Tuesday, December 29, 2015

Blonde China Child Doll Head

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

This sweet blonde, blue-eyed china doll head is meant to depict a child and can be either a boy or girl. She was a Christmas gift from my mother a few Christmases ago. She is a slightly larger, duplicate of the first antique doll that my mother ever bought at auction. That doll was the one that set my mother on down the road as a collector, and the bug bit me some time later.

She, like many of her companions, needs a body and clothes....

Saturday, December 26, 2015

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Treasonable Quilt

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

A few months ago I researched this Confederate quilt that was seized in Baltimore, Maryland in 1862 and have been unable to figure out who the maker was or what happened to it after it was turned over to General Wool.

This morning I read Barbara Brackman's post "Stolen Quilt for Jefferson Davis" on her blog Civil War Quilts and believe that she has pinpointed its whereabouts as of 1864 when it was on display at the Metropolitan Fair in Manhattan. What happened to it after that?

The first article gives us a description: silk with a large Confederate flag in the center with a white cross in the center of a blue background. In the cross was embroidered "Jefferson Davis, President of the Southern Confederacy." On the other portions of the flag were the names of the Confederate Cabinet officers and of some of the Generals. It was seized in a house on Hoffman Street.

click image to enlarge

This second article attributes the quilt to "a Baltimore rebel lady" rather than a group of ladies, but this is not necessarily accurate. Newspapers then made the same types of errors that newspapers do today.

click image to enlarge

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Summer Picnic Blocks

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

Each summer my quilt group, The Sew What's, has a potluck "picnic." As part of the festivities, we have a quilt block drawing. For each block we make, our names go into the drawing once. Usually, we have enough blocks for two winners. This year's quilt summer quilt blocks featured a pottery block. I did not like the wonkiness of the neck on the block on the right, so I adjusted the measurements a bit for the block on the left. Still not sure which one was correct.

These blocks went home with someone else, and that is okay because I still have at least two sets of summer quilt blocks that I won in the past--they are still ufos. One is an almost finished quilt top. The other is still a stack of blocks in a box.

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Dunham's Cocoanut Doll House - Cute As a Quill

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

I follow Christine LeFever's blog, and today she posted picture of her newly acquired dollhouse, an advertising piece for Dunham's Cocoanut. You can see pictures of Christine's dollhouse here. And you can see pictures of Tracy's dollhouse here.

After I drooled over their pictures and noodled around on google looking for information on Dunham's Cocoanut dollhouses, I discovered the same basic story everywhere: the houses were made in the 1890s as an advertising premium, but no one knows how they were distributed. Well, that's like a siren song for this girl. I should be cleaning the house, or working on a flimsy, or getting materials ready for the new school year, but NO, I decided to poke around in old newspapers looking for period information about Dunham's Cocoanut dollhouses.

Here's what I found. The only year in which the dollhouses were referenced was 1903. It looks like it was a premium that was only offered during the spring and summer of 1903. It also looks like grocers created their own rules for giving away the dollhouses. Oh, and dollhouse was two words in 1903: doll house.

Less than a handful of merchants were willing to go to the expense of including information about the dollhouses in their advertisements. It seems logical that they provided information about the giveaways in their in-store display for their regular customers and saw no need to go to the extra expense of advertising it.

The Cook Grocery, Co. in Evansville, Indiana added a small reference to the dollhouse in their July 1903 advertisement: "Dunham's Cocoanut Doll House. Have you seen it. Cute as a quill. Bring your little girl to see it." Presumably, the customer went in to see the dollhouse and learned about the giveaway rules in the store. Whatever the rules were, if the little girl also went along, then she would, of course, want the dollhouse and be eager to do whatever it took to get one.

E.M. Schreiner's Grocery Market devoted an entire advertisement to the dollhouses. Notice that there are no specifics in this giveaway. Surely, Schreiner did not have enough dollhouses to give one with each purchase, so the customer must have gotten to the store and found out there was more too it than just buying a package of shredded cocoanut and getting a dollhouse.  On average, a pound of Dunham's shredded cocoanut sold for 25 to 29 cents in 1903. Smaller packages ranged from 10 to 15 cents, with a special sale price as low as 7 cents.

