Yale University Library

39002004678554

FURNITURE OF THE PILGRIM CENTURY

FURNITURE of the
PILGRIM CENTURY
1620-1720
INCLUDING COLONIAL UTENSILS
AND HARDWARE BY
WALLACE NUTTING
ILLUSTRATED WITH ONE THOUSAND PHOTOGRAPHS Br THE AUTHOR
HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED

[^

BOSTON
MARSHALL JONES COMPANY
PUBLISHERS

COPYRIGHT- 192 I
BY WALLACE NUTTING

AU rights reserved

THE PLIMPTON PRESS
NORWOOD-MASS'U-S-A

To
HENRY WOOD ERVING
WHO EARLY DISCERNED THAT THE
STRENGTH AND BEAUTY OF
PILGRIM FURNITURE
WAS AN EXPRESSION OF
PILGRIM CHARACTER

FOREWORD
'T^HE interest in native wood early furniture is of recent growth. Many
¦*¦ persons who formerly collected Sheraton types have gone farther
back through the Hepplewhite period, through the Chippendale, to the
Dutch period, and of late not a few persons collected only Americana, by
which term, applied to furniture, is meant not merely furniture made in
America, but made also of native woods.
The spirit of patriotism stirred by the great war, has stimulated interest
in the work our fathers left. The study of American furniture has only
recently reached the point of recognizing how desirable is the handiwork
formed of local materials, as modified from foreign styles by the exigencies
of the colonists. The late Empire furniture has acquired, without reason,
in New York at least, the epithet Colonial. We should do what is possi
ble to relieve our early fathers of the responsibility for such productions.
Nothing is colonial that follows 1776, and so far as concerns those who de
sire to be correct the Colonial name should not be applied to any furniture
later than Chippendale.
But what did the second generation of settlers, and to some extent the first
generation, have as furniture? This fascinating question has begun to call
to us until thousands ask it. This book is the effort to answer the ques
tion, and hence nothing is shown here that was not or could not have been
made in America before the time of the cabriole leg, except the gateleg
table, a style which continued half way through the eighteenth century;
and pine cupboards, which for the sake of completeness, are shown to the
close of their period.
No comparison can be made between the rich productions of England
during the seventeenth century in furniture, and English books about it,
with American furniture. A compendium such as is easy to produce, full
of copies indiscriminately made of English and American pieces, is no
longer satisfactory. This book shows few pieces of furniture that have been
illustrated before, except in some instances of fuller restorations of pieces
previously shown. This statement is made with trembling because no
[vii]

one can be absolute in knowledge of this kind. The main feature of the
book, however, is that most of the examples here shown were until recently
unknown. The author is indebted to many persons for information and for the
privilege of photographing their rare furniture. The names of these persons
will be credited under the pictures of their pieces unless an owner has re
quested that his name be omitted.
The author has done most of the photographic work personally. In
reproducing the photographs he has taken care where possible to avoid the
serious error of working out backgrounds — a thing which cannot be done
successfully. We thus have a richer variety of early American work than
has hitherto been attempted.
The objects treated in this book are so confined in character and period
that it has been thought best to depart from the usual custom of showing
only museum specimens. Thus very many simple pieces are set forth,
and even slight modifications in style are noted. For instance, the pine cup
board, now attracting so much attention, is treated by the exhibit of many
quaint little examples, which twenty years since would have been scorned.
The same attention to simple articles, possible to acquire by any furniture
lover, has been given, under beds, cradles, chairs and utensils.
A few pictures including human figures have been used. This was neces
sary because the rooms containing the furniture are dismantled. The
rooms themselves were so carefully furnished that it has been thought im
portant to show them, despite the figures. W. N.

[ viii ]

CONTENTS PAGE
Carved Chests  i
Ornamented Chests, not Carved  35
Plain Chests  44
Chests of Drawers  59
Chests on Frames  87
Desk- and Bible-boxes  97
Secretaries and Desks  112
Court and Press Cupboards  ._   123
Pine Cupboards and Dressers.  144
Wainscot Chairs  175
Turned Pilgrim Chairs  182
Later Pilgrim Chairs   208
Carved or Caned Chairs  234
Banister-back Chairs  258
Children's Chairs  276
Miscellaneous Chairs  281
Stools and Crickets  285
Couches, Settles and Settees  293
Cradles and Beds  314
Chair Tables  335
Boards and Trestles  342
Refectory and Library Tables  345
Gate-leg Tables  362
Butterfly Tables  389
Tavern Tables. .  405
Occasional Tables and Stands  423
Candle Stands  451
Miscellany  471
Looking Glasses  490
Clocks  522
Utensils  526
Hardware  540
Index  581

ix]

FURNITURE OF THE PILGRIM CENTURY

AN Architectural Chest. Owner:
Mr. G. H. Buek, East Hampton,
Long Island.
Mr. Buek's dwelling is that made
famous as the inspiration of the
poem, "Home, Sweet Home." The
chest was discovered by Mr. Buek
in his neighborhood. The tradition
is that it was brought from Lynn in
1649, by a family of Osbournes. It
has been very successfully restored
by Mr. Morris Schwartz. There are
two end-to-end drawers, a rare ar
rangement. The end carving is
shown in the second picture. There
the carving is from the solid, and the
architectural front is merely imitated.
Date 1640-1650.

[1]

AN elaborately carved chest belonging to Mr. William B. Goodwin of
Columbus, Ohio. The chest, which has been restored by Mr. Morris
Schwartz, has unusual carving on the stiles and top rail of a very handsome
character. It departs from the conventional foliage pattern which appears
on the bottom rail. This rail reminds one of the carving on the torus drawer
of court cupboards, on page 126. Date, 1650-70.
Chests were the first furniture. The earliest need of man emerging
from barbarism was a receptacle for.v tluable belongings. The Hebrew ark
of the covenant was a chest. The vord chest, under innumerable forms,
appears in our earliest literature. The carving on ecclesiastical chests was
inspired by reverence as well as by t.4e Knate necessity of man to express
himself. Chests, as we first know them, originated in Italy, the cradle of arts.
The English chests, our direct source of design, were brought to America
more often than other forms of furniture. They were transported full of
va'uable goods and therefore occupied no extra cargo space. Further, they
were the most cherished articles of property.

M

A CARVED Three-panel Oak Chest, owned by the author.
It is peculiar in having an oak paneled top, known in only two or three
other American chests. This feature would indicate an early date since the
earliest chests were closer imitations of the English than the later chests.
A good feature is the scrolled botiom rail. The carving on the inner
stiles is also very uncommon on Amerk an chests. The bottom is pine but
the back is oak. No English chests containing pine are known.
The origin of this chest is not "deiiliitely traced, but it is presumably
Connecticut. Size: 20x46 inches. Hight 27^ inches. Date 1650-60.
The fact that a chest has not a drawer does not necessarily indicate an
early date, yet other things being equal, the absence of a drawer tends to
throw the date back. The earliest chest had no drawer. The later eh'-sts
occasionally had no drawer, but the second and the third drawer mark
the approach toward a chest of drawers. Of course, all carved arches on
chests represent a later substitution for an architectural arch such as ap
peared in the chest on page 1 .
This remark applies to the lunettes on the upper rail of the chest before
us which are, of course, incipient arches.

l3l

A CARVED Oak, Paneled Lid Chest. Owner: Mr. George Dudley Sey
mour of New Haven. This piece is pronounced American, in spite of the
fact that its lid is of paneled oak, a feature which, in over seventy chests
shown in this book, appears in two cases only. The date is therefore very
early, 1650-1660. The panels are carved in a Runic design. The lower
rail and the stiles are lightly carved. The owner thinks the carving
incomplete, which we might question. The upper stile is faintly scratched,
and prepared for intersecting lunettes.

The chest was found in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.
Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford.

It is now in

These chests were convenient for the storage of biggins, boot-haunches,
crosscloths, coifes, demicastors, leather doublets, forehead cloths, jerkins,
kirtles, masks, portmantles, ruffs, safeguards, swashes, and such wearing
apparel, used in those days.

[4]

AN Oak Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: 1660-70.
The ends, which do not show, are in single panels. Though the short
stiles are plain, the end stiles carry double rows of "pencil and pearl" carving.
The top rail, between rows of pencil and pearl ornament, carries a scroll.
The bottom rail carries one row of the pencil and pearl ornament.
The top is oak.
Size: Length, 47^ inches; hight, 26^ inches; front to back, 20% inches.
To a student of structure this chest is as good as any to illustrate certain
peculiarities. The molding on the inside edge of the leg-stiles is worked
from the solid, apparently after the parts of the chest are assembled. Thus
this molding runs out to nothing at the top and bottom. Again, the
bottom rail is beveled on its upper edge, under each panel, which is not
true at the top of the panels. The practice in this respect varied. The
till at the top of the chest, at one end, was usually of pine, and generally
framed in. The back posts, projecting as they did beyond the back top
rail, were cut away for an inch or so, at the top, to permit the lid to open
and to stop the lid, when it struck the shoulder thus cut on the post. Other
wise the lid would have been wrenched off its hinges.

[S]

EnsBeSKSfS ¦: ,yy hs-s -' ^s^sS^^^^SB^S^SBB^'

AN Oak Four-Panel Chest. Date: 1660-70.
The decoration of the top rail is a type of lunettes and reversed lunettes
which we see also on the next page, and on some other oak chests, and one
pine chest in this work. The letters P. W. are, if our date is correctly
estimated, a rather early instance of initials, though one other instance
appears on the ship chest, page 34, as early as this.
It is a striking and beautiful chest. The laureling, which it bears on the
short stiles, resembles that on the author's court cupboard, page 125.
Also that on the chest, page 3, both early pieces, close to English influence.
The absence of a drawer, the great length, and the careful work, all support
the date given.
The author has expended a great deal of time in seeking to trace the source
of this photograph .
In the matter of initials on furniture, they appeared in England in some
instances very early. One piece bears the date 1533, and two names,
doubtless those of a husband and wife. In instances also the faces of
husband and wife appeared, carved on the panels.
Such chests were generally made to order. In fact most other furniture
was so made. That is what gives early furniture so much individuality.
It was designed for the house into which it was to go, and for a very specific
purpose. A philosopher or a poet might start a train of reflection or senti
ment on the fact that the furniture, and even the initials survive the memory
of their owners, who are otherwise lost to us.

[6]

AN Oak Four-Panel Chest. Owner: William G. Erving, M.D., of
Washington. Date: 1660-70. It is 54^ inches long; 29^ inches high;
22*^ inches from front to back, — perhaps the largest no-drawer chest shown
in this book.
The carving is as unusual as the size. The top and bottom rail are
carved like the top rail of the chest on the opposite page, with lunettes and
reversed lunettes, forming shuttle patterns. But the long stiles carry an
extremely rare pattern, difficult to define; carvers characterize it as a "spade"
motive. The short stiles show carving like an inset split-ball turning. The
other features, on end and front, are obvious.
We notice that the bottom rail is not chamfered, as is usual, where it
meets the panels.
This chest never had a drawer, but not a few chests, on careful exami
nation, show that a drawer is missing. Sometimes the supports are en
tirely removed, but some trace of a framed rail for the drawer to rest upon
can always be found, generally in the form of a rabbet on the back stile.

[7]

AN Oak Three-Tulip-Paneled Chest. Owner: Mr. George Dudley Sey
mour. Date: 1660-80. In having no drawer this Connecticut chest
shares in honor with the more usual design, with sunflower center panel,
on page 12. The design carrying three tulip panels is unique, so far as
now known.
It is 47 inches long; 26 inches high; 19 inches from front to back. The
new top should have been pine, not oak. It is otherwise original. It was
found in the Capt. Charles Churchill House, Newington, Connecticut,
nearly forty years ago. At that time it stood on end, and was in use as a
harness cupboard.
A Connecticut Sunflower Court Cupboard was ejected from the same
house to "make room."

[8]

AN Oak Tulip Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: 1660-70.
Size: Length, 49 inches; hight, 32 inches; front to back, i8>£ inches.
The ends have three panels. The tulip design carved thus all over the
piece, on rails and stiles as well as on panels, is very rare. It reminds us
somewhat in this respect of the Hadley Chest, which is also completely
covered with carving.
There is a two-drawer chest in the Connecticut Historical Society, in this
fashion of rail and stile carving, though the panels are more like the tulip
panels of the "Sunflower" chests. These are important and early examples
of chests. It is hoped that more of them may be discovered.
It is to be noted that no moldings appear on this chest. They would
be an over-enrichment, and insipid.

[9]

A PALM- PANEL Chest. Owned by the author. Date: 1650-70.
Quite generally the stiles and rails of oak chests are ornamented with the
shadow molding, as here, when they are not carved. The palm carving
was early. The three similar chests, which have come to the author's
attention are of the same character as this chest, having the lunettes on
the top rail, and the large and small rosettes on the drawer fronts. Mr.
H. W. Erving's has two drawers. The length of the chest above is 52 inches;
hight, 30^2 inches, as three or four inches are missing from the feet; front
to back, 21 inches.
The lid of this chest in pine, is a little too narrow, and bevels sharply,
it being apparently cut from a slab, and left full width on the lower side, to
cover as well as possible.
The regular number of lunettes on such chests is five, while there are
seven large and six small rosettes. This chest has a three-panel end.
Mr. Erving's has a four-panel end.

[10]

AN Oak Tulip-Panel Chest, with the Connecticut Cross Panel, from the
Henry Stearns Collection, Hartford.
This chest is quite like that on page 13, except for the center panel,
where the cross, so characteristic of Connecticut architecture, is substituted
for the sunflower panel. Of course, the large oval knobs are incorrect
restorations for the proper original small knobs. The blocks at the feet are
not a part of the chest.
The ramifications of the word chest, its analogies and synonyms, offer a
suggestive by-path. Aged persons often pronounce the word chist, which
follows the derivation, and was probably correct at one time. The word
is almost unchanged from its Greek form, which indeed is precisely the
Scotch kist.
The coffer ano cassone are equivalents.

[11]

A CONNECTICUT "Sunflower" chest, without drawer, owned by Mr.
James N. H. Campbell of Hartford. We arrive in this chest at a type which
has without sufficient reason come to be more sought for than any other
chest. As all these chests have been traced to Hartford County and most
of them to Hartford, there is a strong presumption that they were all made
by one man and his successor or local imitator. Efforts have been made to
trace the maker but, such is human fame, none of the makers of our earliest
pieces are known. The characteristics of this type of chest are a sunflower
stock with three blossoms and foliage as the center panel, which is always
chamfered at the corners to form an irregular octagon. The side panels
are conventional tulips.
The no drawer type is very rare indeed. There may be in all some fifty
to seventy sunflower chests in existence. There is a tradition that some of
them came from England, and in one case the author saw an inscription on
a lid giving the date on which his earliest American ancestor brought it over.
Against this tradition there is the insuperable objection that the bottoms
and backs and lids of these chests are invariably in pine. Lyon, in his very
accurate work, states that English collectors have never seen an English
chest, oak and pine in parts.
Size: 44^ inches long; 24^2 inches high; 18 inches from front to back.
Date 1670-80.

[12]

A ONE-DRAWER Sunflower Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving.
Date: 1660-80.
Size: 44^ inches long; 31 inches high; 19^ inches from front to back.
The measurements given are generally, as here, on the frame. Lids usually
overhang about three-quarters of an inch in front, and twice as much at
the ends.
The lid is pine. There are two end panels. The upper end panel has
beveled corners, and four small bosses around the central boss. The
fashion of slanting the "turtle backs" or bosses, on the drawer is interesting.
The one drawer Connecticut sunflower chest is very rare, the two drawer
pattern being more numerous.
While the name "sunflower" chest has been bestowed on this style, it is
understood that there are always side panels with conventionalized tulips.

[13]

A PANELED-LID Oak Child's Chest. Date 1670-1700. Owner: Mr.
George Dudley Seymour. It is the only miniature chest in oak of this date,
so far found, in America. The front rail is charred, perhaps by rush lights,
a common thing in English chests. Hight, 14^ inches; lid, 12^ by 20^
inches. The miniature chest below with four ball feet, and double arch
mold, belongs to J. Milton Coburn, M.D. Date: 1700-1710.

