The Gold Standard and the Election of 1896

The concept of sound money is one you may not be familiar with today, but in 1896 it was a hot-button political issue that divided the Northeast from much of the rest of the country, along class and labor lines. Midwest farmers wanted free silver, also known as bimetallism, a monetary system under which both gold and silver bullion could be minted into coin. They believed that it would bring more value to their crops while the country slowly recovered from an economic depression, known as the Panic of 1893. They thought that backing the U.S. dollar with silver would weaken it, and that a strong dollar drove down the prices of their crops. These farmers, largely in the Midwest and Deep South, were debt-burdened mortgage payers. Northeast industrialists wanted the gold standard, because they believed it would strengthen the value of the dollar. Urban laborers, most of whom were wage-earning renters, were also in favor. They believed that a stronger dollar increased the value of their labor. 

Across the Northeast, students and laborers formed “Sound Money Clubs”, organizing and advocating for then-Governor of Ohio and Republican candidate William McKinley. His campaign platform of “Prosperity at Home, Prestige Abroad” emphasized imperialistic foreign policy and strong national credit. His opponent, William Jennings Bryan, campaigned almost exclusively on the issue of free silver and courted the rural vote. Bryan, perhaps best known for his role as a special prosecutor  in Scopes vs. Tennessee, was not the Democratic Party’s original choice of candidate– the party was split between Gold Democrats, Silver Democrats, and Populists, who also supported free silver. When incumbent Grover Cleveland declined to run for a second consecutive term, the Democratic Convention swung towards Bryan’s free silver ideas, bolstered by his intense and passionate Cross of Gold speech.

“If they dare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

(Excerpt from the Cross of Gold speech, delivered at the Democratic
National Convention on July 9, 1896)

Bryan conducted a whistle-stop campaign, traveling by rail all across the country to meet with farmers in the wheat, cotton, and corn belts and giving dozens speeches per day. He campaigned for the rural vote, emphasizing in the Cross of Gold speech that farmers were the basis of the nation’s economy– not city laborers: “Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again; but destroy our farms, and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.” Unsurprisingly, this further alienated the urban vote, and Bryan didn’t win a single state in the Northeast. 

Meanwhile McKinley conducted his campaign from home, allowing people to come to him and using a new campaign strategy of courting wealthy investors for campaign funds. His campaign manager, Mark Hanna, paid for trainloads of people to visit McKinley at his home, threw massive parades, printed thousands of pamphlets, and even hired Republican orators such as Teddy Roosevelt to speak across the country, endorsing McKinley and denouncing Bryan. Leveraging the fears of bankers and investors, Hanna promoted McKinley as a great defender of capitalism. Workers and laborers were told that factories would close and the whistles wouldn’t blow the day after the election if Bryan won.

In New Britain, factory owners, industrialists, and workers were all in for McKinley and sound money. Factory workers organized Sound Money clubs, including the Stanley Sound Money Battery, the Corbin Sound Money Club, and the Russell & Erwin Sound Money Brigade. They met to discuss public monetary policy and politics and held parades, demonstrations, and campaigned for sound money candidates. “There seems to be more real political enthusiasm in this city than in all of the rest of the state,” wrote The Hartford Courant on October 9, 1896, “There is hardly a street in the city but what has a McKinley and Hobart banner. Every shop, no matter how small, has its sound money club and nearly every society has banded its members together to fight for sound money.”

The P&F Corbin Sound Money Club even crafted a large, gold-plated bug and sent it to Gov. McKinley to show their support, a nod to the nickname of pro-gold Democrats and Republicans, the “Gold Bugs”. By September of 1896, the Corbin club alone boasted more than 1400 members, and all three thousand employees took part in a parade and banner-raising at the P&F Corbin factory. Each employee who participated received a gold ribbon with “The Corbin Sound Money Club” inscribed upon it. Philip Corbin himself sent a dispatch to candidate McKinley to tell him about the demonstration, to which they received the reply:

“Please accept my grateful acknowledgement for your gracious message of good will. It is an assurance of victory when the workingmen, democrats and republicans, unite under the banner of sound money and national honor. 

William McKinley”

(The Hartford Courant, September 25, 1896)

McKinley, of course, won the election of 1896, but that didn’t spell the end of grassroots sound money campaigns– when he ran again in 1900 as incumbent, Northeastern industrialists and workers backed him once more. Independent clubs came together to form a Connecticut branch of the National Commercial and Industrial League, “an organization of men engaged in all classes of commercial and industrial pursuits who have faith in the principles of the republican party and its ability to deal wisely with all questions of public policy.” (The Hartford Courant, August 4, 1900.), which attracted businessmen from most of Connecticut’s major industrial centers. Demonstrations and parades continued, with thousands of workers from Russell & Erwin, Stanley Rule & Level, Humason & Beckley, Skinner Chuck Company, North & Judd, Trout & Hine, Vulcan Iron Works, P&F Corbin, and Stanley Works participating.

Bryan’s second campaign platform of anti-imperialism following the Spanish-American war and bimetallism proved unpopular once again and the power of the pro-business Northeast– as well as many other industrial centers around the country– voted overwhelmingly for the Republican ticket. William McKinley won the presidency once more. 

Six months into his second term, McKinley was assassinated and succeeded by his vice president, Theodore Roosevelt.

As many of you know, there was a massive fire Tuesday night on the corner of Columbus and High Street. Popularly known as the Polar Building today, and remembered variously as the location of Superior Ball Bearing, Connecticut Photo Engraving Company, and more, the industrial complex was actually the site of the original Stanley Works Building, constructed pre-1869. That building was later demolished and rebuilt as the Nat’l Spring Bed Co. According to an 1869 map of New Britain, the Stanley family not only owned the factory building, but owned and lived in several residences on this block.

After the demolition of the Stanley Works building, the National Spring Bed Co. was organized in 1898. It was re-established out of the failed National Wire Mattress Company (organized in 1872), at which time they undertook construction on a new factory building. The three-story block currently fronting on Columbus Boulevard was completed around 1900, according to Preservation Connecticut, and by 1909, an additional four-story block had been constructed to the west of the ca. 1898 building. The company continued to expand throughout the 1910s, building a second addition of five stories and 20,000 square feet to the complex in 1911 and giving us the block of brick buildings we know today. In fact, their original wooden plant on Washington Street, at the time used for storage of materials, burned in a serious fire the day they moved into the new five-story building, causing $2000 in damage– nearly $66,000 in today’s money. "The fire could not have come at a more opportune time, if it had to take place, and will not interfere with the company's business one iota," the Courant reported, "The company was planning to move into the new plant today, so the fire does not put them back at all."

