Beth Neal's Dunham's Cocoanut Doll House

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2021

When Beth Neal went looking for more information on her Dunham's Cocoanut Doll House, she found my earlier blog post about them here, and she contacted me. Beth found her dollhouse in her parent's basement. It originally belonged to Beth's great-aunts who lived in Eustis, Florida as children. Beth does not know how her aunts acquired their dollhouse. Did they pool their resources and win if from a local merchant? Was it a form of payment to their father, who owned a jewelry store in Eustis?

Beth graciously sent me pictures of her dollhouse and agreed to allow me to share them here.

As you can see, Beth's dollhouse is in very, very good condition. The lithograph colors are still vibrant and relatively undamaged. Many of these houses have worn or missing lithograph paper, color loss, water damage, or mildew. 

For this post, I would like to take you on a tour of the house. In the next posts, we will look at the individual rooms, furniture, and inhabitants of this little house.

The house itself is a four-room, four-floor construction. Like the other houses I've seen, the edges of the house are painted orange, and I wonder if this was a company color. 

The lithograph sides of the house are also in very good condition, and the windows are clearly defined. 

Right Side

Left Side

The back of the dollhouse reveals that it was made with two pieces of wood. The split in the wood accounts for the tear line in the interior lithograph paper. After looking at pictures of several other Dunham's Cocoanut Doll Houses, this seems to have happened to all of them. 

Back

The Dunham's label on the back warns the recipient that this is the back of a dollhouse and that the crate is meant to be opened from the front. 

Back Label

Both ends of the dollhouse were embossed with the Dunham label. This is the top. It shows its age and a little wear.

Top

The bottom of the dollhouse, however, is vibrant and shows little wear. It must look very much the way it did the day it arrived at the shop where it was displayed. Notice that the word Cocoanut is in orange like the front edges of the house.

Many little girls must have drolled over this house and dreamed of owning it.

Bottom

M. Jumeau Dolls, 1867

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2021

I am far from an expert on Jumeau dolls. However, I find it very interesting to read period pieces on the manufacturing of early dolls.

Just prior to the publication of this piece, the Jumeau dolls had received a Silver Medal at the Exposition Universelle, the second world's fair held in Paris from April 1 to November 3, 1867. Their award that year no doubt sparked the publication of this piece which was lifted in part, with the paragraphs rearranged, from Mr. Bartley's Reports on Toys in the Paris Universal Exhibition 1867 Presented to Both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty. The focus on this English report of Jumeau's fashion dolls was that their elaborate dress made them unsuitable as playthings. There also seems to be some English indignation that the French dolls had won awards as dolls when their role as toys was secondary to their role as fashion plates although Bartley concedes that the heads are better and more unique than a simple china head.

Commercial Bulletin
Boston, MA
Saturday 23 November 1867

Transcript: 

Doll Making in Paris

"The manufacture of dolls is a very interesting process, though difficult to witness, owing to the various portions being generally carried on in different places. M. Jumeau, at 8 Rue d'Anjou au Marais, is one of the largest makers in Paris. He employs many hands, the greatest number being women, who are scattered in all parts of the city. The heads of his dolls are porcelain, and most of the bodies of sheepskin, stuffed with sawdust, except the hands, in which iron fittings are inserted, to enable the fingers to be moved easily. The process of cutting the leather is peculiar, being done by hand, with an iron stamp set in boxwood. The stamps, of course, vary in size, and several of different shapes are required for each doll.

When the leather is cut, the next process is to sew the parts together: this requires a regular apprenticeship, more peculiarly for the fingers, which need great care; after the various parts are sewn up, the body has to be stuffed and the limbs attached. The doll is then ready to receive its head; the manufacture of this part is totally distinct, and similar to that of ordinary porcelain. Cheap china heads and shoulders are all in one piece, and their eyes are simply painted; while the superior description are made separate from the neck and shoulder, to enable the head to move on a sort of joint, and glass eyes are inserted into the sockets left for this purpose. The last thing is the hair, and in this English makers excel the French. At this manufactory, owing to the heads being of china, the hair has to be put on as a wig, and cannot be inserted so naturally as in a wax head. Human hair is rarely, if ever, used in Paris, the general material being mohair for the best and a sort of fur for the cheaper style of doll.