1

[14]

A TWO-DRAWER Sunflower Chest. Date: 1660-1680. This specimen
has not lost any considerable portion of its feet; the top is original except
the cleats; so are most of the ornaments. It was restored many years ago,
perhaps forty, by Hartford craftsmen, inspired by the interest just then
awakened by Dr. Lyon and his friends.
It completes the series of sunflower chests, begun on pages 12 and 13.
It is 45 inches long; 20lyi inches from front to back; 40 inches high; legs,
6 inches, probably never more than 6^2 inches. There is an interesting
variation in the carving of these chests, showing the individuality so dear
to the collector. Owner: the author, who bought the chest near Hartford.

[15]

A CARVED and Painted Chest. Owner: Mr. M. A. Norton, of
Hartford. Date, shown on the central panel, 1704.
This chest is really a variant of the sunflower pattern, with the sunflower
left out! Instead of applied spindles and chamfered corners on the drawers,
we find painted tulip decoration, thus carrying out the carved tulip design
in the side panels.
This chest is undoubtedly later than the pattern shown on the previous
page, of which by the way, Mr. Norton has two examples.
The date is very valuable. It is very seldom found on chests, except in
the last decade of the 17th or the first decade of the 18th Century.

[16]

A ONE-DRAWER Hadley Chest. Owner: Mr. Brooks Reed, of Boston.
In this chest we reach a style in much request. The specimens found
are in one, two and three drawers; the one drawer style being extremely
rare; the two drawer style predominating; and there are but two known
pieces in the three drawer style.
The dates run from 1680, or more certainly from 1690 to 1710. The
material, as that of nearly all carved chests, is oak, with pine in lid, back,
bottom and drawer bottoms. The size is about 44 inches long and 19
inches "deep," that is, from the front to the back. The hight varies ac
cording to the number of drawers, from 37 inches upward. The chests are
almost always initialed. The crude carving varies somewhat in pattern.

[17]

L

A HADLEY Chest, with Full Name. Owner: Mr. Philip L. Spalding,
of Boston. Date: 1690-1700.
The material as usual is oak, with pine lid. It is extremely rare that a
full name is carved on an American chest of this date.
The piece was found near Deerfield, about 1916, by Dr. Miner of Green
field, who also found in the same vicinity the three-drawer Hadley Chest,
on page 22. The condition of both pieces was very good.

[18]

AN Oak Hadley Chest. Owner: Mr. B. A. Behrend, Brookline. Date:
1690-1700. A very beautiful specimen. Its general surface is the soft
age-worn front, so pleasing in its mellow effect.
Instances are known of the absence of initials on Hadley chests. But
usually either initials, or in two or three instances a full name, appears.
Sometimes a Hadley is locked by passing a flat bar vertically down through
a slot, just inside where the 'scutcheons would otherwise appear. The top
is then locked, and all drawers are secure.
The making of a good early lock was no small part of the labor of con
struction on a chest. Most locks are lost. The hinges on nearly all early
American chests are "pin," that is, cotter pin. The so-called chest hinge,
a strap with an offset, is seldom seen.

[19]

jppijwiinwi' J!! j  HiPM "H'l'l  ¦' ifWnWHrWIflPTTfTT^T
i, ,<¦¦ i i i ju j i'hi, «¦ i; "

^S^TT^W^M

f^bxJN ^flRl

A ONE-DRAWER Hadley Chest. Date 1690-1700. The variations
between this chest and that on page 17, are to be marked, as indicating
that the designer, while following in general the style of carving peculiar
to the Hadley chest, did not confine himself to slavish copying. For in
stance, a grotesque head appears on the center of the drawer, page 17,
whereas here a different motive prevails. This chest was found in South
eastern New Hampshire, in the hands of an owner who had brought it from
the Connecticut river, in Southern New Hampshire. It is of very recent
discovery and bears out the uniform source of this class of chests — on the
Connecticut river section of Massachusetts. Size: \\yi inches long; 18^
inches from front to back; 35X inches high. It is owned by the author.

[20]

A TWO-DRAWER Hadley Chest, owned by the author. Date: 1690-
1700. The carving here differs slightly from that on the preceding chest,
especially in the bottom rail. This chest is in a remarkably good state of
preservation, and, in this particular, it stands rather high on its legs.
The initials here are H. A., and are carved in the conventional style on the
center panel. Size: 44 inches long; 42^ inches high, and 18^4 inches
front to back.
A remark of Mr. H. W. Erving inquiring in 1883, if a certain friend had
seen his "Hadley" chest apparently originated the name. Give a piece of
furniture a specific name and at once you enhance its desirability to many
collectors. We, of course, absolve Mr. Erving from any malice afore
thought, as no one had then discovered this tendency of the collector.
[21]

A THREE-DRAWER Hadley Chest, owned by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
The only other Hadley chest known with three drawers is in the Deerfield
Museum. It will be seen that all the Hadley chests here shown with two
and three drawers have four end panels, which are plain. The Hadley chests
were, as a rule, painted in black or red. Of course the carving is very
simple. Date, 1680-1700. [22]

AN Oak Diamond-and-Arch Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date:
1760-80. Size: Length, 45^ inches; hight, 33J/2 inches; front to back,
19^ inches.
An elaborate chest, with legs of unusual length. The ends have three
panels, all plain. The turned incised ornaments at the sides of the arch
are simple but effective. The number of features on this chest leave little
out from the possibilities. The interesting enumeration includes: drops,
bosses, nail-heads, shadow mold, diamonds, rosettes, blocked corners,
turned ornaments, an arch, keystone and other arch-structure blocks, and
moldings around panels and drawer.
The question of correct taste in chest ornament is not the only question
as regards desirability. Quaintness, rarity, odd features, even the over
doing of some features, are all elements entering into the matter. The
historical record is often completed, or a mooted point of structure or decor
ation is cleared up by an unusual chest.

[23]

AN Oak Chest, with Double-arched Center Panel. Owner: Mr. M. A.
Norton. Date: 1660-80.
An important feature of this chest is its two sets of end-to-end drawers,
scarcely known elsewhere. The double arched panel, with its keystones
and capitals, reminds us of similar details on court cupboards. The pointed
dentils above, and the three lines of notched carving below are excellent,
and rare features. The additional decoration afforded by the pencil and
pearl molding renders the chest very rich
The feet have lost somewhat by wear. The chest was found in Con
necticut, the home of most American oak chests. It had been for many
generations in the family from which it was purchased. The chest opposite
has so many similar features, that the two should be compared carefully.

[24]

AN Oak Chest, with Diamond Center Panel. Owner: Mr. B. A.
Behrend, of Brookline. Date: 1670-80.
This chest has the rare arrangement of two drawers end-to-end. It is
enriched by pointed dentils under the lid, and by three rows of tooth or
notch carving. The similarity of this to the opposite chest make it
morally certain that the two came from the same neighborhoods. The
principal variation in style is in the center panel. Each also carries
two lines of molding with sets of duplicate notches, roughly resembling the
pencil and pearl motive, which, however, is absent from this chest. What
we have called pointed dentils are nothing other than the immediate juxta
position of dentils with the Norman tooth carving.
It may be presumed that the infrequency of the two drawers end-to-end
was the greater convenience of a long drawer for laying clothing with fewer
folds. This convenience was found to be so great that it no doubt was re
sponsible for adding drawer on drawer, until the chest disappeared, and
the chest of drawers alone was left.

[25]

AN Oak Three-Panel Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: 1670-
1680. Size: 44 inches long; 25^2 inches high; 18 inches from front to back.
The foliated scroll on the center panel, with the initials W. B., differentiates
the chest from the simple three panel chests. The absence of a drawer
might suggest a date ten years earlier.
The chests of this general type have the corner blocks, of triangular shape,
painted black. The shadow molding is also, as a rule, black; and the ap
plied ornaments are, we believe, uniformly black. These last are generally
of maple, but sometimes of beech or pine, or perhaps birch. Fine birch
seldom grows as far south as Connecticut, except on the highlands. These
were settled later, and even then were far from a cabinet shop and so
precluded an extensive use of birch.

[26]

1 1 ^'

• „,- ,,£ y X- '

A SEVENTEENTH Century Carved New England Oak Chest, owned
by Mr. George Dudley Seymour. Front and end panels of oak, original
pine lid. The Renaissance carving of the stiles and top-rail is perhaps
copied by the maker from the copper-plate frontispiece fly leaf of an old
Bible. Height, 26>£ inches; width of top, 22^ inches; length of top, 45 inches.
Date 1650-1680. The chest was sold many years ago at an auction of the
effects of Josiah Herricks, of Antrim, New Hampshire, and, therefore,
called the "Antrim Chest."
It is generally understood in this volume that the lids of all chests and
boxes are pine unless otherwise stated. Also that the frames are oak.
Chests were made when the passion for solidity ruled. But the American
could not resist making his lid, at least, of pine, not merely because it was
readily available in fine wide boards, but because it was easy to work, and
to lift.
[27]
smsmgsmgg/Ujiaa

I ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
A THREE-PANEL, Corner Block Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving.
Date: 1770-80. Size: 50 inches long; 33^ inches high; 2i}{ inches, front
to back.
This chest has two end-to-end drawers and other features which cause
it to resemble closely the chest on page 25 .
There are three end panels. To the student this chest is very effective
with its numerous black blocks and drawer fronts. The effect of the
lighting does not show the quartering of the grain of the left panel.
An interesting, possibly desirable, feature is the half-leg, turned, super
imposed on the stile leg, and not fully reaching the floor. This feature
does not appear on any other chest in this work.
We consider the tooth carving lends a marked degree of strength and the
feeling of great antiquity.

[28]

A CARVED Oak Chest, with Drops. Owner: Mr. James N. H. Camp
bell. Date: 1670-80. Size: Length, 48 inches; hight, 37^ inches; front
to back, 20 inches.
This very rich front exhibits many features, which are too clearly shown
to require full description. A peculiarity is the very wide bottom rail. The
carving between the rosettes is very unusual. So also are the four little
sections into which each side panel is divided. The rosettes are carried
out even on the feet, and foliage is carved below them.

[29]

u >! c

1..' • <%H

»U -

AN Architectural Chest with Four Panels. Owner: Mr. Stanley A.
Sweet, New York City.
This chest is an amazing instance of individuality. That a carver should
desire in 1776, the plainly original date of this chest, to copy the architec
tural arched chest of at least a hundred and fifty years before, certainly
shows a decisive and independent mind in the maker. He was not satisfied
with a simulated arch, but must needs "do it right" and put the arch into
the framing. The fine scale-like, lattice-like tracery on the stiles and the
lower rail are noticeable, as well as the handsome rosettes, some being
"doubled." The brackets are very striking. The same repeated S scrolls,
carried around the arches and just under the lid are seen on the chest,
page 5-
Regarding the authenticity of dates on chests, it is obvious that if one
had desired to create the impression of great age, by a false date, he would
have chosen an earlier date for this chest . That chests are sometimes falsely
dated, we are certain. Nor is it always easy to detect the fraud. Experts
in carving are themselves deceived in this matter.

[30

A TWO-DRAWER Carved Pine Chest. Owner: Mr. B. A. Behrend.
Date: 1680-1700.
This is the earliest and best pine chest that has come to our attention,
in this style. It will be seen that the arched grooving is like that of the
oak box, page 102. The lunettes are like those on numerous oak chests.
The maker apparently loved his material, but strangely did not copy the
legs of oak chests, but followed the style in his frame of the six board pine
chest. It is hard to understand the three hearts carved above the lunettes,
so as to interfere with them. All the heavy moldings are carried around
the ends, a feature which is perhaps unique in pine. This chest was bought
in Boston, but found, probably, in Connecticut. The discoverer is not
living to verify the origin.

[3i]

A ONE-DRAWER Carved Pine Chest. Owner: Mr. G. Winthrop
Brown. Date: 1680-1700. This chest like the preceding, is a rare speci
men. Its drawer was pulled by reaching under the front, so that it required
no knobs. This style, which omits a rail below the drawer, while a rare
feature is nevertheless present on some of the oldest cabinet pieces in this
work. The little gouge notches cut in the ends of the front boards are
often seen on boxes, cradles, and other cabinet pieces. A very peculiar
line of carving under the large lunettes suggests small horizontal arched
flutings, overlying each other.
Altogether we have here a series of carved pine chests which the collector
of oak may hold lightly, but which are, in spite of that, very quaint and
very important in the history of furniture.

[32]

'

i\

'

Y •N:

A SIX-BOARD Pine Chest. In the former collection of the author.
Date: 1690-1710. An amusing instance of quick appreciation in values
is connected with this chest. It passed, within seven years, through
the hands of two of the best known dealers in antique furniture, at a very
small price. As it was the first carved pine chest of any consequence which
either had handled, they failed to appreciate it properly.
It is easy, by comparing the simple carving with the modified lunette
carving on several oak chests in this work, to see the source of the maker's
motive. We have also, bordering the carving, the arch molding, done in the solid,
which was usually applied to the chests of drawers of the period . The writer
knows of one or two other chests with different carving but of the same
plain six-board construction.
The central sunflower very much adds to the effect. We have seen how
popular it was on Connecticut chests. This one also came from Con
necticut.

[33]

k

A CAPTAIN'S Six-Board Sea-Chest. Owner: Mr. George F- Ives, of
Danbury, Connecticut. Date, appearing in three places on the front,
1677. Initialed, M. S. The term ship or sea chest has been erroneously
applied to chests with V or "boot-jack" ends. Sea chests are always low,
to prevent the danger of overturning. They could not have legs, owing
to the manner in which they are stowed in the forecastle. They always
have backs slanting forward, to fit the ship's side, and the lid is conse
quently narrower than the base.
The specimen before us is the best we have seen. The hearts may sug
gest an early date for the chest on page 3 1 . Certainly they, with the
style of carving, make a very early date plausible, and even probable.
This chest has the usual rope handle.
The lid measures 21 by 53 inches. The chest is 19 inches high.
It is a little to be wondered at that sailors, who are fond of carving, did
not oftener expend their talents on ship chests. But if we begin to wonder
at what was not done in early furniture our field will be too wide. It is
even more wonderful that the present day sees so little real taste exhibited
in furniture.
Pine is not the best material for carving. Late architectural carving
was often done in pear wood, the favorite medium of Grinling Gibbon.
The best wood was one with a hard, fine grain. Oak itself, while the
classic material for Gothic carving, is not susceptible of the daintiest cut
ting.

[34]

AN Oak Two-Drawer Chest with Drops. In the Metropolitan Museum.
Date: 1660-80. The desire for variety led, in the usual fashion, to the
difference in moldings seen on the two drawers. The diamond blocks are
effective. The curious triangular blocks just below the lid are an oddity.
The favorite motive of stopping the heavy molding by returns on the front
is seen here in perfection.

[35]

A CHEST with Drops. Owner: Mr. G. Winthrop Brown, Brookline.
A two-drawer chest with single panel ends. The decoration is extremely
rare. The motive of the fronts of chests always tended to straight lines.
In this case we have a series of curved moldings.
There are four ball feet. The chest bears initials, A. D. Date: 1680-
1700. The drops are also rare in form. The long drops on the leg stiles are
symmetrical from their centers, like turnings in the stretchers of chairs.
It is a feature of ball-foot chests that their base molding runs around
the end as well as the front. This may or may not be true of stile-foot
chests.

[36]

HEAVY Two-Drawer Ball-foot Chest. Owner: Mr. Brooks Reed.
Date: 1660-70.
The heavy effect of this chest suggests its early date. The habit of sim
ulating drawers in the front of the chest part proper shows, however, that
at the time this chest was made, complete chests of drawers were well
known. The back legs are stiles. Later chests with ball feet were more
likely to have the four feet alike.

[371

AN Oak Chest, with Drops. Owner: Mr. Harry Long. Date 1670-1680.
This chest is peculiar in having its stiles run down below the base molding
before the balls are attached . It has the appearance of a chest on which ball
feet are out of place, but the feet appear to be original. There can be no
doubt that some restorations have been made, in the interest of ornament,
using ball feet where a plain stile was originally used.
On pages 61 and 66 there are also stiles running below the body of
the chests before the ball-feet are attached. We do not consider this
feature a merit.
The reader will notice the entire absence, on the ends of chests, of long
drops on the stiles. The makers were content, at most, with affixing
bosses in the end panels, though sometimes even these are omitted. Chests
were often so placed that the ends were not prominent, and so not im
portant. The embossed central square on the panels is a pleasing feature, and the
chest altogether is very attractive. As restored, the moldings are in red.
We err in supposing the color decoration of early furniture was quiet. It
was brilliant in the extreme. The old reds which we admire are merely the
result of age.