The National Spring Bed Company famously produced the ‘Rip Van Winkle Spring Bed’, using Washington Irving (of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow  fame)’s 1819 short story as a marketing scheme. “Guaranteed not to sag or wear out-- is absolutely sanitary and most comfortable”. Customers could send out for a printed, illustrated copy of the tale (the companion piece to the Legend of  Sleepy Hollow) along with product information.

By the time of the First World War, however, the company ran into trouble. Having been deemed “non-essential” to the war efforts and subsequently denied the rations of coal and steel that they needed to continue production, stockholders of the National Spring Bed Co. chose to sell all of their stock holdings to Landers, Frary, & Clark Mfg. Co. in August of 1918. Landers, Frary, & Clark used the holdings and plant to expand their own wartime manufacturing operations. 

Since then, there have been many occupants of the building. In 1950, the Morin Furniture company moved in, and other furniture and manufacturing businesses have come and gone. Notably, Superior Ball Bearing, Lemco Manufacturing, and the Connecticut Photo Engraving Company have all been residents of the building. Currently, it houses Polar Corporation, STAN Furniture, and SD Auto Electric. While the future of the complex is uncertain as the city cleans up the aftermath of the fire and the fire marshal investigates, its nearly hundred and twenty-five years of history are not forgotten. 

Further Reading:

Camp, David Nelson, History of New Britain, with sketches of Farmington and Berlin, Connecticut. 1640-1889. 1889.

Preservation Connecticut, National Spring Bed Co.,

The Hartford Courant, 17 Dec., 1910

The Hartford Courant, 28 Dec., 1910

The Hartford Courant, 7 Aug., 1918

The Hartford Courant, 19 Sept., 1918

Traut, who came to New Britain from Potsdam, Germany, started his career at Stanley when he was eighteen years old, joining with his father, Frederick. While Frederick Traut would have patents in his name, his son surpassed him when he became a contractor in 1875. Around the 1870s, Stanley relied on contractors and purchasing patents. For instance, in 1869, Stanley purchased patents from Leonard Bailey to manufacture his carpenter’s benches and planes with Bailey receiving five percent royalties as a contractor. Bailey and Stanley would have a strained relationship in how they operated the production of the planes despite sales rising in the late nineteenth century. Other Stanley contractor contemporaries were Christian Bodmer and Edmund Schade, both of whom developed patents with Traut. With Bodmer, he received patents nos. 515,063 and 540,283 for planes, patent no. 562,678 for a machine for graduating tubes, and patent no. 562,679 for marking level glasses.

             Many of Traut’s patents were refinements, adjustments, or improvements of other designs seen in tools such as bench planes, bevels, and levels. His first patent, according to New Britain Patents and Patentees compiled by James Shepard in 1901, was patent no. 48,327 on June 20, 1865 for a joint of folding rulers. In 1876, Traut and Henry Richards patented the Liberty Bell planes (patent no. 176,152), also known as “The Stanley Adjustable Plane,” which were similar to the Bailey Planes. However, Traut also had patents that were direct refinements and adjustments of the Bailey Plane. Traut’s patents ultimately contributed to Bailey’s separation from Stanley in 1875 after Traut patented the No. 110 Block plane and the rising sales of the Liberty Bell planes. Bailey insisted that they reduced his royalties as a contractor. Bailey and Stanley continued to have acrimonious lawsuits of patent infringement and a complicated relationship. However, Traut continued to accumulate patents for Stanley. While patents could be measured in terms of the value of the production compared to the costs of applying, a patent’s worth could also be measured by preventing its use by other manufacturers, which can be prevalent in patent infringement suits.

Traut also authored patents for inventions unrelated to Stanley’s tool industry. For instance, from 1889-1890, he received four patents for bottle stoppers, and he also authored a series of patents in 1891 for suspender buckles.

             On March 9, 1908, he passed away at 68 years old and was buried in the Fairview Cemetery, New Britain. Throughout his employment at Stanley from 1850-1904, his many patents propelled him ahead of any other inventor during this period in New Britain. Several of these patents and those he applied for with his contemporaries at Stanley are in The ĐÇżŐ´ŤĂ˝, bound in ribbon and stamped by patent offices in Connecticut.

Below, you can view a gallery of just some of Traut’s patents:

             In the early 1980s, Newell Inc., a then-Illinois-based company that originally manufactured curtain rods, expressed interest in The Stanley Works. Through the purchase of stock in 1981, Newell acquired Stanley’s drapery hardware division. In June 1982, the United States District Court of Connecticut filed a complaint with the United States serving as the plaintiff and Newell Companies, Inc. as the defendant. The complaint focused on the acquisition of Stanley’s drapery hardware division because both companies are within the top six of the industry’s manufacturers. As the top six companies that manufacture drapery hardware account for 96 percent of the output in the market, the complaint cited the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which restricts the power of monopolies and encourages competition in the market. To ensure that Newell did not monopolize the market in this industry, the United States, as the plaintiff, demanded that Stanley’s drapery hardware division be restored to maintain competition.

             Throughout the eighties, Newell acquired more companies, employing a strategy referred to as “Newellization.” After the acquisition of a company or a division of a company, there would be reductions through lay-offs or closing plants to improve profit and centralize their administration. Before The Stanley Works’ merger with Black & Decker to become the Stanley Black & Decker Company that remains today, Newell attempted to merge with them independently. In 1991, Newell invested $150 million in the Black & Decker Corporation, which equated to a 15 percent stake in the company. However, once they attempted to achieve the same result at Stanley, they were interrupted by the company, which had the support of the state as well.

             Discussions began in 1989 between the chief executives of the two companies to discuss the possibility of a merger, but it was ultimately decided against by Stanley's leaders. Therefore, Newell’s attempt at gaining 15 percent of stakeholder control and acquisition of Stanley’s hardware division was deemed a “hostile takeover,” which refers to an acquisition of a company without the consent of their board of directors. Stanley did not want to lose its independence, and there was a fear that “Newellization” would apply to the company and its approximately 2,000 workers in Connecticut. This fear threatened Stanley’s headquarters in New Britain, so after initiating litigation against Newell, the company turned to the State of Connecticut to prevent the takeover. In 1992, Richard Blumenthal was Connecticut’s Attorney General and decided to file an injunction with the company, which resembled the complaint from 1982 as it cited Newell’s violation of state and federal antitrust laws. However, it also emphasized Stanley’s significance in Connecticut’s economy.

             Before the litigation pressed further, it was settled with Newell with the additional requirement that Newell must not encroach on Stanley for ten years. However, by the end of the decade, Newell embarked on a new acquisition—a $6 billion merger with Rubbermaid. The infamous merger followed a similar “Newellization” trajectory and led to a decline in stock prices. Ultimately, in 2017, Stanley Black & Decker purchased Newell’s tool division for $1.95 billion, acquiring Irwin, Lenox, and Hilmor tools.

