During my professional career I’ve spent much of my time overseas including a 3-year period running an engineering and construction company in India, many of the projects of which were in the south. Due to the 1100 mile commute back to my family in New Delhi, I spent a number of weekends at various project sites and wandered through villages and towns of the area. As is the case for many EAIA members, I was fascinated by skilled craftsman and their tools, most of which they purchased from local shops or, more typically, constructed by the craftsman after buying critical components such as blades.
One Saturday afternoon in the industrial district of Chennai (southeastern coast of India), I was attracted to a hardware store that sold a remarkable range of locally and internationally sourced tools. Over one of the display cases was a large array of wooden planes. To my surprise they were not locally produced as was typically the case, but came from the north and were all branded “ALFA”. The proprietor of the shop told me that they are a bit more expensive than those that could be sourced locally, but were provided by a small company, EN-TECH Engineers, that wanted to develop a nation-wide brand that represented consistent quality for wooden tools at an affordable price. The owner of the company had personally traveled to Chennai with a trunk load of planes to develop the market.
I couldn’t help thinking that I had fallen into a time-warp, an analog of American plane making and marketing that was occurring more than a century and half later than similar business models in the US. I also realized this was a rare opportunity to examine the model, not through records, but through witnessing the process and the people who were implementing it. I bought one of the planes.
The address on a small “rack-card” that contained advertising and the entire line of products gave me enough information to track down the owner, Zakir Hussain, who I contacted by phone. I expressed my interest in seeing the entire process and meeting the people involved. He immediately invited my wife and me to come up to Muzaffarnagar, his base of operations only 80 miles from our home in New Delhi. He also suggested that we make it a two-day visit to include seeing the craftsmen of Saharanpur, a city of approximately 700,000 people of which over 75,000 were in woodworking trades, primarily furniture and carving. Saharanpur also had a number of skilled blacksmiths and edge-tool makers from whom Zakir sourced some of his edge tools.
We drove our trusty Tata Sumo, a bare-bones Indian SUV that seemed indestructible but equally uncomfortable on Indian roads, to Muzaffarnagar where we met Zakir and retired to a small hotel to rest for a very full couple of days ahead. Early the next morning we set off to the wood auction in Saharanpur to begin the journey along the pathway of manufacturing a wooden plane.
The wood auction is truly a one-stop source for every part of a tree. The small straight branches not used for firewood are sold to weave into the walls of homes, large logs are sold for sawn timber, and the remaining smaller pieces are sold to make small carvings.
Most of the wood used for planes is sheesham (Dalbergia sissoo) of the rosewood timber family which grows in the Himalayan foothills of northern India. It is both hard and wear resistant, more so than white oak. It is also used for carving and furniture, but has been replaced to a large degree by teak, both species now being plantation grown. An important characteristic of sheesham is the resistance of its heartwood to insects. However, its sapwood is susceptible to infestation, an important consideration for Indian craftsmen making or selecting a plane to be used in India.
There was a bit of clowning and dancing for the benefit of my wife, Alice, who was a great novelty; our host told us that they’d had never seen a European women at that wood auction.
The successful bidders moved their wood out of the yard to the mills or their furniture shops.
Zakir then took us into the havelis (old townhouses that now typically have commercial activity on the ground floor) of Muzaffarnagar to see some carving, but more importantly the source of edge tools that his manufacturing team used in making their planes.
We initially went through some of the small craft shops where carvers were working but quickly moved to the source of edge tools, spending some time with an edge-tool blacksmith and some of his family.
His operation was a typical small family operation, including his young son who was turning a wheel that ran the blower for a very small forge. He should have been in school, reflecting a common problem of child labor among lower income families in India despite a constitutional prohibition prohibiting children under 14 from working.
His father was using discarded high speed still drill bits to forge chisels and gouges several of which I bought based on his “cataloge” burned into a small piece of plywood.
We traced the next step in the plane-making process to the saw mill where the logs were sawn into slabs and the slabs were edge-cut.
Other than the pulleys and belts from an old “one-lunger” gas engine, the process was essentially as it was (and in some cases is) in the US. The one significant difference was the hospitality which included the elderly owner’s offer to smoke an Indian hookah. Somewhat to our surprise, it was started with cow dung which the elder sawyer assured us was quite sanitary due to the heat.
The boards were then sorted, edged, and sent off to the carvers of Saharanpur and Zakir’s shop.
The next step was at EN-TECH: cutting the plane blanks to length and some very preliminary shaping.
Clearly hand safety was not a significant concern and the electrical code was dealt with “economically” (wire in outlet without plugs!).
The plane blank was then trued with a fore plane.
The actual plane shaping then started with scribing the dimensions for the mouth and blade recess.
Note that these operations used the craftsman’s feet as the vise, very similar to a number of craft techniques elsewhere in South Asia and Southeast Asia.
The bed was filed flat, and
the inlets for the wedge and blade trimmed with file and float.
In parallel, the blade was straightened, sharpened, and the cap trued.
The blades for rabbeting and molding planes were cut, forged and shaped from discarded band saw blades. As was often the case in the US, bench plane blades in India were purchased from reputable edge tool manufacturers and were made from high carbon steel. I can attest that they held a very good edge having used mine for several years.
The overall body of the plane was finally and carefully shaped.
The blade, cap and wedged checked for fit. The final “QC check” was actually trying the plane which is perhaps the most important QA test: real functionality!
The stages for producing a smoothing plane are shown below.
Although the process I‘ve described is for a smoothing plane, the company produced a wide range of planes using basically the same processes.
I obtained one of each type produced under the ALFA brand.
Regretfully, EN-TECH’s ALFA brand was discontinued. The larger Indian tool firms had made relatively inexpensive copies of several Stanley and Record planes which were more durable, much easier to adjust, and relatively inexpensive. The local carpenters who couldn’t afford the metal planes continued to purchase planes from small local suppliers despite the typically inferior quality….but lower price. I believe that Zakir thought there might be an export market for amateur woodworker who wanted to use traditional hand tools. Unfortunately this wasn’t the case, although some extremely high quality wooden planes are being imported from China in addition to those from Western Europe.
Although not a success in the long run, it was very interesting to witness the process and the business model of promoting quality through brand recognition. It was also very interesting to see how the parallel to the American model for plane development was truncated by taking advantage of American manufacturers’ early metal plane designs rather than going through the period of transitional planes that we did. It’s comparable to the implementation of cell phone technology in India vs. the US. India had relatively little stranded investment in “copper” ground line communication, was able to quickly adopt cell phone technology from the west, skipped the cell network development stages we went through, and now has very robust cellular networks.
It may be hard to imagine right now in the depths of this long hard winter, but spring is coming and before we know it we’ll be gathering from all over the country for the 2018 Early American Industries Association Annual Meeting. It’s EAIA’s 85th Anniversary, so come and celebrate with us in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania. If you haven’t already received your registration form in the mail, rest assured, it will be arriving shortly. We have a wonderful meeting lined up for you with lots to see and do. Fill out your registration form, sign up for the workshops you want, make your reservations with the hotel, and send it all in! Our weekend in the Lehigh Valley will be filled with history, architecture, learning, interesting workshops, and a celebration of EAIA’s 85th anniversary. We’ll be based at the Comfort Suites University Hotel at 120 West 3rd Street in Bethlehem.
The room rate is $119/night and is good for 3 nights prior to and 3 nights after our meeting. The phone number for making reservations is 610-882-9700. Be sure to mention EAIA when you call to make your reservations.
As usual we’ll start our meeting on Wednesday afternoon with tailgating in the hotel parking lot. So, bring those tools and other items from the dark recesses of your collection that you want to sell or trade. On Wednesday evening you’re invited to tour the Moravian Archives and view their amazing collection of architectural drawings, art works, day books, and journals.
The Moravians were meticulous record keepers and this archive is a treasure trove of Moravian history. On Thursday we’ll spend a full day in Bethlehem learning about the Moravians, their communal culture and their religious beliefs. We’ll visit the wonderful 18th century Moravian buildings, the Colonial Industrial Quarter, and the Moravian Church. The Kemerer Museum of Decorative Arts is also on the agenda. Housed in three interconnected mid-1800’s homes the Kemerer Museum of Decorative Arts features changing exhibits, period rooms, and galleries highlighting furniture, paintings, china, clothing, and silver from three centuries of decorative arts. The museum has over 60,000 items in their collection, so there will be lots to see.Their collection of antique dollhouses is a real treat.
We’ll also have a guided tour of the Bethlehem Steel Stacks and learn more about this vital industry that for over 100 years supplied much of the steel used throughout the world.
Thursday afternoon the Fiber Arts Interest Group will enjoy a talk by Rebecca Densmore on “Rug Punching”. We’ll top off Thursday with our annual Ice Cream Social and “Whatsit’s Session”. It will be held Thursday evening at the National Museum of Industrial History just a few blocks from our hotel. The museum staff have agreed to close the museum to the public so EAIA members will have the run of the museum from 7-10 PM. This Smithsonian affiliate museum houses wonderful exhibits related to America’s industrial history including some incredible pieces of machinery from the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial exhibition. Museum staff will be on hand to answer your questions.
