1893 NEW BEACON STOPPER LAMP LIGHT BULB INCANDESCENT GOOD FILAMENT UNUSUAL DESIGN LIGHTBLUB MUSEUM READY Start Price USD 5,000.00 Current Price USD 5,000.00 Time Left 11 days 20 hours 12 minutes Bid Count 0 Buy It Now Price - Reserve Price - Start Time Wednesday, November 19, 2008 End Time Sunday, January 18, 2009 Location UPSTATE NEW YORK See more about '1893 NEW BEACON STOPPER LAMP LIGHT BULB INCANDESCENT' Description RARE OUTSTANDING GUARANTEED ORIGINAL VINTAGE 1893 NEW BEACON STOPPER LAMP LIGHT BULB INCANDESCENT   -----OLD EARLY  WHATS UNUSUAL ABOUT THIS IS IT HAS EXTRA ROUND HOLES AROUND THE CENTER OF THE BRASS BASE AND NO PATENT DATE INSCRIBED  IT IS IN PERFECT CONDITION FOR IT'S AGE  HAS NO CRACKS OR CHIPS AND DAMAGE THAT I CAN SEE AND THE FILAMENT IS STILL INTACT --- 1893 New Beacon Stopper Lamp During the early 1890's, Edison held the patenst for a lamp with an all glass enclosure to hold a vacume. Many companies were taken to court for patent infringment, others went out of buisness. A few companies, such as Westinghouse, Sawyer Man, Packard, and New Beacon, produced lamps that avoided an all glass enclosure. Such "Stopper" lamps had either a two piece stem and envelope, or no stem at all. The New Beacon Stopper was sealed off by filling the bottom of the lamp with an imperviouse cement. The lead in wires ran through the cement and had two brass radiators attached to each lead in, as well as a mice sheild to help keep the cement cool. There is no real stem structure. The "Stopper" lamps had poorly sealed vacumes, and didnt sell very well, and in 1894, when the Edison patents expired, all companies went bacl to all glass enclosures.  The "Goebel Defense" Three litigation cases brought by the Edison interests against lamp manufacturers were challenged in the courts by what became known as the "Goebel defense." All other litigants were concerned with details of the basic Edison patents. Because an alleged infringer achieved little success when a basic patent was the issue, a new approach was taken - and that was to claim that someone else invented the lamp before Edison. If it were true that someone other than Edison invented the lamp then anyone would be free to manufacture and sell incandescent lamps. The three companies were: Beacon Vacuum Pump and Electrical Company, of Boston The Beacon Co. was enjoined to engage in lamp manufacture on Feb 18, 1893 24 . Judge L.B.B. Colt, of the United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York, granted the temporary injunction. Dissolution of the injunction was not sought because a new lamp had been developed by Cary and Nickerson that was believed not to infringe the Edison patent 65 . One year later, in Feb 1894, large numbers of the "New Beacon" lamp were being shipped. The reasoning of the court in granting the injunction is important to understand. Quoting from the Feb 18, 1893 opinion of the court 24 : "There is no denial of infringement in the present case under the construction given to the patent in prior adjudications. The contention of the defendants is, that this motion should be denied on the ground that Henry Goebel, a German watchmaker, living in New York, invented the Edison incandescent lamp as early as 1854, and that, therefore, the Edison patent is void for want of novelty, or, at least, must be limited to the coiled form of filament. This is the same line of attack upon the patent which was unsuccessfully made in the case against the United States Electric Company. It was there urged that the Starr lamp of 1845, the Roberts lamp of 1852, the Lodyguine, Konn, and other lamps which appeared between 1872 and 1876, the Bouliguine lamp of 1877, the Sawyer and Man lamp of 1878, and the Edison platinum lamp of 1879, limited the Edison patent to narrow inventions or rendered it void for want of patentable novelty. But the court, with a most exhaustive review of the prior art before it, refused to take this view and held that the second claim of the patent, read with the specification, covered a broad and fundamental invention, namely, an incandescent lamp composed of a carbon filament hermetically sealed in an all glass chamber exhausted to a practically perfect vacuum, and having leading-in wires of platinum... "By this invention Edison disclosed to the world for the first time a practical, commercial incandescent lamp, adapted for domestic uses. The problem was by no means easy of solution... "To subdivide the electric light and embody it in a cheap and durable domestic lamp, capable of successfully competing with gas, had for years baffled the science and skill of the most eminent electricians in this country and in Europe. The difficulty lay in the practical construction of a durable incandescent lamp rather than in a knowledge of the elements which should compose such a structure."  