             While Stanley received support from Connecticut to avoid the Newell acquisition, it has also received criticism and faced litigation from the state. In 2002, Blumenthal as the Attorney General and Denise Nappier, the state’s Treasurer, filed a lawsuit against the company because of their proposal to move their headquarters to Bermuda as a means of corporate inversion to pay less taxes. Despite the stakeholders narrowly voting in favor of the move, Stanley stopped the proceedings for the move because of the Connecticut officials' lawsuit, and the proposed investigation from the Securities and Exchange Commission. Stanley’s headquarters remain in New Britain, remaining a fixture of Connecticut’s economy and New Britain’s industrial history.

Quotes

David Ayers (Chief Executive Officer of Stanley): “Even though Mr. Ferguson committed to confidentiality and claimed friendly intent, he subsequently publicly discussed the contents of these meetings and quietly began to acquire Stanley stock. These acts reflect his true intentions, his dishonesty, and Newell’s hostility.” (“Stanley Works Chief Says Newell Merger Would Cause Upheaval.” The Hartford Courant, 4 Aug. 1992.)

Ayers: “Stanley’s philosophy is to cater equally to the needs of all channels of distribution. …We compete just as hard for the business of the corner hardware store or lumber yard on Main Street.” (“Stanley Works Chief Says Newell Merger Would Cause Upheaval.” The Hartford Courant, 4 Aug. 1992. )

Stanley’s Board of Directors in a letter to Newell: “We are aggravated that because of you, Stanley must incur expenses to maintain its independence, vindicate its legal rights, prevent harm to its constituencies, and preclude the illegality that would result from Newell’s combining with or attempting to control or influence Stanley. We will continue to vigorously resist your efforts to effect a combination of any kind with Stanley.” (Ziemba, Stanley. “Stanley Works Bristles at Latest Newell Advance.” The Chicago Tribune, 19 Sept. 1992.)

Daniel Ferguson (Chief Executive Officer of Newell): “I have always believed—then, as I believe now—that, hey, this is a very effective combination, if we can ever get it together some way.” (“Stanley Started Talk of Merger, Rival Says .” The Hartford Courant, 21 Dec. 1991.)

Ferguson: “The interest in Stanley has been there for a long time. If it happens now, great. If it doesn’t happen now, maybe it will happen in 1995.” (“Stanley Started Talk of Merger, Rival Says .” The Hartford Courant, 21 Dec. 1991.)

William D’Amico (Newell’s lawyer): “Clearly, Attorney General Blumenthal has not been listening to Mr. Ayers, because Mr. Ayers has not been giving assurances that Stanley will be an employer in the State of Connecticut. One thing that I am sure of is that should there be a combination of Newell, that Newell would clearly help energize Stanley and that would mean energizing Stanley as an employer in Connecticut and elsewhere.” (“Blumenthal Sues Stanley Suitor Newell Co. .” The Hartford Courant, 2 July 1992.)

Further Reading

“State Considers Helping Stanley Hold Off Newell .” The Hartford Courant, 11 June 1992, https://www.courant.com/1992/06/11/state-considers-helping-stanley-hold-off-newell/.

Associated Press. “Company News; Newell to End Hostile Bid for Stanley Works.” The New York Times, 3 Oct. 1992, https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/03/business/company-news-newell-to-end-hostile-bid-for-stanley-works.html.

“Blumenthal Sues Stanley Suitor Newell Co. .” The Hartford Courant, 2 July 1992, https://www.courant.com/1992/07/02/blumenthal-sues-stanley-suitor-newell-co/.

Johnston, David Cay. “Stanley Works Faulted Again By 2 Officials Of Connecticut.” The New York Times, 4 July 2002, https://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/04/business/stanley-works-faulted-again-by-2-officials-of-connecticut.html.

“Stanley Started Talk of Merger, Rival Says .” The Hartford Courant, 21 Dec. 1991, https://www.courant.com/1991/12/21/stanley-started-talk-of-merger-rival-says/.

“Stanley Works Chief Says Newell Merger Would Cause Upheaval.” The Hartford Courant, 4 Aug. 1992, https://www.courant.com/1992/08/04/stanley-works-chief-says-newell-merger-would-cause-upheaval/.

Townsend, Matthew. “Stanley Black & Decker to Buy Newell Tools for $1.95 Billion.” Bloomberg.Com, Bloomberg, 12 Oct. 2016, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-12/stanley-black-decker-to-buy-newell-tool-unit-for-1-95-billion.

Ziemba, Stanley. “Stanley Works Bristles at Latest Newell Advance.” The Chicago Tribune, 19 Sept. 1992, https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1992-09-19-9203250414-story.html.

Happy International Beer Day! Did you know that New Britain has a more than one hundred year history of brewing beer?

It started in 1903, when the John Zunner Health Beer Company (also known as the Consumers Brewery) and was founded by John Zunner of Hartford. The brewery, erected on Belden Street,  was only in operation for fourteen months, during which time lager, ale and porter were all brewed. When the business failed in 1905, tavern owner John Skritulsky stepped in and took over, rebranding the company as the now-iconic Cremo Brewing Co., incorporating in 1911. At the time, a bottle of beer only cost five cents!

The company did good business until Prohibition, at which time they received a license to brew “near-beer”, a malt liquor that does not contain enough alcohol to be considered an alcoholic beverage, or less than half a percent of alcohol by volume. Within two years, however, it was discovered that Cremo was brewing full-strength beer, and was fined $100,000 for violating the Volstead Act. Barrels of beer had been discovered in Connecticut and Massachusetts, and traced back to New Britain. More than 8000 barrels were removed from the premises and dumped into the sewer. Plant superintendent Thomas Morton said the agents must have taken the barrels before the alcohol was removed, but investigating agents stated that they had also taken samples from saloons in Massachusetts that were selling Cremo Beer.  Cremo then closed and did not re-open until Prohibition was repealed in 1933. 

The grand re-opening in 1933 saw more than five thousand attendees who toured the brewery and enjoyed free beer, courtesy of newly-hired brewmaster Oscar Brockert. The brand became a staple of local taverns and homes, and throughout the 1930s and 40s, the company saw record profits. They sponsored a semi-professional baseball team and even a 15-minute radio show beginning in the 1940s. They also began distributing beer under two new labels: Diplomat and Manhattan.

The success was not to last, however. Employees began striking for better conditions and wages beginning in 1947, and again in 1949. The brewery began to lose money, and customers complained that the taste of the beer was inconsistent. In 1955, the company was fined for filthy conditions in the warehouse, including the discovery of rat excreta in bags of malt. While the conditions were corrected, after years of corporate infighting, strikes, and more than $135,000 of corporate debt, the stockholders voted to dissolve the 50-year-old business. The Belden street brewery building changed hands several times over the years, before finally being demolished in January of 2002.

