howard keystone and e howard watches differences

[hugh mayberry]

what is the difference between an e howard pw and a keystone howard which are considered real howards?

[Kent]

They were made by two different companies.

E. Howard & Co. (also known as the E. Howard Watch & Clock Co. (http://static.flickr.com/30/98352686_6e0ccd8a60_o.jpg)) watches were considered to more prestigious than those from the majority of American watch companies. The following is from “E. Howard & Co. Watches 1858-1903”, George E. Townsend, Heart of America Press, Kansas City, MO, 1985 (May be still in print - contact Heart of America Press (http://www.hoapress.com)).

From pages 3 & 4:
Mr. E. Howard made his first "E. Howard & Co." (Boston) movement in 1858 and finished the last ones in 1903.

More information on E. Howard & Co. can be found on the NAWCC Chapter 174, Pocket Horology (http://www.pockethorology.org/) website. Additional pictures and more information can be viewed at Howard Pocket Watches 1858-1930 (http://www.oldwatch.com/howard.html).


The following information is mostly based upon “The Howard Ten Size Watch,” Arthur N. Borg, NAWCC Bulletin No. 129 (August 1967): pp.941-64.

The Keystone Watch Case Co. purchased the rights to use the Howard name on watches (Note: from the E. Howard Watch & Clock Co. (http://static.flickr.com/30/98352686_6e0ccd8a60_o.jpg)) sometime around 1903, reportedly to provide a market for their better grades of cases. At first, the firm had watches built under the E. Howard name by the American Waltham Watch Co., which Keystone-Howard then marketed. The watches were labeled "E. Howard Watch Co."

Its said that Keystone "finished" these watches at the New York Standard Watch Co., a firm, based in New Jersey, already owned by Keystone. However, it may be that the "finishing" may have simply meant mounting a dial and placing the movement in a case. The reason for the quotation marks is that the term "finish" in the watch industry usually refers to the process of turning a set of raw movement parts into a smoothly functioning movement, as well as adding whatever decorating that was to be done. The overall quality of watches produced by Standard was well below the high grade watches that Keystone-Howard offered and the New York Standard plant may not have had the necessary capability of such fine work.

Back in 1901, the Philadelphia Watch Case Co. had purchased the U.S. Watch Co. at Waltham, see:
elginwatches.org/scans/non_elgin_articles/m_1901_philadelpha_buys_US_watch_co.html
To view, go to the Elgin Watch Collectors Site Home Page at elginwatches.org, then copy and paste the address in your browser's address bar and click on 'Go'.
Jerry Treiman reported (old ref::In a Message Board Thread About a U.S. Watch Co. Watch) 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 acquired a watch factory in Massachusetts. By 1905, Keystone-Howard had patented a 16-size, 17-jewel, three-quarter plate movement design which they began making in both hunting-case and open-face versions under the “E. Howard Watch Co.” name. Keystone-Howard stopped manufacturing watches around 1930, a victim of the Depression. The rights to the Howard name for use on watches was then sold to Hamilton.

[Dr. Jon]

The older watches made under Edward Howard's management are usually called Boston Howards. The later are usually called Keystone Howards.

Both types are desirable and collectable. There is a lot more passion about Boston Howards and more avid collectors of these than the Keystone variety.

I like both flavors. I consider both to be real and so long as no one tries to pass a Keystone as a Boston both are fine.

There are some fuzzy areas. The Boston Howards were made after Edward Howard died and they made some watches very much in the Boston Howard style although not as he would have approved. Edward detested high jewel counts and overcoils. The 17 and 21 jewel split plate movements could only have been made after he was gone. They are definitely Boston Howard watches.

Also I believe the interim management ordered the first lot of Waltham watches of the type that ultimately became Keystone Howards. Some of these are very similar to Waltham American grade watches, except for the marking, so they are very high grade items.