The dolls, when completed, have to be dressed, and this process varies with the fashion; it would not do for a French doll to be behindhand in this respect. At M. Jumeau's establishment the same style is not used for more than a month. All the dolls' clothes are made on the premises, where a roomfull of young women is continually at work for these small fashionables. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the French doll manufacturers have an object in thus dressing up their dolls, which is more important than their use as toys. They are sent to India, and all parts of the world, to serve as types and models of the Paris fashions; for on arriving at these places their first use is to be studied by the dressmakers; and when useless to them in this respect, they descend to the children for toys. These two uses in which French dolls are thus subjected, though, perhaps, an economical commercial arrangement, are quite opposed for the production of a doll suitable for the hands of a child, and this accounts for the total unfitness of most of those expensive ones that were exhibited at the Exposition, and which figure in the shop windows on the Boulevards."

The following paragraphs, which were omitted from the newspaper version above, leave little doubt that Mr. Bartley found the Jumeau dolls in the exhibition lacking. Bartley does concede that the doll clothing manufactured by Juemeau are "good toys" and "popular." 

Transcript: 

"The dolls exhibited by M. Jumeau are not his best specimens, nor can they be looked upon as giving a fair idea of his general style. Some of the smaller ones which are put in the less attractive parts of the stall are good. The three figures at the back of the case are got up in an elaborate and brilliant manner, representing ball costumes; but they are certainly not commendable as toys, or suitable to the taste of English mothers for their children. The small boxes of dolls' clothes, or the dolls' trousseau, are good toys, and from the variety exhibited, and the very large numbers manufactured, it is evident they are popular.

M. Jumeau has not exhibited any of his mechanical dolls, saying "Mamma" and "Papa," and crying when laid down. These specimens are well worthy of a corner in the Exhibition. He also arranges the works, and dresses a large number of walking dolls, the patent for which is American, and for this reason he does not exhibit them."

Enter - The Kewpies

   ©  Kathy Duncan, 2021

In August 1910, The Woman's Home Companion announced that Rose O'Neill's Kewpie characters would be introduced to their audience for the first time in September.

By Christmas 1913, Kewpies were all the rage and were being marketed in every form imaginable including a sugar candy figure.

The Jacobs' Stores in Atlanta, Georgia carried a fill line of Kewpie products, including dolls which were introduced for the first time that year. In 1913, Kewpies ranged from 4 1/2 inches to 11 inches. Although we think of Kewpies as being blue-winged, naked cherubs, some were dressed. It is impossible to tell from the ad what materials these Kewpies were made of. Size seems to have dictated their price with the large 11-inch being the most expensive at $1.50, which translates to $40 in 2021.

Nell Brantley, Doll Collector and Girl Hero, 1914

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2021

On 23 November 1914, The Atlanta Georgian ran a huge photograph of Nell Brantley and her doll. She had won the doll in one of the newspaper's contests, but that is not why they were featured in the article.  The previous May, Nell's house at 152 Forrest Ave. in Atlanta caught on fire, and she was the first person in the household to realize they were in danger. Some accounts claim that she ran to her mother and reported the fire. Then she ran to a bedroom where her convalescing sister was and began carrying her nephews out of the house and laying them in the yard one by one. Another account claims she had one child climb on her back and grabbed the other two and took them all out at the same time, which would have been a staggering feat for a ten-year-old. In reality, she rescued two nephews and a niece all under the age of five or six. Then she returned to help rescue her mother and sister. Her older brother Emmet and a passerby named Clarence Williams were also involved in helping the adults get out of the burning house. Realizing that her little dog was still in the house, Nell returned for him and grabbed her six dolls, which were in a box under the bed. One account has her staggering out of the house with just the dog and returning for an arm full of dolls while another has her bringing the dog and box of dolls out at the same time. In both accounts, she battles through choking smoke to go back upstairs for them. An account, that was published just after the fire, related that she then turned back to reenter the house and rescue the canaries, but a fireman grabbed her and stopped her.

