boss case

[guychampeau]

i have a 16s elgin pw in a boss case labeled... PAT 14K..am i correct in recalling that it is a gold plated case and there was a lawsuit over the stamping??thanks

[Robert Sweet]

James Boss patented the gold-filled case in 1859, so all JBoss cases are gold-filled and not gold plated or solid gold. I'm not familiar with the law suit.

Robert

[RON in PA]

If memory serves correctly, there was a law suit between the Elgin watch co and the Elgin watch case company.

[Kent]

If memory serves correctly, there was a law suit between the Elgin watch co and the Elgin watch case company.

Yes, but the Suit was in 1898 (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/10/13721240_d201f5dccd_o.jpg) and had nothing at all to do with the James Boss case patent or Jas. Boss cases. This was overturned in the Supreme Court. The citation for that case is Elgin Nat. Watch Co. v. Illinois Watch Case Co., 179 U.S. 665 (1901), as reported by John F. in a post on July 11, 2002.

Keystone had gained the Boss patent rights and was marketing the Jas Boss Cases (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/22/31853073_31104b39fd_o.jpg) since the 1880s.

All cases marked "J. Boss" or "Jas. Boss" or having a balance (scale) as a trade mark (indicating that it is a J. Boss grade case) are gold-filled cases. The following chronology and information is from "History of the American Watch Case," Warren H. Niebling, Whitmore Publishing, Philadelphia, PA, 1971 (available on loan by mail to members from the NAWCC Library & Research Center (http://www.nawcc.org/Library/library.htm)), with additional notes in blue based upon an article in an 1889 issue of The Keystone, posted by Greg Frauenhoff, 30-Apr-04 and quotes in brown, based upon the online article "Decorative Aspects of American Horology (http://www.antiquorum.com/vox/june_2002/poniz/poniz.htm)," by Philip Poniz, on The Antiquorum Magaizine Website:

1853 - Randolf & Reese Peters were making cases in Philadelphia, employing James Boss.

1859 - J. Boss received a patent for "spinning up" cases made of "gold-filled" type material. That is, material made of a sheet of composition metal (usually brass) sandwiched between two thin sheets of gold. Boss formed cases by rolling sheet metal as opposed to the traditional method involving soldering and cutting. Rolling increased the molecule density of the metal. His patent, No. 23,820 of May 3, 1859, revolutionized the watch case industry by enabling the production of not only less expensive, but considerably stronger cases. ... Unlike gold washed cases, which were made using electroplating, cases produced by means of rolling had much harder gold surfaces and were thus less apt to wear.

1871 - J. Boss sold patent rights to John Stuckert of Philadelphia.

1875 - T.B. Hagstoz & Charles N. Thorpe formed Hagstoz & Thorpe, purchasing the manufacturing facilities (within which, 12 employees produced 6 cases per day at 618 Chesnut St.) and "J. Boss" patent from the estate of John Stuckert. Hagstoz & Thorpe seems to have made only gold-filled cases using the J. Boss patented method.

1876+ - ... orders increased so rapidly that larger quarters became necessary immediately. The landlord of their first premises, 618 Chestnut Street, was George W. Childs, ... When Childs’ learned of his tenants’ need for more work space, he offered $100,000 and became a silent third partner. A new plant on Brown Street was erected ...

1877 - E. Tracy, a manufacturer of solid gold and silver watch cases, was acquired.

1880 - the company moved to a six story building on Nineteenth St., with an equal-size annex on Wylie St.

1883 - 1885 - T.B Hagstoz withdrew from the company which became C.N. Thorpe Co. and shortly thereafter it was reorganized as the Keystone Watch Case Co.

1887 - the Nineteenth St. building was almost doubled in size and a four story adjacent building was occupied by Keystone.

1889 - the firm was producing 1,500 cases per day.

Keystone then went on to absorb other case companies (and several watch companies). For example, Jerry Treiman reported in a message board thread (about a watch made by the U.S. Watch Co.) that "... the history provided in legal documents for the anti-trust case against Keystone ... states that all of the capital stock of a newly organized Philadelphia Watch Case Co. (August 1900) was owned by Keystone. Thus, Keystone become one of the largest case manufacturers in the country. The combined company built a large factory in Riverside, NJ (http://www.riversidenjhistory.com/PhotoWatchcase.html) in 1907. Keystone stayed in business another 80+ years.

[lak611]

Check out this article (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C04E5DF1430E233A25754C0A9649C94 6196D6CF) from the Feb. 7, 1910 New York Times. You'll get a PDF of the full article if you click on "view full article."

[Kent]

Nice find Laura!

There was a long-standing marketing trust formed by the largest watch and case manufacturers. This also included jobbers. Although the following may seem local to New York City, bear in mind that this was the focal point of the industry. The New York Times carried an article on July 15, 1892 entitled:

"Amenable For Conspiracy
...
"The combination which has existed for the past seven years among the manufacturers and jobbers of watches, by means of which the price of timepieces in this county has been kept in the control of the makers, is just now receiving the attention of District Attorney Nicoll. The probable result of the investigation will be the indictment of several well-known New Yorkers for conspiracy.

