A LOOK AT THE EARLY SAN FRANCISCO GLASS WORKS
The year of 1860 was a truly historical milestone for the
early manufacture of glass in San
Francisco, including the entire West Coast. The
partnership of Francis Cutting and Augustus Baker had already produced a small
amount of pickle bottles by late in 1859 but, with no experience in glass
making, this attempt was extremely challenging for them. The reject rate for
passable bottles must have been quite high but it appears that Baker was still
optimistic about success. Judging from Baker leaving their partnership in the
pickle business, and forming a separate partnership in the California Glass
Works, with Cutting, it would appear that both were still hoping the venture
would work but Cutting was not willing to impact the assets of the pickle
business if the glass works venture failed.
Daily Alta California, January 3, 1860
The only known intact specimen of the Baker and Cutting pickle jar, blown in 1859.
A surprisingly large number of the Baker & Cutting pickle bottles have been excavated over the years, except all but one have been found in pieces.
The partners earnestly continued their quest for a
successful glass works in an environment that was new to such a venture.
Expertise was not easy to find in California
and their search for competent glass blowers was extended as far away as Wheeling, Virginia.
After a month of
trials Baker and Cutting placed this advertisement in The Wheeling Daily Intelligencer of Wheeling, Virginia.
The ad ran for most of February and March 1860.
It is not known if the plea for experienced bottle blowers
was successful, but it is evident that Francis Cutting became weary of the
mounting expenses involved in getting the glass works to a point of success. He
apparently decided to cut his losses and ended his partnership with Baker in
the San Francisco Glass Works at the end of February 1860.
Daily Alta California, March 5, 1860
To say that A.D. Baker is not well documented in the record
while he was operating the San Francisco Glass Works is an understatement, as
newspaper information about this new and important California venture is quite scarce. The
attempt to produce good glass for the bottling of their food products finally
caused Francis Cutting to abandon the project as noted by the dissolution of
their partnership in the glass works on February 29, 1860. Baker continued on
his own, and whether he was ready to operate a fully functioning glass works as
a profitable venture is a cause for speculation – but he decided to open for
business anyway in early March 1860. This was most likely a move of
desperation, for surely, he was heavily in debt at this point. Regardless, in
the next few weeks Baker produced a number of historically significant bottles,
most of which were not lettered, which does make it difficult to identify them.
Just three embossed medicine bottles were found in the wastage area of the
works in such a quantity as to assume that they had to have been blown at this
factory.
A.D. Baker’s opening
of his San Francisco
Glass Works occurred on March 6, 1860. He advertised the sale of “WINE, SODA,
PICKLE, And most kinds of BOTTLES, TELEGRAPH INSULATORS, etc.” (Daily Alta California, March 11, 1860)
Probably in a move of
desperation to garner some operating capital, Baker advertised for sale three
tons of fire clay. This would have been product to be used in the construction
of pots for melting glass. (Daily Alta
California, April 6, 1860)
The terminal date of the San Francisco Glass Works under the
direction of Augustus Baker was almost certainly near the end of April 1860,
with a total run of almost two months.
The exit from San
Francisco by A.D. Baker was unceremonious to say the
least. Based solely on a small newspaper article containing a confusing error,
it is clear that Baker skipped town due to mounting debts that he could not
pay. The noted error, shown in the actual article below, states Baker as the
proprietor of the San Francisco Iron Works, instead of the San Francisco Glass
Works. This can be well documented as an error since no person by the name of
Baker was ever noted as the proprietor of the San Francisco Iron Works. And,
further, the San Francisco Iron Works was not even established until 1865.
