Anyone know anything about Leeds pen company?

I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the
clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with his
last name...

He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either.
Can anyone help?

Thanks,
Gerald Martin

Gerald Martin wrote:

I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the
clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with his
last name...

He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either.
Can anyone help?

Rather low end cheaply made pens. Just a most tiny step above the total
nonamies junkers IMHO. Sorry I don't know more but as I say so many
times there were 100s of companies like that about which little is
known. For the simple reason their quality don't attract the attention
nor interest of the average collector. Unlike even Wearever, which if
not known for quality as least cannot be ignored due to sheer quanity if
nothing else. Frank

Well the basic history can be summed up in a few lines:

During the war Parker and Sheaffer went over (mostly) to war production of
things that needed their technology like bomb sights and the government gave
out contracts to companies to make pens to give to soldiers with the
parameter being that they be available for government purchase for a cent or
two each.

These companies who had virtually no history in pen production (like
Wearever, Leeds, Stratford, Majestic, Ambassador etcetcetc) started
production as a result of this, either to compete for those contracts or to
compete on the consumer market with the companies which did get those
contracts. (not sure I can see anyone ever wanting to write a book about
how people produce junk when pushed although I did have a stab at it in my
last book "Fountain Pens - Their History and Art" and did try to warn
collectors to steer clear of such companies in my first book "Fountain
Pens - A Collector's Guide")

Licensed to Quill


"Gerald Martin" wrote in message
...
in article , at wrote
on
8/1/03 8:07 PM:

Gerald Martin wrote:

I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the
clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with
his
last name...

He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either.
Can anyone help?

Rather low end cheaply made pens. Just a most tiny step above the total
nonamies junkers IMHO. Sorry I don't know more but as I say so many
times there were 100s of companies like that about which little is
known. For the simple reason their quality don't attract the attention
nor interest of the average collector. Unlike even Wearever, which if
not known for quality as least cannot be ignored due to sheer quanity if
nothing else. Frank

Thanks, Frank. Is there a book g that might contain all these little
company histories, per chance?

Love YOUR book, btw.

Gerald

Licensed to Quill wrote:

Well the basic history can be summed up in a few lines:

During the war Parker and Sheaffer went over (mostly) to war production of
things that needed their technology like bomb sights and the government gave
out contracts to companies to make pens to give to soldiers with the
parameter being that they be available for government purchase for a cent or
two each.

These companies who had virtually no history in pen production (like
Wearever, Leeds, Stratford, Majestic, Ambassador etcetcetc) started
production as a result of this, either to compete for those contracts or to
compete on the consumer market with the companies which did get those
contracts. (not sure I can see anyone ever wanting to write a book about
how people produce junk when pushed although I did have a stab at it in my
last book "Fountain Pens - Their History and Art" and did try to warn
collectors to steer clear of such companies in my first book "Fountain
Pens - A Collector's Guide")


Waaaaaaay wrong at least as regards to Wearever and Stratford. Both
were around well before World War One in fact. Both heavily reduced
production during WW2 as they switched to the war effort. Both had to
produce many of their pens with 14kt gold nibs during the war due to the
steel shortage. Both greatly increased the quality and price of their
pens during the war as a result. Both were selling many pens in the
$2.75 each and up area during the war, a far cry from the 25 and 50cent
models they concentrated on during the depression and never did any of
them ever sell pens for a cent or two. Thats silly.

Stratford was the Saltz pen company. I can't say for certain what they
made for the war effort but I do have documents from Saltz explaing why
their pens were in short supply due to war production at their plant.
Wrearever, among other things made valve stems and stem covers for them
for use in Army Jeeps during the war and as I have explained before they
were able to use some of their valve stem covers as blind caps on some
of their WW2 button fillers.

I have sold individual Wearever and Stratford pens for as much as $200.
for a single one. Both companies made some OUTSTANDING high quality
pens. Granted such pens are rare, but to say they only made pure junk
is misleading and wrong. I'd refer you to the Lady Wearever article I
had in the PCA Penant a couple years ago, and next issue will have an
brief item on the 1968 Limited Edition Wearever Sterling Overlay.