"Two associations are responsible for the present condition of affairs. One is an organization in which are included the principal manufacturers of watch movements, and the other is the National Association of Jobbers of American Watches. In the former are the American Waltham Watch Company, the Columbus Watch Company, the Elgin National Watch Company, the E. Howard Watch and Clock Company, the New-York Standard Watch Company and the Seth Thomas Clock Company. The Trenton Watch Company was formerly a member, but withdrew several months ago.

"The association of jobbers includes nearly all the largest handlers of watches in the country. ...

"The purpose for which the association of jobbers was formed is expressed in a circular mailed to its members, in which the names of the manufacturers of movements and cases precede the following words:

'Please remember that only the above manufacturers are in co-operation with the association, and in return for such co-operation the members have agreed to handle no American movements or gold, filled, silver, or base metal cases except of their manufacture. Job lots of movements and cases, made by other manufacturers, are thrown upon the market from time to time, and have been offered to our members. Therefore, I desire to call your attention to the fact that it will be contrary to the agreement made with the manufacturers at the annual meeting if you purchase such goods under any circumstances, either from the manufacturers of them or from any other party or parties who may offer them for sale.'

"This was signed by James H. Noyes, Secretary and Commissioner."

A description of the trust's actions can be seen in this 'statement on a jobber price sheet from the Lapp & Florshem Co, Chicago,' posted on the NAWCC Pocket Watch Message Board by 4thdimension (Cort), June 21, 2006:

"At a meeting of the Watch Case and Movement Manufacturers, and the Jobbers, Association of the United States, the following rules were passed governing sales of product of
Elgin Watch Co. Springfield Watch Co. Brooklyn Watch case Co. Waltham Watch Co. Howard Watch Co. Blauer Watch Case Co. Hampden Watch Co. Keystone Watch Case Co. Crescent Watch Case Co. Columbus Watch Co. Jos. Fahys & Co. Courvoisier-Wilcoxc Co. H. Muhrs's Sons. Bates & Bacon

"No Jobber shall be allowed to sell any American movements without cases. The cases may be of Gold, Gold Filled, Silver, or Base Metal, and it is not necessary that they should fit the movements sold with them, but as many cases as movements must be sold in each bill.

"Cases may be sold in excess of, and without movements to any desired extent, but not a movement without a case of some kind accompanying it."

The actions of the trust affected a number of companies. Dueber-Hampden is a good example. One of John Dueber's main reasons for buying into Hampden was to be able to offer movements and cases to independent jewelers. One of the means used by the jobbers to control the market was to only sell nearly equal amounts of cases and movements to dealers. Without a supply of movements, for which the jewelers had no cases, Dueber was having trouble getting his cases sold.

Several years after the above described trust fell apart, another attempt got started. The N.Y. Times reported, on June 18, 1896 that Mr. J.H. Noyes (Secretary and Commissioner of the former trust) told a reporter:

"Efforts have been made for a number of months to organize a new association of watch jobbers throughout the country. ... Mr. Noyes wished it understood that the new association was in no sense a trust."

Nevertheless,
" ...the essential features of the association will be as follows:

"Membership will be open to every dealer in the wholesale watch or jewelry business who keeps a stock of American watches, movements, and cases in proportion to the amount of his general business. Each member of the association shall place with the Secretary during the month of January in each year a true and complete printed copy of his price lists of all American watches watch movements, and gold, filled, silver, and base metal watch cases in which he deals, and shall not make any change whatever in the list without first communicating the change to the Secretary.

"The officers and Directors are to urge both manufacturers and retailers to do business with those jobbers who are members of the association,

"Each manufacturer is to pay to the Treasurer of the association on the first day of each month a sum equal to a certain per cent on his price list of all goods purchased of him by members of the association.
"The plan, it is declared does not provide for any regulation of the output or for any combination of manufacturers."

This sure sounds like a trust, with the manufacturers paying rebates to the jobbers. Apparently some body or some organization had significant negative input to the association. On July 16, 1896, the N.Y. Times carried an item under the heading:

"No Watch Trust At Present
...
"It was decided at a meeting of watch jobbers at 130 Broadway yesterday that it was inexpedient for them to organize an association. About twenty-five jobbers from all over the country were present and it was said that they represented $20,000,000 of capital."

Be all that as it may, trusts and similar organizations continued, such that in the `teens, the Burlington Watch Co. was selling mail-order, using a fight against "The Trust" as a major selling point. This started at least as early as May 1910 (http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y284/walt845/1910_May_Trust_Letter.jpg) and Continued (http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y284/walt845/1911_Dec_Burl_Spcl_HC.jpg) for a year or more. The was a lot of truth in Burlington's claims, but there was a certain amount of advertising hype as well. Nahum Lewis wrote an excellent article, "The Burlington Watch Company's Fight Against the Trust," which appeared in the December 1997 NAWCC Bulletin on pages 706-9.