Print

[Alan Harris]

Alan, here is an easy to find reference for the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company that states "The Hazel-Atlas mark, usually placed on the back of the product, is an 'A' nested underneath an 'H'. The mark was reportedly first used in 1923, according to trademark office records quoted by Peterson (400 Trademarks on Glass)".

Yes, thank you, I was well aware of the Wiki entry.  Also Ricker Jones posted the exact same language from a different web site back in Reply 110.  What I was discussing is whether Wiki/"Peterson" have it right, or have the entire story.  Plus, it references the "trademark office", and I believe it is not unknown for companies to use names, and logos, before going through the official filing process.  Anyway, IMO there is reason to question it, as other data are strongly suggesting that the jar is older than 1923.  That's why I am hoping the official report now in preparation can untangle this for us.

  Also the mark is not distorted as shown in this reference.http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html

Possibly we have different definitions of "distorted".  As I look at Randy's photo "glass4.jpg", what we believe is/was a complete block letter "A" is not really recognizable as such unless you already know what it should be.  John Kada's reference to "Babylonian cuneiform" is quite apt IMO.

[C.W. Herndon]

Yes, thank you, I was well aware of the Wiki entry.  Also Ricker Jones posted the exact same language from a different web site back in Reply 110.  What I was discussing is whether Wiki/"Peterson" have it right, or have the entire story.  Plus, it references the "trademark office", and I believe it is not unknown for companies to use names, and logos, before going through the official filing process.  Anyway, IMO there is reason to question it, as other data are strongly suggesting that the jar is older than 1923.  That's why I am hoping the official report now in preparation can untangle this for us.

Possibly we have different definitions of "distorted".  As I look at Randy's photo "glass4.jpg", what we believe is/was a complete block letter "A" is not really recognizable as such unless you already know what it should be.  John Kada's reference to "Babylonian cuneiform" is quite apt IMO.

You asked the question, where did the 1923 come from and I tried to give you a possible answer.

As far as the mark on the bottom of the jar is concerned, based on my limited experience casting objects, the mark came out very well. Casting objects, in any medium, is not an exact science.

[Alan Harris]

The 1923 date for the HA logo:

Several previous posts in this thread have discussed the info found on Wiki and some other web sites that the Hazel-Atlas "H over A" logo dates from 1923.  Some additional searching reveals that this view is not universally shared among glass historians and collectors.  So, it's another situation where information (or maybe opinion?) is coming from interested parties long after the fact, instead of from contemporary records and company documents.

A popular and seemingly predominant HA collector group says the following:

Many companies would have design changes in their logo or mark over the course of years, however Hazel Atlas' mark remained the same from the early 1900s to the late 1950s.

Another Wiki-related website where answers are "contributed" has this:

Hazel Atlas was formed from a merger of two companies in 1902, they had produced fruit jars and utilitarian ware up to this point and in 1923 the Hazel Atlas Glass company began marketing dinnerware items. The earliest H over A mark was found on fruit jars dating to around 1910.

To this point I have not seen or found any specific dating for first use of the HA mark that I would consider rock-solid.  As I have commented in prior posts, even hard evidence of a formal trademark registration would not necessarily be enough, we would like to know first use.

[Mark Pearce]

Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.

The second ad here, with it's heading "Sunburn Creams and Lotions of Proven Efficiency", clearly supports the contention made earlier that freckle cream was also used at that time as a sun-screen- by both women and men. 

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19300104.2.170.1&srpos=7&e=-------10--1----0Dr%2e+Berry%27s+freckle+--

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19310110.2.167.61.1&srpos=3&e=-------10--1----0dr%2e+berry%27s+freckle+cream--

[Alan Harris]

Here’s an interesting development-

The Stealth Kiwi Newspaper Bandit strikes again!  Mark, why do you prolong our agony, quit holding back and just show us the pages from the Auckland Star that give photos of the wrecked Electra, detailed maps, and a complete description of the incident.*   

Yes, very interesting.  Obviously the Berry Skin Remover was distributed much more widely than we knew or thought.  Given its availability in New Zealand, it's possible that newspaper archives in England and Australia might contain similar finds.  (Hmmm, Australia, the Norwich City's place of departure prior to wrecking.)  For myself, I will need to think through the full implications for the Hypothesis.  I mean, for sure it further significantly decreases the odds that any freckle cream found had to have come from AE's druggist; but we don't know that the artifact jar contained Berry's freckle cream, or any freckle cream, and the dating of the jar is trending toward the mid-teen's rather than the '30s.  Plus, as other posters have noted, we have no evidence at all that AE used any such cream.

