N. R. "Woody" Woodward is the author of THE GLASS INSULATOR IN AMERICA, 1988 Report and developed the Consolidated Design Numbers identification system for glass insulators. 

From Steve Coffman, Oak Harbor, WA we received the following:

QUESTION: Recently I have come across several mysteries. The first is how to properly date Hemingrays & H. G. Co. Could you please inform me on how to do that and how to decipher the number-dots combinations on Hemingrays?

Next I have a CD 128 PYREX with fine front embossing, but on the back, the bottom line is hardly visible, and on the top line, there is nothing except two slight traces of letters.

Then I have a CD 154 Whitall Tatum, with the name in a curve and what appears to be ghosting of “ATUM” above it, no “T.” But there are no reports of this.

Also I have a CD 154 Hemingray 45, in what appears to be straw, but it is factory applied like carnival. I am sure of it’s validity as a genuine line insulator. What happened here?

Finally, I have a CD 213 Hemingray 43, but it’s ears are of a different shape, and its space between ears is wider than normal.

ANSWER: Since Hemingray insulators were made over such a long period of time, there is no simple method that can be used for dating all of them. In the case of the early Covington production, we can arrival, at an approximate time frame by taking into account various known facts: but exact year of production cannot be determined.

As you know, the earliest Hemingray production was marked only with a patent date. Later, both H.G.CO. and HEMINGRAY markings were used on different styles. The H.G.CO. marking seems to have been phased out during the 1905-1910 period, although some much earlier pieces are marked HEMINGRAY.

Hemingray first used mold numbers on their No. 42 about 1932. After Owens-Illinois bought the plant in 1933, mold numbers and date codes were added to all styles. Varying systems were used during those years: but by 1941 except No. 42 were marked consistently with the mold number followed by a dash and the last two digits of the year the mold set was made. After that, dots were added to indicate subsequent years. Thus, the marking 16-41:: would indicate the insulator was made in mold 16 in 1945. The mold itself would have been made in 1941.

However, earlier varying systems were used; and No. 42 did not adopt that marking arrangement until their 1948 mold set was made.

Earlier insulators such as No. 40, sometimes have a large number on the crown. Those served an entirely different purpose. They are called shop numbers and were used where more than one press was making the same style insulator simultaneously. The insulators were fed into the annealing lehr as they were pressed: and since the men operating each press were being paid on a piecework basis, the insulators were counted as they emerged from the lehr and the men in each “shop” were paid accordingly.

Shop numbers are not nearly as common on Hemingrays as on Brookfields. Shop numbers were last used in the very early 1920s.

PYREX CD #128 carrier insulators were made for more than 15 years and the markings were not exactly the same on all of them. Enclosed is a copy of the embossing on one of the “D” set. If you could make out the first of the two or three large letters and tell if the insulator has the internal spiral ridges in the skirt, I could be more certain of the embossing that you can’t read.

Your Whitall Tatum with the arc embossing would be a CD #155 rather then 154. The “ghost embossing” you describe is created during the fraction of a second when the molten glass blob falls into the mold. Sometimes one part of it will pick up bits of embossing as it starts to cool and before it settles into its final position in—the mold. These should not be listed in books because they happen during production and have nothing to do with engraving in the mold.

I can’t answer your question regarding the Hemingray - 45, also a CD #155 rather then 154. An iridized 45 is not a common thing but not impossible. Complete marking (mold and date code) would help. Some pieces were experimentally iridized at the factory and were later dug at the company dump. Hemingray (Owens-Illinois) iridized CD #118, 142 and 142.4 in the mid-1930s in cooperation with Western Union and a few were put on the lines on a trial basis but they never became a standard item. A little later, their “D” series (D-510 etc.) were offered with the iridescent coating for distribution service. The coating was supposed to create an improved insulator surface; but it didn’t last long. World War II came along and everything but the most essential aspects of production was dropped.

Embossing on one of the “D” set
Pyrex insulators

In addition to those mentioned above, some No. 19 and a few No. 20 and 42 were iridized. But there have also been some “fake” iridized pieces on the market, created simply for sale to collectors. Further, on older insulators there are some types of industrial deposit that resemble iridizing. So one must be aware.

As for Hemingray No. 43, the later style with the wide saddle groove is somewhat less common and I have no information on exactly why the style was redesigned. Quite possibly there was a request for a wider saddle to carry the insulated power supply on railway block signal circuits. The 43 was used in that capacity by some railways. But that is only a guess.

From Robert Fort, Lawrence, KS:

QUESTION: Recently I found a 5-gallon glass water cooler bottle and I’m curious about it’s origin. It’s in an ice aqua color, with some interesting embossing (drawing enclosed). A grid of upside-down arrowheads forms a sort of diamond basket-weave pattern around the main body. The arrowhead pattern is broken on one side to form a smooth circle, in which is a large upside-down arrowhead, with “ARROWHEAD” and “LOS ANGELES” embossed above and below. On the flat bottom of the bottle are the interesting embossings: an “I” inside a flat diamond (blotted out) directly in the center, with the date “1929” and what may be a mold number clearly embossed on opposite sides. Would the “I” in the diamond have been the logo of the Illinois Pacific Glass Company. This is obviously similar to the Owens-Illinois logo, but without the “O.” And if the date is 1929 that would mean it must have been produced after McLaughlin took over IP’s water bottle orders due to the 1920 fire. I assume the molds would have survived a fire. Is it possible that McLaughlin (or somebody) used the old Illinois Pacific molds? I understand that Owens and Illinois merged in ’29, so this bottle would have been produced around that time, but by who? Along the edge of the diamond basket-weave to the spout side is the embossing:

“FINE AND IMPRISONMENT - REGISTERED -PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE” (!)

I’m really fascinated. I have no idea what its worth, but any monetary value it might have is secondary to the excitement I got when I did some reading in McDougald’s book (p.92) and wondered if it could be one of the “large quantity of water bottles for drinking water” which Kevin Lawless discusses in the McLaughlin section. Plus it’s just a nice piece of glass. Thank you for any advice you can offer.

ANSWER: Unfortunately I cannot give you definite proof of who made your interesting water bottle.

The ARROWHEAD refers to Arrowhead Springs, in the mountains above San Bernardino. Water from that source has been sold as a superior drinking water in Southern California for decades.

If your bottle was made in 1929, as seems to be the case, I would doubt that a mold from 1920 would still be in service. Although that is possible, I would think more likely the bottle was made by Illinois Glass Company in Alton (or perhaps they had plants in other locations by that time) and shipped to Los Angeles. It seems to me unlikely that McLaughlin would manufacture a product bearing someone else’s logo.

The stern warning embossed on the bottle is an effort to make certain the bottles are returned; although I doubt anyone has served prison time for failure to do so!