The pricing for porcelain pin types has been completely revised in my Second Edition. Too many collectors found the former system too complicated, so it was entirely discarded. In its place is a lengthy list of all the better specific porcelains with a price (or price range) for each one. You just look up any insulator and read off the price directly,

The valuations are as realistic as we could make them. They aren't values dreamed up by someone staring at the ceiling or throwing darts at a number chart on the wall. I asked the following people to assist in the price determinations

• Lew Hohn, Rochester, New York 
• Jerry Turner, Goshen, Ohio 
• Dee Willett, Bakersfield, Calif.

This group not only represents east-midwest-west, but it also resembles collector-collector/dealer-dealer. Jerry is not a dealer but sets up a sell table at more shows than any other porcelain collector and may buy, sell and trade more porcelain insulators than anyone else in the country.

I and these three people independently arrived at a price for every item in the entire list, and these values were then entered in summary lists. The final price used was essentially the consensus median, after throwing out obvious errors in value judgment and allowing for geographical differences.

I wish to publicly thank these people for the many hours they spent on this pricing work. Hopefully through this tedious process we have a pricing table which will be of maximum use to all collectors.

Jack

Dear Jack:

Noticed the bit about the NP-55 insulators in your column in CJ, so I thought I'd add my comments. No doubt you will get a fair response from up here on these.

NP stands for National Porcelain, which is a subsidiary of Medicine Hat Brick & Tile Co., which is a subsidiary of I-T-E, which is etc. etc.

National Porcelain had an insulator plant in Medicine Hat, Alberta. I don't know when they started manufacturing insulators, but it was many years ago. Their plant burned down in 1972 or 1973, and they didn't rebuild. The insulator part of the business was sold to a new company which is now manufacturing some electrical porcelain but no pin types. They manufactured a number of pin types; I have 9 styles (15 varieties) in my collection.

National Porcelain used an underglaze marking, recess-embossed marking and an incuse marking (in that order I think). I also have a couple of older styles that are marked on the petticoat rest with a small stamped N.P. which I think (but don't know) are National Porcelain. Most are a plain chocolate brown, but the old style turns up in white, and in the last few years of production they were making sky glaze units.

I have always assumed that the 55 (in the marking) was the year of manufacture, as the same style turns up with different numbers, and the same numbers will be on different styles. As well, this ties in with the apparent age of the various specimens.

These insulators are so common in Western Canada that their value is minimal.

Looks like you have been elected to be the clearinghouse for information on Canadian porcelains as well, whether you want to be or not. There is a big gap up here as far as porcelain info is concerned.

So, are you familiar with this one?? It's Sim U-302, nice white glaze, marking on the crown as shown here. I don't know which way is up on this marking. It's a new one on me.
Keith Ewart, 
Moose Jaw, Sask., Canada

- - - - - - - - - -

Dear Keith:

We consider insulator collecting a joint U.S.-Canadian fad, and Crown Jewels will always be available as a clearinghouse for U.S. and Canadian insulators alike. Just look at all the many Canadian subscribers we have, and a great number of you fellows are also porcelain buffs -- and the real eager variety at that. Whenever we put a question to readers about Canadian insulators, you fellows literally flood us with answers!

Your information about National Porcelain is great, and I'm sure one of our readers up there will send us equally enlightening info an your mystery marking shown above.

I've always wished someone in Canada would gather in this information about Canadian porcelain companies and their insulators and publish it in book form. Maybe you could all draw straws for the task. Until that happens, all of us down here in the lover 48 are rather ignorant about Canadian porcelains.

Jack

The U-141 shown at right was patented June 14, 1892 (#476,813) by Pass & Seymour. It has a porcelain outer shell, an inner metallic thimble with threads and an intermediate section of paraffin-filled cement. Collectors have waited patiently for years to turn up one of these classics, but no success thus far.

Reference page 23, May 1975 Crown Jewels, a transcript of the 1901 court proceedings in a suit brought by Thomas re the Boch glaze-welding patent. In relation to insulators made up of more than one component part, it states, "There is no novelty in an insulator made up of separate parts fitted into each other whether of the same or different material. This appears in the Varley English patent, (1861,) the Johnson and Phillips, (1878,) the Pass and Seymour Cuban insulator, (1892,) the Hauty, (1893,) the .... " (Emphasis mine, JT)

I have always been intrigued by the word "Cuban" in the above text referring to the P & S insulator. They advertised that this superior design resulted in the paraffin continually ablating to renew the insulating properties, and I have seen references in other company documents about the difficulty of maintaining good insulators in the Cuban environment.

After feeding these several facts into my crystal ball, it now tells me that the next time one of you collectors gets skyjacked to Cuba, maybe you should glance at the porcelain beehives on the poles down there before coming home.

Jack

Dear Jack:

I inadvertently found in a Thomas catalog the answer to my question about the use of the MACOMB strain (ref page 34, November 1976 CJ). It's a break strain, and they said "used universally with strap iron clevis to pole or cross arm".
Gerald Brown, 
Two Buttes, Colo.

Here is some information I've had for several years which I never felt was important enough to collector interest to include in my reference books, but maybe some of you O-B fans will find it of interest.