There is some indication that Baker may have left for Australia for several years but it has not been proven to be the same A.D. Baker. (Sacramento Daily Union, April 26, 1860)
The article notes that the buyer of the San Francisco Glass
Works was Lucien Bell, who was obviously a victim of fraud, and who apparently
was a novice at making such a purchase. Lucien Bell is non-existent in San Francisco in 1860, or
any other time, but there was a tea
broker listed in the SF directory for that year named Lucius Bell. First noted
in San Francisco
as early as 1852, he initially worked for his brothers-in-law, the Goodman
Brothers, who were general commission merchants. Bell
later partnered with Washington Elliot as grocers in San Francisco in 1858 and 1859. He was
apparently not a good money manager and had to file for insolvency in both
previous businesses. Then, in 1860, he was a tea broker, which was his last
business listing in San Francisco.
If the article shown above is correct, and Baker did sell his heavily indebted
business to Bell, this event must have been a
heavy financial burden on Bell, and Baker likely
wasted no time in removing himself from San
Francisco. In
fact, to further document Baker’s removal from San Francisco, 12 cases of pipe clay in the
name of A.D. Baker were auctioned off to pay for unclaimed freight in July
1860. (Daily Alta California, July
11, 1860)
Bell
was discharged from his debts in April 1860, probably due to the unusual
circumstances of being duped by Baker. (San
Joaquin Republican, April 20, 1860). Unfortunately, Lucius Bell found himself in the same
predicament about a year later when he filed for bankruptcy and his assets were
ordered to be sold. (Daily Alta
California, April 14, 1861) Bell then moved
to Napa for a few years and then, about 1865,
moved back East to Brooklyn,
New York, where he died on
November 18, 1906. He was buried in Rochester,
New York.
As fate would have it the brother of Sarah L. Bell, the wife
of Lucius Bell, was a wealthy banker named James Harvey Goodman. He left a
trust fund to Bell’s
wife in the amount of $136, 800, which passed to her upon Goodman’s death in
1891. (Napa Register, April 24, 1891)
After a long history of business failures in both California
and New York, his wife finally brought some
financial stabilization to the family, and Bell retired from business.
In some way, whether through a court ordered sale, or some
other unknown conveyance, the San Francisco Glass Works that had become
virtually abandoned by its owners, must have passed to someone. The next name
in the written historical record that is associated with its name, is J.
Lambert. The most likely candidate would be Joseph Lambert, who was also
experiencing some difficult employment issues in 1860.
A newspaper article fairly secures his full name: “ OFFICERS
OF THE ALTA CALIFORNIA TELEGRAPH COMPANY.- An annual meeting of the Alta
California Telegraph Company was held at their office in this city last
evening, and the following elected officers: W. W. Welty, President; J.M.
McDonald, Superintendent; J.W. Coleman, Secretary; R.H. McDonald, C.H. Swift,
John Pattison and Joseph Lambert, Directors”.(Sacramento Daily Union, September 7, 1858)
Likely the same Joseph Lambert is listed in the 1859 SF
directory as “Lambert, Joseph, telegraph,
bds, Hotel International.”
The telegraph company was hit with what was likely its death
blow in mid-1860. “Morse et al. vs The
Alta Telegraph Co. et al - A suit has
been commenced in the U.S. Circuit Court by S.F.B. Morse, F. O. J. Smith,
Theodore Little, and George T. Cobb, residents of various Eastern States,
against the Alta Telegraph Company, Jas. M. McDonald and Joseph Lambert, of
this State, to restrain them from using Morse’s telegraphic patent, to compel
them to account for profits which they have made by its use, and to require
them to pay damages done to plaintiffs by its use. The argument in the case is
to be heard on the 19th inst.” (Daily Alta California, June 12, 1860)
J. Lambert was the operating agent of the Alta Telegraph
Company for San Francisco
in 1860, and as a member of the reporter’s union, was one of those who welcomed
the first Pony Express rider of the Overland Pony Express. (Daily Alta California, April 13, 1860).
A week later a newspaper advertisement documented that Lambert had been
selected as the San Francisco
agent for the new Pony Express service. (Daily
Alta California, April 20, 1860, p. 4)
August of 1860 is the earliest that the glass works of
Lambert & Co. had successfully produced glass, with the silica component
coming primarily from the extensive quartz deposits near Folsom. The absence of
the darker elements, as found in most sand grains, would, theoretically produce
a very light colored batch. Perhaps the most difficult part of using quartz
rock would be grinding it finely enough to easily melt and thoroughly mix with
the other ingredients of soda and lime, as well as the frit.