It wasn’t until 2017 when Chris DeGasero of Alvarium Brewing Co. and Rob Metz of Avery’s Beverages teamed up shortly after Alvarium’s opening to revive the New Britain staple that Cremo beer began flowing once more. You can now find Cremo Sparkling Ale at Alvarium’s taproom on their permanent menu, or purchase it in local package stores. Alvarium was joined by Five Churches Brewing in 2018, and the two breweries have made New Britain a craft beer hub for Connecticut.

Charles Keeney Hamilton (May 30, 1885 – January 22, 1914) was an American pioneer aviator and daredevil. Born in New Britain, he grew up on Seymour St. and was a “noted scamp” during his school days. He left New Britain at the age of 18 to become a hot-air balloonist and parachute jumper. He learned to fly in 1909 and joined the Curtiss Aviators where he developed the “Hamilton Dive” and became known for his daring. In 1910, fresh from winning $10,000 for flying from New York to Philadelphia in a day, Hamilton was approached by Mayor George M. Landers and Thomas W. O’Connor (chairman of the Business Men’s Fourth of July Committee) to bring his plane to New Britain and make the first public flight of a powered aircraft in Connecticut and New England from the top of Walnut Hill Park. 

On July 2, 1910, after spending the day with engine problems and a couple of false starts (his first attempt landed him on Hart Street) and an attempt to fix the engine with a carburetor rushed from the Corbin Motor Vehicle Company the airplane was once again taken to the top of Walnut Hill and readied for take-off. 

The New Britain Herald reported: 

“Hamilton came down the stretch at 50 miles an hour, his engine skipping a bit, but not enough to prevent the take-off. He leaped from the ground opposite the Governor’s stand and swooped higher and higher into the air. There were cheers and cries of ecstasy from the crowds. Men pounded each other on the back and women looked on in awe and gratification. After 18 minutes of flight, with his eight-cylinder engine sometimes working on seven cylinders, sometimes only on six, he returned to the field for a wonderful glide to the ground. The flight had carried him and his crippled machine over factory chimneys and busy stores from which people rushed into the streets and roared their applause. During the flight, Hamilton circled the field for about five minutes, making a figure eight as he did so, then came down in one of the swoops akin to a hawk descending on a chicken yard that has made him the foremost and most fearless navigator of the air.”

Two years later, he faced off against another local pilot for “duel in the air”— Nels Nelson. They flew over the Berlin Fairgrounds in a barnstorming exhibition. Hamilton’s career earned him the nickname “the Crazy Man of the Air”, and according to the U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission, was "known for his dangerous dives, spectacular crashes, extensive reconstructive surgeries, and ever present cigarette" and was "frequently drunk". He survived more than 60 crashes and died at home at the age of 29 due to complications of tuberculosis.

A patent, or a government grant to an inventor of the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling aninvention, is an important legal protection for inventors and manufacturing companies. It ensures that people retain control of their intellectual property, and receive recognition or financial benefit from what they create or invent. But when did we come up with the idea of patents, anyway? 

The concept of protecting intellectual property has been around since classical antiquity, albeit in a different form than what we think of today– there remain some Ancient Greek records from the city of Sybaris that discuss the granting of exclusive rights to inventors of unique new culinary dishes for a period of one year. The first modern patents, however, didn’t come about until the Medieval period. The first recorded industrial patent was granted in 1421 to Filippo Brunelleschi in, a Florentine engineer and architect who invented a new way to transport marble from quarries on the river Arno via barge. He also invented cranes, hoisting machines, and hydraulic machinery in order to complete the Florence Cathedral dome, a massive technological undertaking.

In 1449, the first English patent was granted to Flemish glassmaker John of Utynam for a twenty-year monopoly on making stained glass. Venice, too, was granting patent protections by this time– usually for glassmaking. The Venetian Patent Statute of 1474 established the first codified system of patent law in Europe, and remains the legal foundation of modern patent law. The statute granted protections to inventors who notified the Venetian office of Provisioners of Common of “any new ingenious contrivance, not made heretofore in our dominion" for a period of ten years, and even provided a legal avenue in the event of infringement– a public citation of the offender and a fine of 100 ducates. 

Queen Elizabeth I and her successor, King James I regularly granted letters of patent to favored courtiers, or to people who were prepared to pay for them, for monopolies on established industries. While this was used to bring money into the Crown’s coffers, it was widely abused and resulted in the 1624 Statute of Monopolies, another foundational development in modern patent law. It was enacted by Parliament to restrict the granting of letters of patent to novel and original inventions and to limit the number of years on the monopoly. 

More than a hundred years later saw the United States Patent Act of 1790, the first patent statute passed by the federal government of the United States of America. It passed on April 10, 1790, and the first American patent was granted to Samuel Hopkins for a method of producing potash (potassium carbonate). The statute lasted just three years until its revision in 1793, and United States patent law has undergone several revisions since. The United States Patent and Trademark Office was formed in 1836, and to this day serves as the national authority on the registration of patents, copyrights, trademarks, and other forms of intellectual property protection. 

Thousands of patents have been granted to New Britain inventors since the passage of the Patent Act, from the ubiquitous Universal Food Chopper, to bicycle coaster brakes, padlocks, corsets, coat hangers, tape rules, lathe chucks, gas masks, curry combs, ironing boards, prosthetic legs, bottle openers, coffee mills, bearings, egg beaters, planes, percolators, suspenders, and much more. New Britain even broke the world record for number of inventions in a single city in 1902! You can explore our gallery of New Britain patents below– these are just a few of the innovations patented in this city. 

To learn more about patents and the process of patenting an invention, visit the USPTO website here:

Click on a patent illustration below to view it in full!

Born December 6, 1869 in Enfield, Connecticut, Martha A. Parsons was a trailblazer for women in business, making herself absolutely indispensable in her work. 

She attended Enfield High School, then stenography training and took a job at the Morgan Envelope Co. in Springfield, Massachusetts as a stenographer, where she was paid a respectable salary of $10-12 a week. In 1893, she took another position at Landers, Frary & Clark of New Britain, despite Morgan Envelope Co. offering her higher pay ($16!) to stay. Parsons joined LF&C right around the time the trade name “Universal” was implemented for many of its products.

Parsons was so successful in her new position that by 1912 (the same year LF&C released their first Universal electric appliance, a “thermo cell” electric iron) she was made the executive secretary of the company, a high-level administrative position typically only done by men. Her duties would have included clerical and gate-keeping responsibilities, such as writing, reading, and screening correspondence, communicating with the board of directors, taking and submitting meeting minutes, coordinating the executive’s calendar, schedule, and itinerary, maintaining company records, and disseminating important information company-wide.

