to form the Curtiss-Wright Corporation. After the merger, responsibility for engine and propeller manufacture was consolidated under the Wright name while Curtiss concentrated on airplanes. Although the two companies were merged by name and under the direction of a corporate headquarters located in New York City, the separation and specialization of the two divisions continued to cause problems for the company. The election of former Wright personnel to key corporate positions soon led to Wright becoming the dominant division. The Great Depression and the collapse of the market for commercial aviation revealed how reliant the aviation industry was on military production. Sales dropped and Curtiss-Wright was forced to close certain satellite plants and transfer some of their product lines to the St. Louis facility.
During the U.S. military build-up prior to World War II, existing Curtiss-Wright plants were expanded and new aircraft factories were built to meet the growing production demand. The company failed, however, to plan for the future after the war. In 1946, Curtiss-Wright had only two experimental military models at hand for postwar delivery and no assurance of production orders. Wright Aeronautical continued to build engines, but was no longer at the forefront of development. The eventual sale of the Airplane Division to North American included design rights to the former Curtiss-Wright airplanes. The Curtiss-Wright Airplane Division, which manufactured airframes, finally closed down in 1951.
The Curtiss-Wright Corporation still exists in the 21st century, but has become a diversified technology corporation in various markets, including aviation and defense.
Provenance:
Curtiss-Wright Corporation, gift, 1987.
Restrictions:
No restrictions on access.
Rights:
Material is subject to Smithsonian Terms of Use. Should you wish to use NASM material in any medium, please submit an Application for Permission to Reproduce NASM Material, available at Permissions Requests.
Material is subject to Smithsonian Terms of Use. Should you wish to use NASM material in any medium, please submit an Application for Permission to Reproduce NASM Material, available at Permissions Requests.
Material is subject to Smithsonian Terms of Use. Should you wish to use NASM material in any medium, please submit an Application for Permission to Reproduce NASM Material, available at Permissions Requests.