You won’t want to miss it! Don’t forget to bring that “whatsit” you’ve been puzzling over and see if we can help you figure it out..
Friday will be another full day. We’ll carpool to Nazareth, Pennsylvania (just nine miles from Bethlehem) for a visit to the Moravian Historical Society which has an outstanding collection of Moravian artifacts. We’ll also take a behind the scenes tour of the Martin Guitar Factory and their wonderful on-site museum.
Lunch will be at the Pennsylvania Long Rifle Museum where we’ll tour the museum and hear from their archivists and enjoy a black powder rifle demonstration (Jacobsburg Historical Society). The Henry Family not only produced or repaired firearms for all our nation’s major conflicts from the Revolutionary War through the Civil War, but they were also the primary suppliers of rifles for one of the largest American business enterprises of the early nineteenth century, John Jacob Astor’s American Fur Company. The Henry firearm became the most prominent early weapon of the western frontier due to its durability, accuracy, and relatively low cost.
Then we can head back to Bethlehem in time for the Great Planes Antique Tool Auction scheduled for Friday night at the hotel. Mike and Sarah have put together a wonderful auction for our 85th anniversary meeting.
Saturday you’ll have the opportunity to once again spend time in the Colonial Industrial Quarter where we’ll set up Saturday morning tool trading and displays. Our display theme for this year is “Tolls that Measure and Tools that Cut”. This theme gives you lots of room to be creative! Displays are a popular and wonderfully educational part of our Annual Meetings, so please consider bringing a display! Once you’ve looked at the displays and done some tool trading you’ll have the chance to choose from several workshops on Saturday morning including:
After lunch on Saturday we’re going to hear Henry Disston Jr. talk about the history of the Disston Saw Company and hear him play his musical saw at the end of his presentation. After Henry Disston Jr.’s talk you’ll get a breather before our annual Silent Auction. This fun event will be a great warm up to our 85th Anniversary Banquet and Annual Business Meeting.
Whew! That’s a lot to see and do! So, sign up on line, fill out your registration form, sign up for the workshops, track down your whatsits, think about what you can donate to the Silent Auction and come join us as we celebrate EAIA’s 85th Anniversary in the Lehigh Valley on May 23rd thru May 26th, 2018.
by Paul Van Pernis
by Clayton E. Ray
I believe that a significant epoch of anvil-making in colonial North America has yet to be recognized and documented. Postman’s pioneering 1998 book, “Anvils In America”, the first comprehensive coverage of the subject, provides a solid foundation for further research. Its greatest value is not as a last word, but as a catalyst, a value yet to be realized. Anvils are unquestionably the most important tool in the development of civilization but remain strangely neglected. The formation of BIG (Blacksmithing Interest Group) stands to redress this lapsus.
I have seen a few crude anvils of a certain blocky type, and have two in my possession.
These are cast iron without a face plate or cutting table, and without hardy, pritchel, or handling holes. They have no heel, a small horn, and no constricted waist, and their front and back surfaces are planar and vertical. The toes are insignificant in size, and there may be a fifth toe. The only one that I have seen having any marking is one of mine with the name “Jones” embossed on one side.
I think that these anvils were cast in one piece (excepting the horn), and were poured upside down, having no undercuts. The horn would have been added by welding.
The skilled iron workers in any of the foundries from Massachusetts to the Carolinas easily could have made these anvils clandestinely while pouring the sows and pigs that they were supposed to be making to send to the mother country to be returned as value-added finished products, including the expensive steel-faced wrought anvils for marketing to the needy pioneers, whose needs could have been met much more cheaply by the crude locally made cast anvils. No colonial community could have functioned without a smithy.
Not surprisingly, there is little or no paper trail of this activity, as production of such finished items in the colonies was prohibited. The royal appointees who supervised the Colonies (Spotswood, Byrd, and others) carefully concealed their own illicit profitable ventures. Thus far, I know of only one revealing allusion (cited by Postman, page 46), in which the writer in 1759 recommended the purchase of an anvil “of Byrd make”. William Byrd as early as 1744 had exploited his extensive iron deposits in central Virginia. There may very well be more clues to be found in colonial writing.
An additional source of documentation might be the metallurgy of the anvils themselves, but that is beyond my expertise and access. Meanwhile, I hope and expect that other members of EAIA have seen anvils of this kind, and will have better ideas for pursuit of their story. If my suspicions as to the source and age are confirmed, they would add significantly to the record of anvil making in North America.
Please share this blog with any of your friends who may have more information about possible American anvils of this period or even the anvils illustrated in this blog. Any comments should be added as comments to the blog. Your help is needed!
Part I of this post introduced you to Justus Traut’s patent No. 316,079 granted on April 21, 1885. This patent very clearly illustrated and described what became the Stanley #72 Chamfer Plane (See Figure 1).
The patent also included a drawing of the “spokeshave” style chamfer plane discussed in Part I (http://eaiainfo.org/2018/01/06/trauts-model-shop-chamfer-planes-part-1/). For consistency, the terms used by Traut in his patent description and that were used to identify the major components of Traut’s plane in Part I will be used again here in Part II.
Introduced in 1885, the Stanley #72 chamfer plane sold well enough that it remained in the Stanley line-up of specialty bench planes for 53 years until it was discontinued in 1938 . With is “V” shaped sole, the plane is designed to chamfer stock. Each side of the “V” shaped sole acts as a guide to maintain the plane at a 45º angle as the chamfer is cut. The front section or “sliding portion” of the plane can be raised or lowered to increase or decrease the width of the chamfer. The plane is capable of cutting a chamfer slightly in excess of 1¼ inches wide. With the front “sliding stock” of the plane set at its lowest position, the plane can also function as a smoothing plane. Figure 2 shows a Type 1 Stanley #72 chamfer plane and it is identical to the plane shown in the patent drawing except that the production model was fitted with a brass faucet handle set screw rather than the large round set screw shown in the patent drawing. The plane is 9¼ inches long and 2 inches wide. The cutter is set at a bed angle of 50 degrees with the bevel facing down. The cutter does not have a cap iron. The japanned lever cap fixes the cutter in place by tightening a thumb screw. The raised rib on the front “sliding stock” fits into the groove on the rear “gage” portion of the plane (See Figure 3).
The faucet handle set screw when tightened holds the front “sliding stock” firmly in place and thereby determines the depth of cut and the width of the chamfer produced by the plane. As the front “sliding stock” is moved higher on the rear “gage” section, the resultant chamfer becomes deeper and wider. “STANLEY RULE & LEVEL CO. AND PAT APR 21, 85” is stamped in three lines on the upper end of the cutter (See Figure 4).
There are no other markings on the body of the plane to identify it as a Stanley product and the sides of the plane are japanned. It appears that the “Type I” version of the plane was produced for probably less than one year. By 1886, “STANLEY” and “No 72” were cast onto the sides of the “gage” or rear portion of the plane.
The addition of a bullnose front “sliding stock” for cutting stopped chamfers was made available by 1899 or 1900 and became an attachment supplied with the Stanley #72 by 1909. On March 23, 1886 Traut received an additional patent, No.338,570, that described a beading attachment which could be substituted for the front “sliding section”. This attachment allowed the user to create various types of moldings on previously cut chamfers. This beading attachment was first made available to users in 1886. When this beading attachment was combined with the bullnose attachment and the #72 Stanley Chamfer Plane, Stanley marketed it as the #72½ Stanley Chamfer Plane with Beading Attachment (See Figure 6).
Traut’s chamfer plane obviously worked well and was popular with Stanley’s customers as evidenced by its longevity in the Stanley product line. The Stanley #72 Chamfer Plane is easy to set up and works very effectively and is actually a fun tool to use.
Recently, in March of 2017, an intriguing and somewhat mysterious chamfer plane that appears to precede Traut’s patented chamfer plane came to auction. This Stanley Model Shop plane shown in Figure 7, has characteristics that suggest that it could have been made as much as 10-13 years earlier than 1885, the year Traut applied for his chamfer plane patent. This plane, which has Stanley Model Shop #344 painted on the toe, is 10 and 7/16ths inches long and 2 and 1/16ths inches wide, so it is both longer, wider, and heavier than the Stanley #72 Chamfer Plane. It is beautifully made and machined. Like the 1885 Traut’s patent chamfer plane, the “V” shaped sole is designed to hold the plane at a 45º angle as the chamfer is cut. Both sides of the casting are milled and there is a 1 and 3/8ths inch long scale inscribed on the left side of the rear “gage” portion of the plane. The scale is divided into 1/8th inch increments. A single line is inscribed on the front “sliding stock” of the plane opposite this scale. This scale and corresponding line were obviously intended to act as a guide for setting the depth of cut of the chamfer (See Figure 8).
The front “sliding stock” of the plane fits into a sliding dovetail on the rear “gage” portion of the plane. This sliding dovetail is machined to very close tolerances and creates a snug fit between the “sliding stock” and the rear “gage “portion of the plane. This is very different from the method of attaching the “sliding stock” to the “gage” portion of the plane on the Traut’s patent chamfer plane (See Figure 9).