Fuller and Douglass Grocers in Salem, Oregon not only devoted a full advertisement for Dunham's Cocoanut Dollhouses, but they laid out the rules for getting one. Apparently, Fuller & Douglass only had two of the dollhouses, but could have easily sold more than two crates full of cocoanut this way. This suggests that there was a limited number of dollhouses available to merchants; hence the rarity of the dollhouses today. It seems likely that Cook's Grocery in Indiana and Schreiner's Grocery in Ohio may have only had one dollhouse each. In all likelihood, they probably also gave theirs away through a similar contest, the rules of which may have suggested by Dunham's. 

Some have suggested that the dollhouses were given away by collecting premiums and mailing them in, but I saw no evidence of that. Plus, it seems impractical. Remember, the dollhouse was originally a crate designed to hold packages of shredded cocoanut. Shipping them separately as premiums does not seem very cost effective. However, there is evidence that the furniture may have been given away separately. You can see an envelope of parlor furniture here. Note that there is no date on the envelope. More importantly, this envelope was never mailed. The notation in the corner states that it was presented by John Ellis to Florence  of Cleveland, Missouri. Could he be a grocer presenting the crate and sheet of furniture to the child who won it? 

It also seems very probable to me that many of the dollhouses may have never been given away. Instead, they may have gone to the little daughters and granddaughters of the grocers. I suppose it is also possible that wealthier customers could have purchased a whole crate and received the dollhouse, but would they do that if they could afford fancier dollhouses for their daughters? I can imagine the crates being deliver to upper class households, purchasing cocoanut in bulk because they entertained on a grand scale. Those crates may have gone home with the kitchen staff. Just to insure that the public knew the grocers had the dollhouses, Dunham's included this information in their own advertisement in Good Housekeeping in 1903. The interesting bit of information here is that the printed sheet of furniture came with the dollhouse crate.

If you read the fine print in this advertisement, you can see that Dunham's offered to mail a circular describing the dollhouse along with 54 "Dainty Dessert" recipes to anyone who requested it. A "receipt" was what recipes were called in that time. I'm betting all of those recipes involved shredded cocoanut.

One reference to the dollhouse did turn up after 1903. In the Annual Report of the Hospital and Dispensary of New York Medical College and Hospital for Women, 1906, under donations received from October 1, 1905 to September 30, 1906, appeared a donation from Dunham's Mfg. Co. - 2 boxes (doll house) cocoanut. Did the giveaways continue until 1906? Or was this three year old shredded cocoanut being donated to the hospital? Given the conditions of that time period, it seems more likely that Dunham's is clearing out old stock.

Okay, that's my frippery for the day. Now to organize a notebook of workshop materials that have been gathering dust for a few weeks. I wonder, though, if I could find a copy of Dunham's circular...I wonder if it had pictures of the dollhouse...

Saturday, July 11, 2015

Jane (Blakely) Stickle, quilter

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

The other day I decided to take a break from chaining floating four-patches to read the blogs in my feed. I didn't get any further than Kathleen Tracy's Sentimental Quilter. She had posted an update of her Dear Jane quilt, and those little blocks are so darned cute.

Then I started thinking about Jane as a person and not a quilt. I assumed that almost everything that can be known about her is known, but I decided to do a little research anyway....like you do when you should be finishing up a stack of floating four-patches. I was off and running. I did find at least one piece of information that I believe is new, looked at a lot that is already known, and decided to put my own interpretation in play.

Here goes...this is Jane (Blakely) Stickle's life from a genealogist's point of view; I will try to translate the verbiage as I go along. For instance, standard practice is to put maiden names in parenthesis.

Jane (Blakely) Stickle's father Erastus Blakely died on 13 Jan 1831 in Shaftsbury, Bennington County, Vermont and was buried  in the Center Shaftsbury Cemetery. He was ill at the time he wrote his will, and his handwriting is shaky:

In his will , after his debts and funeral expenses were paid, he left his wife Sally in control of all of his real and personal property as long as she remained a widow. That is a pretty standard stipulation in old wills. Then he added that if Sally died before their daughter Jane reached the age of 17, the property would be divided among his children, but only when Jane reached the age of 17. This is a curious provision since Jane is not his youngest surviving child. Real estate equals land; personal property equals portable objects. Of the real estate, son Erastus would receive half, daughters Jane, a fourth; Sally Ann, an eighth; and Elmira Curtiss, an eighth. The purpose for leaving Erastus and Jane greater shares was so that the real estate could be used for their support and educations. Presumably,  Sarah Ann and Elmira had already received formal educations; therefore, their portions are smaller.