Ohio Brass Company's insulator manufacturing plant at Barberton, Ohio (Akron High-Potential Porcelain Co. before O-B bought it in 1910) underwent a succession of corporate name changes. The dates given below are ones I derived from factory drawings at Mansfield and are only approximate, give or take a year. 

• Ohio Insulator Company (1910-1932) 
• Ohio Brass Co., Ohio Insulator Co. Div. (1932- 1936) 
• Ohio Brass Co., Barberton Division (1937-current)

This insulator has been shown in the column three times previously, and most recently December 1976. I received another letter from Douglas Henderson (Hawkesbury, Ont., Canada), who owns this specimen, and he had additional information and some theories why the insulator is probably not connected with the patent #778,005 shown in December CJ. Without repeating all the detail, here are the highlights.

Doug says the pinhole groove looks too shallow and irregular to be used with a spring retainer and, more importantly, that the insulator design precedes by many years the styles in use after 1900 and specifically the insulator used in the patent drawings. The specimen was also used in the field, since it has several small base and wire groove chips which are blackened with a layer of grime such as found on insulators afield. Additionally Doug says,

"... I feel, and Jack Hayes agrees, that my insulator is a bonafide threadless, and Jack has seen it. He told me that there is at least one other insulator like mine and that it was shown on a TV program in Ottawa last January (1976).

"I just had a phone call from Bill Bagg, Ottawa, Ont., and he told me that he had seen and handled the insulator that was shown on the TV program. Bill says that it is identical to mine, according to the description in the article in Crown Jewels April '76, page 16, even to the shallow groove. It was dug from an old dump in Cumberland, Ontario, which is about 55 miles upriver from my place, and about 60 miles from Lachute, Quebec. The finder also found a M. T. Co. threadless in the same dump...

"Bill states definitely that the second specimen is a real threadless, and so mine must be. It is very interesting that they both were found within 60 miles of each other, one in a house and one in a dump.

"I learned that a man by the name of Farrar started a pottery in 1839 at St. Johns, now St. Jean, Quebec. Conjecture Thus between 1840 and 1850 they could have turned out pottery or porcelain insulators of the type in question. We may trace it to its source yet. If it is truly of Canadian origin then to my mind it is even more desirable....

"If you saw this insulator which is a very interesting specimen, I think you would revise your theory.

"I regret that you feel that my insulator (U-975) is not a threadless per se, and that because of its apparent Canadian origin you are going to remove it from your chart of U.S. styles, but that is your privilege. However, may I have the temerity to suggest that you reconsider your decision, in view of the new evidence at your disposal-"

- - - - - - - - -

Well, I guess you've convinced me that this insulator is most certainly an early threadless. I'm equally convinced this insulator is more likely than not a Canadian item, and my Universal Style Chart is arbitrarily restricted to U.S. unipart pin types. Thus, no-go on that count.

As stated elsewhere in this column, it would be a great event for both U.S. and Canadian collectors alike if someone in Canada would spearhead the publication of a book on Canadian porcelain insulators. There are so many interesting insulator styles, company histories, etc. And the Canadian porcelain collectors are real dynamos for digging out this information. I would be happy to personally assist in the project in any way I could, except that I can't envision spending several years touring Canadian porcelain factories and libraries as I did in the U.S. for "our" insulators.

Jack

The U-186 is one of our favorite "patent top" insulators. The patent involved is #1,107,111, August 11, 1914, Benjiman S. Purkey, Tacoma, Washington. It has a "twist-lock" top for holding the conductor in slack-wire fashion, as would be the case for tree insulators. Specimens have all originated from west coast areas as far as I know, and we haven't yet been able to find out which porcelain company made them.

From the specimens I've had and seen in other collections, I've always felt that these were a glazeweld -- the entire crown portion glazewelded to the bottom part. We just can't prove this until we find one with a defective glaze job at the alleged joint, or unless we find one broken so badly that we could relegate it to the lapidary saw, Dora told me several years ago she had a broken one for this purpose, but after seeing it, I considered it still too nice a specimen to chop apart for curiosity reasons, since these are a scarce style. We need every collectible one we can find.

The first question for you readers is to ask if anyone does have a really hopeless basket case of the U-186 we could saw apart to see if it's a glazeweld. And also, can everyone of you look at your specimens in the alleged joint area just under the crown to see if you can see a glazeweld joint.

The second question is this. Purkey had a second patent (#1,251,416, Dec. 25, 1917) on this same insulator except that it had gripping ridges in the top and bottom surface of the slot termination, concentric with the axis of the insulator. These were to bite into the conductor insulation and prevent it from sliding through the slot -- namely, so it would not be a slack-wire insulator. Has anyone ever seen a U-186 version like this??

Jack

Dear Jack:

I need some info on two porcelain insulators I picked up. Due to the fact I'm not knowledgeable on porcelain, I think I got took.... I had one of these insulators on my table ... and I asked for an offer. She offered $1.00 and I sold it. Now don't get me wrong. I was at fault for not knowing better, and I did want to get rid of it. So, I am learning. Anyway at another table the same insulator was being offered for $25. What do you think it was worth?