She signed letters and official press releases “M. A. Parsons” to disguise her gender, though it was revealed in a Hartford Courant article in 1914 regarding the newest, biggest building in New Britain– a seven-story factory to be occupied by Landers, Frary, & Clark. “Miss M. A. Parsons holds the honor of being secretary of such a large concern, a unique position for a woman to hold,” the article read. 

Parsons retired home to Enfield to live with her sisters in 1919– having seen the company through World War I, and by which point Landers, Frary & Clark was regularly producing electric appliances like toasters, percolators, ovens, and more.

Martha Parsons died in 1965 at the age of 95, and was inducted into the Connecticut Women’s Hall of Fame in 2010. You can learn more about her life and visit her home, now a museum operated by the Enfield Historical Society , and view her entry into the CTWHF .

Happy birthday to George Marcellus Landers: born on this day in 1813 to Marcellus and Marietta Hoyt Landers, George was a politician, businessman, and a profoundly influential figure in the city of New Britain. His family moved to Hartford, Connecticut when he was seven years old, and at sixteen he took an apprenticeship under New Britain carpenter Aaron Hart. By 1841, he had opened his own business on East Main St., making coat and hat hooks. In 1853, he formed a joint stock company called the Landers & Smith Manufacturing Company. When Smith retired after the 1862 acquisition of the Meriden company Frary, Cary & Co., the company reorganized and was renamed the Landers, Frary, & Clark Manufacturing Company. Landers, Frary, and Clark quickly expanded their manufacturing to include table cutlery, opening the Aetna Works plant just four years later in order to keep up with the expanding demand. 

In addition to business and manufacturing, Landers was also very active in politics. During the division of New Britain from Berlin, he advocated for the new city to have more than a single representative due to its much greater population, and was elected to the position in short order. He served three terms in the Connecticut House of Representatives, in 1851, 1867, and 1874. He also served in the Connecticut Senate in 1853, 1869, and 1873, as the State Bank Commissioner in 1874, and was elected to the forty-fourth and forty-fifth Congress in 1874 and 1876. He was responsible along with F.T. Stanley and H.E. Russell for bringing municipal water services to the city, as well as constructing sewers in the city. Additionally, Landers served on several boards and commissions for city schools and libraries and as a director of the New Britain Gas Co. and the New Britain National Bank

He died in 1895 at the age of 82, and is buried at Fairview Cemetery. His memorial plaque can be viewed in the Walnut Hill Park rotunda. You can learn more about the history of Landers, Frary & Clark here, or in the museum during our open hours, every Weds. and Sat. from 1:00 PM to 4:30 PM.

She married Buell Burdett Bassette on June 21, 1893 in Houston, Texas.They had three children:  Elizabeth Felton, Harold Burdett, and Ruth Candee. From 1905 to 1907 they resided in Washington, D.C., where Bassette went to the Capitol every day to observe Congress in session. In 1907, Buell, previously the manager of an oil company, took a position as cashier of the Stanley Rule & Level division of Stanley Works and the family relocated to New Britain. She became the first society editor of the New Britain Herald, writing under the pen name “Patricia”. Her home quickly became a gathering place for political activity in New Britain, Connecticut, including campaign rallies for Mayor George A. Quigley and other local politicians. She was a proponent of the Temperance movement (a prominent social movement in the United States from about 1800 to 1933 that criticized the consumption of alcohol and believed alcohol intoxication was immoral), and ran for the Board of Education on the Prohibition ticket, on which her husband was also a candidate for Governor.

Bassette regularly went to New York, Boston, and Hartford to march in suffrage parades. She was a founding member and served as the first president of several women’s political clubs and organizations, including the New Britain Suffrage Association, the New Britain League of Women Voters, and the New Britain Women’s Republican Club. Recalling one such march in New York City down 5th Avenue during a speech to the League of Women Voters in 1947, Bassette said that “Proudly carrying our banners uplifted, we felt like Christian soldiers marching as to war.” Her work for women’s political rights continued even after the passage of the 19th Amendment in August of 1920 and she became the first woman to vote in the city of New Britain.

Bassette went on to advocate for women’s rights to serve on juries throughout the 1930s with the League of Women Voters, who demanded the right to be considered for jury duty in the name of “female equality and citizenship”. In 1933, she also became the first woman to run for a seat in the Connecticut House of Representatives. Her campaign slogan was ‘For the Common Good of our Cosmopolitan City’, adapted from the Commonwealth Club motto, of which she was also a member. Bassette ran on a platform unaffiliated with any other member of the Republican party, and hoped “to surround herself with all groups representative of all the wards in the city.”

She continued her political advocacy and activism until her death, and was remembered by friends and community members as a hard-working, bold, and purposeful pioneer of women’s rights.

Lena Candee Bassette died March 10, 1957.

Citations

Kirby, A. M. (2014). Hometown Heroes and World Changers. In Legendary locals of New Britain, Connecticut (p. 112). essay, Arcadia Publishing Incorporated.

Newspaper clippings on Lena Bassette's political career, 1929-1933, Folder 48, Box 161, Gilbert Family Papers Collection, AC-159, Tyrrell Historical Library, Beaumont, Texas

Speech to League of Women Voters, 1947, Folder 57, Box 161, Gilbert Family Papers Collection, AC-159, Tyrrell Historical Library, Beaumont, Texas

Obituaries of Lena Candee Bassette, 1957, Folder 72, Box 161, Gilbert Family Papers Collection, AC-159, Tyrrell Historical Library, Beaumont, Texas

Miller, M. Catherine (2001-12-01). "Finding "the More Satisfactory Type of Jurymen": Class and the Construction of Federal Juries, 1926–1954". Journal of American History. 88 (3): 979–1005.

Further Reading

Pankhurst, E. S. (2013). The Suffragette Movement: An Intimate Account of Persons and Ideals - With an Introduction by Dr Richard Pankhurst. United Kingdom: Read Books Limited.

Raeburn, A. (1974). The Militant Suffragettes. Victorian (& Modern History) Book Club.

Marlow, J. (2013). Votes for Women: The Virago Book of Suffragettes. Virago.

Nicholls, et al. (2018). Make More Noise!: New Stories in Honour of the 100th Anniversary of Women's Suffrage. Nosy Crow.

Connie Wilson Collins (1928-2013) is considered one of New Britain’s greatest civic leaders and labor activists. Born in New York and raised in New Britain, she began her career in 1951 at Landers, Frary, & Clark and quickly became active in the plant’s union, United Electrical Workers of America Local 207. Later, she rose to the position of Union President, and  was the first black person and the first woman elected to that role at Landers (later General Electric). Connie spent her time there advocating for labor rights. By 1969, she became the first black person elected to public office in New Britain, and served several terms as an alderwoman on the Common Council. 