There was just one problem, Erastus Blakely's estate was insolvent. That means that the estate could not pay its debts or taxes or other expenses. It also means that the heirs are not allowed to inherit.

click image to enlarge

A commission of claims was appointed to determine the estate's debts and assets. It turned out that Erastus was heavily in debt. A property inventory was completed that indicated Erastus had a large number of unfinished wagons and wagon parts. These wagons were immediately finished, at the expense of the estate (more debt), and offered for sale:

click image to enlarge

Evidently, Erastus Blakely was in the wagon making trade. In addition to the wagon parts, he had a blacksmith shop, which he would have used in his trade. He had a lathe with which he could have made spokes. He could have made the ironwork in his blacksmith shop. Timber, iron, and coal are all assets in his estate. He also had a large number of wagon hubs that I believe he would have purchased. Many of his debts may have been from purchasing some ready made wagon parts. To strengthen the theory that he was a wagon maker, in 1822, Erastus ran the following advertisement, seeking to hire a journeyman wagon maker:

click image to enlarge

The 1820 census for Erastus Blakely lists the following individuals:

Blakely, Erastus 10022 - 2301----4


1 male under 10 = Erastus Blakely Jr.
two males 16 - 25 = two unknown males
two males 26 - 44 = Erastus Blakely Sr. and one unknown male
two females under 10 = Jane Blakely and probably Sarah Ann Blakely
three females 10 - 15 = Caroline Blakely , Emily Blakely , and probably Elmira (Blakely) Curtiss
one female 26 - 44 = Sarah Blakely
four employed in manufacturing = Erastus Blakely Sr. and three unknowns, probably all hired men

It should be pointed out here that three years later, Caroline and Emily Blakely died within about a month of each other. 

The pay outs for Erastmus's estate mostly include interest on mortages as well as his tombstone, which cost $15. On 6 May 1834, Sarah Blakely petitioned the court for the remainder of the personal estate of her husband Erastmus Blakely, with the exception of a one horse wagon and a sulkey, which was granted to her. A sulkey was a light, two-wheel, horse drawn wagon. With any luck, she was able to retain her own quilts and dishes this way.

No where in the probate record is a pay out for the education of Jane and her brother Erastus, which would have at least appeared as a payment to a school or tutor. It seems reasonable to think that Jane's formal education ended at the age of 13. She had probably already had some formal education and may have then been tutored by her mother or older sisters. The theorem watercolor that she painted certainly suggests the type of education that young women at the time received at female academies.

There are, in fact, no individual pay outs for support of the individual family members, which I've seen in many other estates. 

At the time of Erastus Blakely's death, his son Erastus was only eleven years and would not have been able to help the family financially. One cannot help but wonder how the Blakely household fared during the ensuing years or how difficult their situation may have been.

By 1840 the household had dwindled to four people:

S. Blakely 00001 - 00001002

one male 20 - 29 = Erastus M. Blakely
one female 20 - 29 = Jane Blakely
two females 50 - 59 = Sarah Blakely and an unknown female
two people engaged in agriculture = Erastus M. Blakely and Jane Blakely?

Now for the BIG FIND, Jane's wedding record...

click image to enlarge

Walter Stickles and Jane Blakely married on 29 October 1844 in Shaftsbury, Bennington County, Vermont. She was 27 at the time of her marriage, and this was her first marriage. Walter was 26, according to his tombstone. Notice that this would make Jane older than Walter although he is always older on the census records. This is a very late marriage for a woman in that time period. 