[38]

AN Oak Chest, with Applied Ornament. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving.
Date: 1680-1690.
This chest shows no very marked variation from some that have preceded
it, except that we have now passed out of the carved styles, and shall find
only such decoration as variations in moldings and in applied turned pieces
can supply. The moldings on this chest are of Spanish cedar. There are
two panels in the ends. The triglyphs, which appear here in numbers, give
a strong series of vertical lines. Size: 45^ inches long, 33 inches high, 20^
inches from front to back.
It has not hitherto been mentioned, but the reader will have seen that
oak chests were made of riven lumber, and therefore they almost uniformly
show the quarter grain. This is sufficient ornament in itself. In fact, we
count it a defect that carving should ever appear on any except plain oak.

[39]

AN Oak Chest, with Applied Ornaments. Owner: In the former Wallace
Nutting Collection; then owned by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash; then by an owner
unknown to the writer. It is marked by very handsome quartering, appar
ently left free of ornament on the top rail to show its beauty. Date: 1670-90.
At the top of the next page is a chest of oak owned by Mr. Dwight Blaney
of Boston and Weston. It is wisely left in the rough. Date: 1660-70.
At the bottom of the page opposite is an oak chest owned by Mr. H. W.
Erving. It has the characteristic shadow moldings strongly emphasized.
The end panels are varied with blocks, forming short armed crosses. It
has two-panel ends. It is 43 inches long, 31 inches high, and is 20^2 inches
from front to back.

[40

[4i]

AN Oak Chest, with Applied Ornaments. Owner: Mrs. Hulings Cow-
perthwaite Brown, of Boston and Brookline. A chest with interesting
ornaments, inherited from the Waters Estate. Date: 1670-90.
On page 43, at the top, is a chest belonging to Mr. H. W. Erving. It has
three-panel ends. It was made as seen with no rail under the drawer. Its
date is 1660-80. It is 45^ inches long, 24^ inches high, the feet having
been shortened, and 18X inches from front to back.
A chest at the bottom of page 43, belonging to Mr. H. W- Erving, has
pine panels, with the usual oak frame. There is a one panel end.
Date: 1670-80. It is 41^ inches long, 28^ inches high, and 18^ inches
from front to back.
Chests should not be judged in this book by the space accorded to them.
The exigencies of space, with so many specimens, must be apparent.

[42]

[43]

AN Oak Chest, with Chamfered Feet. Date: 1670-90. It is 47 inches
long, 29 inches high, and 20^ inches from front to back.
The shadow mold is the only ornament on stiles and rails. The student
will easily discern that the panel mold at the top and on the outside stiles
is worked in after the panel is put together, whereas the similar mold, on the
inner stile, is worked before assembling the panel. The reason is easily seen.
A miter was avoided; yet the general effect was preserved.
The chamfering of the legs seems original, though why it should have
been done, it is hard to say, as no one would now suppose any use or beauty
was conserved. Owner: the author.
With this chest we pass from the ornamental panel to simpler fashions
coincidentally with the short and delightful excursion in painted decoration
which arose about 1700, and continued perhaps twenty years, in a very
limited territory. Of course the plain, or nearly plain oak chest was used
by all sorts of persons, as to worldly condition. It is sufficient to show a few.

[44]

TT

lllj.llW. ill!!'

1 !"""

',y

L

AN Oak Chest with Painted Pine Panels and Painted Drawer-Front.
(Branford, Connecticut.) The oak carcass of the chest is painted black,
evidently in imitation of the contemporary English imitations of lacquer
work brought into England from the far East. The end panels are painted
in a thistle design while the central panel is dated 1705-6. The painting
is much plainer as seen on the chest than in the photograph. There was
a tradition of painting furniture in the shore towns of Connecticut, includ
ing Branford, Guilford, Madison, and extending up the Connecticut River
to Middletown. The chest is
now in the Wadsworth Athen-
eum, Hartford. Mr. George
Dudley Seymour, owner. Date:
1 690- 1 700.
The little chest at the bottom
of this page is painted in very
effective decoration, but the
photograph does not bring out
its features. The chest is owned
by the Metropolitan Museum.
Date about 1700.
[45]

A ONE-DRAWER Oak Chest. Owner: Mr. Dwight Blaney. Date
1660-80. The striking feature is the extraordinary repetition, above, below and on,
the drawer-front, of the same molding. We cannot deny it is very effective.
The motive is that found on the choicest sheathed paneling of our earliest
houses. The same idea is carried out on the top rail. The stiles show, on
each side, a triple bead which also appears at the top and the bottom, that
is on the rails, above and below, the drawer. The top of the panels is
chamfered, on the rail as well as the bottom — a rare feature. Mr. Blaney's
other numerous pieces have previously figured in works on furniture. We
seek to show, almost entirely, what has not hitherto been made public.
On page 48 are two miniature pine chests, made to go together. Owner:
Mr. Geo. D. Seymour. They are in the Wadsworth Atheneum. Date:
1710-20.

[46]

A SIX-BOARD Single-Drawer, Whitewood Chest, with front paneled
in the Jacobean manner. Formerly in the collection of George Dudley
Seymour. Now owned by Miss Mary Miles Lewis Peck, of Bristol, Con
necticut. An heirloom of the Lewis Family, of Farmington. Found in
Bristol, Connecticut, an offset of the town of Farmington, by Mr. Seymour
about 1895.
The panels are painted black, as well as the incised moldings in the rails
and stiles. The applied moldings are painted red. A peculiarity in this
chest is the running of the molding on the outside stiles down through the
width of the drawer. The central block of the panels is very thick, protrud
ing far beyond the face of the chest. Date 1700-20.
In 1920 Mr. Seymour found another six-board, single-drawer Whitewood
chest in Bristol of the same style. The two chests are so much alike
that they appear to have been made by the same hand. In 1920 the
author of this book found another chest of the same character, which
piece also is believed to have come from Connecticut. These three chests
are all that have come to light thus far of this style.

[47

mifm-mmivii nm . i iiiiiiiiMjwiipwiii

'">M"(#»/«»!I*J

[48]

ABOVE is a pine chest, owned by Mr. G. Winthrop Brown. Date,
1710-20. It has pleasing lines.
Below, on the left, a miniature chest in pine. It is i6y4 inches high; the
top is 19 x 13 inches. On the right is another little chest in pine. It is 20
inches high; the top is 23 x 13^ inches. Both are owned by Mr. Chauncey
C. Nash. Their date is 1710-20.

[49l

A TURNIP-FOOT All Pine Chest. Owner: the author.
The single arch mold suggests the date: 1690-1710.
The small chest below is a six board pine chest, dating about 1710.

[So]

ON the right is a little
chest with painted decor
ation of a very fine type.
It is owned by Mr.
Chauncey C. Nash. The
upper drawer is treated
as a unit with the chest
section, in the decorative
motive . The lower draw
er has birds, probably
doves, in addition to the
floral design. The single
arch molding gives us a
date, with other consid
erations, between 1700
and 1 7 10. This chest
belongs with the small
class with this decora
tion, found in the south
central portion of Con
necticut, sometimes as framed, at other times as board chests
of drawers. Of course the framed chests are more important, as
also more rare.

or chests
they are

THE little ball-foot chest
below is owned by Mr. Arthur
W. Wellington of Boston and
Weston. Date: 1700-10. The
miniature chest is always ap
pealing. Whether is was made
for children, or to place above
another piece, for specially val
uable belongings, we do not al
ways know. Doubtless it was
at times put to both uses. This
chest is pine.
It is often the case that the
front feet are balls, while be
hind the board end is carried
down.

[5i]

A PAINTED Chest of Whitewood. The property of the State of Con
necticut, in the Stone House, at Guilford. These decorated pieces are
mostly in whitewood, otherwise called tulip wood, with pine in parts. The
whitewood front presented a finer grain for painting than oak or pine.
The frames are oak. A goose painted on the end panel gives this piece its
name of Goose Chest. The outside scroll does not differ much from other
examples in this book. The design on the upper panel shows a handsome
vase of flowers. Compare pages 51, 45, 62, 63 and 74.
Within a triangle whose north apex is Middletown, east apex Madison,
and west apex Branford, all these pieces, together with the whitewood
chests shown or mentioned on page 47, have been found.

[52]

A PAINTED Chest, with Two Drawers. Owner: Mr. Geo. F- Ives.
Date: about 1700. Size of lid: 20 by 42 inches. Hight of chest, 40 inches.
This chest belongs to the class shown on page 74, and elsewhere. But the
design is different from the thistle and crown. To give room for a handsome
spray between the drawer panels, the latter were set very far apart.
There is a large tulip on the ends, as on page 62, and the whole design is
very attractive.
The feet are missing, which is not so noticeable, as owing to the unusual
hight of the chest, the proportion is well maintained.

[53]

A SMALL Painted Chest. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: about 1700.
When purchased the chest was entirely covered with a thick coat of
brown paint which had been on for many years . On carefully removing this ,
the figures all came out, and have simply been touched up line for line, with
absolute fidelity. One interesting fact brought out is preserved to us by this
protective coating of paint. That is the brilliancy of the coloring. It is
often imagined that the colors on decorated pieces were soft. They were in
reality quite strikingly bright, almost painfully so. Some of the parts of the
color on this chest were unbelievably red.
As retraced the fascinating little chest teaches us much. The background
appears black, but is a few shades off, rather green-black. The thistle
blossoms and buds and the crown are the most intense and varied centers of
color. Size: 25^ inches long, i6}{ inches from front to back, 19 inches high.
The overhang of the lid is Y% of an inch in front, and \Y2 inches at the ends.
The material is whitewood. The origin is south central Connecticut.

[54

isr

AN Oak Six-Board Chest. Owner: Koopman's, Boston. This example
shows the gouged notches at the ends of the front, and a mold at the joints
of the boards of the front, similar to that on the earliest sheathing.
The chest was the one indispensable piece of furniture in an old civiliza
tion or in a new country. Men could, and did for ages, eat from a board.
They sat on the chest. They could sleep on the ground, and did, even in a
highly civilized country, taking up their beds, that is, rugs, and marching on.
Or they slept on a chest. So the chest is the central symbol of house fur
nishing. It was the repository of treasures, the emblem of family dignity;
the object of bequest by will, more than any other property. It was the
first effort at joinery, and the last achievement of art. Among nomads,
where it was set down, there was home; when it was taken up, the march
followed. It was the family ark.
Romance, tragedy, the joy of the bride, the last memory of a long dead
owner, all gathered about a chest. The poorest could have something
that was called a chest. The wealthy or the devout summoned craftsmen
to put forth the best powers of their cunning and their genius upon this
symbol of family importance, or churchly devotion.

[55]

A CHEST in pine owned by Mr. W. of Boston. This piece should be
compared with the wardrobe of pine and whitewood, owned by the same
person, on page 145. Doubtless the reason why chests of this character are
very rare is that at the period of wall panel work in pine the chest had, for
the most part, passed out of style. For this very reason the piece before us
is of the more interest with its numerous panels which are raised, and with
its bracket feet, which do not go with any of the chests that precede this.
Somewhat is lost from the feet, perhaps an inch.
The question of the date of pine paneling is mooted. The best antiqua
rians who study houses place it at 1720. It would therefore hardly be pos
sible to name a much earlier date for this piece. There is in Mr. Geo. F.
Ives' collection a room of paneling into a side of which a secretary is built
with the same panel work as that used in the walls, and resembling this
chest. The date is agreeable to that already named.

The increased demand for labor doubtless works against artistic develop
ments in furniture. If the Indians had been hurried they would never
have thought out the designs in fabrics which are now sought after.
Beautiful and worthy work doubtless requires also a higher appreciation
than it now receives from the American public. As a politician must die
before he becomes a statesman, an artist or an artisan is seldom a genius
so long as he is with us.

[56]

A SEVENTEENTH Century Ship Model. Owner: Mr. Geo. F. Ives.
It stands on a decorated chest with slender legs. Owing to the difficulty
of bringing out the red and black decoration we do not attempt to show the
chest, merely using it to serve as a base for the model. Those who know,
state that every rope on an ancient ship is shown here. It is all original
requiring no restoration. The very sharply cocked bowsprit, and the high
poop, are peculiar to ancient vessels. The subject of ship models is worthy
of extended treatment, which it receives elsewhere, and we can hardly enter
farther into the subject in a work of this scope.
The chest, by the way, on its high legs, is said to have been placed, as now,
at the foot of a bed, to hold extra bed coverings.

[57

A SIX-BOARD Pine Chest. The panel work is cut from the solid. The
original coat of red paint is in place. Date: 1700-20. Owner of this and the
chest below: Mr. George Dudley Seymour. Origin: Capt. Chas. Churchill
House, Newington. Below is a chest on shoes. The scratch carving
running around the front is discernible on the left end. Date: 1710-20.

[58]

AN Oak Chest of Drawers owned by the author.
amount of ornament applied to chests and chests of
Century drew to its close, is no doubt quaint, but is a
the more artistic types of the 16th Century. Yet we
fathers, in that they did what they could, and eagerly
which their children do not, always. The decorations
to need rehearsal in the text. Date 1680-1700. It
and 43^ inches high — a large article.

The extraordinary
drawers as the 17th
distinct decline from
love the work of the
groped after beauty,
are shown too clearly
is 46 by 21^ inches

[59]

AN All-Pine Chest of Drawers. Owner: Koopman's, Boston. This piece
is probably within the limits of the 17th Century. The little gothic arches
into which the feet are cut, and the character of the drawers, incline us to
date it about 1690, for the single arch molding may go back to that time.
The discovery of the piece is said to have been made in Maine. It is odd in
having all the drawers alike. It is a question of taste, on which there might
be a difference of opinion whether a piece is more attractive in this form, or
with a variety in the drawer fronts.

[60]

A CHEST of Four Drawers. Owner: the author. Date: 1690-1700
There is one heavily embossed panel at the end. Size: 39^ inches long 38
inches high; 19^ inches from front to back.
The top and bottom drawers are blocked, that is, they protrude beyond
the body of the piece, and match the end panel.
The feet are flattened balls, sometimes called onion feet. They are
strikingly odd from being set on extended stiles. Origin: Connecticut, again!

[61]

A DECORATED
Chest of drawers,
shown from two posi
tions on this and the
following page. Owned
by the author. The
tulip design of the end
view is very bold and
is practically the same
at as the end of the
Davidson highboy,
page 74, where the re
flection prevents its
being well shown.
A half dozen articles
of furniture in this de
coration have come to
light very recently.
They are in whitewood
which is, otherwise,
and properly, called
tulip wood. It is rather
commonly found in New
England, but structur
ally, in old furniture,
it seems mostly to have
been confined to articles
made about 1700. Thus
the three chests like
that on page 47 are in
tulip wood. This ma
terial shows little grain
and less color, and is a
semi-hard wood. It
had no beauty unless
decorated. The front
of this piece shows a
different design for each drawer, and the lines are very delicate. On the
two drawers at the top an excursion in portraiture appears, the faces having
vines issuing from the lips. They are in flat, light color, and make us wish

[62]

pmftHWP«»T"w'

Biinwyaiiii

that the decorator had not essayed his skill! The coloring of the tendrils
is nearly white. That of the rest is in shades of yellow, old red, pink, etc.
Some original handles remain. The drawers are of the heavy early con
struction and are made with side runs, a fashion which went out about 1700.
The body is 19 by 42 inches; it stands 43 inches high. The author has
spliced the feet about three inches. It is otherwise original.
The decoration while a little worn, is better and in a better state 01 preser
vation than we remember having seen elsewhere.
Date about 1700.