The year 1893 was one that is remembered for several reasons. The United States was in a financial panic, President Grover align="left"> Cleveland began his second term in the White House, and the Columbian Exposition (Chicago's World Fair) opened in May of that year. In addition, the incandescent lamp industry was in the throes of patent litigations, brought about mainly by the Edison Electric Light Company. The Columbian Exposition served as a pleasurable outlet for the citizens in difficult times. The Exposition also provided an opportunity for George Westinghouse to introduce a non-infringing lamp (known as the Westinghouse Stopper Lamp) at a time when the Edison interests controlled a near-monopoly of the lamp industry. The story of the Stopper lamp is an interesting one but it is outside the scope of this writing. The Edison interests believed that many lamp manufacturers were infringing the Edison lamp patents. That view became clear in May 1885 when suit was brought against the United States Electric Lighting Company. Then, in 1886, E. H. Johnson, President of the Edison Electric Light Company, said 2 : "The fact that Mr. Edison invented the incandescent lamp in the form in which it is now presented by all electric light companies was so widely proclaimed by the publication thereof in every class of literature at the time of the invention, that it would seem very like an insult to the intelligence of the community to recall it. Indeed, a retrospective view of the history of the great invention is rendered unnecessary by the fact that even the infringing companies themselves do not dwell upon their claim to the ownership of original patents, but fortify their position by the assertion that Edison's patents are invalid and open to the public, and offer in corroboration of their statement the apparent apathy of the Edison Company in the matter of defending them." However, legal action had started in May 1885 against the United States Electric Lighting Co. 3 . That case persisted for many years, ending finally in the Court of Appeals on Oct 4, 1892 - in favor of Edison 4 . It was after the formation of the General Electric Company in 1892, when the Thomson-Houston Electric Company joined forces with the Edison General Electric Company, that courtroom activity increased significantly. For example, legal proceedings had been initiated against the Mather, Perkins, Sunbeam, Germania, Boston Incandescent Lamp and Sawyer-Man companies. Some litigations involved the alleged earlier invention of the lamp by Henry Goebel. In order to try to justify the lamps being made, it was claimed that as early as 1854, Goebel, a German immigrant, had made lamps that were in all design aspects exactly like the lamp developed by Edison in 1879, and manufactured in late 1880. That is, the lamp contained a high resistance filament of carbon (the high resistance being necessary, according to Edison, when lamps were to be operated in parallel), platinum lead-in wires in an all-glass envelope, and a high vacuum to prevent disintegration of the carbon; the source of the carbon in late 1880 was bamboo. The complainant found it highly unlikely that an individual with limited financial means, facilities and support personnel could arrive at a design 25 years earlier than that achieved by Edison, which required the synergism of thousands of experiments and numerous technical contributions from highly skilled workers. The small manufacturer of lamps had a difficult time trying to produce product that did not infringe the Edison patents. It was not until the increased patent litigations of 1893 occurred that attempts were made to develop and sell non-infringing lamps. A notable example of a lamp that was marketed was the so-called Westinghouse Stopper Lamp, which was introduced at the Columbian Exposition. Another stopper lamp was the one manufactured by the Beacon Company. Some lamps were found, upon litigation, to infringe; one such lamp utilized the Edward Pollard silver films in the stem press. Another, called the "Novak", contained a trace of bromine gas. Eventually such lamps disappeared from the marketplace, either because of their inferior performance, higher cost, or patent infringement.   Henry Goebel Henry Goebel (1818-1893) was born on Apr 20, 1818 in Springe, Germany - a village about 15 miles southwest of Hannover 8,9 . In Germany he was known as Heinrich Göbel, his full name being Johann Heinrich Christoph Conrad Göbel 97 . His father was Johann Heinrich Christian (1781-1845) and his mother, Marie Eleonore (1778-1855) 97 ; his father was a landscaper, and later a manufacturer of chocolate. The following information regarding Goebel was taken from affidavits given for patent litigations (which are included in the References) as well as the above-mentioned article by Pope. The accuracy of the information is uncertain. In an affidavit, Goebel wrote that he learned the trade of watchmaker and optician in Germany 9 . He became associated with a person there for whom he repaired physical instruments. Supposedly it was from that person that he got the idea of making an electric light by passing an electric current through a carbon conductor placed in a vacuum. Goebel left Germany with his family in 1848, and after a voyage of about three months, arrived in New York City in the early part of 1849. He resided in the city of New York for the rest of his life. At the time of his death, which was due to pneumonia, seven of his fourteen children survived him 74 . --THANKS zz- --------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- Place a Bid!