Next Jane appears on the 1850 census with W. P. Stickles, age 34; Jane herself, age 33;  her brother E. M. Blakely, age 31; Sarah Hall, age 34, who might be Jane's sister Sarah Ann; her mother, Sarah Blakely, age  68 or 69; and Addison Johnson, age 20. Several items in this census are interesting. First, E.M. Blakely's occupation is tailor. It may be that instead of receiving a formal education that he was apprenticed to a tailor. Some have theorized that Jane may have acquired her scraps for her quilt from her brother. That might account for why her blocks are so small - maybe she is frugally utilizing the tiniest pieces of fabric or maybe she only has access to tiny pieces. Certainly the years following her father's death would have taught her to be frugal. It is also possible that Jane and the other women in the household are sewing for E.M. Blakely although there are no occupations indicated for them. Of additional interest are the real estate valuations. A dollar amount in this column on the census always indicates land ownership. The real estate valuations are as follows: W.P. Stickle, $400; E.M. Blakely, $300; Sarah Blakely, $300. All three of them own land. Walter's land might be Jane's inheritance from her father. Since Erastmus Blakely's probate settlement does not mention a sale of his land and a sale notice does not seem to appear in the newspaper, it may be that Sarah Blakely and her children managed to hang on his land, which comprised 16 acres. The only way to determine that is to consult Bennington County, Vermont land deeds.

Much has been made of Jane Stickles appearance on the 1860 census in a household separate from Walter. Here is the important rule to remember about the U.S. census: it is a one day snapshot of households in the United States. One day. Just one day. In the case of the 1860 census that day was June 1, 1860. The census taker was told to enumerate all of the individuals living in household on June 1, 1860. When the census taker arrived at Walter and Jane's house on 6 June 1860, he was told that Jane was living in the household alone on 1 June 1860. Her occupation was given as a farmer. There is no real estate valuation. Did she not know the value of the land, or has something happened to their land? On 7 June 1860, the census taker was at brother Erastmus Blakely's household and was told that among others (including his mother Sarah Blakely), Walter Stickle was a resident of the household on 1 June 1860. This does not mean, as I have seen some say, that throughout the 1860s Jane lived alone on the farm and reunited with Walter in the 1870s. The census does not project where a person will reside until the next census is taken ten years later. Instead, it means that on 1 June 1860, Jane was in the household alone, and Walter was at her brother's house.  Given her poor health, it is doubtful that she was running a farm by herself. Besides that, what man leaves his wife and moves in with his brother-in-law and mother-in-law when he has other family members in the area? There are Stickle households around Erastmus Blakely's. What brother-in-law and mother-in-law would welcome him? If there was a martial separation, it seems more likely that Jane would have moved into her brother's house. It is much more probable that Walter is temporarily at his brother-in-law's to help him - maybe they are building a barn or mending a fence or building an addition to the house, or possibly they are weeding fields or planting. June is a busy time on a farm. It is also highly possible that Walter was back at home with Jane on 6 June 1860 when the census taker arrived, even though he would not have been enumerated in his own household. It is also possible that on 7 June 1860 when the census taker was at brother Erastmus's house that Erastmus was staying with Jane and Walter, helping them, and not even at home himself. 

Following the 1859 Bennington County Agricultural Society Fair, a report on the fair was run in the Bennington Banner with a report from each department. The report from the Ladies Department was scathing. The needlework was found to be wanting. The writer implied that the women of Bennington County had allowed themselves to "grow lax and negligent in this, the ornamental part of our display." Likewise, it was implied that they had "neglect[ed] [their] duty!" They were implored to make it their "highest pleasure to  beautify and adorn [their] homes...with bright and beautiful specimens of [their] own handiwork." Going further, they were admonished with this plea: "Wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, remember this, and at our next annual display, let it be said that your works praise you." 

click image to enlarge

This challenge may have led Jane to create her now famous quilt. 

In 1863, Jane Stickle entered her quilt in the Fair of the Bennington County Agricultural Society, where she won the equivalent of a first place for her "best patched quilt." Best patched quilt is such an understatement. It makes me want to see all the best patched quilts of the period that contained thousands of pieces. Were they all as breath taking as Jane's? For her efforts, Jane won a $2 premium, the equivalent of $58.70 in 2015.