[63]

AN Oak and Walnut Chest of Drawers. Date: 1690-1700. The carcass
is 33 inches high, 36 inches long, 22 inches front to back. The molding
projects to give an over-all length, both top and bottom, of 39 inches.
Top, half inch walnut. Frame and end rails, oak; the end panels plain
pine, there being two, one above the other, sunken, with perfectly plain
rails and stiles. Drawer fronts pine, covered with 3^8 inch walnut; and all
moldings walnut. The posts are 2 by \}4 inches. The two wide drawers
are blocked. The drawers have the grooved side runs. The piece was
bought in the rough, by the author, in Boston, 1921, and is in his collection.
The feet were missing. Added, they are five inches high, which length is
conservative. We notice a tendency during the latter years of the 17th
Century to construction in walnut, and to smaller posts. With the excep
tion of the feet the chest is practically original.

[64]

A CHEST of Drawers in Walnut, owned by the author. It is somewhat
smaller than the average chest of drawers, being 38^4 by 21 inches, and
33>£ inches high. It has undergone some repairs and the handles are not
original. It is low enough to satisfy the modern taste for a dressing case.
A very interesting and unusual feature is the series of small panels on the
stiles. They add not a little to the appearance. They are instead of the
usual applied half spindles. It will be noticed that the first and the third
drawers are alike; also the second and the fourth — a familiar arrangement
adopted for variety's sake.
The date is difficult to determine. If we say 1680-1700 we shall not
greatly err.

[65]

AN Oak Ball-Foot Chest of Drawers. Date: 1680-90. The center panel
of the top drawer contains the initials "R. B." while the center panel of the
drawer below contains the initials "A. P." The ends of the chest contain
two panels separated by the returned ends of an applied molding extending
between the two upper and two lower drawers. The other applied moldings
between the drawers extend only to the outer edges of the stiles. The ball
feet should be compared
with those on page 61.
Mr. George Dudley
Seymour, owner.
Below, is a chest of
drawers the picture of
which is furnished by Mr.
H.V.Weil, of New York
City, who owned it at
onetime. Let us say here
quite emphatically that
none of the pictures in
this book are made to
scale. This piece is larger
than it appears. The end
panel is blocked like those
on pages 61 and 56.

[66]

AN Elaborately Paneled Chest of Drawers. Owner: Mr. Brooks Reed.
Date: 1680-90.
Features to which one should attend are the blocking of the top and
bottom drawers, the difference in the depth of the drawers and the system
of moldings on the end panel to enhance the blocked effect. Compare
with central blocks on chest, page 38. Compare also the panels formed on
the stiles by moldings with the author's chest of drawers, on page 65.

[67]

OAK and Pine Chest of Drawers. This piece has effective ball feet. The
drawers, including the moldings, are of pine. The drop handles are very
unusual and pleasing. The termination in a ring is a device graceful in itself
and convenient in use. The rosettes behind the drops match well the hand
some 'scutcheons.
In the former collection of the author. Owner: Mr. I. Sack. Date
i 690- i 700.
The transition from the chest of drawers with decorative moldings, to a
plain front, doubtless may be accounted for by the coming in of the high
boy, which used decoration of another sort. The legs were elegantly turned,
and veneer of an elaborate character supplanted the molded front. There
was a gain in the filling of wall space. But the modern return to the chest
of drawers shows it a more convenient piece of furniture.

[68]

AN Oak Two-Part Chest of Drawers. Owner: Mr. George Dudley
Seymour. The two-parts are separable on the medial line, which should be
covered by a molding, over the joint, but was not so covered when the chest
was found in the rough state. The brasses are in part original. The piece
was, so it is said, brought into Boston to sell, from Dedham. It was put in
order by Patrick Stevens, then employed by Robbins Bros., of Hartford.
Date: 1660-70. Hight, 56K inches; the top is 20^ by 38K inches.

[69]

A MINIATURE Chest
of Drawers. Photograph
furnished by Mr. H. V.
Weil, who owned the
piece. The handles, which
of course are of the usual
size for a large chest of
drawers, display very
quaintly the comparative
ly small size of the draw
ers. It is such pieces as
these, so rare, so appeal
ing, that make the quest
of antique furniture what
it is. Date: 1690-1700.
Below is a miniature
pine chest of drawers:
Owner: Mr. Harry Long.
In the moldings we have
the style of a somewhat
earlier time. The pine
feet, being part of the
end board, give a date
perhaps as late as 1700-10.
These little pieces are
sometimes called child's
furniture. They may
have been so intended,
or they may have stood
on larger chests of draw
ers, to store small articles
of the wardrobe.

[70]

A TWO-PART Oak Chest of Drawers. Owner: J . Milton Coburn, M , D . ,
South Norwalk. Date: 1670-90.
The applied ball-turned molding is a most interesting feature. There is
the not unusual arrangement of decorative moldings, whereby the second
and fourth drawers are more elaborate than the first and third; and in this
case, as frequently, deeper than the others.
Handles on furniture in America, as the end of the 17th Century ap
proached, were sometimes wooden knobs, always small in diameter, and
to be differentiated from the 19th Century knob — -and sometimes brass drop
handles. The brass gradually supplanted the wood on the finer pieces. But
in the case of tavern tables, and other simple articles, the small wooden
knob persisted to the middle of the 18th Century.
[7i]

ON pages 73-85 appear a series of high-boys, called in England tall-boys, or
high chests of drawers. While these are impressive from their size, and
offer good opportunity for the display of veneer, and of style in turning, they
are somewhat ungainly, their very name being a sly poke at their awkward
ness. The period we treat here excludes the "bonnet top". Highboys began
as flat tops, logically, as they were simply chests of drawers on legs. A very
few, like that belonging to the author, on the opposite page, had scrolled
legs, influenced by- the Flemish style of chairs. Most had turned legs in the
trumpet pattern, clearly shown on page 77, and modified on pages 74 and 75
to a cup and ball. There were usually four legs in front and two behind, all
connected by a scrolled stretcher, which followed the contour of the arches
on the frame above.
The material was usually a walnut veneer, varied by solid wood pieces
like the oak specimen on page 73, the butternut on page 76, or by pine or
maple, as in specimens shown. On page 74 we have an extraordinary exam
ple in decoration, reminding us of the similar crown and thistle work on
pages 62 and 63. It is owned by Mr. James Davidson, of New London.
The early example on page 75, owned by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash, shows
the heavy frame, considerably larger than the top, a feature of importance
for very early styles. This piece is also a five-legger, and the frame is without
arches. The brasses on these pieces begin with drops, and are followed by
plates and bails, a style which is found in a considerable number of instances
as early as 1700. The earliest highboy here shown scarcely goes back beyond
1690, and the latest may be 1720. An instance of an ornamental molded
panel is known, possibly more than one. These examples before us are now
shown for the first time.
The specimen on page 76 is owned by the author.
Incidentally the highboy on page 73, shows, or may show, the origin of
the heavy Flemish scroll base on Victorian furniture. But this middle
19th Century furniture carried the scroll into huge clumsy proportions, and
applied it, in many cases, to the frame instead of making it a part of the
structure, as a supporting member.
The frame of the highboy on page 73 extends beyond the top. This is
an early feature, where the extension is so considerable. It will be seen
that the frames on highboys on pages 73, 74, and 75 have the single long
drawer. This feature is also shown on the pieces on pages 78 and 85. The
plain, table-like frame suggests an earlier period.

[72]

A FLEMISH-LEGGED Highboy, owned by the author. Mr. James
Davidson also owns one, and another exists in New York. This piece is in
American oak, even to the backs of the drawers. The curved legs, however,
appear to be bass wood. Date, perhaps 1680- 1700.

[73]

A PAINTED Highboy. Date" 1700. The end does not show, owing to
reflections, the large single tulip, like that on page 62. The decorative scheme
of the front also bears a close resemblance to the chest of drawers on page 63 .

[74

A FIVE-LEGGED Highboy, owned by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash. A
rare specimen, in walnut, practically all original. Date 1690-1710.

[75]

[76]

[77\

[78]

[79]

ON page 77 is a rare arrangement of highboy legs, following the usual
design of the corresponding cross-stretcher lowboy. The incipient pair of
missing legs is represented by the acorn drops. One should note the thin
flat strip which lines the under edge of the frame and, by a slight projection,
forms a bead. This is characteristic. This piece is in walnut. The present
owner is unknown. It was in the former collection of the author. Date:
1700-10. On page 78 is a specimen in herring-bone walnut veneer. The brasses are
good. The turning is not as delicate as the preceding. It was bought by
the author in Boston, and taken to the Webb House, Wethersfield. Present
owner unknown.
On page 79 is a remarkably good curly maple effect. It is the property
of Mr. Geo. F. Ives. The interest centers in the country-made turnings,
which were probably done from memory. The turner "did himself proud" in
the drops, not stopping short of seven rings. Date: 1700-20.
On page 81 is the most perfectly preserved old highboy the author has
seen. It is owned by Mr. W. of Boston. Every part, including every
handle, is original. The veneer is in fine condition. It is in the herring-bone
pattern. The date can be hardly later than 1690- 1700. The frame, below,
is 38^2 by 21% inches. The upper part is 36^2 by 20 inches. The total
hight is 61 inches, and outside measurement on the table mold is 40^
inches, and 22^ inches from front to back.
The piece has never been cleaned.
The highboy on page 83 is the only one we have seen with two small
end-to-end drawers over the central arch. On page 76 there is no central
drawer, also a rare feature. But on page yy we find two small drawers on
each side of the frame. In the odd piece on page 84, there are two abutting
drawers. The conventional type is supposed to have three drawers in the
frame, the central one being shallower than the others to allow for the arch
under the frame. These variations in detail have no little interest for
collectors, though they are otherwise more curious than important.
When we enter upon highboys we are as likely to find them in Massachu
setts as in Connecticut, which is supreme in its oak treasures.

[80]

A HERRING-BONE Walnut Highboy. Date: 1700. Owner: the author.
On the next page is the fine example of a curly maple highboy owned by
Mr. W. of Boston. Its turnings are beautiful. It is painted black, and is
in all respects original. Date: about 1710.
[82]

==7

\

.... . ,

V

w

¦o-

V/

¦p

Kf
'O
1
~\j*
-'
y
X i !
i
[83 j
A SIMPLE Highboy, without stretchers, owned by Mrs. E. B. Leete
of Guilford. It is a great rarity. The leg turnings are quite like those of
some tables. While the need of stretchers on highboys is apparent, this
piece has existed without them since about 1720.

[84]

A SIMPLE Five-legged Highboy, owned by Mr. I. Sack. Its 17th
century turnings suggest tavern table legs. It is a piece of much interest.
The single arch mold suggests 1690-1700 as the date.

[85]

THE ORIGIN and purpose of little chests on frames is hazy. They are
close cousins to the boxes which follow. Besides the descriptive name they are
also called Pilgrim Chests and Desk Boxes on Frames. Their size would
indicate their probable use for more precious contents than were placed in
the great chests, but as the tops were always flat they could scarcely have
been used for writing purposes, unless one stood while at work.
The same impulse which brought in the highboy was evidently at work
to bring in the box-on-frame, that is, greater convenience.
The charm of the piece we are considering lies in the obvious artistic
impulse that created it. Undoubtedly it was a labor of love, constructed
with ingenious care and thought, stimulated by an ambition to produce a
masterpiece. All the little refinements, together with the more important
features, suggest this conclusion. The popular habit of naming all chests
"dower chests" or "hope chests" is not unnatural, and we are not prepared
to say that most chests did not come into being as wedding dowers. It was
quite the thing that the bride-to-be should find it useful and appropriate to
have a chest of some sort wherein to accumulate the various stock of house
hold linen that she would require.
The one drawer which always appears in this type of chest was convenient
for the more precious or the smaller articles.
Until a recent period such chests were exceedingly rare and even now
there are perhaps only twenty to thirty known. The notable piece next
following is unique. It was found in York, Maine, and is far more ornate
as well as earlier and quainter than any of its humbler brethren on the
following pages.
Its American origin should not be challenged as it has pine in the lid and
bottoms of the frame and drawer. Its most striking feature is the doubled
stretcher work of the ball-turned base, a markedly good design for strength,
and possibly unique in this respect also.
Another astonishing feature is the beautiful urn turning of the front
posts reminding one of court cupboards. The piece is in an unrestored
state and therefore shows only one of the two arches of the side panels. The
star of the center panel also originally had eight points. These minor marks
of years, however, only endear the piece to us. It is painted black. One
may hope to see it restored ultimately, as the somewhat glossy appearance
it presents makes a good picture of it impossible.
Date: 1670-90.
The fortunate owner is Mr. Chauncey C. Nash, of Milton.

[86]

AN unique little chest-on-frame. Owner: Chauncey C. Nash. Hight
36 inches; length 27 inches; depth 18}^ inches. Oak, with pine lid and
drawer bottom. Date: 1660-90.

[87]

A CHEST on frame partly restored. Property of the Wayside Inn.
Date: about 1680. The sizes of all these pieces are about the same as that
on page 87.

[88]

A CHEST-ON-FRAME, from the collection of Miss C. M. Traver,
New York City. This fine specimen is in its original condition. It is a ques
tion, mooted among antiquarians, whether these chests, with square
stretchers, had a shelf upon them. If the chest opposite this is correct
the shelf must have been original as the applied molding on the bottom
stretcher laps over the lower edge of the shelf. Further, there was a
shelf on the piece above, but it was destroyed. Date: 1670-90.

[89]

A CHEST-ON-FRAME owned by the Rhode Island School of Design.
The foliage decoration, a branch of delicate sprays, is clearly discernible.
This decoration is usually in black on a red ground. These simple little
chests are of the class desired because of their size, their variety, and their
merit. [90]

THE description of this chest-on-frame appears on the following page.
[9i]

ON the previous page is a good example of the decorated panel chest-on-
frame. It is the property of Mr. Arthur W. Wellington of Boston and
Weston. For the most part the decorations are in colors which are not
picked out by the camera. The turnings are attractively done.
On the following page is a similar piece, but with a deeper drawer, and
with decoration which shows somewhat. It is owned by Mrs. F. G. Pat
terson, of Boston, and is further described on its page.
Instituting a comparison between the little chests here shown, we may
place the Nash chest in a class by itself. The others are divided .between
decorated chests, with turnings below, and chests with carving and applied
turned decorations. These latter are the older. The most perfect is the
chest on page 89, which is unrestored.
Most or all of the chests-on-frames originated in New England, within
narrow limits from southern New Hampshire to Cape Cod. They are a type
so marked as to attract much attention. Many collectors have never seen
one. At least half of them have come to light within a year, as their dis
tinctive features made them sought as soon as they were known to exist.
They now hold values parallel with those placed on large spindle-decorated
chests. There is a difference of opinion as between the two styles, with
perhaps a slight present leaning to the decorated pattern.
A specimen of this style of chests in the possession of Mr. H. W. Erving
has the spray decoration on an unpainted panel, and is fully more attractive
in method of application. The leafage is green, the stem black. Another
specimen of the style in the possession of the Rhode Island School of Design
lacks the front stretcher, but is otherwise very admirable. Mr. B. A.
Behrend owns three specimens. Most of the others have been mentioned
in previous works on furniture.
We lament the going out of style of an article so attractive and con
venient. It certainly adds to the realism of a family about to be insti
tuted to have one receptacle into which its treasures can be gathered.
Around such a piece one's heart strings twined. It was the symbol, in
substantial form of the greatest social institution, and held that proud
position until the cradle supplanted it.

[92]

A CHEST-ON-FRAME described on the previous page. This piece is
in beautiful condition and the turnings are very handsome— the best per
haps to be found on a decorated piece of the kind. Date about 1700.

