Patent Analysis
Comparison of this Website's Patent/Design Registration Dates to Horowitz and Mann’s Patent/Design Registration Dates
28 discrepancies exist between the Patent/Design Registration Dates researched by two different groups. Horowitz and Mann (H/M) completed their research prior to publishing their book “Victorian Brass Needlecases in 1990. The exact details of how the research was undertaken is unclear as both authors have since passed away. The research for this website was done at least 23 years later in 2013 and is described in detail in Patent/Design Representation Research – How it was accomplished. Both groups used design registration records from The National Archives (TNA) in Kew, UK as well as patent information from other resources including the Business and Intellectual Property Centre at the British Library in London. Today some of these resources are available online at TNA's website. If you have the design registration number for a specific Avery style needle case, all you need to do is type it into TNA's search engine and the search result will provide you with the name of the party who registered the design as well as the date it was registered. The design registration and patent numbers can be found on the individual needle case webpages on our Master List. In addition copies of all patents are found on our Patents page.
Of the 28 items where there is a discrepancy, 15 appear to be simply misinterpretations of the diamond registration mark. This mark is composed of three elements, one number and two letters, which when translated indicate the date the item was registered. Many of these marks on the actual needle cases are very hard to read. For example the year code for 1874 is the letter "U" which if worn could easily be misinterpreted as the letter "J" which would lead one to misinterpret the year as 1880. In another example the month code for February is the letter "G" which if worn could look like a "C" which translates into the month of January. In addition the day of the 28th could easily be misread as the 23th. As you can see from these examples what looks like January 23, 1880 is actually February 28, 1874.
The table below lists each item with a brief explanation of the probably reason for the discrepancy. Items with an asterisk in the Explanation column indicate the discrepancy was most likely a misinterpretation of the diamond registration mark on the needle case. The remaining 13 items fall into six categories which are explained in more detail after the table below.
Item # and Item Name |
TNA/Patent Date |
H/M Date |
Difference |
Explanation |
1 - Archery Society |
11/27/1876 |
11/01/1876 |
1 element off |
* |
2 - Basket Needle Case |
08/03/1877 |
08/04/1877 |
1 element off |
* |
3 - Bird on a Box |
02/21/1873 |
01/21/1873 or 02/24/1873 |
1 element off |
Typo and Minnor Production Error |
4 - Bower |
07/24/1877 |
06/24/1877 |
1 element off |
* |
5 - Butterfly |
08/04/1871 |
10/04/1871 |
1 element off |
* |
6 - Camp Kettle (aka Cauldron) |
08/01/1877 |
07/01/1877 |
1 element off |
* |
7 - Constance |
05/16/1871 |
1870 |
Wrong year |
Mismatch to Patent |
8 - Cotton Plant |
05/31/1872 |
06/27/1872 |
2 elements off |
Minor Production Error |
9 - Cross (patent only) |
10/05/1872 |
10/18/1872 |
1 element off |
Typo or Transcription Error |
10 - Demi-Quad |
10/14/1869 |
11/19/1868 |
3 elements off |
Mismatch to Patent |
11 - Dog Carrying Woven Basket |
Patent not found |
?/31/1878 |
Not applicable |
Patent not found |
12 - Donkey with Panniers |
10/08/1879 |
07/31/1878 |
3 elements off |
Significant Discrepancy |
13 - Duplex |
05/21/1870 |
1872 |
Wrong year |
Mismatch to Patent |
14 - Elephant with Howdah |
05/27/1880 |
04/01/1878 |
3 elements off |
Significant Discrepancy |
15 - Flower Petal |
05/03/1872 |
05/08/1972 |
1 element off |
* |
16 - Horseshoe |
06/25/1874 |
06/23/1876 |
2 elements off |
* |
17 - Invalid Chair |
07/23/1878 |
07/??/1877 |
2 elements off |
* |
18 - Lap Desk Floral |
12/19/1876 |
03/29/1876 |
2 elements off |
* |
19 - Locket |
Patent not found |
08/10/1877 |
Not applicable |
Patent not found |
20 - Minerva Pincer |
05/21/1870 |
11/09/1868 |
3 elements off |
Mismatch to Patent |
21 - Oval Tub – Diamond Jubilee, Scott’s Monument, Scott’s Portrait |
03/16/1872 |
03/14/1872 |
1 element off |
* |
22 - Oval Tub – Ladies Portrait |
03/16/1872 |
03/07/1872 |
1 element off |
* |
23 - Penny Stamp |
03/28/1874 |
03/28/1876 |
1 element off |
* |
24 - Roses with Buds |
05/31/1872 |
06/27/1872 |
2 elements off |
Minor Production Error |
25 - Seated Cherub with Book |
05/27/1880 |
04/01/1878 |
3 elements off |
Significant Discrepancy |
26 - Sheaf of Wheat |
09/23/1873 |
09/14/1873 |
1 element off |
* |
27 - Temple Bar |
03/27/1878 |
03/21/1878 |
1 element off |
* |
28 - Trolley and Box (aka Railroad Handcart) |
09/07/1877 |
10/07/1877 |
1 element off |
* |
1. Typo and Minor Production Error (Bird on a Box) – the 1/21/1873 date must be a typographical error as the diamond registration mark on this item appears to be 1/13/1873. This item is stamped February 24, 1873 although the item was registered on February 21, 1873. It appears likely that the firm that actually manufactured this item made a mistake when stamping the date on it.