* As no one here knows (or cares) about my weird sense of humor, I should carefully explain that this sentence is not in any sense a sarcastic dig at Mark, it is just that I find it too funny how Mark stays quiet for long periods and then suddenly pops up with amazing things from obscure NZ papers.

[Malcolm McKay]

Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.

Certainly interesting and given that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands then that gives as an alternative origin for the freckle cream jar. In fact rather than clarifying the matter it adds an additional possible source for the jar - but was the product sold in New Zealand packed in the same type and colour of jar as the example from Nikumaroro.

[Jeff Victor Hayden]

Sounds like a another lead to be followed up, NewZealand/Australia as the source of the jar?
A bit of research here may add some new information regarding the origin and owner of the jar found on Gardner Island.
The same theory may apply to the PISS and Great Britain as being the source of the jar. I'll have a trawl around the 1930's magazines and newspapers of Great Britain to see if anything comes up.

[C.W. Herndon]

Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.

The second ad here, with it's heading "Sunburn Creams and Lotions of Proven Efficiency", clearly supports the contention made earlier that freckle cream was also used at that time as a sun-screen- by both women and men. 

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19300104.2.170.1&srpos=7&e=-------10--1----0Dr%2e+Berry%27s+freckle+--

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19310110.2.167.61.1&srpos=3&e=-------10--1----0dr%2e+berry%27s+freckle+cream--

What was interesting to me was how many "hits" I got when I went to this web site, PAPERSPAST, located Auckland Star, and typed in "Dr Berry's Cream" or "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

[dave burrell]

Assuming the artifact found is a Dr. Berry's jar.
That has not been proven.
What was found is an old jar, likely pre 1920 vintage,that once held
an unknown ointment type, ointment made by an unknown company, purchased in an unknown country, used by an unknown person, for an unknown ailment.

[Ric Gillespie]

Certainly interesting and given that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands then that gives as an alternative origin for the freckle cream jar. In fact rather than clarifying the matter it adds an additional possible source for the jar - but was the product sold in New Zealand packed in the same type and colour of jar as the example from Nikumaroro.

Please provide your source for your statement that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands. 

[C.W. Herndon]

What was interesting to me was how many "hits" I got when I went to this web site, PAPERSPAST, located Auckland Star, and typed in "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" or "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Since no one has commented on my previous post today, I assume that either no one else has looked at The Auckland Star, or that no one else found it strange when, although this site contains the ditigal copies of this newspaper from 24 March 1870 to 31 December 1945 (23312 issues), only one ad is found for "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" and one separate mention is made of "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Personally I find it somewhat of a stretch of the imagination to believe that, although only two ads for this product were apparently printed in these 75 years of this newspaper's publishing, we are supposed to take these two ads as proof this product was sold in New Zealand during the 1930s. Someone is going to have to come up with more than this to convince me.

Assuming the artifact found is a Dr. Berry's jar.
That has not been proven.
What was found is an old jar, likely pre 1920 vintage,that once held
an unknown ointment, from an unknown company, purchased in an unknown country, used by an unknown person, for an unknown ailment.

Also, I disagree that the company that made this jar is unknown. We know what the Hazel-Atlas trade mark looked like, see picture 1 below. The remnants of the mark on the pot/jar, shown in picture 2, appear to be a very close approximation of this trade mark.

[dave burrell]

What I meant by "unknown company" is that we do not know if this jar ever held Dr.Berrys ointment.
Of course it's Hazel atlas made, the glass is so marked, but who Hazel atlas sold it to, and who filled it with ointment, is the unknown company.
Unfortunately the jar did not come with a label.
I never said "the company that made this jar is unknown" but I can see where it might be read that way, so I just edited my Original.
My post should have been read "Unknown ointment MADE BY an unknown company."

[Malcolm McKay]

And there was a NZ survey team on the island in 1938 http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/New_Zealand_Survey_Report/generalreport.html while the freckle cream IIRC was sold as a anti-sunburn prep as well. There is another source for it.

[Jeff Victor Hayden]

although this site contains the ditigal copies of this newspaper from 24 March 1870 to 31 December 1945 (23312 issues), only one ad is found for "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" and one separate mention is made of "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Doubt very much if one advert in 75 years and 23312 issues brought in many customers.

[Ric Gillespie]

And there was a NZ survey team on the island in 1938 http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/New_Zealand_Survey_Report/generalreport.html while the freckle cream IIRC was sold as a anti-sunburn prep as well. There is another source for it.

If the 1938/39 New Zealand Survey was at the site where the jar was found, why didn't they see the skeleton that was there in 1940?And if a 1938 NZ team can have a jar of 1923 Freckle Cream so can an American aviator in 1937.
And I will ask you again to please provide a source for your statement that New Zealand was in the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands colony.
BTW, have I asked you how long you've known David Billings?