Also Keystone carried on Howards fascination with oddball banking. (Banking is how the lever stops when it has locked a pallet stone) Edward Howard tried to do away with them with the Coles escapement and then with a Lange type banking pin on the lever. Most Boston Howards bank against the pallet bridge rather than banking pins. There were many Keystone models that used ruby pins for banking. Some 23 Jewel models included these in the jewel count.

As far as I know, Howard was the only American maker who used Geneva stops to control the main spring, after the early Waltham years and used them up the take over by Keystone. There are several Keystone models that have Geneva stops so they carried on that tradition although not on all watches.

Keystone employed several other high grade features in their watches. The high grade Keystones are very fine and worthy of admiration.


The line between Boston and Keystone is not crisp and both include very fine items. Both are real Howards but most "Howard" collectors favor the Boston flavor.

[Clint Geller]

There is much good information here already. I would add that in 1903 when E. Howard & Co. sold the rights to the Howard name for use on watches (the original company remained in the clock business) to Theophilus Zerbrugg of the Keystone Watch Case Company, only the name copyright, but none of the movement design patent rights were transferred. Consequently, Keystone Howard movements manufactured in the old US Watch Co. factory in Waltham, and E. Howard & Co. movements (someone here called them "Boston Howards," which is fair enough) made in Roxbury (now part of Boston ) were all completely different from one another. There is no ambiguity here.

However as has already been noted, around 1903 the American Watch & Clock Company, also of Waltham, manufactured some watch movements for both Howard firms, but these movements differed both from those made in Roxbury and from those made by Keystone Howard in Waltham. I believe, but I am not absolutely certain that one can reliably distinguish a Waltham movement made for Boston Howard from one made for Keystone Howard by the manner of the Howard signature on the dial (and perhaps also the engraving on the movement). Watches that were made for Boston Howard have dials signed "E. Howard & Co., Boston" whereas those made for Keystone Howard are signed simply "Howard." The best Waltham-for-Howard movements are 16 size "true center bridge" Model 1899's that are finished very similarly to "American Watch Company" Grade M99's except for the composition of the endstones (except for that on the balance wheel).

[Dr. Jon]

Interesting note on the watch movement patents. Why would the owners, whoever they were have kept these patents, unless in negotiations Keystone offered very little money for them.

I can not see how they would have been of any value. IMHO by this time Howard watch designs were hopelessly outmoded and the patents of use only if they were going to continue the same money losing approach.

On the other hand, it would not have been the strangest thing in the history of the enterprise.

Any idea what happened or what they were thinking?

[Tom McIntyre]

