Posted by BobbyB on March 27, 2008, 3:35 pm, in reply to "Re: The Missing Link MONARCH"
I hope you do pursue the Ham line, JC. You will find that the more you know the more interesting it gets. Finding answers begets new questions. My goal is to be able to date any tubular lantern to within 5 years or better. This is much easier for 20th century lanterns, so i am beginning there. The Monarch is a natural because it is relatively plentiful and the perfect entry level tubular for beginning collectors. Plus the Monarch details also relate to other Dietz lanterns. I have been gathering data on all the 7 mainstream producers or HEBDPDP (pronounced hee-bee-deepee-deepee) as I like to call them. I'll bet you can figure out what those initials stand for! Then there are the more obscure producers like Buhl, Star, and the rest of the Ohio group (that are not Berger, like Ohio, Warren, and Winfield).
You mentioned the Ham Clipper which had suit for patent infringement filed against it by Dietz in 1893, but Ham prevailed, and after R.E. Dietz died, Ham was collecting royalties on most if not all of the mainstream hot blast lanterns produced in the U.S. Dietz and Ham actually wound-up partnering on their lantern designs, and the final editions of the Ham Clipper are actually related to the Monarch. BB
Responses: