With the consolidation of several companies in the mid 1850's to form the Western Union Telegraph Company, there seemed little doubt that nearly all the smaller companies would eventually be swallowed up by that fast growing giant. In the late 1850's and early 1860's independent telegraph companies reluctantly gave way by the dozens to Western Union, until there were few major concerns left to compete with the "colossal monopoly". 

On August 3, 1864 a group of telegraph companies consolidated to form one large company, to be known as the United States Telegraph Company. The U.S. Tel. Co. was one of the last major competitors of Western Union in the early days. The new company was formed from the merger of the following telegraph companies: Independent, Inland, Inland Extension, United States, and United States Extension. I am not sure of the exact dates for the forming of those five previous companies, but from what I've gathered, I came up with the following approximate years: Original U.S. Tel. -1859, Independent- 1860, Inland- 1862, U.S. Extension -1862. With the newly formed U.S. Tel. in 1864 came the promise of a well organized, successful company. It controlled nearly 10,000 miles of line at various locations and linked several important points. The man chosen for president of the new enterprise was James McKaye. 

With the formation of a new company determined to expand, trouble was inevitable. One of the first of many conflicts between U.S. Tel. and another company came in the state of Illinois in 1864. Judge John D. Caton, who became a powerful telegraph personality in that state by taking control of the deteriorating Illinois & Mississippi Telegraph Company in 1852 and making a strong organization of it, stood in the way of U.S. Tel. Caton had become well known as a powerful telegraph personality in the 1850's as the merger of companies took place. He was responsible for right of way contracts for telegraph lines with the leading railroads in Illinois and Iowa. Due to Caton's control of the lines in the area, it was inevitable that there would be trouble between him and U.S. Tel. On September 23, 1864, J.J.S. Wilson, Caton's lieutenant, reported to Caton: "The United States Telegraph folks are setting poles along the Chicago & Alton Railroad just outside the railroad company's fence." The same day another employee, L.A. Louis, reported with similar news: U.S. Tel. Co. agents claimed to have made arrangements with the Illinois Central Railroad to construct a line along the road on the opposite side of the tracks that Caton's line occupied. As it turned out, U.S. Tel. couldn't meet its contracts, and Louis reported to Caton that Mr. Arthur, an official with Illinois Central, "will cut poles as fast as they (U.S. Tel.) set them on his right of way."

The Illinois & Mississippi was only the beginning. Western Union, American Telegraph Company, and U.S. Tel. were known as "The Big Three" at that time. Western Union and American were the "Big Two" as far as U.S. Tel. was concerned when it came to trouble. Western Union, who had the powerful Jeptha Wade (See August and October '78 Crown Jewels for a feature story on Wade.) on its side, was a great competitor. Western Union did everything in its power in the early going to defeat U.S. Tel. They even went so far as to cut their rates on messages below cost in the areas where U.S. Tel. had competing lines, just to put U.S. Tel. in a bind. 

In July of 1864 the original United States Telegraph Company had an act of Congress passed authorizing the construction of "a line or lines of magnetic telegraph between the Missouri River and the City of San Francisco, in the State of California, on such route as they [the corporators] might select, to connect with the lines of the said United States Telegraph Company, now constructed and being constructed through the States of the Union." A corporation known as the United States Pacific Telegraph Company was to be formed for the actual building of the proposed line. This proposed line was one of the major concerns for Western Union, as they already had in operation a line connecting California with the East. More on that conflict later in the story. 

In the early part of 1865 there seemed little doubt that U.S. Tel. Co. would prosper, despite its competition. It had chosen to have fewer offices, concentrating mainly on the major populated centers. It also chose to construct its lines primarily along highways and over farms, rather than along railroads, so it wouldn't have to share its profits with the railroad companies. However, this did have certain drawbacks. Inspection of lines was not easy, and separate facilities for offices had to be provided, whereas telegraph lines along a railroad could have been inspected easily, and offices were easily located in railroad depots. The year 1865 was a busy one for U.S. Tel. In April, sixteen new offices were opened in Delaware, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania. In June twelve more were opened on a line from Montreal, Canada, through New York State. At the end of 1865, the U.S. Tel. Co. was credited with having nearly 16,000 miles of line, and an authorized capitalization of $6,000,000. It was reported to have gross receipts of $668,422.26. 