I suspect the patent value was very little and there was always the possibility that it might be sold to a third party. There was little in the way of patent rights still available in 1903. Only the 1894 patents had any time left. This is the list of all the Howard patents in the NAWCC database including design patents and trademarks.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Number Ltr Re Description YYYY MM DD Inventor 1 Inventor 2 Assignee
18488 D WTCH OR CLK DIAL NUMERALS 1888 7 31 CARR RUFUS B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
================================================== =====
319783 I RECORDER WTCH MAN 1885 6 9 CARR RUFUS B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
319818 I RECORDER WTCH MAN 1885 6 9 HOWARD ALBERT E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
358402 I WTCH & CLK PINION MFG 1887 2 22 LEARNED WILLIAM B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
359980 I CLK OR WTCH BALANCE MFG 1887 3 22 MURRAY LEONIDAS E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
360203 I CHIME RELEASE MECH 1887 3 29 CARR RUFUS B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
401180 I MACHINE PINION FACING 1889 4 9 LEARNED WILLIAM B MURRAY LEONIDAS E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
412045 I RECORDER WTCH MAN 1889 10 1 SCRIBNER JAMES F E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
412030 I WTCH MVT BOX 1889 10 1 LEARNED WILLIAM B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
412018 I CLK STRIKE 1889 10 1 CARR RUFUS B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
439845 I WTCH CANNON PINION 1890 11 4 LEARNED WILLIAM B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
459917 I CLK PROGRAM ELECTRIC 1891 9 22 SMITH FRANK EDWIN E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
496162 I WTCH CANNON PINION 1893 4 25 LEARNED WILLIAM B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
511408 I CLK TOWER WIND MECH 1893 12 26 CARR RUFUS B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
511852 I WTCH DIAL 1894 1 2 LEARNED WILLIAM B E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
530345 I WTCH CENTER ARBOR 1894 12 4 LEARNED WILLIAM B MOSHER JAMES A E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO
796162 I WTCH STEM WIND MECH 1905 8 1 TAFT RYLAND L E HOWARD WTCH CO
889386 I MACHINE STAFF LATHE 1908 6 2 MEHL WALTER B E HOWARD WTCH CO
900183 I WTCH MVT 1908 10 6 MEHL WALTER B E HOWARD WTCH CO
922013 I WTCH CASE 1909 5 18 MEHL WALTER B E HOWARD WTCH CO
================================================== ===========
14692 T WTCH MVT-HORSE- HEAT AND COLD 1887 8 23 E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO HAYDEN CHAS J
14733 T WTCH MVT ADJUSTED -DEER- 1887 9 6 E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO HAYDEN CHAS J T
14732 T WTCH MVT -DOG- NOT ADJUSTED 1887 9 6 E HOWARD WTCH & CLK CO HAYDEN CHAS J T
2865 T WTCH WTCH CASE & WTCH MVT 1905 9 12 E HOWARD WTCH CO
2866 T WTCH WTCH CASE & WTCH MVT 1905 9 19 E HOWARD WTCH CO
47483 T WTCH E HOWARD & CO 1905 11 7 E HOWARD WTCH CO ZURBRUGG THEOPHILUS P
47690 T E HOWARD WATCH CO 1905 11 14 E HOWARD WTCH CO ZURBRUGG THEOPHILUS P
71680 T (RING) 1908 12 8 E HOWARD WTCH CO

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Clint Geller]

If indeed Keystone had ever intended to manufacture watches based on the earlier Boston Howard designs, Keystone would have been keen to purchase not only any associated design rights but all kinds of other documentation and hardware (dies, master plates, gages, and certain machinery, etc.) associated with that production. However, I did not mean to imply that access to the original company's watch designs were an important item in the negotiations between Keystone and Howard. I am aware of no evidence supporting such an assertion. The point I was trying to make was only that Keystone Howard watches and Boston Howard watches shared only similar (though not identical) names, but no design details. An earlier post on this thread had suggested there was some overlap ("...the line between Boston and Keystone is not crisp...,") and I wanted to clarify that the only watch designs that overlapped both B-H and K-H were made by a third company, the AWWCo, and were unlike any of the watches made by either B-H or K-H.

However, Dr. Jon raises an interesting point about the marketability of Howard's obsolescent watch designs in 1903. I would argue that the Howard split plate designs marketed in the 1890's would not have appeared radically different to a typical retail customer in terms of overall layout than many RR watches sold successfully by Elgin in subsequent decades. What was "hopelessly outmoded" about E. Howard & Co.'s watches in their closing decade or so of watch production was their relatively conservative finishing with meager jewel counts, usually (but not always) restrained damaskeening and brass (versus gold) wheel trains; their stodgy marketing approaches; and most of all, their inefficient production methods. Thus, while the Howard name evidently retained cache in 1903 (apparently, it still does), Howard watches had become outdated in the public eye.

If Keystone had wanted to mimic the look of a Howard split plate movement with modernized finish and had proceeded to make them by more efficient methods, its not clear to me that they couldn't have done so successfully, at least for a time. However, there was no motivation to have done so, since Howard split plates had not been selling well for some time. (There is in fact documentary evidence both in the Howard factory records and elsewhere that deep and massive discounting had been going on. After all, the Howard firm departed watchmaking for a reason.) I think everyone agrees that it was the Howard name that Keystone desired, not Howard's watch designs.