News article
explaining Lambert’s testing and using quartz for use in glass making. (Sacramento Daily Union, August 16, 1860)
But, how do we know that the J. Lambert noted above, is the
same person who operated the San Francisco Glass Works, after the exit of A.D.
Baker? One small news article mentioning a display of bottles at the Mechanic’s
Institute Fair by the San Francisco Glass Works, includes its business address
as 153 Montgomery Street.
This address is the same as that of Joseph Lambert for his business office.
(San Francisco Daily Herald, September
10, 1860)
Note the same address
for both the California
Glass Works and Lambert’s Pony Express Office is 153 Montgomery St. Also of interest –
this ad is the last for Lambert as agent for the Pony Express. (Daily Alta California, August 24, 1860)
J.W. Brown became the second San Francisco agent
and the office was moved to Olney’s Washoe Exchange at the corner of Montgomery and Merchants
Streets in September 1860.
Aside from a few additional news reports about the glass
works display, virtually no information has been located, and it must be
concluded that the works were not successful and closed its doors shortly after
the fair. Only one small note has been located to date. (For additional contemporary
news reports see EARLY GLASSWORKS OF CALIFORNIA, by Warren B. Friedrich. N.D.)
Essentially, this
article is championing a glass factory in the town of Folsom since that is
where the raw material – Folsom quartz – was mined to make soda bottles for a
Folsom proprietor. The article is obviously referencing the California Glass
Works of Lambert & Co. To my knowledge no soda bottles have been found in
or around Folsom that may fit the description of those noted. (Marysville Daily Appeal, September 21, 1860)
Certainly, there are soda bottles whose origins are in
question and may actually be attributed to Lambert’s factory, even though they
are extremely rare.
This rare partial
bottle of Napa Soda is a fine candidate for
being made at one of the iterations of the California
Glass Works. It is market P & W SF, near the base. The crudity of the mold is nearly childish in nature and surely
could not have come from any glass factory with experience. I have seen two
other specimens of Napa
Soda bottles, almost clear in color but also lacking in execution of the mold.
The glass color could certainly fit that expected if Lambert was using pure
quartz rock.
Little to no information was gleaned about Lambert until a possible mention in September of 1861, when a news article
noted a meeting of the Silver City Quartz Mill Company was to take place.
Lambert was noted as a president of the company (Daily Alta California, September 28, 1861, p. 2) Another news article a month later excoriated
Lambert for acting without authority of the Board of Trustees of the Milling
Company. (Sacramento Daily Union,
October 12, 1861, p. 2) At a meeting of
the stockholders, he was absolved of any wrongdoing, with the members noting,
“By virtue of the By-Laws, as amended, he is General Superintendent and Manager
of the Company’s mill and property, and not subject to suspension or removal by
the Board of Trustees. (Daily Alta
California, October 16, 1861, p. 2) Keep
in mind, however, that it is not possible to determine if this is the same
Lambert. In later news articles there are too many John Lamberts to determine
if it is the same person, so he becomes effectively lost.
To summarize the timeline of this early San Francisco glass
works, that began simply as a side business of the Baker & Cutting pickle
trade in 1859, and by the beginning of 1860, was to be an entity in its own
right, but quickly failed. It is highly unlikely that it was ‘in blast’ during
much of its short lifespan. The following timeline is noted:
The California
Glass Works
December 31, 1859 to February 29, 1860. Baker & Cutting,
proprietors.
February 29, 1860 to about April 22, 1860. Augustus D.
Baker, proprietor.
About April 22, 1860 to about May 1, 1860. Lucius Bell, owner. (Was probably
never in blast under his ownership.)
About May 1, 1860 to about October 1, 1860. Joseph Lambert,
proprietor. (It was probably idle for at least the first three months of his
ownership.)
****************************************