2. Mismatch to Patent (Constance, Demi-Quad and Minerva Pincer) - these appear to be mismatches to patents issued to W. Avery & Son. Nine UK patents for needle cases were issued to W. Avery & Son and they include descriptions and drawings for approximately 102 different items, the majority of which were never produced. For those that were produced, it is sometimes extremely difficult to determine which description and drawing goes with which needle case. Often the actual needle case varied a bit from the patent drawings and descriptions and included considerable more detail than the patent which referred mainly to the mechanical aspects of the design rather than the decoration on the exterior. Occasionally, a needle case is stamped with a reference to a patent which is incorrect as in the Constance which is stamped Patent 1473 1870 but appears more likely to be a multiple version of patent 1322, Fig 2 dated May 16, 1871. Although the Demi-Quad has no patent number or date stamped on it, H/M incorrectly assigned it to patent #3517 dated November 18, 1868 when it is in clearly represented on patent #2998, Fig.1, dated October 14, 1869. Although the Minerva - Pincer is also stamped Patent 3517, it’s design is found in patent 1473, Fig. 1 and 2 dated May 21, 1870.
3. Minor Production Error (Cotton Plant and Roses with Buds) - these two items are stamped June 27, 1872 roughly a month after the date the item was registered on May 31, 1872. Since this is the only design registration issued to this firm, perhaps they thought they had to wait a month in order for the patent to be valid. The registered design applies to two needle cases which are identical except for the decoration on the front cover.
4. Typo or Transmission Error (Cross and Duplex) – the Cross is a patent only, therefore there is no diamond registration mark to translate. Although the Duplex contains the word Patent, there is no date stamped on it. One can only conclude that H/M’s registration dates are typographical or transmission errors.
5. Patents Not found (Dog Carrying Woven Basket and the Locket) - After a thorough search through the TNA records, these registrations could not be found. Of these two, only the Dog Carrying Basket is signed W. Avery & Son which may indicate the Locket was not a needle or pin case. Until additional information if located regarding the Locket, this item will be placed on the list of potential needle cases.
With regard to the Dog Carrying Woven Basket, the brass basket is identical to one of the panniers from the donkey. In addition it contains a tiny circular slot on the bottom which serves no purpose with the dog, but is used to hold the panniers in place on the donkey. The dogs basket is clearly stamped ??/31/1878 which happens to be match with the day and year on the donkey’s panniers, although the stamp is located on the bottom of the basket as opposed to on the band of brass that holds the two panniers together. What does this mean? At first we questioned the authenticity of this piece since no design of a dog carrying a basket was found near the date that was marked on the basket. The search through the TNA records including comparing all design representations registered the first and last week of each month that contained 31 days during 1878 to an actual photograph of the Dog Carrying Woven Basket. In addition, in reviewing detailed photos of this item it appears as if the brass band in the dog’s mouth is slightly different from the brass in the basket. Could it be that at some point two unrelated pieces were brought together to form this item? Perhaps years after the two items were created. Conceivable a bone that the dog might have originally carried in its mouth went missing and a donkey became removed from its panniers and disappeared. The two remaining pieces were then joined together with an additional piece of brass to create a new item, a dog carrying a basket. This could have occurred at any point in the items history and would explain why the design registration could not be found. However, the Dog Carrying Woven Basket could also be another design variety, like the elephant and donkey mentioned below, that was created by another company whose name remains unknown. The main search through the TNA records was done by company name and subject. Therefore only known companies associated with needle cases where searched or companies who listed their designs as needle or pin cases. Yet, often design registrations do not include a subject. For example the elephant and the donkey listed below were not registered as needle cases. The only reason they were discovered was because Avery and Farnol did register other items as needle cases and a search by their respective company names included all items they registered. The fact that the basket attached to the dog contains the registry diamond on the bottom with a day and year that matches the day and year of the diamond stamped on the donkey’s pannier seems to imply these basket were registered to the same firm.
6. Significant Discrepancy (Donkey with Panniers, Elephant with Howdah and Seated Cherub with Book) – these items have a significant discrepancy between the TNA date and the H/M date. Of these, the Donkey and Seated Cherub with Book were registered to J. M. Farnol at 19 Hall Street in Birmingham. The Elephant with Howdah was registered by Avery on the same date as the Seated Cherub with Book and Avery indicated his business address was the same as Farnol’s. What makes these interesting is that all three designs involve a cast metal figure, animal or cherub, with a stamped brass attachment: panniers for the donkey, howdah for the elephant and the book for the cherub Avery’s name appears on the panniers, the howdah and according to H/M on the book. Apparently Avery and Farnol worked together on these items but why the one to two year span between the registration date stamped on the brass section and the time in which the design was formerly registered is unclear. Perhaps another company registered the brass parts at an earlier date. During the Victorian period many brass specialists in Birmingham had design books from which one could select a common design for which a die or mold already existed thereby saving the cost associated with making a new mold. Imagine this; Avery wanted to create an elephant with howdah needle case. Rather than create a new mold, he worked with one brass specialist who already had a howdah mold that was registered on April 1, 1878 and also with Farnol who appears to have specialized in cast metal items such as toys. Perhaps Farnol also had an elephant mold from a previous toy he made that he did not register. Although Avery registered the new design that combined the two elements together on May 27, 1880, it’s conceivable that the howdah maker insisted that his registration date be stamped on the howdah to protect his design. Farnol apparently followed a similar process when he created the Donkey with Panniers and the Seated Cherub with Book. Of course this is just a guess, but it does provide a reasonable explanation for the one to two year gap between the dates stamped on the items and the date when the final concepts were registered. We know that Avery and Farnol first began to work together 1877 since Farnol registered “The Stile” needle case that year with Avery’s name stamped on the registration representation. Additional Avery registered his Lighthouse with Boat on July 1, 1878 again using Farnol’s business address as his own. It’s interesting to note that July 1, 1878 was the same date that the panniers was registered according to the diamond stamp on it for the donkey design that Farnol registered over a year later in October 1879.