As shown in Figure 10, the “sliding stock” is held in place by a compression screw with a knurled knob that is inserted through a hole in the right sidewall of the plane and is then threaded into the left sidewall. When this screw is tightened, it compresses the two sidewalls of the rear “gage” portion of the plane just enough to hold the front “sliding stock” firmly in place.
The increased length of the rear “gage” portion of this plane allows for the use of Leonard Bailey’s cutter adjustment mechanism and the graceful curve of the sidewalls provides additional strength to the casting. This plane also has an adjustable throat plate under the front knob which allows the user to open or close the mouth of the plane (See Figure 11).
The front knob screw is fixed in place in the front knob by means of a piece of metal that is stuffed into the bottom of the knob. Once the size of the plane’s mouth has been set, the throat plate is then held in place by tightening the front knob (See Figure 12).
The plane’s cutter is 1½inches wide. At just 1/8th of an inch narrower than a cutter for a #2 Stanley smooth plane, it was likely made by simply grinding down the edges of a cutter from a #2 smooth plane. There is a small 1 and 7/8ths inch by 15/16ths of an inch rectangular plate with a slot in its upper end attached to the cutter with a screw.
The slot is placed over the cutter adjusting lever which allows the cutter to be adjusted for depth of cut (See Figure 13). The lever cap also seems to have been produced by grinding the edges of a #2 smooth plane lever cap. A #2 smooth plane lever cap is 1 and 9/16ths of an inch wide, and the lever cap on this plane is 1 and 7/16ths inches wide (See Figure 14).
There are no trademarks on either the front or rear castings. The markings on the cutter adjustment screw and the trademark stamped on the cutter suggest that this plane was produced sometime between 1872 and 1875 (See Figure 15 and Figure 16.
If one assumes that the numbering system used for Stanley Model Shop planes was sequential, (and that is a big if!),  then this plane with Stanley Model Shop #344 on the toe appears to have been produced 10-13 years before both the “Spokeshave” style chamfer plane and the Stanley #72 Chamfer Plane shown in Traut’s 1885 patent. The “spokeshave” style chamfer plane shown in the 1885 patent and featured in Part I of this post carries the Stanley Model Shop #776 which suggests that it was put into the Model Shop at a later date than this chamfer plane.
So, who made this plane and when? The lever cap, the cutter adjustment mechanism, and the adjustable throat are all features developed by Leonard Bailey. The graceful curve of the sidewalls on the rear “gage” portion of the plane and the fine fit and finish of the plane are typical of Bailey’s design signature. Leonard Bailey began his tenure at Stanley Rule & Level Company in 1869, and left the company in 1874 primarily because of a dispute with the Stanley board of directors over his desire to have total control over all the woodworking planes being manufactured at Stanley. Justus Traut and the men in his shop were also manufacturing planes at that same time, some of which competed directly with the planes being produced by Bailey and the men in his shop. Is it possible that Leonard Bailey made this plane? He may have presented this prototype to the Stanley Production Committee who, for whatever reasons, decided not to put this plane into production. So, it went onto a shelf in the Model Shop and possibly got left behind when Bailey left Stanley. Perhaps several years later Justus Traut came across this chamfer plane on a shelf in the Stanley Model Shop and modified it slightly at a time when carpenters and cabinet makers were asking for a chamfer plane. Traut was adept at appropriating the ideas of the men in his workshop and turning them into patents, and it’s conceivable he may have done the same thing with this Model Shop plane. Traut’s version of the chamfer plane is smaller, less complicated, required less machining, and therefore would have been considerably less expensive to manufacture. Traut received approval for his version of the chamfer plane from the Stanley Production Committee in 1885 and went on to apply for and receive Patent No. 316,079 later that year for what became the Stanley #72 chamfer plane. If only we had access to the written records of the Stanley Production Committee. We know they exist and a review of these documents would help tool researchers find answers about this tool and so many others. Unfortunately, despite several attempts by multiple tool researchers and collectors, the legal counsel at Stanley has refused to allow anyone access to those records.
So, although we know this plane was made at the Stanley, I’m not convinced that it was made by Justus Traut. While I’m not yet completely convinced that Leonard Bailey made this plane, I tend to lean in that direction. We know that Justus Traut gets credit for the Stanley Chamfer Plane and his 1885 patent No. 316,709, but it’s my guess that the idea was not entirely his! I’d love to hear your thoughts. Can you help solve this mystery?
by Paul Van Pernis
 The first description of the Type 1 Stanley #72 Chamfer Plane was in an article by Clarence Blanchard in “Stanley Tool Collector News”, Volume 4, Number 9, Summer 1993, pp. 12-13.
 A type study of the Stanley #72 and #72½ chamfer planes, titled, “The Stanley No. 73 & 72½ Chamfer Plane”, by John Wells & Chuck Wirtensen was published in The Gristmill, No. 123, June 2006, pp. 12-16.
 Blanchard, Clarence, “Stanley Plane Truth and Exceptions to the Rule, Stanley No. 72 Bullnose Attachment”, The Fine Tool Journal, Volume 46, Number 2, Fall 1996, p. 14.
 The number 72½ was sold by Stanley from 1886 until 1917. Further information about the 72½ is available in the type study cited in footnote #2.
 See Lot 396 from the 50th International Tool Auction, March 25th, 2017 by Brown Auction Services.
 See Roger K. Smith’s excellent type study of “Bailey-Stanley Iron Planes” in Patented Transitional & Metallic Planes in America 1827-1927, pp. 279-284
 A caveat! As I’ve mentioned in prior posts regarding Stanley Model Shop planes, the numbering system used in the Stanley Model Shop is at best confusing and and may not be entirely reliable in determining when tools were made and/or placed on the shelves in the Model Shop.
 For more information about Bailey’s years at Stanley see, “Leonard Bailey: The Years at Stanley Rule & Level Co., Part I” in The Gristmill, June 2009 No. 135, pp.30-37 and “Leonard Bailey: The Years at Stanley Rule & Level Co. Part II”, in The Gristmill, September 2009, No. 136, pp. 13-22. Both articles are authored by John G. Wells and Paul Van Pernis
Justus A. Traut, worked for the Stanley Rule & Level Company for over 50 years, and churned out patent after patent from the time his first patent was issued on June 20th, 1865, until November 3, 1908, when his last patent was issued posthumously, almost eight months after his death. Traut was just one of the brilliant inside contractors who worked at Stanley. Although he was touted during his lifetime as being the “The Patent King of the United States”, it’s likely that many of his patents were the result of ideas and innovations developed by the mechanics working in his shop at Stanley. Traut was adept at refining those ideas and innovations and then submitting a patent. It was only on rare occasions that he shared credit for his patents with others.
Stanley Rule & level Company and their inside contractors were very responsive to the needs of their customers. They listened carefully to suggestions from the users of their tools and kept a close watch on the developing styles and trends in furniture, architecture, and building construction. The Eastlake and American Queen Anne styles of architecture and furniture were very popular in the United States between 1870 and 1910. Houses were filled with wainscoting, fancy wooden trim, elaborate staircases, window treatments, fireplace surrounds, and mantels. The furniture followed suit with lots of spindles, chamfers, beading, inlays, and elaborate decorative details. Justus Traut was no doubt aware of these trends and responded by submitting a patent application on February 25th, 1885, for a chamfer plane. Granted on April 21, 1885, Traut’s Patent No. 316,079 states, “My plane is principally designed for use in making chamfer moldings on the corners of pieces of wood-work for various uses.” A chamfer can be defined as a transitional edge between two faces of an object. It is a bevel created at a 45º angle to two adjoining right-angle faces. Chamfers are used as a decorative detail or as a means to “ease” sharp edges both for safety and to prevent damage to the edges.
Traut’s patent included drawings of two versions of the chamfer plane. The first set of drawings shown in Figure 1 illustrates a plane that is essentially identical to the Stanley #72 chamfer plane produced and sold by Stanley starting in 1885. Bear will me, and I’ll come back and discuss this version of Traut’s chamfer plane in detail in Part II of this blog post along with another interesting and somewhat mysterious chamfer plane from the Stanley Model Shop.
For the moment I’d like to focus on the plane shown in the second set of patent drawings (See Figure 2). This drawing depicts a two-handled “spokeshave style” version of the chamfer plane. Recently this spokeshave style version of Traut’s chamfer plane along with the accompanying original patent papers came to auction (See Figure 3).
Likely Traut himself, or one of the mechanics in his shop, personally made this tool. It’s exciting, at least for me, to hold in my hands a tool that Traut no doubt held in his hands. Traut assigned this patent to the Stanley Rule& Level Company as soon as he was granted the patent. The patent is signed by Martin Van Buren Montgomery who was the commissioner of patents in 1885 and also by the then “acting” Secretary of the Interior who’s name I can’t read on the patent. I haven’t been able to uncover who this was in my research, so if you know who this gentleman was, please let me know. (Thanks to reader Gary Hammond who informed me that the “acting” Secretary of the interior was H.L. Muldrow).
This delightful little spokeshave style chamfer plane is only 4½ inches long and 9 inches wide across the width of the handles. The japanning on the outside of the plane body and the nicely curved handles are in excellent condition. The Stanley Model Shop number “776” is painted on the end of the right handle and on the lever cap. It is not a “patent model” because the U.S. Patent office stopped requiring the submission of patent models in 1880 (See Figure 4). So this plane would not have been sent to the Patent Office in Washington, but would have remained at the Stanley factory .