My mother pointed out that houses burned more slowly then, so Nell would have had plenty of time to rescue her family, dolls, and dog. Houses were made of wood and most of the windows were open all the time. Children were trained to hang their clothes with the hooks going over the rod so that they could grab their meager wardrobes on the way out.  

While the details of the event vary from account to account, the one constant is that Nell received a gold medal from the Ralston Hero Commission of St. Louis for saving the lives of her two nephews and niece. 

So far, I have only been able to locate one article from the time of the fire. 

This article was picked up from an Atlanta paper that originally published the account on May 23, 1914, which would place the fire on May 22.

Other papers later published a photograph of Nell and her little dog Togo. This one is from The Detroit Times of 3 June 1914. 

Nell's full name was Vera Nell Brantley. She was the daughter of Joseph and Mary Oma (Davis) Brantley. By 1910, her father was deceased. Most of the older children had moved out by the time fire. However, her older sister Johnnie Louise (Brantley) Sullivan and her three children were also living in the household. 

Nell had won her doll from The Atlanta Georgian newspaper, which ran a contest for boys and girls to win Christmas toys in 1913, specifically dolls and teddy bears for girls and tricycles, trains, and rocking horses for boys.  

Nell's name appears in the lists of children who were competing for prizes, evidently, she won one of the dolls. Given its large size, perhaps 30" or more, I think it would have been one of the more expensive dolls.

However, this was not Nell's first contest. The Atlanta Georgian frequently ran contests that involved getting "votes" that were tied to subscriptions and "votes" or points varied based on whether they came from existing subscribers or subscribers. 

One list of entrants reveals that little Nell Brantley was a "newsie" or newspaper carrier. 

In this contest from the spring of 1913, children were competing to win a Shetland pony and outfit, which seems to have varied from a pony cart to a saddle. Vera Nell Brantley appears in District No. 1 throughout the lists that were published as the contest unfolded. One list places her address as 31 Alexander, which is different from the address at 152 Forrest Ave, where the family was found a year later when their house burned. 

The Brantleys don't seem to have lived at 31 Alexander for long. 

The seven room house was for rent in December of 1912, and occupied a month later.

It is not hard to imagine an enterprising widow swapping her sewing skills for music lessons for her children. I believe that the occupants were Oma Brantley and family. 

For most of the Pony Outfit Contest, Nell Brantley's name appears as one of the top contenders in District one. Then about the time her name is dropped from the list this advertisement appeared.

I am not sure exactly how the Brantleys figured out this vote exchange would work to their advantage, but someone did the math and calculated that Nell would probably not be able to win in the newsie category, but that if they exchanged their votes, one of her siblings could win as a school child. This seems to have been within the rules. Shortly afterward, Nell's sister Helen Brantley appears on the contest list for District one, and she won. Of the dozen Shetland ponies to be given away, she would have the sixth choice.

Remember the prize was a Shetland pony and outfit. This was a much more complicated prize than a large doll. The pony would have had to be stabled and fed at great expense to a family that appeared to be struggling. So, why did they work so hard to win it, even going to the trouble and expense of placing an ad so that they could exchange votes?

It appears that the Brantleys never intended to keep the pony. It was put up for sale almost as soon as they gained possession of it.

By December of 1913, Nell was competing in District No. 4 in The Atlanta Georgian's Christmas toy contest. I think this is an indication that the family had moved, probably to the house on Forrest Ave. that burned later. 

In December of 1913, Helen Brantley also won The Atlanta Georgian's Great Want Ad Contest, which was a two-person tour to California. The Brantleys must have liked what they saw in California because the family eventually relocated there. 

In late May 1914, the house on Alexander St. was available to rent again, and I wonder if the Brantleys moved back there after the Forrest Ave. house fire.

Vera Nell  Brantley went on to have a brief career in California as a silent film actress in the early 1920s. 

Her films included, Darwin Was Right, Fast Fightin', Cyclone Saddle, and White Thunder. She was then married briefly to John Hugh White, and they had one son Jay Hugh White. I don't know if Nell was widowed or divorced.