I am slowly learning that I must become a wheeler & dealer to get ahead in this hobby. I don't want to -- I have lots of fun. I'd hate to spoil it. 
Tom Wisser, 
Linwood, N.J.

- - - - - - - - - -

Dear Tom:

You can relax. You were o.k. on it. This insulator is very modern and possibly even current production. The older ones with plain brown glaze are about $1 items, and may not sell at that. The more recent ones with the contrasty glazes (radio treated tops) are just prettier and might fetch $2 to $3 on that count. As you said, you wanted to get rid of it, and you did that. If you still have the second one, you might try for $3 or so on it.

Obviously you have a much better feel for the value of insulators than the fellow at the other table with a $25 price on this same item.

The only way that makes one feel "took" is to first buy the one with the $25 sticker on it and then see other tables like yours with $1 stickers on the same thing. This is not to say one cannot occasionally find some bargains on tables because the seller didn't recognize a goody when he had one.

Jack

Here's more info on the U-401 first reported in CJ, April 1975, page 23. That specimen was marked I.E.P./1958, and I related the factory drawing on it at Macomb was dated 1954.

Last year Chester Morris (El Paso, Texas) sent me a similar item, except that it has a sanded hole with a 5/8" pin adaptor leaded and its porcelain part is 3" tall instead of 3-3/4". It has an underglaze L-M marking.

I recently noted these were listed in the Joslyn catalogs starting with #15 (1945). and they were termed "Clamp Type Wireholders" and listed under street lighting equipment. These had standard 1" pin hole. The 1945 cataloging means these could turn up with Illinois markings also.

Here are a couple of "goodies" I've seen recently.

Bob Reyburn (Ontario, Gal.) dropped by to show me some of his pet items and make me drool. One was a U-670A Fred Locke (marking #1-9 on the skirt). This was an off-white glaze typical of Locke items of the 1901 period, and it had a skirt tapering to a sharp edge as the early Lockes have. This insulator was obviously quite different from the Fred Locke U-675's we've seen before and which have a longer petticoat.

Emma Almeida (Shrewsbury, Mass.) recently sent me a U-713 Imperial, white glaze, markings #2 and #3 plus a manufacturing date of 9-20-99. I don't think anyone has reported this style for Imperial before, but am not sure. In case you Imperial fans don't have this one, you now have something new to chase after. Emma has a couple of duplicates.

Also, recent word from Lew Hohn (Rochester, N.Y.): "... I seem to remember a note awhile ago about Pittsburg H.V. lack of cobalt blue. I have Just picked up 2 -- a cobalt blue U-267 and a cobalt blue U-12. Have the light blue in each of these, and the cobalts are the same characteristics. Also have a true gray in P.H.V. -- Sim U-358. I have a light blue in that also. A real beauty!"

Dear Jack:

Enclosed is my check for a copy of your 2nd Edition.... It is so hard on some of the shapes to exactly identify them with the drawings at quarter size. Is there a method of enlarging the drawings to full size with the possibility of pasting on cardboard, cutting out and using as a form to fit each insulator into? 
Errol Q. Bond, Sr., 
Fullerton, Cal.

- - - - - - - - - -

Dear Errol:

Cardboard templates are somewhat impractical for identification, since porcelain pin types vary endlessly in exact size and shape, and it would be endless work to make the templates. I have 5 large notebooks with prints of all the U- drawings (they're drawn full size initially, then reduced), and I never refer to these for identification of shape.

I really think you are overworking the exact identification. For instance, most ordinary porcelain cables are 3-3/4", 4-3/4", 5-1/2", 6-1/2", 7-1/2" and 8-1/2" size, and the Style Chart has ample shapes of each for you to pick out one that looks about like the specimen in hand. Since all the U- drawings are 1/4-size in the book, I have always printed a ruler on the back cover of my books so you can measure specimens to determine their approximate size. They also print rulers on the covers of field guides for bird identification, but I couldn't ever get the birds to come close enough or stand still long enough so I could measure them like we can insulators.

Jack

Emma Almeida (Shrewsbury, Mass.) has one of the best collections of early wiring insulators around, and here are three of her early ones showing design evolution.

Cleat #1 at left is a nonreversible type (top and bottom halves different). The base part has transverse grooves its entire length, and the mating part has a plane surface. There are no conductor positioning slots.

Both patents are those of Buffinton & Dow. Sept 19 is #505,215 covering the transverse gripping grooves. The Oct 3 patent is #505,912 for the spacer ridges on the mounting surface.

Cleats #2 and #3 are of the reversible type (both halves being identical).

Cleat #2 with the anchor trademark (unattributed) is intermediate type with the transverse grooves only half the length of the base, and is the first type to have conductor positioning slots, one in each half.

Cleat #3 shortens the transverse grooves still more but still has only the one conductor positioning slot in each half. The Aug 13 B & D patent (#544,501) is for the four small teats in the positioning slot to prevent the conductor from sliding through the slot.

Note that Duggan (of Imperial Porcelain) held a prior patent (#508,687 of Nov 14, 1893) on a reversible cleat with corrugated slots on each end of both halves. The B & D patent to use some other means for gripping the conductor.