[93]

ON the next page is an oak chest-on-frame, which differs strikingly from
the other examples we show. Its back legs follow the style of the court cup
board, instead of being turned like the front legs. The side and back stretch
ers are also plain. The turnings of the front legs and stretcher are extremely
rare, being what we may call the reverse of the ball turning, or a series of
turned flutes, into which a ball-turned piece would fit exactly. The lid is of
yellow pine. The false drawer has knobs instead of the usual bosses. The
chest is 36 inches high, and the frame is 27^ by 16 inches. The lid over
hangs 14 °f an inch in front, and \}i inches at the ends. The date is 1680-
90. It is owned by the author.
On page 96 is an example of an all-ball-turned chest-on-frame, made with
painted panels. It is owned by Mr. B. A. Behrend. Its date is about
1680-90. The frame is oak; the lid pine. It is peculiar in having a perfectly
plain drawer front. The mold on the rail below the drawer is not seen on
some of the other chests-on-frames.
A few years since there were not above a half dozen chests-on-frames
known. If they are found in the next few years as rapidly as in the five
years just passed, they will rival the sunflower chest in numbers. In
passing from the treatment of these pieces we cannot fail to see how closely
they resemble the boxes which follow, where the boxes have flat tops.
The chests are generally a little larger and may have suggested desks.
There is a close resemblance.
Properly following analogies, we should look for antique chests, of a large
size, on frames. One is shown on shoes. But we know of no large chests,
set on legs, and with a drawer under. Their place was taken by the highboy.
The discussion of this matter in Lyon is very interesting, but developments
since his volume should have added more to our knowledge than we can
claim to have gained. One thing, however, we feel more clearly: the little
chests on frames were not designed as desks. We have, it is true, almost
no desks of the period, but we do find slant top boxes. Why, if these little
chests were for desks, were the tops never slanted? The decision must
be that they were not designed as desks.

[94]

[95]

fFfyv*

[96

INTRODUCING the subject of boxes we present a miniature box, owned
by Mr. George Dudley Seymour. We can call it a toy box. Its entire surface
is covered with carving in the Friesian manner. The body of the box is
worked out from a single piece of wood, which appears to be whitewood.
The cover, also of a single piece, has thinned edges running in grooves
formed in the edge of the body. Midway of the length of the cover are the
initials A. C, while the initials N. J. are incised on the end of the cover.
Length, \% inches; width, 2yA inches; thickness, \y4. inches. As we have
found Friesian designs, carved in America, we are allowed to assume that
this box may be native. Certainly whitewood is native. Date: about 1700.
The box was found in Cheshire, Connecticut, about 1900.
On page 109 is another minute box, owned by Mr. Hollis French, of Bos
ton. It rests on top of a larger box. There is in this box, again, a Friesian
design, with beautifully notched carving on the base and the lid. While
these boxes are very rare, they were useful, more than the name toy box
would imply. Probably they were used as jewel boxes to be placed, if need
were, in a large "strong box." Many simple boxes of about this size are
found with slight ornament. They are in some cases attractive but, of
course, never important.

[97]

THE Box, otherwise called Bible box or desk box, is a small article de
signed to rest on a table. Undoubtedly it was sometimes used for a great
Bible. But in general it was a receptacle for valuable papers or other
articles too small or too important to place in a chest. Where boxes have
cabinets as well as slant fronts, of course they are designed for desks. It is
unfortunate that they should be named, indiscriminately, Bible boxes. It
is better to use the shorter term box.
The English box has a lid, back and bottom of oak, and is usually very
dark. We have tried in the following pages to exclude boxes of a foreign
character. The American box was rarely all oak, and the wood is lighter
than the English box.
The hinge for slant top boxes is, in best forms, a butterfly. The flat tops
generally have pin hinges like chests.
Probably several hundred American boxes are known. Certainly this
estimate is not too high if we include plain pine boxes. The specimens of a
finer character may be confined to 150 or 200 in number. The design of the
carving follows closely the carving of chests. Almost invariably there is a
molded base. The locks are likely to be missing. It is very probable that
where no lock was ever fitted the box was used for a Bible. The writer has
never seen this distinction made, but it is very reasonable. It will be noted
that many of the most beautiful specimens never had locks.
The Bible no one would steal, not because it lacked value, but owing to
the fear of sacrilege. Hence it needed no key to protect it. The Bible was
in many cases, a huge, very expensive volume. It contained of course a
family record more important then, when the state kept no vital statistics.
In fact history would lack much if deprived of these records. At a time
also when optical knowledge was small, a Bible with large print was neces
sary for the aged, who had recourse to it often. And it was so heavy that
it required a rest. Hence, the Bible-box.
On the other hand, nearly every slant top specimen, which was made
for a desk, had a lock, at least the examples before us would so indicate.
The ends are more likely to be plain than carved . The presence or absence
of a cabinet has no bearing on desirability. The cabinets are always very
simple. (The box passed out of fashion with the general introduction of
desks?) But a modern desk box persisted, and is found today in mahogany
in many homes. It opens on a slant, being flat on top.

[98]

A BOX of Oak. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: 1660-80. Size:
21^ by 14^ inches, and 8}4 inches high. There is some difficulty in
naming the carving running across the upper front. Perhaps the best name
is arched fluting. The lunettes familiar on chests run across beneath the
fluting. The same carving is repeated on the ends, which is unusual.
The box at the bottom of the page also belongs to Mr. Erving. The short
half-moon carvings in three rows near the bottom were seen on one chest we
have figured. Date: 1670-90. The top line of carving is unusual and
attractive. The box is 27^ by 17 inches, and 11 inches high.
The base mold on boxes is often of the very simplest character — sur
prisingly so, since so much elaboration was expended on the other parts
of the box.

[99]

A BOX owned by Mr. Dwight Blaney. The carving is artistically de
signed and executed.
Boxes are usually put together with nails. The only paneled box we have
to show appears on page 102. Occasionally we find dovetailing. It is
obvious that panel work was a device for covering large surfaces, and not
ordinarily indulged in for beauty's sake alone.
Below is an oak box belonging to Mr. George Dudley Seymour. It is
asymmetrical, one panel having the initial W. The design is a tulip
pattern, less conventionalized than usual. The corners are notched. Date:
1670-90. Now in the Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford. Origin: Guilford,
Connecticut.

|.'f "¦" 1 _.l":'ll- "'»*" '5*1

w y

'i )

pw

[ 100]

AN Oak Box belonging to Mr. H. W. Erving. Date: 1670-90. The
aster or sunflower is a design found on much 17th Century work. An
example appears even on the pine chest, page 33. As a matter of fact, of
course the flower may be something else. It looks more like a rose. There
are turned ornaments on the ends.
Size: 25^ by 17 inches, and 9^ inches high. Initialed, E. D.
At the bottom of the page an oak box appears. Owner: Mr. Arthur W.
Wellington. The carving of arched flutes is like that on Mr. Erving's box on page 99.
Below is a handsome rope pattern with rosettes. Date: 1660-80.

[101]

AN Oak Box, with two rows of arched flutes. It is unusually large, being
23^2 by 19 inches, and nl/& inches high. Date; 1660-80. It carries carving
on the ends also.
Another oak box, below, in paneling, is a rare design. It bears the initials,
H. S. The applied drops and bosses are mostly original. Size: 27^ by 17^
and 9^4 inches high. Date: 1670-90.
Both of these boxes are owned by the author. Only one who loved
ornament for its own sake would have taken pains to work out so many
little panels as we see in this box. The maker really delighted in design.

[ 102]

A POND Lily Box, with raised carving. Owner: Mr. H. W. Erving.
The carving is asymmetrical, and rather more attractive on that account.
The dimensions are: 25^ by 16^ inches. It is 9 inches high. Date:
1670-90. Below is a pine box with starfish design. There are one complete and two
half lunettes, each with tooth carving to form the outlines. The carving is
raised. The design is striking. The battle-ax shaped designs between the
lunettes are difficult to understand. No base molding appears.
Origin: Connecticut. Owner: Mr. George Dudley Seymour. Date:
1670-1700.

X;

[ 103 ]

A PINE Box on Ball Feet. Owner: Mr. B. A. Behrend. This delightful
specimen has fine butterfly hinges. We have seen but one other box on feet
and that was later in date. We give 1690-1700 as the probably date of the
box before us.
Below is a carved pine box belonging to Mr. Chauncey C. Nash. The
carving is combined with heavy moldings, which gives an appearance of
solidity. Date: 1690-1700.
Boxes occasionally had tills at the ends, like chests. Sometimes boxes
were carved on the slant top. In such cases of course they were designed to
hold Bibles, not papers. We have not seen an American box so carved.

[ 104]

-.r»

— — •
-
¦5$
iS1 -
tBr'M
A HADLEY Box. Owner: Mr. B. A. Behrend. Date: 1690-1700. At
least one other Hadley box is known, perhaps two, but they are sufficiently
rare to excite much interest. This specimen is very shallow.
A box with painted rosettes appears below. The ends are of oak, the front
and back of pine, as is the lid. It belongs to Mr. H. W. Erving. It is
suggestive of the starfish design on page 103, but of course has no special
reference to it. The design was a very obvious one, easily outlined by a
compass. Red and black paint appears in the cutaway sections of the
rosettes. Size: 23>£ x 18 inches, 8}4 inches high.
Date: 1700-10.
[105]
A SMALL Box, from Norwichtown, Connecticut. Fanning Family.
Front, ends and lid profusely enriched with carving in the Friesian style.
Made, according to family tradition, by David Fanning, of Norwichtown,
when he was nine years old, which would give the box a date of 1736, as his
birth was in 1727. Fanning, who died at Groton, Connecticut, January 8,
18 17, was a soldier in the French and Indian War, a man of considerable
local prominence. The box was recently bought from one of his descend
ants. Made of whitewood, pine and soft maple.
Length, 20^ inches; width, 10^ inches; hight, 6)4 inches; lid, 21 by
10^2 inches. George Dudley Seymour, owner.
Below is a Carved and Stippled Front Pine Box. This rude piece,
related in its type of carving to Friesian carving, was evidently the work of
a tyro in design. Date 1675-1700. Owner: Same as above.

[106I

AN Oak Box, belonging to Mr. B. A. Behrend. The foliated design here
compared with Mr. Seymour's box under it is interesting. Mr. Behrend's
box shows something resembling the acanthus. Mr. Seymour's is a con
ventionalized tulip. The initialed box may date from 1670- 1700.
Mr. George Dudley Seymour's box below is of about the same date.
Both boxes show the notches at the corners, simple touches which the carver
loved, and used frequently.
Did any one ever connect the remarkable mechanical ability of the people
of Connecticut, especially of the Connecticut Valley, with the fact that
they so long kept the traditions of the Pilgrim generation ? If a wooden
nutmeg had ever been made by the Connecticut artisan it would have been
because he was the only person in America with sufficient skill to make wood
look like a nutmeg.

[107]

AN Oak Box. Date: about 1670. It has its original butterfly hinges.
The size is 21 by 18 inches, and io>£ inches high.
Below it is a walnut box, dating perhaps 1720. It is dovetailed, not
nailed like other boxes, and has ball feet. It is 19^ by u^ inches, and
\\yi inches high. It opens down, desk fashion, and has a cabinet. There
is a chain covered with leather to hold it from swinging too far. Both these
boxes are owned by the author. They are without decoration, but belong
to the simple substantial sort, many of which have doubtless been destroyed.

[108]

A CARVED Oak Box. The property of Mr. Hollis French. Date: 1660-
90. The scrolls and the foliations resemble those on the press cupboard,
page 139. The little box on top was described on page 97.
Below is a tulip motive box, owned by Mr. H. W. Erving. The carving
is attractive. The box is 27 by 15 inches, and 10 inches high. The date is
1660-80. There is every reason to suppose that these boxes were made
about the same time as the tulip chests. One may see in the carving at the
center that the artisan tried his hand at a very successful 'scutcheon in wood.

[ 109]

^p!..1 ""'

A PAINTED Pine Box. Owner: Mr. George Dudley Seymour. Date:
1700-10. The piece was bought in Hartford. The bottom molding is a
restoration. The painting, not restored, shows a vine enfolding large
flower-forms. The box is now in the Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford.
The vine just mentioned resembles closely the decorations on the panels
of chests-on-frames, as for instance that on page 90.
At the bottom of the page appears a box in pine, the property of Mr. B. A.
Behrend. It is initialed E. A. At the center, within a diamond marked out
in scratch carving is the date 1694. We see again in this instance that pine
carving was used very early.

[no]

A LITTLE Box, with scratch carving. It is owned by the Connecticut
Historical Society at Hartford. The outlines of the carving are filled in
with white, but a decorative border of carving is not so filled. The size is
io>2 x 7 inches, and $}A inches high. The lid overhangs yi inch front and
sides. The use of nails in early furniture is not well understood. The impression
prevails among many persons that nails indicate a late date. Also the use
of hand wrought nails is reckoned by some a mark of antiquity. All nails
were hand wrought up to the year 1795 . Before that period nails were freely
used where experience showed them to be appropriate. Thus the bottoms
of many of the oldest chests and the drawer sides of court cupboards were
attached with nails, in the earliest examples we know. In fact the sides of
the drawers of court cupboards and chests were gouged, where they met the
rabbeted ends of the drawer front, in order to make room for great nails to
set in deeper than they otherwise could. Small dovetailing is a proof of late
work. The early dovetail, when used, was very broad.
Nailers, that is persons who made, not drove, nails formed a guild. A
good nailer could make several hundred nails a day. There were nails of
very many shapes and sizes, as there are today.

[ml

ON the next page appears a secretary, dating about 1700. The marks
of its age are found in the single arch molding, in the shape of the door
panels, in the ball-feet and in the sliding panel of the table, under the cab
inet. The greater number of the handles are original. The wood is walnut.
Later feet would have been more delicate. The earliest ball-feet were very
clumsy. The secretary is owned by the author. As books of record became
necessary the top became indispensable. Also the tops were used, as they
still are, as library shelves.
The rarity of early secretaries is to be accounted for by the fact that
the ordinary family found it convenient to move a desk box from place to
place, and also from the circumstance that in those days less writing was
done than at present. In other words, the piece was more a luxury than a
necessity. When, however, the convenience of a cupboard above a desk was
felt, transforming a piece into a secretary — though why it should be called a
secretary rather than a desk, the author does not know — the fashion of
secretaries rapidly came in and reached in the block fronts the finest develop
ment of cabinet work ever attained in America, in the marvelous creations
of John Goddard of Newport.
The French scrutoire was a creation beyond the limits of our work.
Secretary tops on 17th Century desks are very rare.
The wood of secretaries and desks, in this country, was at first pine, for
the simpler specimens, and walnut for the finer examples. An occasional
whitewood secretary, like the above, is found. We do not recall any Ameri
can oak desk with legs.
Then came maple, which followed along with the walnut, and continued
in use during the mahogany period, for the simpler desks. Desks with
maple frame and pine for the desk proper are not unusual.
A fine cabinet is not found in the 17th Century desks. As a rule desks
are made with base attached. Occasionally we find an early desk which
maintains the tradition of a separate upper section, like a desk box. The
fact that almost every desk had a lip on the drawer indicates that few were
made before 1700. Nor do we find any carving on American desks, in the
early time. This again shows that they are later than the boxes and the
little chests on frames. They are essentially a part of the furniture of a
developed country, and a secondary age.
As a consequence the variety of desks before 1720 is small, and we have
seen none that appeared to be older than 1690, possibly 1700.
In this connection we notice that the portion of Connecticut where early
furniture was made comprised a rich agricultural district, and was settled
in many cases by men of substance.
Put in another form, one reason why we find so much good furniture
before 1700, in Connecticut, is that her people could afford it.
[112]

[H3l

ON the previous page appears a
picture of a secretary with ball feet,
the property of the author. The fea
tures which mark the close of the
Seventeenth Century and some which
also appeared in the early part of
the Eighteenth Century are here man
ifest, namely the ball feet and the
arched panels with horizontal mem
bers at the top. There is a sliding
panel in the table of the cabinet.
Date about 1700.
The secretaries of this period are
rare.
A feature in the large piece is also seen in some other secretaries, of the
mahogany period. The top extends about an inch in the back beyond the
line of the frame of the lower part. This extension would suggest that the
parts were not designed for one another. But the pieces were designedly
so constructed in order that the top might bear against the wall, reaching
over the dado of about an inch thickness.
At the top of this page is a piece almost precisely like that on the previous
page except for the top. Sometimes as in the instance of the secretary on
page 113, the top was made detachable. This piece without cupboard
above is in walnut, and the date is the same, about 1700.
At the bottom of the page is a little
desk in pine, with maple frame. Its
small size suggests a desk box changing
by development to a desk box on a
frame. These little desks are often made
detachable from the frame. That
they are not of the same date or for
the same purpose as the little chests
on frames is clear. The desks are
not in oak.