Her next husband was "Buddy" Jackler. They were married for decades and lived in Palm Springs, California. Nell played golf often, and she and Buddy were occasionally photographed for the society pages. In the picture below, from 1978, Nell (Brantley) Jackler is the second from the left. 

Won't You Dress This Doll?

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2021

In the early 1900s, dolls mostly appeared in newspapers as line drawings rendered for store advertisements at Christmas time. They tend to be blurry and lacking in detail. 

A photograph of a doll in a newspaper was extremely rare. However, The Atlanta Georgian enthusiastically published photographs of dolls in connection with their pet project: The Empty Stocking Fund. The purpose of the fund was to raise money to buy toys for the underprivileged children of Atlanta. Dolls figured prominently in that effort. They were used in articles about fundraising endeavors, they were dressed and sold at auction, and they were given to poor children. The actual fundraising efforts ran the gamut from youth theater productions to what appears to have something bordering on burlesque shows to concerts to bazaars where doll clothes were sold. There seem to have been a couple of activities each week during the time between Thanksgiving and Christmas.

The Fund purchased new unclothed dolls in bulk, which would have saved a substantial amount of money, and then prevailed upon the girls and women of Atlanta to donate their fabrics and time to make clothes for the dolls. This doll seems to have come with stockings and shoes, which would have made her a little pricier than a barefoot doll. 

This appeal to the women of Atlanta to rush to the newspaper to pick up a doll to dress was published in The Atlanta Georgian on 3 December 1914 and written from the doll's point of view. Its depiction of the dolls' possible fate is a bit drastic, but the call to dress the doll pulls at the heartstrings. 

Won't You Dress This Doll and Brighten Some Little Girl's Christmas?

Told To The Christmas Editor.

I am a doll--as yet undressed and unadorned. I am doomed to be forever the chattel and bond slave of some child. No thoughts of suffrage or equal rights ever come to me, for my lot is foreordained, and I accept it.

But I am content. I would not swap my fate to be Queen of the Carnival. For I was created that a child might be happy.

I will grow old early. My hair will disappear--not in single strands, one by one, but at one fell swoop, like the scalp of an Indian's victim. I expect that my nose will be cracked before long, and my eyes punched in.

But it will not be through neglect. No. I will be loved as tenderly as ever, in spite of my mishaps and mutiliation. I will be all in all to some little girl, who will hug me with a fierce devotion as long as there is a scrap of sawdust left to be hugged. I am glad.

I am the spirit of Christmas. I am happiness incarnate. And because I have been selected as a gift to one of the children of Atlanta's poor, I am likewise a symbol of charity. And again I am glad.

But it is not well that I go to my little mistress unclothed. It may be that I am destined for a home whose children themselves are cold for lack of clothing, and in which there is little brightness and attractiveness. Will you not clothe me?

Won't you please put a bit of ribbon at my throat and my waist, and make for me a little dress, perhaps with a scrap of lace here and there, so that I may go forth gloriously to my mistress on 
Christmas Day and make her doubly happy?

It will be indeed the finest charity if you will dress me and my sisters who are at The Georgian office. I do ot ask it through vanity, but I ask it because by making me more beautiful you lighten the gloom that has settled about the heart of the little girl to whom I am going, and that may taint her spirit forever. A little child is so sensitive, so impressionable. I who am only a doll know that. I know that when the soul and the heart of a child are concerned you must be more careful than you would with my fragile body.

Even as I am now, unclothed and ashamed of it, the little girl to whom I am going will be glad to have me. But dressed as the practiced hands of girls and women can dress me, I will transport my little mistress into a heaven of happiness, where she will remain for many blissful days and weeks, forgetting the poverty and misery about her, and thinking the wholesome, wonderful, fairy thoughts that all little girls should think.

So, won't you dress me?

I am at the office of The Atlanta Georgian, No. 20 East Alabama street, together with a great many other dolls that the Empty Stocking Fund is buying. Think of it, and if you are interested, send your check to the Christmas Editor.