As stated earlier, the United States Pacific Telegraph Company was formed to complete a line from San Francisco to the Missouri River. Western Union had a completed line in that same area at the time, but that line was highly criticized, due to its being out of operation much of the time. This was due partly because of troublesome maneuvers of the Indians. Knowing of a possible competitive line, Jeptha Wade suggested that the Western Union line be thoroughly repaired and put in working order. He also proposed a new line to be built along a more southern route, through Denver. Western Union's main concern with U.S. Tel. was west of the Mississippi, and therefore concentrated its attack on stopping it in the West. Actual construction on the line, starting eastward from San Francisco, was put into full scale in 1865. James Street was directed to construct the line under the superintendence of James Gamble. In January of 1866 the line was completed to Salt Lake City From there it was intended to have been built eastward to Missouri and join its relatively large empire in the East. 

Even with the promising news of the completion to Salt Lake City, there were some indications the company might fall. In fact, the end was very near. In the middle part of 1865 stockholders in U.S. Tel. Co. started asking questions. There seemed to be far too little profit for a company of its size. There also were reports that a contractor hired by U.S. Tel. had become very wealthy off the company, and many stockholders may have feared there was some wrong doing on the part of the company directors. The validity of the company became so questionable, that the company stock value in August was only worth one half what it was in March. In September it was worth one third, and in October about one fifth. Competing lines took advantage of the situation by lowering rates and continuing court battles on right of ways. President McKaye, who had been at the head of the company since its formation, found himself in an awkward position and resigned. William Orton, then Commissioner of Internal Revenue, was offered the position, and not realizing all the matters concerned, accepted. He was not long in finding the true condition of the company after taking over for McKaye on November 1, 1865. There was little opportunity for Orton to get the company back on its feet, as it was losing over $10,000 a month after expenses. In February of 1866, Jeptha Wade, of Western Union, offered a consolidation proposal. Orton made a counterproposal, which was a heavy load for Western Union to take on; but it accepted, and thus eliminated another competitor from the field. The contract was agreed upon February 27, 1866, and on March 1, 1866 the United States Telegraph Company was officially merged with the giant monopoly. And there came to an end to a short lived, but yet determined company. 

With at least 300 offices and 16,000 miles of line, the U.S. Tel. Co. certainly must have used many insulators. What type of insulation was used by U.S. Tel. during the early going is unknown to me. More than likely several different types of insulators were in use on its lines, due to the fact that there were already nearly 10,000 miles of line in use when U.S. Tel. was formed in 1864 by the consolidation of the five companies. A November, 1869 article in The Telegrapher, a New York newspaper printed monthly by the National Telegraph Union, stated: "The glass insulator now employed is substantially that first used by the United States Company, being a sort of compromise between the 'egg' of the Magnetic line and the well known 'petticoat' or 'umbrella' so much used a few years since." The CD 731 has been referred to by collectors as "the compromise", and that type of insulator may or may not be the type referred to above. There is an insulator embossed U.S. TEL Co. // CHESTER / N.Y. (See figures 1 and 2 on the following page.) These insulators are rather scarce, especially in the East, and it is quite a challenge trying to locate one. Most are of a pretty dark aqua; but I have seen at least one unit in a real light aqua. The name "Chester" embossed on the insulators refers to a telegraph equipment supply company formed in the mid 1850's in New York City. These insulators most likely were ordered from the Chester firm, and made on special order by a glass manufacturer or supplier somewhere in the East. (See a Chester ad elsewhere in this article.) 

U.S. TEL. CO. insulator, Notice its larger size compared to figure 3, which shows a similar insulator which is found with the Mulford & Biddle and various other embossings.	Reverse side of the U.S. TEL. CO. The embossed "NY" near the base is a characteristic similar to the embossing found on the CD 729 Mulford & Biddle.