What I object to most is the statement that these two companies had no
history of pen production. Wearever was easily the largest pen company
on earth by the 1950s. They started about 1912. Saltz was smaller and
possibly raveged by tragedy but was still in business in the late 1980's
making ballpoints and may in fact still be around although I have not
checked that. Wearever pens are still made although they now
concentrate on advertisng pens. These two companies are among the
longest surving pen companies of all times.

I will gladly pay $100 each for every mint WW2 Stratford Maganetic pen
you or anyone else can get me. Boxed set with pencil $200. I won't
list all the rarer higher quality Wearevers because that would take too
long, but one of their better ones was a 51 clone that had a life
guarantee, sold for $5.00 and had a very heavy high quality gold FILLED
cap. During the War even Parker expressed fear of Wearever's
semi-upscale movment in pens in an article in Forbe's magazine about the
pen industry. (I have the article.)

The basic history of both companies has not been written and both are
perhaps far more complex and interesting than Parker, Sheaffer or
Waterman. With Saltz it ranges from a Jewish family coming here from
Germany around 1900, to moving its business back to Germany around 1930
when the depression hurt them so badly here, trying to work with the
changes there in their German homeland thru the 30s and (or so many have
said, without documentation I am aware of yet) eventually vanishing in
the Holocuast, and meanwhile the US end of operations trying to keep up
their part of the pen business and sucessfully outlasting those that
could not.

Wearever, under the Kahn family survived successfully until the family
head David passed on and the remaing family members sold the business to
Dixon about 15 years ago which continues the name in a, granted, greatly
reduced manner, but at least the name survives to this day.

To call these companies pure junk to avoid is unfair and shows an
elitist attitude that only expensive pens are good pens. Sure both
companies did make tons of low end junk. But they knew their market and
were fully capable of making pens that could WRITE as well and be as
dependable as any pen made at any price when they choose to make a
better pen. Which they both did on at least some occasions. Plus they
showed ingenious design in some cases never before or since seen in
pens, such as the Magnetic that remains one of the most unique pens ever
made. End of rant. Other than to repeat that old saying,

"One man's junk is another's man's treasure." Frank

Licensed to Quill wrote:

And I still insist that they produced virtually no quality pens. I have yet
to see a quality Wearever in 25 years of collecting and the same goes for
Stratford. I accept that Stratford was the low end of Salz (end meaning end
of production of pens rather than / as well as end of the market) and I
certainly agree that Salz had an interesting history (which had nothing to
do
with producing quality pens) but I still maintain that you would be hard
pushed to find any quality Stratford pens.

I am not being intransigent on this: Show me a .jpg of any wearever or
ambassador pen which in ANY way rivals the big five (Sheaffer Parker
Watermans, Swan, or Montblanc depending where you are) in quality that
demonstrates I am wrong.


I again refere you to the Penant article on the Wearever Lady Fair
series, which showed a two page color spread of their pens that are
identical in quality to the Lady Sheaffer's of the same era. In fact
even I cannot tell the two brands apart until I remove the cap and see
the nib. Like Sheaffer Wearever used a smooth stainless steel nib for
those pens. Sheaffer did make some of theirs with 14kt nibs, but only
the upper end of the line.

All Wearevers over 1.95 used gold FILLED trim that is more imprevious to
wear than any pen made at any price today using cheap plated trim. In
fact the gold filled trim of Wearvers seems to stand up every bit as
good as Sheaffer, and FAR better than Waterman or Parker of the 40s. Of
course not one out of 20 Wearever pens of that era have the gold filled
trim, because probably less than 10% of their production was in the pens
in the 1.95 to $5.00 range. The rest was in the dollar or even less
range.

As I said the next Penant may have pics of the sterling Wearever LE of
1968. Its really not super quality but does show they could do a
sterling overlay if they wanted to. I have copies of many of the
Consumer reports you mention and they also come down rather hard on
Parker, Waterman and Sheaffer of the era and picked Venus as the best
fountain pen back then in some of their reports.

As for Stratfords I assume you have not seen the Magnetic which is a
button filler with gold filled trim and a beautiful large well made (and
heavy thick gold) 14kt nib with "Stratford" in a nice script logo. To
borrow Parker's term "Like a pen from another planet," being streamlined
like a Buck Rogers Space Ship.