Within two years, Connie’s dedication to serving her community led her to co-found the Opportunities Industrialization Center of New Britain, along with Alton F. Brooks and Emma Pierce– she wrote the first grant of $25,000 in order to establish OIC in the city and served thirty years as president of the board of directors. Dedicated to empowering community members through economic and community partnerships and job training, the program celebrates 50 years of service this year.

During her lifetime, Connie was honored with numerous awards and citations, including the 1979 Connecticut’s Outstanding Woman of the Year award and the 1995 New Britain Black Leadership Solidarity Recognition Ceremony. Today, Connie’s legacy of community service is honored annually at the Queen Ann Nzinga Center with the Connie Wilson Collins Exceptional Women Concert, which honors outstanding women from the community of the Greater New Britain area.

After his honorable discharge from the Navy in 1949, Al worked briefly at both Landers, Frary, & Clark and Stanley Tools. He married his beautiful wife Eleanor in 1950, who worked in the New Britain Tax Department. In 1954, he took the New Britain Fire Department exam and scored top of his class– and found his lifelong passion. He served with NBFD for more than thirty years, retiring in 1984.

Al has been a volunteer at the ĐÇżŐ´ŤĂ˝ for twenty years. He winds the grandfather clock weekly, and performs clerical duties for the Museum. Come down and see Al’s smiling face on Wednesdays from 1:30 to 3 PM and ask him to show you his tattoos!

 In Connecticut, and up and down the East coast, the high concentration of military bases and camps led to the rapid spread of the virus. Now London saw the first cases in the state, and by the end of September the number of cases neared one thousand. In October alone, the flu caused more than 5000 fatalities. Without enough doctors, nurses, or hospital beds to respond to the needs of thousands of flu victims, Connecticut was in a state of desperation. Though New Britain initially offered to send aid to Camp Devens in Massachusetts, the city was rapidly overcome.  Private homes and clubs were opened to serve as emergency hospital facilities and volunteers stepped up for nursing duties, including the Hartford Golf Club. 

In New Britain, the New Britain Hospital could not contain the sheer number of flu victims. Two soldiers returning to New Britain from the war front via Fort Devens in Massachusetts are said to have brought the disease to New Britain on Sept. 18, 1918, according to the New Britain Health Dept. By early October, nurses and doctors themselves were falling ill. A Danbury News headline said the flu was “Sweeping Through New Britain Like Prairie Fire.  Many Are Dying.  Doctors Are Exhausted… Great Need of Nurses.”  With 1516 cases and counting, Mayor George A. Quigley’s offer of his home for a temporary overflow hospital was quickly accepted.

Among the hardest hit were immigrant populations: the poor and newly arrived immigrants living in crowded tenement houses, factory workers in close quarters spending long hours on the manufacturing floors, and groups of young single men or single women living together in boarding houses. With so few healthcare workers, it fell to outside help to provide aid to New Britain’s dying population. Dr. Theron Blackledge (1873-1959) traveled to New Britain from New Brighton, PA at the request of the State Board of Health and courageously went house to house to treat victims of the highly contagious disease. He was hired in order to help take the strain off New Britain’s local physicians, who were inundated with calls and overwhelmed by the needs of the city. “The physicians are working day and night, and many of them are beginning to show the strain,” the Courant reported. Dr. Blackledge wired home in early October to request more nurses, but they could not be spared, and thus he was left to attend both the hospital and homebound patients by himself.  As cases declined, the grateful city presented a gold Hamilton watch– the manufacturer’s highest quality at that time– inscribed from Mayor Quigley. The watch is now part of the ĐÇżŐ´ŤĂ˝â€™s permanent collection.

In November, the Hartford Courant declared the ninety-day pandemic deadlier than the four-year war that had just ended. Although cases of the influenza continued into 1919, the worst had passed and the city could begin recovery. New Britain alone had lost nearly 700 residents in the span of three months to the disease, and it remained the deadliest pandemic in American history until it was supplanted by the COVID-19 pandemic in late September, 2021.

For Kids and Families

Gilbert, J., & Forsyth, M. (2020). Daisy and the Deadly Flu: A 1918 Influenza Survival Story. Stone Arch Books, a Capstone imprint.

Getz, D., & McCarty, P. (2017). Purple Death: The Mysterious Spanish Flu of 1918. Square Fish.

Little, J. (2014). If I Die Before I Wake: The Flu Epidemic Diary of Fiona Macgregor, Toronto, Ontario, 1918. Scholastic Canada, Limited.

McElroy, J., & McElroy, S., MD (2014, November 12). Influenza. Sawbones: A Marital Tour of Misguided Medicine. Retrieved from  

Further Reading

Arcari, R. D. (2007). Spanish flu epidemic: Ninety Days that sickened Connecticut. Connecticut Explored. Retrieved from  

Drury, D. (2020, September 15). The Spanish Influenza Pandemic of 1918. Connecticut History | a CTHumanities Project. Retrieved from  

History.com Editors. (2010, October 12). Spanish Flu. History.com. Retrieved from  

Spinney, L. (2021). Pale Rider: The Spanish flu of 1918 and how it changed the world. Langara College.

Quinn, T. (2008). Flu: A Social History of Influenza. New Holland.

Cover image: World War 1 veterans march in a Red Cross Parade, May 1918. Photograph by Paul Glaeser. Images from the ĐÇżŐ´ŤĂ˝ Digital Archive, Fafnir News 1944-1945, Anchor Brand News 1943-1946, The Hartford Courant Apr 6, 1918.

If you would like to contribute the image or story of New Britain veteran to our archive, please contact Riza Brown, curator, at info@nbindustrial.org

Interested in learning more? ĐÇżŐ´ŤĂ˝ us in person to see our showcase Lest We Forget, now through December 1, 2021.

We will open our reconfigured museum at 59 W. Main Street in New Britain on November 3rd, 2021, and resume our normal open hours on Wednesdays and Saturdays from 1 PM to 4:30 PM.

Our staff looks forward to welcoming you!

Questions? Contact us at info@nbindustrial.org

Many of us are familiar with the idea that women have been involved in American war efforts since the early 20th century-- J. Howard Miller solidified the image of Rosie the Riveter in the American collective memory in 1942 with his famous illustration. The image of a young, white woman with impeccable makeup, the sleeve of her coveralls rolled up and hair covered with a red bandana, with the text ‘We Can Do It!” declared in bold font at the bottom conjures up a sense of patriotic duty. It’s believed to originally have been part of Westinghouse Electric Corporation’s wartime production campaign to recruit female workers. [1] In fact, the name ‘Rosie’ did not become associated with the image until Norman Rockwell’s 1943 version of the illustration appeared on the cover of The Saturday Evening Post, and it was likely that female industrial workers never even saw the image until it resurfaced decades later in an advertising campaign. [2] Still-- when we think of women in wartime, most of us think of Rosie. 