All the ones located to date, as far as I know, came from the western part of the country, and were probably from the line which was completed from San Francisco as far east as Salt Lake City. If anyone knows of their use elsewhere, please advise me of it. 

The embossed U.S. Tel. Co. units are very similar to an insulator marked MULFORD & BIDDLE // U.P.R.R. However, the U.S. Tel. Co. ones are somewhat larger and have a skirt which "rounds into" the base. (See figure 3 on the following page for a comparison.) The embossing on the U.S. Tel. Co. is rather large, and very neat. Notice in figure 2 the location of the embossing "NY". It is very near the base. This characteristic reminds me of the CD 729 Mulford & Biddle, 83 John Street, insulators, as the embossing on those insulators is also very near the base. Mulford & Biddle was in business in New York City in 1865, and the insulators made for U.S. Tel. Co./Chester were more than likely produced in that year also. This brings forth a theory that the supplier to both Chester and Mulford & Biddle could have been the same firm. The unusual location of the embossing is one indicator of this.

There seems to be very little known on who actually produced the early threadless units. There are several different supply house names embossed on threadless units, such as Chester, Keeling, Lefferts, Mulford & Biddle, Tillotson, etc. But who made these for them? That is a question that has been bothering me for some time. It's bothered me so much that this spring I hope to do enough research to possibly come up with an answer. 

There is one possible supplier of these, Bartlett & Co. of 289 Greenwich Street. Bartlett states in an ad that they were manufacturers and dealers in glassware. But again, being a manufacturer and dealer doesn't necessarily mean they produced any insulators at all. (However, I personally feel that they did make some.) They may have manufactured other types of glass and ordered insulators from another firm. In the ad, which I've included on this page, notice that Bartlett advertised the U. S. Pattern. Anyone have any ideas as to what the U.S. Pattern is? 

I guess it's only right that I let everyone know how the new style numbers for threadless are going along. I've set up some guidelines to go by, and have broken down the basic groups. I hope to really get things off the ground this winter, and by the time you're reading this, we should have things well under way. 

For those of you who haven't followed the project too closely, I'll give a little background. For the past couple of years collectors have been indicating they would like a separate set of numbers assigned to threadless. I would once again like to make special note that we already have two fine systems -- Jack Tod's and Mr. Woodward's. Jack's U- numbers are for U.S. items, and some Canadians may have felt left out. So the new T.S. numbers will include Canadian porcelain. Otherwise, Jack's system is fantastic. Mr. Woodward's system is also to be credited for saving all of us so much confusion. But, once again, some collectors wanted numbers assigned to the new finds; and a new system has been suggested. 

I have written both Jack and Mr. Woodward for their suggestions on a new system. I don't really see this new project as a criticism of their established charts. Both have been very helpful to me in the past in writing the articles and prior to the articles, helping my knowledge on the hobby. I feel we can all grow together and better our hobby. The help these two fine individuals can contribute will be immeasurable, as they have had the experience and know what to do and what not to do. I certainly look forward to their suggestions. Also, I want this project to be everyone's project. Contact me with any suggestions you may have. 

As I finish this month's article, I'm reminded that "Threadless Corner" and "Patent Pages" are both one year old with this issue. It's been a year of a lot of work, and yet more fun. I've enjoyed it and hope to continue with the research. 

A recent letter from a discouraged collector really made me realize how close all of us must stay for us to make this hobby great. There have been a lot of great collectors over the years, many of whom have contributed so much. As I do my research each month, I realize what our dear Dora must go through all the time. Folks, let's get the pencils out and drop her a line to let her know we appreciate her labor of love toward this growing hobby. 

At this time, on the first birthday of the columns, I'd also like to thank all those who have contributed to them in the past year, and also all the pioneers of the hobby who did the research many years ago for us to benefit from. This month a thanks to Ken Waehner for sending some material so I wouldn't have to forever borrow from Bob Pierce. Thanks, Bob, for allowing me to use your printed material. Thanks also to the Branhams once again for the copies of early telegraph ads, and to Dave and Marilyn Delling for their efforts in producing the book, Before Threads, which has been helpful in confirming certain information. Thanks to all, and let me hear from you.