click image to enlarge

Because her quilt consisted of  thousands of pieces, it warranted an additional mention in the newspaper:

click image to enlarge

At the time Jane finished her quilt, she was 46 years old. Many have commented on how surprising it is to discover that she was an invalid. The term "invalid" in the 19th century was not necessarily used to mean someone who was permanently disabled. In reference to women, it often meant someone who was sickly or highly excitable. This article, however, explicitly states that she had been confined to her bed for a long time. At the age of 46, she was almost out of her childbearing years. Even though no children ever appear on the census with Jane and Walter, it is possible that Jane had experienced a series of miscarriages and stillbirths. These would be undocumented. They may have even had children who died in fancy - although there are no tombstones for them in the cemetery where Jane and Walter are buried. If she had a history of problem pregnancies, a pregnancy at age 45 to 46 might have confined Jane to bed. Since she did not die until 1896, she probably did not remain bedfast for the next 33 years although she may have remained in precarious health. There is nothing to suggest that she was consumptive, and if she was, she probably would not have lived for another 33 years. 

I find this article particularly important because it documents the label that Jane put on her quilt. This can be no other than the Dear Jane quilt we all know and love.

Jane's mother Sarah Blakely died on 17 March 1869 and was buried next to Jane's father in Center Shaftsbury Cemetery. 

By 1870, Walter and Jane are living next door to her brother Erastus M. Blakely. Walter's real estate is valued at $6,000 and Erastus's at $1,000. Originally, Erastus share of land would have been half of his father's estate or 8 acres. Of course, the real estate valuation includes the buildings on the land. However, it appears that Walter has continued to amass land while Erastus has not or not at the same rate. Of interest on this census is that the occupation for both Walter and Erastus is "farm laborer" in spite of the fact that they both own farms and that their neighbors are listed as "farmers" instead of "farm laborers." It seems evident that they are also hiring out as farm hands in addition to running their own farms. Walter and Jane have Flora Bump living with them and working as their servant.

Most accounts state that Walter was bankrupt by 1877. I found no notice of a bankruptcy in the newspapers, which was the norm in a bankruptcy proceeding. Clearly, his bankruptcy exists in other records. It would not be surprising at all if they had been forced into bankruptcy in 1877. A national depression began in 1873 and lasted until 1879. It was so severe that it was known as the Great Depression until the Great Depression of the 1930s came along. By 1877, if Walter had any mortgages or loans, and he might have if he continued his expansion, he would have been in financial trouble. Compounded by his declining health, he would not have been able to hang on. His brother-in-law, Erastus died in 1878 and may have been in poor health in 1877, so Walter may not have been able to depend on Erastus for help any more. 

By 1880, Walter and Jane were borders in another household. Walter was unemployed because of his rheumatism. When he died on 19 Feb 1883, his cause of death was "heart disease."

Jane Stickle died thirteen years later 2 March 1896. On her death certificate, the cause of death is dropsy. Dropsy was a nineteenth century term for edema caused by congestive heart failure or renal failure. It means that she would have experienced swelling in her legs. It is possible, then, that Jane had a heart condition that left her unable to do much that was physical. That would make it even more unlikely that she was operating a farm single handedly in 1860. 

Both Walter and Jane Stickle  are buried in Center Shaftsbury Cemetery, Bennington County, Vermont.

Had Jane lived for four more years, she would have appeared on the 1900 census. That census contained information on how many children a woman had given birth to and how many were still living. That would have answered some questions about Jane's childbearing. Equally, informative would be Walter and Jane's bible.

And this, doggone it, is why I don't get more quilting done...

Last updated on October 11, 2015.

Keywords: Jane Stickle, Jane Stickles,  W.P. Stickles, W.P. Stickle, Walter P. Stickle

Monday, July 6, 2015

The Des Moines, Iowa Quilt War

© Kathy Duncan, 2015

I was wondering what made quilts newsworthy in the nineteenth century, so I went to a newspaper database and simply used the keyword "quilt" and narrowed my search by decades. After skimming through several articles, besides those listing premiums at various fairs and competitions, one of three factors seemed to make quilts noteworthy: 1.) the number of pieces in a quilt, 2.) the age of a quilt, or 3.) the age of the quilter.

The quilt of Orpha Adkinson (Adkison) of Madison County, Iowa drew considerable attention in 1868. It started out simply enough with a notice that her quilt of 3,150 pieces had more pieces than a recently reported California quilt that contained 550 pieces. 