[114]

A TURNED frame desk of the highest merit and rarity which was in the
owner's former collection and has now passed into the collection of Mr.
Harry Long. The solid and large turnings call for an earlier date than the
over-hanging lip of the drawer, but it is necessary to place this piece about
1700 or a little later. The interior is very simple, containing a few pigeon
holes, a single range of drawers and in the center a small door without a
panel. The point of merit in this piece is the solidity of the frame and the
style of the middle and end stretchers.
What seems a defect is the fact that the pulls on which the drawer rests
when open are faced with a thin strip to form a lip all about the pull.
The wood is walnut and the dimensions are 42 inches long, 38^2 inches
high and 20 inches wide. The dimension of the square of the legs is 2^
inches. The depth of the drawer is 3 inches. The piece is shown prac
tically in the original state.
[H5]

A LITTLE sturdy desk of pine, in the Rhode Island School of Design.
The very heavy lid with its excellent "thumb-nail" molding, the heavy dove
tailing, the flush drawer, the heavy turning bespeak a date inside the
Seventeenth Century, probably 1680- 1700. The lid suggests a chest top.
It is the chagrin of the writer that he once failed to obtain this desk. Econ
omy is often very wasteful. [116]

A SMALL desk in the author's collection . It is of pine above with a maple
frame— the usual construction of simple desks of its period. The cabinet is
very plain. It has good old butterfly hinges. Desks of this character were
only one degree removed from desk boxes. Comparing this desk with
that opposite, one at once feels the quainter earlier character of that
desk. Date aboi t 1700-20. [H7]

A DESK with Turned Frame, the property of Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
While the handles on this piece bespeak a date of at least 1710, which is
borne out by double arch molding, the turning leads us to suppose that the
date is fully as early. The butterfly hinge and the general character of the
desk proper is almost exactly the same as the author's on the preceding pages
Frame 23^ inches high, 29 inches long, 18^ inches deep.

[118]

A WALNUT Desk. Formerly owned by Mr. I. Sack. This hand
somely turned specimen, dating about 1690-1710, has handles which of
course are too late. The piece is made in two parts, being really a desk box
on a table frame, with an extra set of drawers. It is a rather large piece,
carefully restored. Obviously a desk so constructed required a special chair
of extraordinary hight. Even so one could not sit closely. This fact no
doubt led to the development of a series of drawers running to the floor,
since there was no possibility of utilizing the space under the desk for
the knees.

[119]

A PINE Cross-Stretcher Desk. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston. This delight
ful desk, dating about 1690-1700, is only 31^ inches long. From front to

back it is 19^ inches. The hight is 33^2 inches.

It has the early butterfly
It is the only desk known

hinges. It was found not very far from Boston.
to the writer, in pine, in this style.
The dimensions given above are over all. The frame is only 29^4 by 19/i
inches. A desk with cross-stretchers is convenient for the feet of one sitting
at the desk. It matches also, if in a chamber, the cross-stretcher lowboy.

[ 120]

A WALNUT Cross-Stretcher Desk. Date: 1690-1700. It has fine old
butterfly hinges. The drawer is a restoration, and the writer is not sure it
should not have been restored to correspond with the piece on the previous
page. The desk came into Boston, in the rough, complete in every detail
except the drawer. 1
The carcass is 36 by 20 inches. The hight, behind, is 32^ inches; and in
front 28^ inches. The width of the flat portion of the top is 6 inches, and
that of the lid 15^ inches.
The cross-stretcher chair is practically unknown as an American product.
One example appears on page 337, and a pair of stools on page 285.
This desk is the property of the author.

[121]

Below appears a desk
owned by Mr. H. W.
Erving. It has a very
prettily scrolled frame,
the scrolling being ex
tended around the ends.
The legs show the Dutch
influence and have button
feet. It is constructed of
maple and butternut, and
the back is of pine. There
is a rosette at each side of
the upper drawer and the
pulls to support the lid
are round. The desk is
dainty, in advance of its
period, which is about
1720-40. It is 2&y4 inches
long, 20 inches from front
to back, and 38 inches
high.

A SMALL Desk in Pine.
Owner: Mr. I. Sack. The gene
alogy of this desk is established.
The turnings are an imitation of
highboy turnings. The date is
about 1700-10. It is a piece of
no small interest as showing the
approach to a smaller type of
legs than those in use at the be
ginning of the 18th Century.
We cannot precisely say when
the style of desk hinged in front
came in. It is at least a little
later than the style hinging in
the back. But for years both
styles went along side by side.
Both begin in 17th Century.

[122]

A PRESS Cupboard in the Metropolitan Museum. The brackets are
considered as not belonging to the piece. The carving is very rich, in the
early arch style, and strongly suggests the English cupboards. Yet it is
supposed to be American. The posts can be, as they are, severely plain.
They would otherwise call the eye away from the decoration, which is
subtly contrived by an artist . It is very far in advance of the later American
carving. It is so early that it was done in the spirit of a previous generation.
Date about 1650.

[ 123 ]

THERE are known to be in existence in America perhaps forty court
cupboards, if we reckon under this term also the specialized form called
press cupboards. They are a direct inheritance from English styles. The
possession of a court cupboard in the early days was a mark of social stand
ing. Only those with pretensions to some dignity in their dwellings had
these stately pieces.
The genealogy of the Parmenter Court Cupboard, a picture of which
follows on the next page, traces it to the builder of the Parmenter Garrison
house. That house was erected about 1683, in South Sudbury, it being the
first house in town. When the Wayside Inn was built about 1700, the
carpenters passed their nights in the Garrison house, for fear of Indian
attack. Pelatiah Parmenter was born in the early part of the 17th Century and
was lost at sea, during the war of the Revolution, in privateer warfare.
Abel Parmenter , his grandson,was born in the garrison house in 1754. Joshua
Parmenter, who is responsible for preserving the cupboard, was born in
Framingham in 1824 and died in 1903. His widow, from whom the writer
acquired the cupboard, now survives him. His mother was Lucretia Par
menter, daughter of Abel. Joshua went to live in the garrison house at
about 10 years of age.
Sudbury was settled from Watertown and undoubtedly the cupboard was
brought with other plenishings for the new garrison house. All the shelves
being of pine, together with the backs and drawer bottoms, and the posts
being of maple, the cupboard is established as a thoroughly American struc
ture. The great weight of the drawers, their large side runs, and the four-
inch posts, have a massive effect. The carving on the doors seems to be
deeply recessed, owing to the subtle devise of allowing the molding to over
lay the carving slightly.
The lack of a rail below the drawers will be noticed on several chests in
this work.
The feet of this cupboard have been pieced by the writer. Joshua Par
menter remembered their being cut off when he was a boy, about 1835.
Against all advice he cherished the old cupboard, so that our generation
now has this unique example of early American work. Date: 1640-50.

[ 124]

THE Parmenter Court Cupboard, owned by the author. A fuller descrip
tion appears on the previous page. The author is somewhat embarrassed
in placing an estimate on the merits of this remarkable piece, and will there
fore confine his statements purely to the historic and structural features.
This piece by its bill of sale cannot pass from the author's hands except to
a public museum.

[1251

A PRESS Cupboard in the Brooklyn Museum of Fine Arts. It should be
compared with that on page 139. This example is free from extensive restor
ation and therefore better. In both the same rather unsatisfactory pillars
appear, but in that piece there is the rare feature of carving on the back
stile. This piece has lost some three or four inches from the feet. Of
course the unavoidable presumption is that these two pieces, with some
others like them were made in the same neighborhood of Connecticut.
Date: 1670-80.

[126]

A COURT Cupboard in the Connecticut Sunflower (or Aster) and
Tulip pattern. This cupboard belongs to Yale University and is kept
with two others in the president's office, where of course every courtesy is
extended to persons desiring to see them. Yet one must keenly regret
that it is necessary to intrude on a private office to gain a view of such
important objects. Since so few are available for study, the principle of
the greatest good for the greatest number — the true educational idea —
would seem to be in need of application here.
[127]

ON this page is shown a detail of the sunflower press cupboard owned by
the Lancaster Public Library. The special interest of this cupboard, aside
from its rare intrinsic merit, arises from the fact that it is in its rough
state, except that the paint found on it, when it was bought in 1876, has been
washed off.
The reason for the purchase of the cupboard, at the early date mentioned,
was that it had been a possession of the first minister of the town. There
was a question whether ninety dollars was not too much to invest in such an
old, queer piece of furniture! So far has public interest and knowledge
advanced since 1876!
An object of much interest is the fine drop under the architrave. Many
possessors of court cupboards do not know such a drop was used. It is a
marvel that so fine a piece should have escaped for so long the knowledge of
antiquarians. It is mentioned nowhere in previous literature on antique
furniture. It is undoubtedly of Connecticut origin.

[128]

THIS Cupboard is described on the previous page. Date: 1660-78.
The Rev. Jos. Rowlandson married Mary White. He was minister in
Lancaster, 1654-76. He died in Wetherfield, 1678. His heirs sold the cup
board in 1825 to the Rev. B. R. Woodbridge, of Norwich. He died at South
Hadley, in 1846, leaving the cupboard to his nephew, Mr. J. W. Dunlap
of that town, who sold it to the library. [ 129 1

A COURT Cupboard owned by Mrs. J. Insley Blair, Tuxedo Park. It
is of rather light construction, but is perhaps more attractive to the taste of
the general public. Its spool turning is quite unusual. It belongs to the
very last part of the 17th Century. [ 130]

A PRESS Cupboard owned by Mr. Dwight Blaney of Boston. It is
very unusual in having three drawers, like one in the possession of Yale
University. The repetition of the three sets of triglyphs on the posts and a
set corresponding in the center enhances strongly the vertical line effects,
often lost in press cupboards, but secured in court cupboards by the repeti
tion of the two tiers of posts. Date: 1660-90.
Obviously the need of drawer space was beginning to impress itself on
designers. A cupboard enclosed left very little room for the display of
plate, which was beginning to be looked on as a secondary object.
[131]

A PRESS Cupboard owned by Mr. Philip L. Spalding of Boston. It
came from New Hampshire, being found last in Concord. It of course
lacks a portion of the foot, but is otherwise in good condition. The style
of the molding is unusual, a series of parallel grooved moldings each
interrupted several times in its length, for the imposition of a small boss.
Date: 1660-90. [ 132]

A COURT Cupboard owned by Mr. James N. H. Campbell of Hartford,
who also owns that on page 137, and has placed them in a room paneled
to honor them. A simple splay-cupboard type, very attractive, owing to its
freedom from over ornament. The raking of the small dentils under cap
and shelf is very noticeable, and a good decorative feature. This piece was
restored a good while since by the father of the owner. Date: 1670-90.

[ 133 ]

A COURT Cupboard owned by Mrs. Hulings Cowperthwaite Brown of
Brookline. An unusual detail of interest, seen in another cupboard only
in this work, on page 138, is the engrailing beneath the bottom shelf.
It is gratifying to be able to illustrate so many cupboards open below, as
the closed or "press" cupboard has hitherto strongly predominated. Date:
1660-90. [134]

A PRESS Cupboard Base, the property of Mr. Arthur W. Wellington.
This beautiful cupboard base has some distinctive features which are very
pleasing. The columns are boldly and daintily turned. The scheme of
recessing the drawers below is interesting. The geometrical moldings on
the drawers assimilate this piece to some of the later Seventeenth Century
chests and chests of drawers. The piece never had wooden knobs, but was
made with the brass drop handles as seen. There are visible on the top the
outlines of the splayed cupboard which was imposed upon this base. At
the corners little holes have been filled in with new wood where the dowels
of the corner posts stood. No trace has been found of the old top. This
base, however, presents features of much interest and beauty. It seemed
worth while to record it as we have done. We believe that in all cases
bases of this character had tops. Several have been found, not as good
as this, however, without tops. The wood is of the beautiful old surface
in this specimen and is very attractive. This cupboard with four turnings
like the two which remain must have been a very beautiful affair. So
far as we can discover there have been only the most insignificant restora
tions to this piece.
Date: 1670-1700. [135]

ON page 130 is a court cupboard formerly in the possession of Mrs. A.
W. Mattoon of New Haven, and long on exhibit in the New Haven His
torical Society rooms. It is now owned by Mrs. J. Insley Blair of Tuxedo
Park. The turnings while very unusual resemble those on the desk, page
119. The piece is thoroughly genuine. Date: 1680-1700.
Court cupboards received more enrichment than any other pieces of
furniture. In this particular the sideboard of the mahogany period inherited
their importance. The question of livery cupboards has been treated very
fully by Lyon. The connection between "livery" and "deliver" should be
noted, as the livery cupboard was the point from which the supplies were
delivered to the servants by the mistress of the house.
There was a hiatus after 1700, when the court cupboard went out, be
fore the sideboard came in. Meantime a side table did duty.
The English court cupboards, which are being brought to America, seem
to have no attractions whatever for the student of antiques. This is partly
because there has been a scandalous number of spurious and even poorly
constructed cupboards brought to America. Except a cupboard has been
here more than two hundred years, collectors will have nothing to do with it.
The foreign piece is easily detected, as it has no pine in its construction; the
oak is dark. Several American court cupboards have come to light since
the great war. Two such pieces have been found in southern New Hamp
shire and two in Massachusetts. But pieces of such size can hardly hide
away in any number. It is not likely that a dozen more will come to light
in many years.
In the old inventories cupboards are mentioned very frequently. Sarah
Dillingham, of Ipswich, in an inventory of 1636, left "a Cubert, ios."
Later we read of "one great cubberd, 1 li.;" "one cubbortt, 5s. 6d.;" "one
cupbord and cloth, ios.;" "one vallance for a cupbord, 6s.;" "one cuberd
and cuberd cloth;" "a cupboard & a cushin;" "one cubboard & cubboard
cloath;" "a cubber;" "cobbord;" "a cubbart & cubbart cloth;" "one cub- ^
bard & a drawer, 3 li.;" "a cobbord, 8s.;" "a coubourtt;" "curttaings &
vallings & cobbartt cloth and cushenghs;" "one coubbard and one leather
skin and the things in the coubbard, 13s.;" two cubberds 2 li. 18s.;" "great
cobber." There are also mentioned cupboards with the following ad
jectives prefixed: Court, livery, press, side, standing, wainscot and hang
ing; the last being in the nature of wardrobes. All these are before 1664.
See the valuable records on furniture in the Probate Records of Essex County,
Salem, IQ16. Published by the Essex Institute.

[136]

A PRESS Cupboard owned by Mr. James N. H. Campbell. It stands
in front of wainscot built to set it off. The design is very unusual and
striking. The grain of the oak is very boldly shown. The effect of the five
cruciform sets of applied decorations is good. The pillars belong to the
simpler type. The date is perhaps later than the average. It may be
about 1680-90.

[ 137]

THIS Court Cupboard is now restored, and we venture to show it in its
present form. It is in the Metropolitan Museum and from the Bolles
Collection. Its design is somewhat ornate for an American cupboard,
which it nevertheless is. The center arch molding in these cupboards is a
style carried over from early chests and is a reminiscence of the earliest
period as always when seen in any furniture. The exuberant quality in
taste, a legacy of the Elizabethan time, is amusingly shown here. The ends
have cruciform panels; the front diamond shaped panels, and an arch.
Corbels, dentils, nail heads, notch carving, molding, applied spindles and
scrolled skirt leave nothing out from the discursive mind of the construc
tor. Date: 1650-80. [138]

A COURT Cupboard in the Stanton House, Clinton, Connecticut, a
public collection. The posts supporting the architrave are not as fine as
in other types. Several similar pieces have been found in the same part
of Connecticut. Date 1660-1690. The nail heads are an erroneous effort
at restoration. The moldings lining the panels are also wrongly placed
there.

