ejc544
Registered User
I have just completed rejuvenating a dark walnut kitchen clock that I had acquired about five years ago. There are a couple of puzzles that I wish to present for discussion:
1. The information on the movement does not jive with the case, but indeed it may not be a marriage of two clocks. Let me explain. Since my photographic skills are nil, let me assure the reader that the movement is clearly stamped E. Ingraham & Co., Patd. Oct 6, 78, Nov. 11, 79. Bristol Conn. The case, see attached photos, appears to be complete with its original glass that clearly states Niagara Trademark. The label, which is incomplete, indicates that it is an 8 day Niagara. The name of the company has been obliterated, but it does say Manufacturing Company followed by Erie, Penn.
Strange! Perhaps not. A little bit of googling revealed that during the 3 rd quarter of the 1800’s the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut were each vying for the rights to an area at the base of Lake Erie. After much debate, the Federal government gave the county to Pennsylvania so that it could have dual access to large bodies of water.
Could the case have been made in the contested territory and then shipped to Bristol, Connecticut where the movement was inserted?
2. Behind the movement, written on the backboard is some scribbling in
pencil followed by 11-14-02. Can I assume that this is a repair
date?
3. The repairs of faulty bushings are interesting. If you look closely at the bushing adjoining the count wheel, you will notice that it appears to be a button shaped piece of metal. A similar repair appears on the back of the movement as well. Both items are affixed to the movement with solder. Is repair typical of the early 1900’s or does my clock belong in the infamous Hall of Shame?
As always, your comments are deeply appreciated.
Ed Cypress
1. The information on the movement does not jive with the case, but indeed it may not be a marriage of two clocks. Let me explain. Since my photographic skills are nil, let me assure the reader that the movement is clearly stamped E. Ingraham & Co., Patd. Oct 6, 78, Nov. 11, 79. Bristol Conn. The case, see attached photos, appears to be complete with its original glass that clearly states Niagara Trademark. The label, which is incomplete, indicates that it is an 8 day Niagara. The name of the company has been obliterated, but it does say Manufacturing Company followed by Erie, Penn.
Strange! Perhaps not. A little bit of googling revealed that during the 3 rd quarter of the 1800’s the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut were each vying for the rights to an area at the base of Lake Erie. After much debate, the Federal government gave the county to Pennsylvania so that it could have dual access to large bodies of water.
Could the case have been made in the contested territory and then shipped to Bristol, Connecticut where the movement was inserted?
2. Behind the movement, written on the backboard is some scribbling in
pencil followed by 11-14-02. Can I assume that this is a repair
date?
3. The repairs of faulty bushings are interesting. If you look closely at the bushing adjoining the count wheel, you will notice that it appears to be a button shaped piece of metal. A similar repair appears on the back of the movement as well. Both items are affixed to the movement with solder. Is repair typical of the early 1900’s or does my clock belong in the infamous Hall of Shame?
As always, your comments are deeply appreciated.
Ed Cypress