In his patent, Traut describes the front portion of his chamfer plane as the “sliding stock” and the rear portion of the body of the plane as a “gage” with “an angular groove b, extending longitudinally through it’s under face” These are shown in the patent drawing in Figure 2. above as “A” and “E”(See Figure 5 below).
The two pieces are brought together when the raised machined rib on the back of “sliding stock A” is slipped into the machined groove on the front of “gage E”.
The 1½ inch diameter shouldered depth of cut set screw is used to hold the two pieces together and to adjust the depth of cut of the chamfer. When the set screw is tightened, the front “sliding stock” is held firmly in place on the rear “gage” portion of the plane. The large size of the depth of cut set screw required the addition of a groove in the “gage” portion of the plane to prevent the set screw from hitting the casting of the rear “gage” portion of the plane. (See Figure 7).
Once the depth of cut of the chamfer is set by adjusting the “sliding stock A”, the set screw is tightened and the spokeshave style chamfer plane is set squarely over the corner that is to be chamfered (See Figure 8).
Traut stated in the patent, when the plane is moved over the wood, …. “shaving after shaving is removed until the ‘gage E’ stops further cutting by resting firmly for its whole length upon the stock being chamfered.” The result is a chamfered corner.
The cutter is 1¼inches wide and has a nice oval logo stamped on the upper end of the cutter (See Figure 9). No cap iron is used with the cutter. The diminutive japanned lever cap is 1 and 5/8ths inches long and only 1 and 5/16th inches wide. The lever cap adjusting screw is brass and is identical to those seen on the Miller’s Patent Plow planes produced by Stanley between 1875 and 1884. The cutter is held in position by tightening the lever cap against the cutter. The plane fits nicely in my hands and feels like it would have worked quite well using either a push or pull stroke across the work piece. This little plane is in almost pristine condition and it is clear that this spokeshave style chamfer plane was never put to use nor put into production. One can imagine that Traut envisioned this chamfer plane being added to the extensive line of spoke shaves that Stanley was already manufacturing. Its small size would have made it handy to use and its simple construction would have made the cost of manufacturing it quite reasonable. But, that never happened. Instead, this plane along with the original patent papers spent its days quietly resting on a shelf in the Stanley Model Shop until it thankfully found its way into the tool collecting world.
There is a Part II to this blog post that contains information about the Stanley #72 chamfer plane and a “mystery” Stanley Model Shop chamfer plane. The image below shows the first production model of the Stanley #72 chamfer plane and an intriguing Stanley Model Shop chamfer plane that seems to predate those shown in Traut’s 1885 patent. So, stayed tuned for Part II of Traut’s Model Shop Chamfer Planes.
by Paul Van Pernis
 For more information on Justus A. Traut, see Smith, Roger K., Patented Transitional & Metallic Planes in America, Volume II, 1992, pp. 207-213. A complete list of his patents can be found at http://www.datamp.org/patents/search/xrefPerson.php?id=124.
 Lot 397, 50th International Antique Tool Auction, March 25th, 2017.
 The first U.S. patent law was passed in 1790, and the granting of U.S. Patents was controlled by the Secretary of State until 1849, when Congress transferred U.S. Patent Office to the Department of the Interior. In 1925, the responsibility for issuing patents was transferred to the Department of Commerce, where it remains today.
 In the US, patent models were required from 1790 to 1880. The United States Congress abolished the legal requirement for them in 1870, but the U.S. Patent Office kept the requirement until 1880.
 This logo, has been noted on some Stanley #102 and #110 block planes of similar vintage.
 See the excellent type study entitled “Stanley #41,42,43,44 Miller’s Patent Plow Planes” by Walter Jacob in Antique and Collectible Stanley Tools, 2nd edition, 1996, by John Walter, pp. 717-725.
Brown’s 51st International Antique Tool Auction was held on October 28th, 2017, at the Radisson Hotel in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania. There was active bidding in the room as well as from absentee bidders. The prices realized that are listed in this post include a 13% buyer’s premium. Prices shown below enclosed in square brackets are pre-auction estimates taken from the Brown auction catalog No. 51. The condition of all items was taken from the same auction catalog and neither the pre-auction estimates nor the condition of items reflect the author’s opinion unless so noted. All photographs are courtesy of Brown Auction Services.
Selected Auction Items
Lot 431. A Sandusky No. 141 Center Wheel Plow Reproduction (See Figure 1.) Mint and beautifully made from solid rosewood with ivory tips, possibly made by Jim Leamy, and rated Mint with an estimate of [800-1500]. It sold to a floor bidder for $2,712.00.
Lot 720. The two miniature Infill Miter Planes made by Bill Carter of London and shown in Figure 2. Each of these beautiful little planes is just 3 inches long and 5/16ths of an inch wide and are made of gunmetal with dovetailed steel soles. One has a boxwood infill and the other a rosewood infill. These were rated Fine and were estimated at [400-800] but surpassed that for a hammer price of $1695.00 to an absentee bidder.
Lot 368. A William’s Patent Adjustable Sole Plane. A rare example of the design patented by Stephen Williams of Philadelphia, PA, in 1864, in which the body is made of eight sliding wooden blocks clamped together by a brass band which allows the sole to be adjusted to different shapes. Other than some slight damage it was very clean and complete. Rated as Good+ with estimate of [3000-5000], it brought $3,390.00 from an absentee bidder (See Figure 3).
Lot 530. Figure 4 shows Shaw’s Patent Combination Brace Wrench. Similar to the Lowentraut combination tool patented by Samuel Johnson, this rare example of a combination brace wrench was patented by Elver Shaw on June 28, 1989. It has a metal rather than rosewood grip and the patent date cast into the side. Some light pitting was noted, but the tool is complete and in good working condition. Rated Good+ with an estimate of [300-600] it sold for $1017.00 to a bidder in the room.
There was a wide selection of planes by 18th century American makers in this auction including several molding planes and a few plow planes. The top sellers of the group were a molding plane by N. Potter (Lot 591), with an astragal and cove form, which sold far beyond its [300-600] estimate for $4068.00 (see Figure 5)
An ogee and astragal molding plane by F. Nicholson (Lot 393, shown in Figure 6) with his “Living in Wrentham” mark, was estimated at [1200-2000] and was hammered down at $3616.00. Both of these planes were sold to the same lucky bidder in the room.
The auction also featured two stunning modern infill planes made by Sauer & Steiner who build each plane by hand. They look almost too pretty to use. Lot 117 was a K5 smoothing plane with a beautiful steel body and Desert Ironwood infill in Fine condition and estimated at [800-1600]. It sold for $1864.50 to an absentee bidder (See Figure 7).
The other, Sauer & Steiner plane, Lot 411, shown in Figure 8 was a K18 jointer plane, also with a steel body and beautiful Desert Ironwood infill. It was in Fine condition with an estimate of [2000-4000] and also sold to an absentee bidder for $3729.00.
Prototype tools are of great interest to many collectors, and this auction didn’t disappoint. There were three lots featuring tools patented by Justus A. Traut. Lot 371 was a prototype Clapboard Gauge invented by Justus Traut that became the Stanley No. 89 clapboard gauge. Traut was granted patent No. 377,178 on January 31st, 1888 for this tool. The clapboard gauge was sold with the original patent papers as well. Estimated at [2000-4000] and in Fine condition this lot sold for $3614.00 (See Figure 9) .
Lot 372 featured Traut’s prototype for a marking gauge along with the original patent papers as well as the document assigning the patent to the Stanley Rule & level Company. Stanley never put this tool into production but Traut received patent No. 670,627 for this tool on March 26, 1901. As can be seen in Figure 10, it was in Fine condition. With a [2000-4000] estimate it sold to an absentee bidder for $4,407.00.
The last lot in in this group, Lot 373, was a try square prototype. Traut received patent No. 266,556 on October 24, 1882 for this tool which was never put into production. This lot also included the original patent papers. Rated Fine with a [2000-4000] estimate, this lot also sold to an absentee bidder for the same price as the previous lot, $4,407.00 (see Figure 11).
Speaking of Stanley patents, Lot 174 (see Figure 12) featured a Type 1 “hooked” Millers Patent plane with a very well-done replacement tote. A very pretty plane, this one was in Good+ condition and estimated at [3000-5000] and brought a respectable $2,260.00 from a floor bidder.
Lot 614 was a very rare Grantham’s Clynometer Folding Inclinometer. 10 inches long and made of two pieces of boxwood hinged at the end, with a brass level vial on top and removable scale on the side to hold it in position, this interesting inclinometer is marked with scales on the top surface as shown if Figure 13. Only one other example is known. This inclinometer was rated Good+ with a [700-1000] estimate and brought $1,045.25 from an absentee bidder.
Lot 479 featured a very well-preserved American Style Goosewing Axe. Likely originating from the Pennsylvania area, this 18-inch axe was in very nice condition with its original handle. Rated at Fine (see Figure 14), with an estimate of [300-600] it brought $508.50 from an absentee bidder.
