CD 206 Castle & Grading Insulators
Reprinted from "INSULATORS - Crown Jewels of the Wire", January 1977, page 20
Hi Dora,
I've had a couple of things on my mind since the Oroville Show.
(Incidentally, Joanne and I enjoyed it very much, except for the unfortunate
tragedy which occurred there.) First of all, maybe I can add to the general
confusion surrounding the origin of the CD 206 Castle. As far as I know,
McLaughlin has been credited with the manufacture of the castles; and according
to Jerry Gibby, who has spoken with Mr. McLaughlin, the McLaughlin plant did
indeed manufacture castles. However, as you know, Crystalite Products purchased
many McLaughlin molds and manufactured Maydwell insulators in them. The
insulators from these molds can be identified today by the ghost embossing (on
the back of Maydwell pieces) just above "U.S.A." Isn't it possible
that Crystalite produced castles as well as other CD's? People have agreed it is
possible for several years, but I haven't heard much argument for or against
this possibility. What I have to say on the subject is only a guess based on a
little logic, but at least I want to go on record as stating that there is a
Maydwell castle.
I must give credit to Jerry Gibby who started me off on this hypothesis. We
discussed the following at Oroville in October. The castle is found in three
colors: straw, blue and green. It is found in two styles as well, one style
having square parapets or turrets, the other having rounded ones. If you look at
the straw and green castles on the basis of color only, it seems possible that
they could be of either McLaughlin or Maydwell origin. The blue castle, however,
is definitely McLaughlin, since there are no blue Maydwell insulators (as far as
I know). All three colors are found in the square parapet style. However, the
straw castle is the only color found in the rounded style. Since the blue castle
is a McLaughlin on the basis of color and is the same style as some straws and
all greens, I consider all the square-type castles as McLaughlins. The
rounded-type is a Maydwell. It seems quite illogical that McLaughlin would have
two different shaped molds to produce such a limited item as the CD 206 castles.
And because the straw color is so typically Maydwell, it seems to me quite
probable that Crystalite manufactured them and that they were probably
distributed by Maydwell and Hartzell. If indeed they are not all manufactured by
McLaughlin, then it still remains a mystery why there are no embossed castles.
Well, at least I hope I have helped to add to the knowledge and the confusion
about the castles. If anyone could help me with information, I would like to
correspond with Mr. Maydwell, Mr. Hartzell, or anyone connected in any way with
Crystalite Products Corporation.
The second thing I would like to mention is the need for a uniform grading
system for insulators. There is so much discrepancy in grading, especially for
the collector who deals by mail. For example, I have received insulators that
were stated to be VNM and had one tiny chip on them. From another source I have
received a VNM insulator which had a dome chip, three missing drips and a
fractured skirt. It doesn't matter how the grading is done, as long as it is
uniform nationwide. The current vogue seems to be to string out as many V's as
possible in describing a piece of glass, so that what you get is this: VVVVVVVNM.
This tells you nothing, since you don't know the definition of "V"
(very).
Let me make a suggestion. Why not take a hint from numismatists? In
describing a coin they use the terms fair, good, very good, fine, x fine and
uncirculated. Anything in between two grades is defined with an "a"
before the grade. Example: "a fine" or "about fine" means
better than "very good" but not quite "fine" condition.
Still, to a beginner this doesn't say what "fine" is. So, a system
describing each condition for different coins has been devised. In the case of
insulators, there could be a distinction made between threadless and threaded.
Then a description of what constitutes a piece in good, fine, etc. condition
could be drawn up. The ultimate in a piece could still be defined as mint--in
other words, it is perfect. By way of example, in describing a piece that is
less than mint, perhaps a minimum and maximum system could be used. A
"good" piece, therefore, could be a piece having several exterior
chips not greater than 1/4" in diameter, but at least 1/8" in
diameter. If the piece had drips, "good" could be defined as "at
least 2 drips chipped or missing, but not more than 5". Again I stress that
the terms and definitions are not important, but the uniformity nationwide is
the essential thing.
I realize that such a system might not be as feasible as one that someone
else can invent. Also, the establishment of the system would be quite time
consuming. But, it needs to be done desperately, and the sooner the better. I
hate to dump more work on the NIA, but it is our governing body, and perhaps
they could undertake this.
When this system of grading has been devised and passed into NIA law by the
membership, accuracy in grading will be a reality, and trading by mail will not
be so hazardous. Any piece not fitting the description of the grade it was
advertised as, could simply be sent back, and the reason cited by referring to
the grade.
I realize all this will take money. Perhaps the NIA could sell the grade book
to its members. Anyone truly interested in accuracy in grading would surely want
one, and all avid collectors would, too. Caution would have to be exercised in
dealing by mail with individuals not affiliated with the NIA, since they would
not be bound by NIA rules.
Dora, I'm sorry about the length of all this, but as for the grading thing,
we need it badly. Once done, it would be a relief to all concerned. Uniformity
in grading can only strengthen our hobby.
Thank You,
Tim Wood
38744 Hwy 226
Scio, OR 97374
|