But who were the real Rosies of our factories and production lines? And even earlier, the thousands of American Red Cross nurses who served the nation in World War I? NBIM’s digital archives provide us with a look back at these women doing crucial jobs to support war efforts throughout the first half of the 20th century. 

World War I

In the industrial sector, early 20th century women found employment in factories and sweatshops. They operated sewing machines, sorted feathers, rolled tobacco, and other similar tasks. [3, 4] World War I saw a huge increase in demand for "pink-collar jobs." The military needed additional personnel to type letters, answer phones, and perform other secretarial tasks. Eleven thousand women worked for the U.S. Navy as stenographers, clerks, and telephone operators. [5] The Parker Shirt Company of New Britain employed dozens of women as seamstresses, and in the summer of 1917 fulfilled an order for 36,000  uniform shirts for the United States government.

In addition to factory work, nursing was also a defining aspect of women’s work. Red Cross nurses began providing military aid as early as 1898 during the Spanish-American War, and was formalized as the Red Cross Nursing Service in 1900 by federal charter. [6] This established a nursing reserve for aid and preparedness in times of war, and eventually led to the creation of the U.S. Army Nurse Corps, still in its infancy at the outbreak of World War 1 in 1914. These Red Cross nurses and Red Cross Reserve nurses played a crucial role in the war, both on the front lines and home front.

    In New Britain, that took the form of Red Cross parades, which snaked their way through the city and raised funds and recruited volunteers to war time services. Civilian nurses and factory workers all participated, as stated in this excerpt from a 1918 Hartford Courant article.

    “Preparations are now nearly complete for the big Red Cross drive from May 20 to 27, when New Britain must raise $100,000 of the 100,000,000 fund Uncle Sam needs for his loyal sons. New Britain’s quota of these sons has been among the first to enter the trenches and they have already covered themselves with glory, so that the people back home have every reason for giving the second war fund drive their most enthusiastic support…. The factories will close for  the afternoon, and they will be represented by thirty or more floats in the parade…. Every patriotic woman in New Britain is invited and expected to march… the representatives of the school are to be girls only. [The girls] are to be dressed in white and wear the Red Cross in some form.” [7]

Hundreds of New Britain women turned out in nursing uniform for these parades, many of them bearing signs and banners with slogans and the names of companies committed to the war effort. Large floats showcased their wartime production and stirred up patriotism for the cause. As one large float proclaimed, “Over there, over here!”

Additionally, Red Cross workers were responsible for manufacturing war goods. In New Britain factories, Red Cross workers made clothing for hospitals and refugees. Elsewhere women helped produce munitions, gas masks, and other front-line essentials.

World War II

By the time the Second World War broke out, even more women had joined the workforce as secretaries, teachers, nurses, and other traditionally “pink-collar” professions. Western women became increasingly reliant on their own employment to feed, clothe, and house themselves and their families, rather than their husbands or other patriarchs. Prior to the war, many of these women were from low-income and minority households. [8] In New Britain, many women were employed as industrial laundresses, seamstresses, and secretaries at companies like Fafnir Bearing, Landers, Frary & Clark, and North & Judd. 

This all changed when the United States joined the conflict in 1941. The War Manpower Commission was a federal agency established to increase the manufacture of war materials and was largely responsible for recruiting women to fill industrial jobs in order to balance the agricultural, manufacturing, and other needs of the nation on the warfront and the home front. [9] With this, thousands of American women were able to fill jobs left open by soldiers fighting in the European and Pacific theaters. 

By the end of World War I, twenty-four percent of workers in aviation plants were women. At the beginning of World War II, this number had increased dramatically. [10]Mary Anderson, director of theWomen’s Bureau, reported in January 1942 that about 2,800,000 women “are now engaged in war work, and that their numbers are expected to double by the end of this year.” [11]

    As the workforce shifted, so did the defense industry: New Britain’s factories pivoted from producing household goods and personal hardware to building planes, guns, and producing uniforms and equipment for the military. Landers, Frary & Clark made gun mounts, and mess kits; North & Judd began production of uniform buckles, clasps, and other fasteners under their “Anchor Brand” name. The American Hardware Corporation, Stanley, New Britain Machine Co., and Fafnir Bearing Co. all shifted operations to support the war, and in the process brought hundreds of New Britain women onto their factory floors. These jobs were critical and sometimes dangerous, but without them the defense industry would have floundered-- and women are the reason it did not.

At the end of the war, many women either returned voluntarily to homemaking or were otherwise laid off from their positions when men returned to fill them once more. However, women remained a permanent fixture in industrial jobs and their contributions during wartime led to the increased acceptance of working women through the latter half of the 20th century.

References:

1. “Rosie the Riveter.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

2. Sharp, Gwen; Wade, Lisa (January 4, 2011). "Sociological Images: Secrets of a feminist icon" . Contexts. 10 (2): p. 82–83.

3. Gourley, Catherine (2008). Gibson Girls and Suffragists: Perceptions of Women from 1900 to 1918, p. 103

4. "Sweatshops 1880-1940". National Museum of American History. 21 August 2017.

5.  Gourley 2008, p. 119

6. “Red Cross Nursing.” About Us: American Red Cross, www.redcross.org/about-us/who-we-are/history/nursing.html.

7.  â€œNew Britain to Raise $100,000 for Red Cross” The Hartford Courant, Pg. 20. May 12, 1918

8. “Women in the Work Force during World War II.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives.

9. "Franklin D. Roosevelt: Executive Order 9139 Establishing the War Manpower Commission". www.presidency.ucsb.edu. Archived from the original.

10. Adams, Frank S. "Women in Democracy’s Arsenal", New York Times, October 19, 1941.

11.  "About 3,000,000 Women Now in War Work" Science News Letter, January 16, 1943.

Admittance by reservation only in compliance with COVID-19 safety precautions. Please call (860) 832-8654 upon arrival. Tickets available at this link:

TAPLIN Double Dasher Beaters. Dover Egg Beaters. The latest and most improved types of egg beaters. A full variety of styles, sizes and prices, to meet every requirement. THE TAPLIN MFG. CO. New Britain, Conn. New York Office: 143 Chambers Street

Connecticut boasts its fair share of inventors, but did you know that many of the products that were produced in New Britain’s factories were invented by Black Americans? These innovators may not have lived in Connecticut, but they still made an impact on New Britain’s industrial legacy. You may even have the modern versions of some of these things in your home! Black inventors have helped to shape our lives and our factories, and here are just a few examples of their contributions.