The Daily Iowa State Register of Des Moines, Iowa dutifully reported the exhibition of Orpha's quilt with an added twist. Note that the California quilt is reported as having 2,600 pieces which is more believable since 550 pieces seems more like an average quilt. The twist, though, is in the editor's attitude - he believes that making elaborate quilts is a waste of time, advocating that women make a comfort instead. He does, though, grudgingly express in the "fair lassie" of Madison County who made the quilt.

Within a couple of weeks, a farmer wrote to the Daily Iowa State Register to claim that an unnamed woman in Jasper County had made a quilt of 3,780 pieces. The editor's response is that the girl in Jasper County would be better off making utility quilts "instead of fooling away so much time on one."

The matter did not drop there. Two weeks later, on Octpber 20th, a quilt with 7,010 pieces turned up in Decatur.

Within the same article, the editor reposed that he did not "want any quilt kivering us, which is red with the blood of murdered time." He criticizes the "girl who will wear out a bundle of years and a gross of needles in making such quilts."

Finally, on November 7th, the last comment in the Des Moines "war of quilts" was made.

But what of Orpha Adkinson, the "fair lassie" who was the brunt of this war against intricate quilting? When she submitted her quilt to the Des Moines, Iowa fair in 1868, she was 16 years old. One would guess that she had probably started her quilt at least two years before. 

Orpha Susan Adkinson, daughter of Andrew J and Annie (Wilcox) Adkinson, was born 6 September 1852 in Illinois. Her mother was the widow of Preble when her parents married in 1846. They moved to Vermillion County in 1847, where Orpha was born. Her family moved to Winterset, Madison County, Iowa in 1856. In 1860 and 1870, she appears on the census in her parents' household in Winterset, Madison County, Iowa. I have not located her in 1880. When she appears on the 1885 census with her parents, she is classified as divorced, but is using Adkinson as her last name. On 12 November 1874, an Orpha S. Adkinson married Henry C. McMillen in Madison County, Iowa. I have not found a divorce record for this couple yet. 

In 1892, Orpha's mother died after twisting her ankle on her walk home from church. This caused the long bone of her leg to break. She died two weeks later. In 1894, her father died after a lengthy illness. In 1895, Orpha is found in her sister Annie Witherall's household. In 1895, she is still listed as divorced.

By 1910, Orpha is living with a nephew, Warren Benge, still in Madison County, but now she is termed a widow. In 1920, she is with her sister Eudora Benge. In 1920, Orpha's last name is Adkison, and she is once again designated as divorced and is still in Winterset, Iowa. Orpha last appears on the 1930 census as a lodger in Murrell household in Winterset and is once again listed a widow.

Orpha S. Adkinson began teaching by 1885. She was active in her church. She seems to have married only once and was never publicly associated with quilting again. One can not help but wonder if the quilt war discouraged her from continuing her quilting or if she stopped entering her quilts in fairs.

Orpha S. Adkinson died on 3 September 1934 and is buried in the Winterset City Cemetery, where her parents are interred. Her obituary appeared in The Winterset Madisonian on 6 September 1934:

Winterset Woman was Leader in fields of Religion and Education

Orpha Adkison, prominent Madison county woman, died at the home of Mrs. Fred Murrell on Sep 3 after an illness of about a year. Had she lived until Friday of this week she would have been 83 years old. 

Miss Adkison has long been identified with educational and religious activities, both here and elsewhere. She was a veteran member of the Madison county W.C.T.U., being one of its first secretaries. She spent several years on the Woman's Mission board at Dayton, Ohio, and for eight years she taught in a school for Indian children at Clamath Falls, Washington. Most of her life,however was spent in Truro and Winterset.

Orpha Adkison was born on September 6, 1851, in Vermillion county, Illinois, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. A.J. Adkison, with whom she came to this county at an early age. Here she affiliated with the Christian church, but a few years ago she changed to the Church of Christ.

The deceased is survived by three nephews, B.M. Benge of Grand Junction, Colorado, Harry Adkison of Long Beach, California, and W.P. Benge of Winterset.

Funeral services were conducted from the Tidrick funeral home Wednesday at 2 p.m. under the Rev. H.L. Olmstead, of the Church of Christ. Burial was made at Winterset.

Other souces:
Obituary of A.J. Adkison
Obituary of Mrs. Anner Adkison