[ 139]

THE Press Cupboard on the next page is in part described there. Its
enormous turned posts, reduced at top and bottom to diameters so small,
resemble more nearly the earliest cupboards known, the Elizabethan, than
any others shown in this volume.
Court cupboards are the most valuable and important pieces of furniture
that have come down to us from the Pilgrim time. We doubt if any of the
Plymouth people had such cupboards. The ancient inventories mention a
good number, beginning in and near Boston and running up along the North
Shore to York, Maine, a region where there was greater wealth.
The second region, where they are found, is in the famous oak triangle,
if one may so name it, the points of which are Hartford, New Haven, Say-
brook. Of course sporadic instances of fine carved specimens may be found
outside these limits. And various migrations to newer settlements, carried
such furniture inland. Any thrifty New England Settlement of some size
before 1660, may be relied on as a producer of oak furniture. The student
of history sees at once that he is very restricted, in this investigation. The
tradition of oak began to die out before the century was over. Seventeen
hundred sees walnut well established, and in England "The Age of Walnut"
is a title given to a work on furniture covering the period beginning 1670.
It is eminently true that styles overlap, like shingles on a roof. Thirty
years is not too long to reckon as the length of the overlap. America trailed
behind England from a score of years to a generation.
But while, in conservative neighborhoods, oak persisted in England, for
a century more, the same is not true here. An Oak piece of furniture, made
in America after 1700 is extremely rare, and after 1720 is practically un
known. We feel certain from various sorts of evidence that the court cupboards
mentioned in old inventories were no better than the articles called merely
cupboards. One. reason for this certainty is that the court cupboard
is not valued any higher than the other cupboards. The same remark
applies to livery and press cupboards. The press cupboard is mentioned
only once in the Essex records, before 1664, and only once after that.
In those cupboards that remain to us the proportion of press cupboards is
larger. Side cupboards are mentioned oftener as the date grows later.
As a rule there is no descriptive adjective with the word cupboard. We
are not always certain what a side cupboard was, or why the term should be
used, as we find no corner cupboards in these early times.

[140]

A CONNECTICUT Oak Court Cupboard.
Owner: Mr. George Dudley Seymour. The front and cupboard ends are
ornamented with corbels and turtle-back bosses, the corners of the top
being sustained by boldly-turned, deeply-cut posts.
Hight over all, 54^ inches; hight of upper section, 21^ inches; hight
of lower section, 33 inches; depth of lower section, 19^ inches; top of lower
section (the cupboard proper) 45 by 20J4 inches. Date 1675-1700.
[141]

A PAINTED Whitewood Press Cupboard. Owner: Mrs. G. C. Bryant,
Ansonia , Connecticut . On this page appears a diagonal view to give the end
board; on the next page is the larger front view; neither picture being made
by the author. This is undoubtedly a most important piece of painted
furniture, and the only press cupboard, made after the analogy of the court
cupboard, of any wood except oak. We have here every feature of the great
court cupboards, but in simple, quaint, humble form. Here is a splayed
cupboard proper, the corner posts, doors and drawer; only the long drawer
is placed below. The decoration belongs to the same class as that shown
on page 54 and elsewhere, though we find it here in a simpler form. This
unique piece excites our strongest approval. That a designer should have
the courage to evoke from a "six board" basis a piece of furniture of so much
character, and withal so satisfying, speaks much for the individual artisan
of the time.
The date is 1690-1710.
Since the above was written another cupboard, largely pine, of the same
general construction as that here mentioned, has been found in New Hamp
shire. It is decorated in the thistle design.

[ 142]

[H3]

ON the next page is shown an important wardrobe in pine. It is owned
by Mr. W. of Boston, who is to be congratulated, as the piece is perhaps
unique. The curved paneling is carved from the solid. The piece stands
very high. It is in the rich shade of old pine, natural. The attempt at a
bracket foot, which is almost a stile, suggests the early date, about 1700-10.
The small number of early wardrobes arises from the fashion of the time,
which favored folding away garments or hanging them in a built-in closet.
On page 146 is a corner cupboard of pine. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston. It
belongs to the period when paneling came into fashion, about 1720-30.
On page 147 is an unique cupboard in respect to its canopied top. It was
found in Rhode Island. There is no distinctive mark of date, which may be
from 1720-50. The shape of the scroll, as it meets the shelf, reminds us of
the arm of a settle. .The wood is pine. It is owned by Mr. W. of Boston.
The cupboard, built in, or as a movable piece, came into its own in the
18th Century. For the sake of completeness of treatment we shall carry
through, beyond our period, the pine cupboard.
Further, as the task we set ourselves was to show native, distinctive fur
niture, we are fairly compelled to include all pine examples of style even past
1700 — thirty years after our period, in other matters, properly ends.
There must always be a question where furniture ends and mere carpentry
begins. In the case of cupboards we rule out absolutely plain pieces like
boxes with doors. We include whatever has a touch of taste in form, or
decoration. Attention is called to the frequency of side cupboards. The phrase
"corner cupboard" is heard everywhere. But before 1730 a cupboard was
as likely to be designed for a side wall as for a corner. The material of cup
boards, as soon as we leave court cupboards, is usually pine.
If we are to consider the wardrobe on page 145 as what the old inventories
designated "a hanging cupboard," we find ourselves obliged to suppose
they were very rare. There is a rare mention of presses. Whether they
were for press beds or for hanging clothes we cannot be certain. When we
remember the extreme rarity or perhaps utter lack of paneled walls in the
17th century, it is easier to understand the lack of "hanging" cupboards.
The word wardrobe, meaning a press for clothing, does not occur in early
inventories. In literature of the date it is used of a room where clothing was
kept, rather than of a clothes press.

[ H4]

[145 1

[146]

H7]

A KNICKERBOCKER Kas. These huge articles were very popular in
New York, New Jersey and wherever the Dutch element predominated.
The example above belongs to the author. The date is about 1750. There
is an immense cornice, two doors, a drawer, and very big ball feet. The wood
is walnut and pine; in the finer specimens walnut.
On page 149 is a cupboard of 1720-30, belonging to the author. Such cup
boards, with scroll boards flatwise to the beholder, preceded cupboards with
doors. The shelves are handsomely shaped. The piece is 73 inches high
and 35 inches wide. The bottom shelf is 38 inches high.

[148]

[ H9]

ON the next page is a most attractive side wall cupboard, belonging to
Mr. W. of Boston. The scrolled panels are carved from the solid. One
notices the early approach to the bracket foot. A very rare cupboard, with
but one or two known like it. Date: 1710-20.
On page 152 is the first example we show of an open dresser. The term
dresser was in common use up to fifty years ago, applied to any broad shelf
in the culinary end of the house. But generally there were, as here, shelves
above. The supporting uprights when scrolled as here, dignified the work
sufficiently to make it rank as furniture. The specimen on page 152 is
peculiar in having the boards in the back scrolled; also the feet. As a rule
the backs are solidly boarded, but sometimes they are paneled; and in case
the dresser was built into the wall there was often only a plaster backing.
The date is 1720-50. Owner: Mr. I. Sack.
On page 153 is a corner cupboard or dresser — on the dividing line because
the lack of any facing board above the main shelf brings the piece into close
cousinship with the dresser. A feature which gives attraction, and a sense
of earliness, is the heavy construction, the boards being a flush inch in thick
ness. Date: 1720-30.
On page 154 a corner cupboard belonging to Mr. Geo. F. Ives shows some
unusual features.
The dresser of page 155 is too generally found with its cornice missing.
It is the most attractive large form, following court cupboards, and was the
kitchen sideboard. It is now eagerly sought for those fine old kitchens which
have been set aside as dining rooms, the cooking being done in a new exten
sion. One reason for the scarcity of such dressers is that, being very large
pieces, they were generally built in. Where they have been kept for con
venience, they have also been removed to a lower back room and beheaded.
Large numbers of such headless cupboards, having no cornice, or tricked out
with an extemporized molding, are passed off on the unsuspecting. The
writer has never seen an original without a cornice, which sometimes coin
cides with the room cornice. But as a rule the kitchen had no cornice; that
decoration ceasing with the cupboard.
Dressers were almost invariably of pine, in New England, whereas in
Pennsylvania they were often of walnut, when at all elaborate.
They continued to be made up to the time of the modern hinge, but lost
all interesting features. Their style shows deterioration after 1780.

[150]

[i5i]

A DRESSER from I. Sack, Boston. It is in pine, all original, and has
some unusual features, as scrolled back board, and scrolled feet. Also it
is open to the floor, without the usual cupboards. The cornice which
marks the usual dresser was probably not made on this piece, which has a
molded face board instead. It stands about five feet and a half high,
by about four and a half feet long.

[152]

A CORNER Cupboard or Dresser, owned by Mr. Harry Long. It
originated in Connecticut and is of pine. An apparently small detail
gives it much of its quaintness and feeling of antiquity. The boards in
stead of being seven-eighths are a flush inch thick, which affords a sense of
solidity and stockiness.

[153]

A CORNER Cupboard owned by Mr. George F. Ives of Danbury It is
wider than the usual style, and carries the original strap-and-wedge hinges.
Such cupboards were as a rule made to fill the entire space from floor to
ceiling, the cornice being continuous with that of the room.
[154]

A DRESSER with scroll boards. We enter here upon a class of subjects
which has lately stirred a furor of desire. These pieces are generally pine
throughout, and the open sort, without spoon racks, are mostly New
England examples. They date variously from 1720 to 1790. They are
mostly found on the East Coast of Massachusetts.

[155]

THE paneled wall is in the
possession of the Metropolitan
Museum. The cross combined
with the arch in the lower section
of the wainscot is characteristic
of Connecticut, although the arch
with the panel is a very rare
feature even there.
It is a matter of continual re
gret that so little panel work
was used in America when there
was such abundant wood for the
purpose. One of the noblest
rooms in this country has cloth
very carefully pasted over the
tongues of the panels, so as to
give a smooth surface and then
the whole is carefully papered
over. People became ashamed of
paneling, because their neighbors
did not have it. The cupboard
on the left was saved from the
Marsh house, Wethersfield, date
about 1730.
It has the demi-dome top, in
plaster, plain. Some cupboards
were plastered, to the floor, on
the curved back.

[156]

THE Kitchen of the very ancient Fairbanks house at Dedham. In this
case the dresser is built against a remarkable sheathed wall, the boards of
which run horizontally and are beautifully molded. The end boards of the
dresser are very boldly and handsomely scrolled. These dressers, as here,
oftert ran across the entire available wall space on a side of the room. The
effect, when all the family utensils were arranged in state, was very good.
One lived in the atmosphere of wholesome utilities, and household treasures.
This cupboard may be seen by the public, with the delightful old house.
We may doubt if the cupboard was originally here. That would give us a
date around 1635. We presume its addition occurred about 1720-40.

[157]

A BUILT-IN Cupboard in the famous Benning Wentworth house, at
Little Harbor, New Hampshire. Date: about 1745. The cupboard is
recessed into the wall of the house, the corner post showing, and being deco
rated with a turned piece. It is a most ingenuous and pleasing conceit.

[158]

A CONNECTICUT Press Cupboard from Fairfield County. An heir
loom in the Wheeler family. Owner: Mr. Winthrop Edwards Dwight.
This cupboard shows interesting variations from the other two shown,
principally in the rosettes, or repeated sunflowers on drawer and architrave.
[159]

IN the lower cupboard the panel construction of the door is squared
behind and mitered-in part in front, on the same board — a strong and
ingenious device.
The upper cupboard has a corner mold. Hence the base mold is cut off
before reaching the corner. Dates of both pieces: 1720-40.
[160]

A PENNSYLVANIAN Dresser, owned by Mr. Arthur W. Wellington
who has also two more very handsome specimens. This piece shows the'
rat-tail hinge which is characteristic of the region.

[161]

A WALNUT Wardrobe, in the later Pennsylvania style. Owned by Mr.
C. C. Littlefield of Newfields, New Hampshire. It is a large piece, nearly
reaching a low ceiling. The construction of these cupboards, like that of the
kas, is contrived with wedges and slots. Date: 1740-70.
[162I

A FINE Dresser, belonging to Shreve, Crump & Low, of Boston. The
scrolling of the end boards is the best we have seen. The scrolled cornice is
very good. Date: the former part of the 18th Century. By an ingenious
offset of the hinges they are made secure by rivets through the body.

[163]

THE side of the parlor in the Robinson house, Wethersfield, built about
1737. This is said to be the oldest house now standing, in the village, but
the Michael Griswold house may dispute the claim.
The arrangement shows the usual panel effect of the period, whereby
an opening at one or both sides of the fireplace was made to do duty, the one
for the door of a shell, or domed, top cupboard, the other for a passage to a
rear room.
A curious feature of many of the finest domed cupboards is that their best
details, the pilasters, are hidden back of these large doors in the wall panel
ing. One would say the paneling came later, but the date of the houses
themselves is that of the paneled period.

[164]

ON the left is an excel
lent small cupboard,
designed to be fastened
up on a side wall. There
are arched doors, with
glass in the upper
part, and panels with
long bevels below. There
is one shelf. The wood
is all pine. It is one
of the best and the
rarest specimen of the
kind. The date is
about 1700. The
walls are at right
angles.

On the right is a little corner wall r~
cupboard dating perhaps before 1700.
It is all original. Owner: the author.
It has one of the earliest types of
hinge. The wood is oak. The cup
board was found in a very weathered
condition, in 1921. It is American.
The smaller pieces of 17th Century
furniture passed out of sight almost
entirely. There must have been a
good many fascinating cupboards like
the above, but they are very rare now.
An amusing feature about the lower
cupboard here shown is that no one
knows which end up it should hang.
"There is much to be said" in favor of
both ends! The absence of any mold
ing leaves us without a guide. For
variety's sake, and to please all, it
may be well to reverse it April 1st,
annually.

[165]

On the right, at the bottom
of this page is a little cup
board to fasten on a wall.
Pieces like this in pine are ex
tremely rare. This is probably
to be accounted for by the fact
that a recessed cupboard was
ordinarily used. Date: 1700-
1720. Owner: Mr. George F.
Ives. The corner cupboard on the
opposite page is perhaps the
most important that has come
to light . It stood in the Jaffrey
House in Portsmouth. Owned
by the Boston Fine Arts
Museum. Date: 1730.
The cupboard is remarkable
for its great hight and for the
elaborate carving of the capi
tals and the cornice. There is
a slide under the large door.

THE quaintest little cupboard
which has fallen under the au
thor's eye is this hat box with
drawers under. The piece may
possibly have been intended to
rest upon a table or a chest of
drawers, but as now it could also
have been attached to a wall.
The three cornered box at the
top with its H hinges, dates the
piece somewhere about Revolu
tionary times when the three-
cornered hats were in vogue.
The hat box is closed with its
original button. Below, the
owner would have kept his bands
and other linen . This piece is of
pine like all other cupboards un
less otherwise specified . It origi
nated in New England.

[166]

[i67]

THE little recessed cupboard above is built over a fireplace in the Williams
Place in South Easton, dating from 1717. It shows the method of utilizing
the space formed by the slanting of the chimney as it drew in above the
fireplace, and is one of the earliest examples of this use. In the same house
there still was in place in 1920 a diamond-pane leaded window, showing that
such windows were in use to a later period than is generally supposed.
There are also simple corner cupboards in the same house which originally
had no doors above.
The habit of recessing cupboards was very popular in the early years of
the Eighteenth Century. There is everything to be said in favor of the
fashion, as it gives economy of space,
and adds charm to an interior. In
some homes such cupboards took the
place of desks for the preservation of
valuable papers.
A quaint little set of hanging
shelves is shown here. The side
boards end in simple pigtail scrolls.
It is of pine. We can only judge
by the rarity of such simple little
things of the slight estimation in
which they were held, but nothing
adds more than pieces like these to
the quaint charm of an old home.
We endeavor, in this particular, to
preserve not only the notably impor
tant articles but simpler objects like
this. The date is uncertain, perhaps
1 8th Century. The large walnut cup
board on the opposite page is a fine
example, dating about 1740-60. [168

[i69]

THE closed door of the demi-domed shell top cupboard in the Webb-
Welles house, Wethersfield, shows the characteristic feature of Connecticut
panels, with the cross at the base. The date is 1752. Washington was
regaled on china from this cupboard, and accorded the distinguished privilege
of entering the parlor where it is situated — a privilege reserved otherwise to
attendants at weddings and funerals only; attest the perfect and unworn
condition of the wide pine floor. This cupboard is supplied, like all the
doors in the front rooms below, with the brass box-lock, which attained,
between 1730 and 1790, a high place as a decorative feature. It was at that
period made with tbe drop swing handle, never with a knob.