Several unique saws were featured in the auction. An Anderson Patent Saw, Lot 138, was patented by William Anderson in 1902. This double-sided saw is ground as a crosscut saw on one side and as a rip saw on the other side. It also features a slot near the tip designed to allow the user to pivot the blade on a point to start the cut. The saw was in Fine condition with an estimate of [200-400] and sold for $452.00 to an absentee bidder (see Figure 15).
Lot 416 featured a Richardson Patent Timber Saw which features a teardrop cutout in the middle of the blade that was designed to reduce friction. In Good condition with an estimate of [250-450], it brought $310.75, also from an absentee bidder (see Figure 16).
Lot 426. This Shelton & Osborne Screw-arm Plow Plane was a stunning plane with a solid ebony body, wedge, and fence, with boxwood arms and nuts. In extremely good condition with a Fine rating, this uncommon Birmingham, CT, maker specialized in high-end plow planes and this one was no exception (see Figure 17). It surpassed its [400-800] estimate with a hammer of $1,525.50 from an absentee bidder.
by Paul Van Pernis and Katyn Adams
Many thanks to the staff at Brown Tool Auctions for providing the pictures and their help in preparing this post.
Our Purpose: The Early American Industries Association Preserves and Presents Historic Trades, Crafts, and Tools and Interprets Their Impact on Our Lives
The Early American Industries Association was founded in 1933 in the midst of the Great Depression. The following is a summary of the early history of our organization. Loring McMillen who was Vice-President of EAIA in 1958 wrote an article entitled, “Early American Industries, The History of the E.A.I.A.” for a 25th Anniversary edition of The Chronicle, Volume XI, Number 3, dated October 1958, and William K. Ackroyd and Elaine B. Winn wrote an “Early American Industries Association Sixtieth Anniversary History 1958-1993,” which was published as a special supplement to The Chronicle, Volume 51, May, 1998. Much of the following information has been gleaned from those two articles.
On August 31, 1933, 16 men and women gathered at Wiggins Old Tavern at the Northampton Hotel in Northampton, Massachusetts to form an organization of members interested in collecting, preserving, and studying the early tools and crafts of America. The meeting was the result of a conversation begun by Lewis N. Wiggins, the owner of Wiggins Old Tavern, and Stephen C. Wolcott of Nutall, Virginia, who had stepped into the tavern as Mr. Wiggins was hanging some old tools on the wall. As a result of that conversation they decided to gather a few like-minded individuals for lunch at the tavern. In 1958, Mr. Wiggins wrote a letter to the then president of EAIA Fred C. Sabin recalling the events that lead to the first founding of EAIA. “My memory is clear of our early days – the very first day in fact. I was in the north room of my ‘Wiggins Old Tavern’ – the room that was later known as the ‘kitchen’. It was entered from the parking lot. The first room I had developed was known as the ‘Ordinary’, the next room was the ’Tap Room’. On this very hot summer afternoon, I was working on the development of the ’Kitchen’. I was hanging on the east, whitewashed wall, a number of treasured tools. In my hand was an exceptionally interesting hand wrought steel gouge with a wooden (butternut) handle.
Behind me a gentleman spoke, ‘I see Mr. Wiggins, that you are interested in preserving treasures. Do you know what that fine tool was made for?’ I replied, ‘It is a gouge for woodworking.’ Then he asked me if I knew for what special purpose it was made and when I told him I did not know, he said, ‘It was especially made for gouging out wooden bowls.’ I thanked him and asked his name. ‘I am S.C. Wolcott and I live in Nutall, Virginia.’ He was a charming, intelligent gentleman. We sat down in the kitchen chairs of the early 1700’s and discussed the various articles in that room; things that were for display and for use, as I was about ready to open that room to the public and service of food, as was in the Ordinary and the Tap Room. Mr. Wolcott said, ‘I spend several weeks each summer browsing around New England. I have met several interesting men who are collecting, preserving and studying the early tools and crafts of America. We should get together and form an association for mutual aid and pleasure. I have a very fine collection of carpenter’s tools that someday I shall give to the Williamsburg Restoration.’ I replied, ‘Please invite these gentlemen – as many as you like – to meet here at Wiggins’ Old Tavern as my guest for luncheon, then we can discuss plans for an organization. At any rate, we would like the opportunity of becoming acquainted.”
“To my joy, within a few days he telephoned that W.B. Sprague and S.E. Gage, then at their summer homes in Litchfield, Connecticut, and Albert Wells, of Southbridge, Massachusetts, would be at hand on a certain day for a ‘get-together’ luncheon. I telephoned a friend of mine, Earl T. Goodnow, of West Cummington, Massachusetts, an interesting intelligent collector of Early Americana, to meet with us for luncheon. It seems to me it was July 1930. (Mr. Wiggins is here incorrect, the date was August 31, 1933) After luncheon we held our first meeting.”
William Sprague after being contacted by Stephen Wolcott circulated notices and letters to various collectors and other interested people and proposed a meeting for August 31, 1933, at the Old Wiggins’ Tavern in the Hotel Northampton to form the organization. Sixteen collectors met on August 31st, 1933, and ratified the organization of The Early American Industries Association. The annual dues were set at $1 a year and it was elected to have two meetings a year. At that meeting, the 20 original members were admitted to EAIA, four of whom could not attend, but were voted on and admitted anyway. The original members of EAIA who met that day were:
At Mr. Sprague’s suggestion, J.M. Connor Jr. of Metuchen, NJ, M.L. Blumenthal of Elkins Park, PA, Stephen H. Pell of Fort Ticonderoga, NY and Charles Messer Stow of New York, NY, who could not attend the initial meeting were also admitted to the membership bringing the total to twenty members. It is of interest to note that two women, Emma Fitts Bradford and Florence Bradford were two of the original 16 members of the Early American Industries Association. In 2008, on the occasion of EAIA’s 75th anniversary, then EAIA President, Bill Curtis, his wife Judy, along with Bill and Judy McMillen traveled to the Old Wiggins’ Tavern and presented the management with a framed commemorative certificate identifying the Old Wiggins’ Tavern as the location of the very first Early American Industries Association meeting. The certificate was designed by then EAIA Executive Director Elton “Toby” Hall and was signed by President Bill Curtis and Executive Director Toby Hall on behalf of the EAIA membership.
The original mission statement of the organization was developed shortly thereafter and stated: “The purpose of the Association is to encourage the study and better understanding of early American industry, in the home, in the shop, on the farm and on the sea, and especially to discover, identify, classify, preserve and exhibit obsolete tools, implements, utensils, instruments, vehicles, appliances and mechanical devices used by American craftsmen farmers, housewives, mariners, professional men and other workers”. This statement of purpose has been changed several times over the years and was most recently changed in 2008 to the Statement of Purpose noted at the beginning of this “history”.
William B. Sprague was elected as the first president of EAIA, with Stephen C. Wolcott elected secretary, and Earl T. Goodnow, treasurer. Mr. Sprague quickly developed many of the guiding principles of the association. He outlined those principles to include; forming an association of people interested in the early tools and implements of American, to arouse interest in these tools, to discover their purposes and uses, to encourage museums to take a greater interest in this field, to encourage dealers to search for material, to exchange information, and to find a final and permanent repository for collections. He stated that the tool and its use was the prime interest of the association, rather than the product. The only requisite for membership was an interest in the purposes of the Association.
Even though he was not able to attend the first EAIA meeting Charles Messer Stow is credited with having been one of the original members to whom the association owes much of its success. John Davis Hatch, secretary-treasurer of EAIA in 1940, EAIA’s 5th president, and one of the earliest editors of The Chronicle, wrote in 1958, “The many contributions made by Charles Stow that contributed to the founding of the Association were as follows: it was Stow who suggested that S.C. Wolcott stop at Wiggins Tavern in Northampton, MA, and who suggested that W.B. Sprague and S.E. Gage of Litchfield turn up at the earliest meeting in Northampton. Charles Messer Stow provided the good natured ‘push’ to his New York friend Bill Sprague to take leadership in forming EAIA. Mr. Stow provided the early list of collectors that was responsible for the wide-spread start of those invited to the initial meeting and because he was the writer of ‘The Quester’ column, (a nationally known Friday afternoon weekly hobby section on art and antique collecting) in the New York Sun, invited many to become members of the new organization.” It’s been said that Mr. Stow liked to refer to EAIA as the “Pick and Shovel Club” because the thrust of the association was to identify and preserve the common everyday tools of the home, hearth, and forge.
One of the first objectives of the association was to publish a magazine. Volume No. 1 of The Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association dated October 1st, 1933, appeared on November 20, 1933, just three months after the initial meeting of the EAIA. The initial plan was to publish The Chronicle twelve times a year, and in 1934, seven issues were produced, however, by 1941 the current plan of producing four issues of The Chronicle each year was adopted. The Chronicle has been published in an unbroken run since that first issue and represents an important repository of information about early American tools, industries, and the men and women who produced those tools. An article by W.B. Sprague entitled “Early American Manufacture of Felt Hats”, was the first scholarly article published in The Chronicle and appeared in the November issue, Volume 1, No. 2. The Chronicle is the lifeblood of EAIA and is the single largest repository of information on early American industries. We owe the editors of The Chronicle a great debt for the continued production of this fine journal.
