Yuku free message boards

From what I have researched, the brief-lived firm was named "Thomas & Edwards Company, Fishing Tackle Manufacturers." Aside from the grand name, the enterprise is assumed to be located at 52 Center Street--FE's initial business address--and is situated about 400 feet from Edwards’ home. Most of the rods components are Landman's, so any & all confusion is understandable. But otherwise, what a mystery---

Housatonic notes Houston's remark that Edwards left town after the rod shop's failure. He did so--but only long enough to marry Bertha Ford & return. Brewer town records from 1901 note that Edwards lives down the street (where he stays until he finally moves to CT in 1919 after the sale to Winchester). So Houston's comment is highly suspect, particularly if he means to imply that Edwards left town w/ a cloud over his head. He was gone for a couple months at most.

And the interview later w/ Thomas is credible--why would Thomas make up something that made Edwards look good? He could have simply quietly noted that they had optimistically set something up, but because of X, Y & Z, they never built a rod. Instead he affirms the firm's existence in Amer. Sportman.

This is one of the great & endless controversies, no doubt. It's a shame there's no affirmative paperwork, nor as Housatonic notes, no marked rods. On the other hand, there are no marked TE&Hs or TE&P rods: each & every rod w/out exception is marked Kosmic or Walton. Edwards & Thomas made rods for 5 yrs for Spalding w/out adding a marker's mark--why would T&E not have done the same for the Empire City Special Grade rods (& for other outfitters)? In fact they wouldn't have had a qualm.

As for the mathematics, the two working for 18 months could have made more than 200 rods (assuming a rod/40 hrs). And who knows how many are still kicking around? And whether the rods surviving are T&Es? As noted by Jeff & Bruce, Landman was cranking out a similar rod. And the almost generic rod was made for many end sellers. At the time Campbell published, he was as close to a T&E expert as existed. And there was no doubt in Campbell's mind that T&E made rods, or that he owned a number of them. We think we know much more today than what he knew in 1997. I don't believe it.

It's actually refreshing to see this old canard raised again. Every time this sort of argument is dragged out, everyone gets a chance to toss out bits & pieces. Sometimes new stuff emerges, or clarifications, or genuine howlers. On this topic, unfortunately, no one's an expert, & we're all continuing to pick away at it. I hope that someday someone like Jeff or Bruce turns up an unexpected document, or piece of ephemera that suddenly clears the smoke away from this topic. I for one would love to know (1) whether the firm actually made rods, (2) how many, (3) how long it lasted, if it existed, (4) why it broke up, & last (5) whether there is a definitive, slam-dunk method to identify T&Es vs. Landman's, etc. But I suspect these are mere dreams.

Jeff you are so right about the use of "factory." For instance, when Spalding sold Kosmic/TE&P (or T&P!) to USN&T, USN&T mentions acquiring the factory. USN&T first announces its purchase in a New York Times ad in April 1894. The same month (actually less than a week later) Forest & Stream reports that USN&T, as the new owner of Kosmic rods, has opened a store on Broadway and “now owns the complete plant and factory.”

'Complete plant & factory'? By that point we're down to Thomas & Payne & a couple apprentices... No doubt there were some legitimate (under our current definition) factories out there making rods. In '87 Spalding's Michigan factory burns down--it had been a sizable facility. T.B. Mayell had a large 'plant.' 25 yrs later Winchester worked from a truly awesome factory. But the Kosmic crew & its later spinoffs worked from far more modest quarters.

On reflection I don't think that the number of EC rods (my memory is that Dave wrote 500+) kicking around means much. First, I'm not sure how anyone could make such an estimate. We have to remember we're living in a rarified atmosphere--we visit places that have vintage rods, seek out vintage shows, read catalogues from vintage rod dealers, know collectors, share stories & information in forums like this great one. So everything we do amplifies the sense that there are large numbers. In other words, we know the people who own & collect the rods. In my own small circle I know collectors who have together about 18 EC rods--not bad, but far from 500.

Second, presuming T&E existed and made some of these rods, when they stopped why shouldn't other firms have stepped into that void? Certainly if ECs were made over a period of 15-20 years, there'd be 100s of them, perhaps, still around...

And agreed, confirmatory paperwork would be a blessing. When I was in Brewer a couple months ago, I didn't go through business records in the library. Given that Brewer is the epicenter, checking town records for that period would make sense. Jeff, have you already done so, or should I make a return trip? I'll be back in the area in Sept. and could do that research...

A correction from one of my earlier posts: Brewer records show Edwards back in the area by 1899. Also Dave, his studio address is 3 State Street & that remains his business address through 1919. From 1901 through 1915, Edwards is listed in the Bangor-Brewer Business Directory as “E. William Edwards, Photographer, Studio 3 State St., Near Bridge, Brewer, ME.” From photographs of the building, we know the studio was at Penobscot Square, and that his studio shared space with V. A. Kenney Co., the Merrill Drug Co., and at least two other small businesses. A large oval sign that read, Edwards Photographic Studio, hung on the third floor of the building. (I have a photograph of the building at the time.)

Last, it occurs to me that Black wrote me a couple months about a local newspaper report on the partnership (T&E) that said that business is thriving. He felt that was the best confirmation going for the partnership. I haven't personally seen the article, but it's existence seems as solid a proof as the interview with Thomas. Has anyone who's part of this thread seen the article?