Some of you may be familiar with Taplin Manufacturing Co, who made hand held egg beaters used all over the United States. Taplin produced egg beaters that became incredibly popular, and their improved design reduced the chore of beating egg whites from an exhausting effort to a five-minute breeze! The person responsible for this improvement to mechanical egg beater design was Willis Johnson of Cincinnati, Ohio, who patented and improved the mechanical egg beater () on February 5, 1884. This patent was actually intended not just for eggs, but for batters and confections of all kinds! It was the predecessor of the modern electric mixer, later produced by another New Britain company: Landers, Frary & Clark under their Universal trademark.

Speaking of Universal-- both the refrigerator and oil stove were improved significantly by inventor John Stanard. His use of cold-air ducts was the first iteration of the manually-cooled refrigerator, which he patented in 1891. () This design allowed cool air to circulate throughout the unit without needing to open the doors to the ice-chamber when retrieving food from within, as well as a revolutionary cold-water tap! This design was a direct predecessor of the refrigerators later produced by Landers, Frary, & Clark and was the first instance of the “fridge-freezer” combination appliance.

Even more notably, Standard created the oil stove that we still use today: the small, portable device used in chafing dishes and in train cars. Standard’s oil stove (U.S. Patent #413,689) was more complex than the chafing dishes we are used to seeing, in that it has attachments for different methods of cooking, including chambers for broiling and baking, and a platform for frying and boiling. You can see examples of a simplified version of his invention in the Universal portable alcohol stoves.

All of these inventions are things we still use today in their modern forms, and we wouldn’t have them without the contributions of Black Americans. Next time you use your refrigerator or electric mixer, take a moment to reflect on their origins!

Photograph of Lewis Latimer statue holding a lightbulb and his notebook outside the Margaret E. Morton Government Center in Bridgeport, CT. [Photograph courtesy of CT Post.]

Patent draft illustration of Latimer's carbon filament process.

You can read the full text of Lewis Latimer's carbon filament patent here:

You can read the full text of Lewis Latimer's carbon filament patent here:

Lewis Howard Latimer, born in Chelsea, Massachusetts in 1848, was the only black member of Thomas Edison’s research team. His work was crucial to the development of the lightbulb, and without it, we would not have modern lighting as we know it today. In his adulthood, Latimer lived in a section of Bridgeport’s South End known then as “Little Liberia” a neighborhood established in the early 19th century by free blacks.

Latimer can claim several patents to his name, including an improved toilet system for railroad cars (U.S. Patent 147,363), the electric lamp (U.S. Patent 247,097), a supporter for the electric lamp (U.S. Patent 255,212), an early air conditioning unit (U.S. Patent 334,078), a locking coat rack (U.S. Patent 557,076), and a lamp fixture (U.S. Patent 968,787). The patent he is most well-known for, however, is U.S. Patent 252,386, his improved process for manufacturing carbon filaments, enabling the production of a lightbulb with twice the lifespan of its precursor.

Latimer enlisted in the U.S. Navy at just fifteen years old, where he served as a Landsman on the USS Massasoit. After the end of the Civil War, he received an honorable discharge and went on to work for a patent law firm as an office boy, where he learned drafting. By the end of his tenure there, he had been promoted to head draftsman. [FouchĂŠ, Rayvon, Black Inventors in the Age of Segregation: Granville T. Woods, Lewis H. Latimer, and Shelby J. Davidson]

In 1876, Latimer was employed by Alexander Graham Bell to draft his patents for the telephone, and then only three years later moved to Bridgeport, Connecticut to work for the U.S. Electric Lighting Company, a fierce competitor with Thomas Edison. [Clarke, John Henrik (1983). Ivan Van Sertima (ed.). Blacks in Science: Ancient and Modern.] There, he invented a modification to the process for making carbon filaments which aimed to reduce breakages during the carbonization process. This modification consisted of placing filament blanks inside a cardboard envelope during carbonization.

In 1884, he was invited to work for Thomas Edison’s research team. He was responsible not only for research and development, but translating their research data into German and French. [Center, Smithsonian Lemelson (1999-02-01). "Innovative Lives: Lewis Latimer (1848-1928): Renaissance Man". Lemelson Center for the Study of Invention and Innovation.]

Latimer was later inducted into the Edison Pioneers, an organization composed of former employees of Thomas Edison who had worked with the inventor in his early years. Latimer was the first person of color to join this group of 100. He is also an inductee of the National Inventors Hall of Fame for his work on electric filament manufacturing techniques.

According to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, he was also an accomplished writer. His publications include a book of poetry called Poems of Love and Life, a technical book, Incandescent Electric Lighting, publications in African-American journals, and a petition to Mayor Seth Low to restore a member to the Brooklyn School Board. He played the violin and flute, painted portraits and wrote plays, and was an early advocate of civil rights. In 1895 Lewis wrote a statement in connection with the National Conference of Colored Men about equality, security, and opportunity. ["Lewis H. Latimer House". Landmarks Preservation Commission. 1995.]

Lewis Latimer died December 11, 1928, in Flushing, NY, aged 80.

You can read the full text of his carbon filament patent

Sarah (Marshall) Boone was born enslaved in New Bern, North Carolina in 1832. She married very young (only 14 or 15) and moved to New Haven after her freedom was purchased, ostensibly by her new husband, a freedman. They had eight children and had relocated to Connecticut by 1856, six years before the start of the Civil War. (Sarah Boone Invents A Better Ironing Board, Ainissa Ramirez, CTExplored, 2020)

In 1892, Sarah, now working as a dressmaker, invented and patented an early version of the modern ironing board with collapsible legs. Prior to her invention, women had been pressing and ironing on tables or a plank rested across two chairs. (Created Equal: The Lives and Ideas of Black American Innovators, William Morrow, 1993)

“Sarah Boone was one of many dressmakers in New Haven, and the listing of her name in the city directory after 1861 and her proximity to Yale’s campus suggests that she made dresses for both Black and white clients, a common practice according to Rollins Osterweis’s Three Centuries of New Haven, 1638-1938.” ( Ramirez, 2020).

“My invention relates to an improvement in ironing-boards, the object being to produce a cheap, simple, convenient, and highly effective device, particularly adapted to be used in ironing the sleeves and bodies of ladies garments,” Her patent application states, “My improved device is not only adapted for pressing the inside and outside seams-of the sleeves of ladies waists and mens coats. but will be found particularly convenient, also, in pressing curved waist-seams wherever they occur.”

Sarah’s invention “is the predecessor to our modern ironing board, containing many similar elements: it narrowed at the top to fit inside clothes; it had padding on the side to prevent unwanted impressions; and it was collapsible to be stored easily.” (, Anissia Ramirez, The Hartford Courant, 2020).

Sarah Marshall Boone died in 1904 and is buried in a family plot in Evergreen Cemetery in New Haven.

You can find the full details of her patent application .

[Thanks to for many of the resources used in this feature!]