It was at the third Annual Meeting of EAIA held at Old Wiggins’ tavern in 1936 that the membership first started bringing unidentifiable tools to the meeting. It was at this meeting that the term “What-is-its”, soon contracted to “Whatsits” was first used, and the “Whatsits” session has been a part of every EAIA Annual Meeting since then. Membership at the time of the first issue of The Chronicle was 26, and by November of 1934 the membership had grown to 405. The November 1935 issue of The Chronicle announced that the membership had grown to 610. Only three Annual Meetings were held during the years of the Second World War. No further membership totals were published until after the war. In 1947 the membership was 502, with the war having taken a toll on membership. W.B. Sprague, at the direction of the EAIA Board of Directors, incorporated the Association in the state of New York on March 16, 1942. In 1944 because of the rising cost of publishing The Chronicle, dues were raised to $2.00 per year and the annual dues crept up gradually to $5.00 a year by 1952.
With the completion of the first quarter century of The Early American Industries Association in 1958, the membership and Board took up the matter of, “…recording for posterity the tools and trades of vanishing American industries.” A Publications Committee was formed, and a book on the Conestoga wagon was chosen as the first subject for publication. Due to delays, rewrites by more than one author, and difficulty finding a publisher, the book entitled, Conestoga Wagon, 1750-1850, by George Shumway, Edward Durell, and Howard C. Frey was not sent to the publisher until 1964. Despite the delay, the initial order of 1500 books sold quickly, and by 1967, a second edition of the book was in the works. This was the first in a continuing line of books regarding early American industries published under the imprimatur of the EAIA.
In 1960, EAIA was approached by the Smithsonian Institution regarding their new museum building, the National Museum of American History. The Association was asked if members would be willing to donate American woodworking and carpentry tools made prior to 1850 for an exhibit in the National Museum of American History. The membership enthusiastically responded to this request and by 1961 the Smithsonian had accepted 62 tools from EAIA members for this exhibit.
Membership in EAIA was growing during the 1960’s. Because historic sites such as Williamsburg, Shelburne, Old Sturbridge Village and others could accommodate only a limited number of EAIA members attending an Annual Meeting, a decision was made by the Board of Directors in 1967 to create three classes of membership: active membership which entitled the member to a subscription to The Chronicle and the privilege of attending meetings; associate membership entitled the member a subscription to The Chronicle and an opportunity to become an active member when an opening occurred; and subscription membership which entitled the member to a subscription to The Chronicle. Membership was limited to 700 individuals from 1967-1969. The Board of Directors did not want to turn away active members who wanted to attend Annual Meetings because of attendance limitations placed on EAIA by the historic sites chosen for Annual Meetings. While this difficult decision disappointed many early American industry enthusiasts from across the country, it did help stimulate the formation of the Mid-West Tool Collectors Association and several other regional tool groups (P.A.S.T., N.E.T.C.A, and others) throughout the country. In the 1970’s, as historic sites and the nearby communities constructed new meeting facilities and hotels, it was possible for EAIA to allow all members to attend the Annual Meetings. In 1981, the decision about classes of membership was reversed, the By-Laws were amended, and anyone who paid membership dues was allowed to attend the EAIA Annual Meeting.
In 1971, all EAIA business information was removed from The Chronicle and instead put in a newsletter entitled Shavings. Initially published bi-monthly is was soon determined that the business news of EAIA could be handled with a quarterly newsletter and since then, Shavings has been published four times a year.
The first “Tool Exchange” took place at the 1977 Annual Meeting and along with Wednesday afternoon “tailgating” has been a much-loved part of our Annual Meetings ever since. 1977 also saw the production of the first membership directory. In 1977, the EAIA Board set up a committee to develop a research grant program to “…support to individuals engage in research or publication projects relating to the purposes of EAIA. It was titled the EAIA Grants-In-Aid Program (Now called the Research Grants Committee) and the committee chair was Charles Hummel. The committee moved ahead with the project, and EAIA’s first research grants were awarded in May of 1978. Four grants were awarded that year and since then EAIA had awarded over 120 research grants to individuals to assist them in research consistent with the mission of The Early American Industries Association.
In 1988 the EAIA Board of Directors voted to develop the position of Executive Director for the Association. A job description was developed, candidates were interviewed, and on July 1st, 1989, Alan Bates became the first Executive Director of EAIA. On July 1, 1992, Richard Kappeler became the second EAIA Executive Director. Elton “Toby” Hall became the third Executive Director in 1994 and served in that position until his retirement in 2010. Our current Executive Director John Verrill assumed the position in 2010. In 2009, Judy McMillen became the first female President of the Early American Industries Association and served in that position until 2011.
The Early American Industries Association Board of Directors adopted a resolution on October 24, 2004 that established the EAIA Endowment Fund. Its purpose is to provide EAIA members and friends the opportunity to make charitable gifts to the Early American Industries Association. These charitable gifts will become a permanent endowment of financial support for the Early American Industries Association. This fund has already assisted in furthering the publications and programs of our Association, particularly in the area of the Research Grants Program.
As we approach our 85th anniversary in 2018, the Early American Industries Association continues to “preserve and present historic trades, crafts, and tools and interprets their impact on our lives”. We invite you to come and join this vibrant group!
Submitted by Paul Van Pernis
 The editors of The Chronicle have been:
 Early American Industries Association List of Published Books
The 2018 EAIA Annual Meeting Will Be Wednesday, May 23rd thru Saturday, May 26th, 2018 – Save the Dates!
Come and join us at the Early American Industries Association’s 85th Anniversary in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and we’ll celebrate in style as we experience the industrial and cultural history of Pennsylvania’s Lehigh Valley and the equally fascinating history of the Moravians. Formed in 1457, the Moravian Church, or Unitas Fratrum (Unity of Brethren), was established by followers of John Hus, a Czech philosopher and reformer. This was 60 years before Martin Luther began his reformation and 100 years before the establishment of the Anglican Church. In the early 1700’s, religious persecution of non-Catholics increased throughout much of Europe, so the Moravians sent a group of their believers as missionaries to North America in 1735. They came as part of General Oglethorpe’s philanthropic venture to establish a colony in what is now the state of Georgia. Shortly after their arrival in Georgia the Moravians experienced hostility from neighbors and government officials who looked askance at their pacifism and their friendliness with local Cherokees and enslaved African-Americans. After several years of this hostility and conflict, the Moravians decided to leave Georgia and find another place to practice their religion and perform their missionary work.
In the late spring of 1740, a weary group of Moravian missionaries from Georgia arrived in Pennsylvania as “working guests” of George Whitefield, a British cleric conducting his own missionary work in the New World. Sailing to Philadelphia in Whitefield’s sloop, The Savannah, the Moravians felt they’d found a place where they could practice their faith. Whitefield hired the Moravians to construct a school on land he owned in Nazareth, Pennsylvania, where he intended to educate the orphan children of slaves. But, an argument with Whitefield over religious doctrine caused the Moravians to leave Nazareth a short time later and establish the nearby town of Bethlehem. Not long after the Moravians left Nazareth, Whitefield fell on hard times and the hard-working Moravians bought Nazareth and the surrounding 5000 acres of land from him. The original structure the Moravians built for Whitefield in Nazareth, served the Moravian community through the centuries as a place of worship, a boarding school for Moravian girls, a nursery for the children of missionaries, and as the Moravian Theological Seminary. It is still there and now houses the Moravian Historical society.
The communal societies of Bethlehem and Nazareth became closely linked in their agricultural and industrial economy with Bethlehem emerging as the center of the Moravian communal craft economy and missionary activity in North America. Other settlement congregations were established in Pennsylvania, New Jersey New York, and Maryland. All these churches and communities of believers were considered frontier centers for the spread of the gospel, particularly in mission to unchurched European settlers and the Native Americans. Eventually, the Moravian Bishop at Bethlehem, Augustus Spangenberg, led a party that surveyed a 100,000-acre tract of land in North Carolina, which came to be known as Wachau after an Austrian estate of Count Zinzendorf the head of the Moravian Church. The name, later anglicized to Wachovia, became the center of growth for the church in that region. Bethabara, Bethania and Salem (now Winston-Salem) were the first Moravian settlements in North Carolina. In 1857 the two American provinces, North and South, became largely independent and set about expansion. Bethlehem in Pennsylvania and Winston-Salem in North Carolina became the headquarters of the two provinces (North and South). You can learn a bit more about the still very active Moravian Church’s history and its current mission work at http://www.moravian.org/the-moravian-church/history/.
During our 2018 Annual Meeting you will have the opportunity to learn about the Moravians and their craft based communal economy that was set up to support their missions. Many of the original buildings from the mid 18th century are still present and we’ll get to see those with private tours. The Moravian Archives in Bethlehem and the Moravian Historical Society Museum in Nazareth will provide you with a fascinating glimpse of Moravian history, culture and industry. As a communal society, the Moravians kept extensive written records of all of their activities including fabulous architectural drawings, maps, and paintings. They built wonderful limestone buildings, and established America’s first industrial park known at the “Colonial Industrial Quarter” utilizing water power from Monocacy Creek.