I'm not arguing Wearever or Stratford made plenty of high quality pens.
They did not. They were sub Esterbrook on average. A working man's
pens that WORKED. They knew their market. Its like asking if today's
19 cent Bic is a quality pen. You would probably say it is not. But it
a highly reliable pen, in fact it does write as good or better than the
average $500 ballpoint which just holds some other brand refill that may
not write as well. I would maintain the quality of a 19cent Bic is
extremely high when it comes to writing. The same goes for a Wearever
that sold for a buck way back when. I am usually amazed how very well a
properly restored dollar Wearever can write.

Let's agree to disagree becaause I know I will never change your mind
and you cannot change mine when it comes to what each of us defines as
quality vs price, then or now. Frank

Frank

I disagree with you strongly on what you say in your last paragraph and
accept all of the rest: I will have my mind changed when I see something
that changes it

AND my current project is a new book featuring those kind of pens. There IS
a relationship between quality and price but it isn't an absolute one: Pier
used to introduce people to fountain pens by opening up a booth in Cambridge
Mass and selling vintage pens which write well and look quite nice to
students who had never seen a fountain pen before. He thereby introduced
lots of people to collecting / using vintage pens (later) which were of
higher quality.

Very few people indeed start collecting by retail-buying and then starting
to write with a Coronet or a No:7 with a blue nib or a MontBlanc safety.

JR

wrote in message ...
Licensed to Quill wrote:

And I still insist that they produced virtually no quality pens. I have
yet
to see a quality Wearever in 25 years of collecting and the same goes
for
Stratford. I accept that Stratford was the low end of Salz (end meaning
end
of production of pens rather than / as well as end of the market) and I
certainly agree that Salz had an interesting history (which had nothing
to
do
with producing quality pens) but I still maintain that you would be hard
pushed to find any quality Stratford pens.

I am not being intransigent on this: Show me a .jpg of any wearever or
ambassador pen which in ANY way rivals the big five (Sheaffer Parker
Watermans, Swan, or Montblanc depending where you are) in quality that
demonstrates I am wrong.


I again refere you to the Penant article on the Wearever Lady Fair
series, which showed a two page color spread of their pens that are
identical in quality to the Lady Sheaffer's of the same era. In fact
even I cannot tell the two brands apart until I remove the cap and see
the nib. Like Sheaffer Wearever used a smooth stainless steel nib for
those pens. Sheaffer did make some of theirs with 14kt nibs, but only
the upper end of the line.

All Wearevers over 1.95 used gold FILLED trim that is more imprevious to
wear than any pen made at any price today using cheap plated trim. In
fact the gold filled trim of Wearvers seems to stand up every bit as
good as Sheaffer, and FAR better than Waterman or Parker of the 40s. Of
course not one out of 20 Wearever pens of that era have the gold filled
trim, because probably less than 10% of their production was in the pens
in the 1.95 to $5.00 range. The rest was in the dollar or even less
range.

As I said the next Penant may have pics of the sterling Wearever LE of
1968. Its really not super quality but does show they could do a
sterling overlay if they wanted to. I have copies of many of the
Consumer reports you mention and they also come down rather hard on
Parker, Waterman and Sheaffer of the era and picked Venus as the best
fountain pen back then in some of their reports.

As for Stratfords I assume you have not seen the Magnetic which is a
button filler with gold filled trim and a beautiful large well made (and
heavy thick gold) 14kt nib with "Stratford" in a nice script logo. To
borrow Parker's term "Like a pen from another planet," being streamlined
like a Buck Rogers Space Ship.

I'm not arguing Wearever or Stratford made plenty of high quality pens.
They did not. They were sub Esterbrook on average. A working man's
pens that WORKED. They knew their market. Its like asking if today's
19 cent Bic is a quality pen. You would probably say it is not. But it
a highly reliable pen, in fact it does write as good or better than the
average $500 ballpoint which just holds some other brand refill that may
not write as well. I would maintain the quality of a 19cent Bic is
extremely high when it comes to writing. The same goes for a Wearever
that sold for a buck way back when. I am usually amazed how very well a
properly restored dollar Wearever can write.

Let's agree to disagree becaause I know I will never change your mind
and you cannot change mine when it comes to what each of us defines as
quality vs price, then or now. Frank