But, that’s not all. There’s so much to see and do, you’ll want to come back for another visit to this treasure trove of American industrial history. Here are some of the highlights of our meeting:
We’re planning a special event for Wednesday evening, May 26th at the Moravian Archives in Bethlehem just a couple of miles from our hotel. The Moravians wrote down everything and kept extensive records. The Archives will be open on Wednesday evening with a special display. It will include examples of their written records from Moravian craftsmen, beautiful hand painted and lettered architectural drawings as well as other Moravian artifacts. It will be well worth the effort to get to Bethlehem in time to see this display. ( http://www.moravianchurcharchives.org/ )
The National Museum of Industrial History will host our traditional Ice Cream Social on Thursday night. The museum which opened in the summer of 2016 is a Smithsonian Affiliate Museum located in the old Bethlehem Steel factory complex. They’re closing the museum to the public just for us on Thursday evening so we’ll have the museum to ourselves. We can enjoy the exhibits at our leisure, interact with the museum staff, enjoy our traditional ice cream social and we’ll hold our “Whatsit’s Session in the museum’s auditorium. The museum houses many of the original machines from the 1876 Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia as well as an exhibit on the silk industry in the Lehigh Valley. ( http://nmih.org/)
Martin Guitar has been making guitars in Nazareth, PA since 1833. You’ll have a behind the scenes tour of the factory and see their wonderful museum. martin guitar. (https://www.martinguitar.com/)
You’ll have a chance to visit the Moravian Historical Society museum in Nazareth and take a walking architecture tour of Nazareth if you wish. (http://www.moravianhistoricalsociety.org/)
The Pennsylvania Long Rifle Museum is in Jacobsburg, PA, is just a few miles from Bethlehem. This wonderful little museum houses more than 100 historic arms on either permanent display or in rotating, topical exhibits. Displays feature Henry firearms dating from the American Fur Trade Era, the War of 1812, the Civil War, the American West, and the early 20th century. Most of the firearms were made by several generations of the Henry family. The museum is located on the Henry homestead and the family home will be open for our group to tour as well. (http://www.jacobsburghistory.com/society-collections/pennsylvania-longrifle-museum/)
I could go on and on. We’ll visit the Kemerer Museum of Decorative Arts as part of our tour in Bethlehem and get a behind the scenes tour of their wonderful dollhouse collection. (https://historicbethlehem.org/?historic-site=kemerer-museum-of-decorative-arts)
We’ll visit the Moravian Historical Society Museum in Nazareth, and you will have the opportunity to take a walking architectural tour of Nazareth as well. We’ll have a guided tour of the Bethlehem Steel Stacks complex and learn more about this once huge company and its history in the Lehigh Valley.
The Fiber Interest Group is already making plans for a special project and demonstration during the meeting. We’ll tailgate on Wednesday afternoon, and have our usual tool sales on Saturday morning. Mike Urness and Sara Holmes from The Great Planes Trading Company will put on an antique tool auction on Friday night at the hotel. (http://www.greatplanestrading.com) Mike has a collection of Pennsylvania made tools as well as a fine collection of watch and clock maker’s tools that he will put in the auction along with a good selection of other antique tools. We’ll hold the Saturday morning tool sales in the Moravian Industrial Quarter and at the same time there will be an opportunity to learn how to make Moravian stars, hand dip some candles, visit the blacksmith shop and learn about Moravian beer making from a “beer historian”. Their will be an opportunity to have a sample! We’ll set up our displays in the same area on Saturday morning. The theme for our member displays is “Tools that Measure and Tools that Cut”. So get creative and show us your measuring and cutting tools from rules to scissors, to micrometers, to chisels, planes, knives, tape measures, lumber scales, calipers, surveying chains, speed indicators, etc. Have some fun and teach us all a bit more about those interesting tools in your collection. We’re really hoping to see some displays from the Fiber Interest Group that fit this theme.
On Saturday afternoon Henry Disston Jr. a long time EAIA member will give us a lecture on the history of the Disston Saw Company and end his lecture by playing his musical saw.
We’ll end our meeting with our always fun Silent Auction, Banquet and Annual Meeting. And to top it all off, next year we’ll will celebrate EAIA’s 85th anniversary! So, we’ll have some fun and maybe a few surprises as we celebrate that milestone.
We’ll be based at the Bethlehem Comfort Suites University at 120 West 3rd Street in Bethlehem. (http://www.comfortsuitesbethlehem.com/ ) The room rate will be $119/ night and will be good for three days prior to and 3 days after our meeting. The meeting hosts are David Lauer, David Pollak, and Paul and Eileen Van Pernis. So, remember to put the dates May 23rd through May 26th, 2018 on your calendar, and we’ll look forward to seeing you next May! Look for more information in upcoming issues of Shavings and here on the EAIA website.
by Paul Van Pernis
What a fantastic 2017 Early American Industries Association meeting at Old Sturbridge Village, Massachusetts on May 17th thru May 20th! We enjoyed a beautiful venue, sunny warm weather, amazing displays, wonderful lectures, workshops, auctions, great demonstrations, and fascinating displays. We learned, had fun, relaxed, renewed old friendships and made new ones. We savored wonderful food and enjoyed pleasant company. Take a look at a visual tour of a great meeting in this slide show.. Thanks to Bob and Alice Roemer, John Verrill and all the staff at Old Sturbridge Village for a great time! Also thanks to Mike Urness and Sara Holmes for another Great Planes Auction.
posted by Paul Van Pernis
From its inception the Stanley Rule & Level Company was very attentive to its customers needs and desires. Their salesmen were instructed to listen carefully to comments and suggestions from their customers about the tools they manufactured and bring that information back to the foremen in the shop. Because of the nature of the “inside contracting system” the shop foremen were anxious to meet the needs of their customers. A new or improved tool that appealed to Stanley’s customers meant more income for the shop foreman, his employees as well as the company . Based on the large number of variations of Stanley’s “transitional” wood bottom planes from the Stanley Model Shop that have turned up, the skilled mechanics at Stanley invested a lot of time and effort on improving these planes. Stanley manufactured and sold eighteen different models of their transitional wood body planes during the 74 years they were offered in their catalogs. Between 1869 and 1943, multiple patents were granted to Stanley employees relating to “improvements” in these transitional planes. Some of those “improvements” were incorporated into the Stanley transitional plane line, but others never made it into production. Those “improved” planes that didn’t make the grade were relegated to the shelves in the Stanley Model Shop. Fortunately, for plane collectors, many of these “improved” transitional planes have escaped from the Model Shop and have found their way into the tool collecting world. I’ve shown you a few of those planes in previous posts and I hope you will enjoy looking at a couple of more.
Holding the cutter and cap iron tightly in position to prevent “chatter” was a problem with transitional wood bottom planes. In addition, scratches, gouges, and damage to the beech wood soles of transitional planes were common problems as well. Often, much of this damage occurred near the mouth of the plane. Resurfacing the sole of the plane to restore a smooth surface was not difficult but would result in an increase in the size of the mouth of the plane. Justus A. Traut submitted a patent application on December 28th, 1901, and on October 7th, 1902, was granted patent No. 710,542 which attempted to solve some of these problems. The rather complex patent drawings shown in Figures 1 and 2 were accompanied with multiple pages of descriptive patent text to illustrate and explain Traut’s ideas.
In summary, the patent describes the body of the plane body as being made of “any suitable wood adapted to the purpose” with a throat cut into the body designed to accept the “operative mechanism” which is described in the patent as an “adjustable supporting frame” for the cutter, lever cap, cutter adjustment screw, and the lateral adjuster.
The “operative mechanism” also included a metal sole with a narrow mouth opening for the cutter. The patent drawing shows the “operative mechanism” held in place in the throat of the plane body by two wood screws. If the sole of the plane were resurfaced, this “operative mechanism” which included the metal mouth could be moved upward by loosening the two screws in the throat of the plane that attach the “operative mechanism” and cutter frame to the body of the plane. This would keep the metal portion of the sole flush with the wooden sole of the plane body. Traut wrote in his patent with a flourish of elegant prose that…“the opposing forces thus set up tend to the establishment of perfect equilibrium between the parts and result in a bench plane possessing the greatest stability and practicability and in which chattering of the plane iron is practically destroyed or overcome due to the inherent tension at which the frame is always held.” Traut was trying in this patent to eliminate cutter chatter and at the same time provide a means for maintaining the narrow throat width for the cutter. I’m not sure that his design completely achieved the goal of eliminating cutter chatter, but it certainly created an improved method of holding the cutter compared to what was then being used on Stanley wood bottom transitional planes. And, it simultaneously solved the problem of the cutter mouth being opened if the sole of the plane was resurfaced.
The Model Shop plane shown in Figure 3 is identical to the plane shown in the patent drawings and is likely the plane used to produce those drawings. There is no doubt that it was made by Traut and the men in his shop. It is assembled on the body of a #27 Stanley transitional jack plane. The beech bottom is 15 inches long and 2 and 11/16ths inches wide. While the cutter, cap iron, and lever cap on a standard #27 transitional plane are 2 and 1/16ths inches wide, the cutter, cap iron, and lever cap on this plane are narrower at 1 and 15/16ths of an inch wide. The cutter, cap iron, and lever cap are narrower on the Model Shop version of this plane to allow for the metal “operative mechanism” and the narrower width of the metal mouth. The Model Shop number “211” is painted on the front tote, on the upper surface of the toe, on the toe of the plane, and on the lever cap. The stamp on the toe, the Stanley logo stamped on the cutter, the single patent date of 7-24-88 on the lateral cutter adjusting lever, and the “B” casting mark on the bottom side of the frame of the plane are typical of Stanley planes made from 1900-1904 (See Figures 4 and 5).
Traut applied for the patent on this plane on December 28, 1901, so it’s very likely that this plane was produced during the last three months of 1901. Figure 6 shows the “operative mechanism” and cutter support frame removed from the plane. Interestingly, this mechanism is attached to the body of the plane with two pan head machine screws that are threaded into the wood throat of the plane rather than the wood screws shown in the patent drawings. I would think the machine screws wouldn’t have held as well as a wood screw had this plane ever been put to use, so the use of the machine screws on this plane is puzzling.
Figure 7 shows the sole of the plane with the metal portion of the sole and the cutter mouth. Note how the metal mouth fits snugly into the sole. While there are a few storage scratches and stains on the sole, the plane is in unused condition.
The “operative mechanism” and the metal cutter frame incorporating the metal mouth look like they would have worked very well and would have lived up to the claims Traut made in his patent. Figure 8 shows the “operative mechanism” and cutter frame inserted into the plane with the cutter, cap iron, and lever cap removed.
But despite the “improvements”, Stanley never put this plane into production. One of the major selling points of the Stanley transitional planes was their lower cost. Figure 9 is taken from a Stanley 1902 pocket catalog and illustrates the difference in cost between Stanley’s cast iron bench planes and their transitional planes. The transitional planes were priced fifty cents to two dollars less than a comparable cast iron plane.
The cost of casting and machining the “operative mechanism” and cutter frame on this Model Shop plane would likely have made these planes as expensive, if not more expensive than their cast iron counterparts. So, this nicely designed and interesting plane never got beyond the prototype stage and was relegated to a shelf in the Model Shop.
This next Model Shop transitional plane is shown in Figure 10 and also has a metal sole plate and mouth that extends through the body of the plane, but differs from the first plane in the nature of its cutter adjustment mechanism. This plane is 8 and 3/8ths inches long and 2 and ½ inches wide at the mouth. The cutter, cap iron, and lever cap are 1 and 11/16ths of an inch wide, equal in size to the cutter, cap iron, and lever cap used on a conventional #22 size Stanley transitional smooth plane. To accommodate the metal sole plate, the metal mouth, and the “faucet handle” cutter adjustment mechanism the wooden body of the plane is about ¼ inch longer in length and ¼ inch wider at the mouth than a conventional #22 size Stanley smooth plane. The cast iron frame that sits atop the wooden plane body has also been modified slightly to accommodate the cutter adjustment mechanism and the metal mouth and sole plate (See Figure 11).
There is no Stanley stamp on the toe. The trademark on the cutter for this plane (See Figure 12) is consistent with the years 1910-1920, and Model Shop number “3162” is rather crudely painted in white on the side of the plane (See Figure 10). This is one of four transitional planes of this configuration known. Two of the others were 15-inch long Stanley wood bottom transitional jack planes. The frame and cutter adjustment mechanism is nickel-plated on one example and on the other it is japanned. These planes carry the Model Shop numbers “3159” and “3160” painted with white paint on their sides in the same rather crude fashion as found on this plane. The fourth plane is a Stanley No. 35 size transitional smooth plane with the faucet handle adjuster and red japanning. Model Shop number “3161” is painted on the rear tote of this plane. It appears the men in the Model Shop were trying out this adjustment mechanism on a variety of transitional planes with a variety of different finishes. Who knows, there may be even more of these transitional Model Shop planes with faucet handle adjusters and metal mouths out there somewhere. If you have one, please let me know.
This little smooth plane captured my attention when it came up for auction for a couple of reasons. The first is the “faucet handle” cutter adjustment screw. This has been seen on a few other Stanley planes and was used in the Model Shop version of the Stanley #97 Cabinet Maker’s Edge Plane. For a good look at that plane check out Walter Jacob’s article in “The Chronicle”, Volume 69, Number 3, September 2016, pp. 128-129.
The “faucet handle” cutter adjuster appears to have been an attempt to correct the problem that plane users had trying to turn the conventional round brass horizontal cutter adjusting screw in the confined space between the planes frog and the back portion of the frame casting on the smaller sized transitional planes or other planes with a low cutter angle. Additionally, the cutter adjustment mechanism that utilizes this “faucet handle” is different from what’s seen on Stanley’s conventional wood bottom transitional planes. Turning the “faucet handle” moves a cast iron plate which rides in machined ways on the frog. The cutter fits over a raised tab on this cast iron plate and the entire plate moves when the ‘faucet handle” adjuster is turned thus moving the cutter in or out of the mouth of the plane.
This cutter adjustment mechanism which is shown in Figure 14 is an adaptation of Traut’s cutter adjustment mechanism illustrated in his patent No. 645,220 dated March 13,1900 (See Figure 15). While the cutter adjustment mechanism on this Model Shop transitional plane is similar to what is shown in the patent drawings, the sliding plate has been adapted to work on the cutter support framework that is similar to what is shown in Traut’s patent No.710,542 that was used on the first plane shown in this post.
The second interesting feature of this plane is that the adjustable metal mouth frame is secured to the cast iron frame rather than being attached to the wooden body of the plane (See Figure 14). If the sole of the plane were to be resurfaced, the screws holding the metal mouth in place can be loosened and the metal mouth can be easily raised to remain flush with the sole of the plane. Figure 16 shows the metal mouth mechanism removed from the throat of the plane and shows how simple it would have been to adjust the metal mouth mechanism.
The cast iron frame that supports the metal mouth mechanism is screwed to the upper surface of the plane’s wood body with a wood screw through the front knob and two round head wood screws placed through the frame just behind the mouth opening. Rarely, Model Shop tools are accompanied by their Model Shop tags and this is one of those rare instances where the tag was still present with the plane. The tag shown in Figure 17 allows us to know exactly when this little plane entered the Model Shop, May 25, 1916.
So, with that documentation, we know that the men in the Model Shop continued to experiment with modifications to Stanley’s transitional planes years after Traut was granted patent No. 710,542 and eight years after his death.
The plane is also in beautiful condition with just a few scratches and stains on the sole (See Figure 18). The cutter adjustment mechanism and the metal mouth make a lot of sense and it appears that this plane would also have worked very well. But, again, most likely because of the additional expense of casting and machining the frame and cutter support mechanism, Stanley put this one back on the shelf in the Model Shop one hundred and one years ago! Thankfully, these interesting planes were at some point “liberated” and have found their way into the tool collecting world for those of us who find them intriguing glimpses into the history of American woodworking plane development.
By Paul Van Pernis
 The Stanley transitional planes included the following catalog numbers: 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 27½, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37. The number of Stanley transitional planes swells to twenty-three if you include the 122, 127, 129, 132, and 135 in the Liberty Bell series of planes.
 Transitional planes are wood bottom planes with a cast iron frame attached to the upper surface of the wood bottom. The frame supports the frog, and the rear tote and front knob are attached to the frame as well. The name “transitional” is a misnomer as they are not a chronologic bridge between the classic wooden bodied bench plane and a cast iron bench plane. Rather, they are simply a wood bottom plane with a cast iron frame mounted on the upper surface of the plane that incorporates the adjustment feature found on the similarly sized cast iron planes by the same manufacturer. Roger Smith does an excellent job of explaining the development of these planes in Patented Transitional and Metallic Planes in America, Volume I, pp. 25-39. For general information regarding Stanley transitional planes go to Patrick Leach’s Blood & Gore at http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan4.htm.
 Here’s the link to the previous post. http://eaiainfo.org/2015/03/14/stanley-model-sh…od-bottom-planes/.
 See Roger Smith’s type study of “Bailey-Stanley Wood Bottom Plane Types in Patented and metallic Transitional Planes in America Volume I, pp. 275-278.
 The plane discussed in this post was Lot #504 in the 42nd International Antique Tool Auction of Saturday, April 6th, 2013. The two jack planes described above were sold as Lot #342 in the 39th International Antique Tool Auction of Saturday, October 29th, 2011. The Stanley #35 size transitional smoothing plane with the faucet handle adjuster and red japanning on the cast iron was Lot #627 in the 41st International Antique Tool Auction on November 3, 2012. It also came with a Model Shop tag dated 5/25/1916. I am aware of one other Model Shop plane with a “faucet handle” cutter adjustment screw. It was sold as Lot #343 in the 39th International antique Tool Auction on Saturday October 29th, 2011.
 Justus A. Traut was born in Potsdam, Germany on June 12, 1839. In 1904, a celebration was held at Stanley commemorating his 50th year with the company. He died on March 9, 1908 just shy of his 69th birthday. So, he wouldn’t have been around to work on this Model Shop plane.