[170]

ABOVE is the interior of the cupboard described in the previous page.
While it extends to the ceiling, the cornice is at different level owing to the
framing.

I I7i]

THE Dining Room of the Quincy Homestead at Quincy has a charming
corner cupboard or more properly a side cupboard, here shown. The hidden
appearance of the pilasters is noticed. The panel work may have followed
the cupboard in date. The date is about 1740. It has been observed that
corner cupboards ceased to be built into houses between 1750 and 1760.
On the later date none was built in the very elegant Wentworth-Gardner
House. Nor does one appear in the beautiful Lee Mansion, Marblehead.
This leads us to feel that while many refinements in architecture and fur
niture came in after the middle of the century, it is a question whether the
losses were not more than the gains, in architecture after 1760, and in fur
niture after 1770. Certainly paneled walls were more numerous before 1760,

172 ]

THERE appears above a distinct surprise for searchers after cupboards,
if they have not seen the parlor of the Sparhawk house at Kittery.
Here are two demi-domed shell-topped cupboards, opening diagonally
from each side of the fireplace. Only one such cupboard appears here, but
the second is identical. The combination is distinctly beautiful. We cannot
but feel however that the projection of the fireplace into the room is a loss
to the sense of unity. It seems to divide the room. It cuts off the length
of the vista, from any point into the fireplace — the focus of any room. If
we compare this method of construction with the recessed fireplace style,
we shall at once feel the greater beauty, and especially the greater charm —
the cosy home sense, of the latter. The structural features here call for
the date 1745-55-

[ 173 ]

[174]

I 175 1

A

A MOST remarkable chair ap
pears in the large on the preceding
page and a side view of the same
on this page. It is owned by Mr.
Paul A. deSilva of Boston and is or
was on exhibition in the Old State
House, Boston. It bears this in
scription: "This chair was brought
from Lyons, France, in 1685, by
the father of Nathan Waldo.
Nathan, who was born in Boston,
settled in Windham, Connecticut,
taking this chair. By one of the
direct descendants it was given to
Rev. John P. Cleveland, D.D., of
Providence, R. I. It afterward
came into possession of the late
Mrs. Jane C. Austen-, the novelist,
and is now loaned the Bostonian
Society by her daughter, [Mrs.
Albert deSilva] ."
Now there are two odd facts
connected with this chair: the arms and a stretcher are American cherry,
so pronounced by Mr. Morris Schwartz. The rest of the chair is said to
be American oak. Then, if American, it must have been made at least a
hundred years after its period, and is the only American chair of the sort.
The English corner chair of oak, which Walpole sought, and examples of
which are brought to America, was never made here. Of course, if there
has been a slip in the tradition and the chair is American, it is far more
important. There have been brought to America not a few buffet chairs, as the
three-cornered chairs are called. They are turned throughout, and the
turned pilgrim chairs seem to have been their descendants some genera
tions removed. Such a transition chair is in the rooms of the Connecticut
Historical Society at Hartford. The chair above should be of date
1500-1600, if built in its period. If it is an American chair it can hardly
be denied the highest importance. The shape of its arm is that of the
oldest American Wainscot chairs.

[176]

[i77]

ON THE previous page is a wainscot chair with tape-loom back, owned
by the author. Chairs like that on the previous page and made in America
are extremely rare. There may be half a dozen known. This is the
stranger, since they are quite common in England, and were continued up
to a late period. It is probable that their bulkiness forbade any general
importation to America.
The chair in question belonged to Thomas Robinson who removed from
Hartford to Guilford in the year 1639.
"The Robinsons and their Kin Folk," a book printed for the Robinson
Family Association, contains a cut of this chair and some description of
Thomas Robinson. There is great similarity of moldings used in this chair
to those of the American oak chests. The sharp scroll of the under arm is a
characteristic feature. A delightful detail is the tape-loom back. This
chair was undoubtedly built with a solid back, and some time after the
weaver of the family conceived the idea of cutting her tape-loom in a solid
plain panel. Thus she had always a loom set up which was stable and
actually added to the comfort of the chair. It gave the back some springi
ness. The holes for the yarn were burnt through with a hot iron. The
reeding is somewhat crudely done showing less attention for precision than
in the original chair.
An effort has been made to connect the original owner of this chair with
the Pilgrim Robinsons, but without substantial results. The original John
Robinson, pastor of the Pilgrims in Leyden, remained behind in the old
world for a very excellent reason, to pay his debts, the reason which perhaps
has driven some immigrants to the new world, instead of keeping them at
home. Date: 1620-40.
The chair opposite is in the possession of Yale University and is in the
President's room. It belonged to Rector Pierson of the College, and bears
an inscription to that effect. It will be observed that in this example the
scroll on the under side of the arm is developed and carried out under the
frame of the seat. The simplicity of this chair as compared with the
English types is marked.
Date: 1640-1660.
There are supposed to be less than six wainscot chairs of American origin,
of which we show three. This remark may call out the knowledge of other
specimens.

[178]

[ 179

THE Wainscot Chair gets its name from the original meaning of wain
scot, which is one of the most fascinating studies in etymology. There is
hidden a great deal of history in the word. The common English word for a
large wagon, a wain, is the forepart of the word; the schot (English shot),
meaning partition. That is, wainscot was the best kind of oak for panel
work, such as was used in wagons. We say oak, because those who used the
term first, always thought of the construction as in oak, and in England
today wainscot means oak panels suitable for wall partitions. Elderly
Americans who lived in New England can well remember when the sides of
wagons were paneled, in long curves, on boat-shaped sides. So persistent
is the tradition of cabinet makers.
The word wainscot as generally used today is sought to be confined in
meaning to a wall completely paneled to the ceiling, as distinct from a dado,
or low panel-work. But the distinction can hardly be made good, in early
usage. The wainscot chair therefore was an oak chair with panel work, and so
of course with solid back. It is little wonder we have so few of them, as a new
country had little time or place for such cumbersome furniture. The three
shown here, the Gov. Leete chair on the next page, the Rector Pierson chair,
and the Thos. Robinson chair on pages 177 and 179 are about one-half of
the American wainscot chairs known. The desire for a light chair of course
consigned many early solid back chairs to the fire. Among this number
we do not find any that are carved, so far as known. Some carved speci
mens are obviously over- restored . The wainscot chair was not built for
a surface to ornament, but as a matter of custom and dignity. There are
some six, then, uncarved. This is not remarkable, as out of a half dozen
one would hardly look for carving, which would not be likely to occur often.
We can only presume, since we do not know, that there were carved wainscot
chairs of American manufacture. The inventories seldom use the word
"carved" in descriptions of furniture. Of course, if the De Silva chair
is counted as a wainscot, which would be straining a point, we have carving
there. But the case is sporadic, as the particular piece was out of period.
The Gov. Leete chair opposite, in the Stone House, Guilford, like the
other wainscot chairs shown has its top rail mortised between the posts,
rather than capping the posts, as so often seen in England. This is a
better construction. The arched back afforded a head rest. The turnings
are the oldest type.

[ 180

[i8i]

THE BREWSTER CHAIR. The piece opposite is possibly the finest
example that has ever come to light, being altogether original. It was
purchased of Mr. John Tufts, formerly of Sherborn, Massachusetts, by the
author. Mr. Tufts stated that the chair had been in his family eight gener
ations of record. The posts are two and a half inches in diameter, and the
chair has lost nothing but the balls on the front posts which have been
restored since this picture was made. All the spindles are, we believe,
original. It has now passed out of the author's hands.
Comparing this chair with the Elder Brewster chair from which such
types derived their name, and which is in Pilgrim Hall in Plymouth, it
appears that the original is in a far less perfect state of preservation than
the one here shown, a good part of the spindles of the Plymouth example
being missing and its posts being of lighter construction. Also it lacks the
upper turned rail in the back. It is to be noted that the Brewster chair is
found with a wooden seat whereas the Carver chairs which follow are
usually rushed. Of course, the wood seat is the older type.
The finials of the piece before us are especially noteworthy and it is
remarkable also that it seems to have lost almost nothing of its hight
beyond the slight necessary wear.
Regarding the origin of such pieces it should be pointed out thatBenn in
his "Style in Furniture," a very full and careful work, was obliged to send
to America for pictures of the Brewster and the Carver chairs. The con
clusion is inevitable that such pieces were either made in America or that
they came from Holland. The writer does not believe that either the
Elder Brewster or the Governor Carver chair came in the Mayflower, or
indeed any other known pieces of furniture.
Date: 1620-40.
The chairs of both types are almost invariably in ash, a very poor ma
terial, as it splits too easily and in all specimens there is shown a tendency
to chip away at the bottom or elsewhere. Further, it doesn't lend itself to
delicate turning as the wood is too coarse in grain.
We have to help us in solving this riddle the fact that at first all lumber
was riven. Ash was used in England; it split smoothly and easily, and John
Alden was the skilled man among the Pilgrims to attend to this work.
It was the best available wood for preparing quickly material for turning.

[ 182

00

ON the next page is a Brewster chair owned by Mrs. Francis H. Lincoln
of Hingham. Its date is 1620-40. There are some records and traditions
regarding this chair which should perhaps lead us to call it a Myles Standish
chair. It is said the chair belonged to that doughty Pilgrim father; was
inherited by his grand-daughter, and so came down to the present. The
record is that Isaac Sampson married Lydia Standish, daughter of Miles and
Sarah (Alden) Standish. The son of Lydia was Jonathan, born 1687, who
married Joanna Lucas. George (3) Sampson married Hannah Soule.
Caleb (2) Standish married Mercy Standish. {Boston Transcript, 4031.)
A Mr. Huggins from Maine married Miss Sampson, daughter of the
Sampson who married Lydia Standish. The chair remained in the Huggins
family till the marriage of his grand-daughter to A. C. Hill, from whom it
came into the possession of Miss Mary S. Baker, and from her was inherited
by the present owner. The expert in evidence will drive a coach and four
between some of these lines. But there is a better proof in the chair itself .
Its posts reach a diameter of 2 11-16 inches in places. Its type carries it
well into the first Pilgrim generation. As such great chairs were rare, always,
one feels strongly that with Carver and Brewster represented by their
chairs, it is more than probable, since we have a Standish tradition, that it is
correct. He was the third or the fourth in importance among the Pilgrims,
and Edward Winslow had a wainscot chair of state.
The chair had lost its spindles under the arms. When the Ship Church,
Hingham, was deprived of some of its old fittings, spindles from the pews
(late 17th Century) were used to repair the chair. They fell short of the
seat rail, into which they should go; hence the square rail introduced to
receive them. The bottom of the chair has been cut off. It had two rungs
in front and on each side, and one at the back. The spindles were turned
like those on page 183 , and then flattened. The front balls are a restoration.
Two or three more Brewsters, though known, cannot yet be secured for
museums. The greater pity as no museum has one except Pilgrim Hall at
Plymouth .
The Metropolitan Museum and various other museums had an opportu
nity to acquire the chair on page 183 but did not exercise it. May a grain of
love for our early history sometime sprout in the powers that be, that, from
millions expended on museum material, a wee fraction may be allotted to the
unique belongings of the settlers of America.

[184]

[i85l

THE picture above represents the supposed front of a livery cupboard
in oak. It was found in the Capen House at Topsfield. The frame is in
oak. We do not know of any other very ancient American specimen.
Of great interest are the turnings as they very closely resemble those on
the ancient chairs in this work. It is not beyond the realm of the possible
that the backs of the Brewster and the Carver chairs were suggested by
the spindle work on livery cupboards.
It is supposed the cupboard on which this front was used hung on the
wall, though why that conclusion has been reached the author does not
know. There is also in the Capen House a hutch which was found in an old
farmhouse about three miles away. This is the only ancient specimen
which we know of the English type found in this country. The door dif
ferentiates it from our chest and the result is what might be called either
a hutch or a cupboard. One of the best points about it is the fact that
the back legs are made shorter than those in front. The ancient sills of
the houses projected into the rooms and no doubt the short legs rested on
the sill as now in the Capen House. The specimen has a restored lid and
inside shelf but the rest is absolutely as found. Mr. George Francis Dow
has furnished the author with the photograph of the livery cupboard
front and with this information.

[186]

' A BREWSTER-TRANSITION Chair in the Geo. F. Ives Collection.
Description on the opposite page.

[187]

[i88]

[i89]

ON the preceding page is a remarkably heavy fine Carver, owned by
Mr. Chauncey C. Nash. The back spindles are very short, The finials
are very large and elaborately carved. The date is 1620-60.
On this page is a sport, an interesting chair owned by Mr. Geo. F. Ives.
Its spindles go directly into the seat rail. It is somewhat smaller than the
usual Carver, but, the turnings being heavy, it loses nothing by its reduced
size. The seat is slipped in, panel-wise, and is of wood. Its date may be
1630-60. In many cases the last, most delicate member of a finial is broken off;
the wood remaining is then smoothed, and only attention to this detail
reveals the loss. The front ball, heading the arm posts, is more often missing
than present.

[ 190]

'*> -

[i9i]

ON the preceding page is the beautiful Carver, owned by Mr. B. A. Beh
rend. The triple spindles are elaborately turned. The posts are 2^ inches
in diameter. The limit of massiveness so far discovered, and about the
same as the chair on page 189. Date: 1620-50.
On this page are two Carvers owned by the author. They are rather
light, ij/g and 2 inches in diameter of the posts. That on the left is rather
dainty for a Carver. Dates: about 1650-80.
On the next page is a very fine specimen of a leaning-back Carver. It
is said to have been found in Fall River. The turnery is very handsome;
the back finials are distinguished. It is built with rake backward for com
fort. The posts are heavy, and the chair is as good as any specimen we
have seen. It belongs to Mr. George Dudley Seymour, and is in the Wads-
worth Atheneum, Hartford. \ Date: 1630-60.
There are several Carvers coming to light annually. When Dr. Lyon
wrote he knew of only fifteen. The author estimates ten times as many
are now known, but only a half dozen of the very heavy sort.

I 192 ]

[193]

AT the left is a heavy
side Carver Chair. It
has probably lost some
thing from the finials.
The ball turning of the
top spindle is quite un
usual in Carvers. This
chair is high. It is
painted black. Owner:
Mr. B. A. Behrend.
Date: 1630-60.
It had, until quite
lately, been presumed
that side Carver chairs
were always light, or
what are called in Con
necticut, "lady" chairs.
But recently three heavy
examples have come to
the attention of collec
tors, as heavy as fine
early specimens of arm
Carvers. The writer in
clines tobelieve that these
chairs have only recent
ly been recognized by
searchers. If this view
is correct, we are likely
to have a considerable
addition made to our list
of such chairs.
On the next page is,
perhaps, an unique child's
high Carver. The turn
ings are very heavy, and it has the "panel" seat. It adds to the regular
features of the Carver a fine intermediate turning between the arm and the
seat. These turnings, — arm and intermediate, are elaborate. The chair
seems to be of walnut and is very heavy. It belongs to the author. Date:
1660-80.

[194]

[i95 1

[196

ABOVE on the left is a Carver chair, owned by the author. It has a
very fine arm turning. On the right is another Carver, owned by the
author. It has a panel seat thinned at the edges and inserted in grooves
of the frame rungs. Dates: 1660- 1690.
On the opposite page is a remarkable high chair in the possession of the
Worcester Antiquarian Society. Although this piece has been repeatedly
shown before, it being one of very few of which that is true, in this book,
we cannot refrain from reproducing it again and more carefully. It is said
to have belonged to Cotton Mather.
The finials are almost precisely the same as that of the Brewster chair
shown on page 183.
It also has some other Brewster features. Date: 1630-50.

[i97l

A CHILD'S Carver
Chair, owned by the au
thor. There are only two
low chairs of this style
that the writer has seen,
but of course others may
exist. This chair may
have had small finials at
the back. It is now ab
solutely unrestored, and
while the picture of it is
sizable the chair itself is
very small, the seat being
only seven inches from
the floor. It is especially
pleasing to be able to
trace these Carver chairs
through their various
adaptations. Thus we
have a low and a high
baby Carver chair, side
Carvers, and large arm
Carvers of different sizes.
In the example before
us there is very extreme
wear on the fronts of the
posts where the chair has
been dragged about by
children. This mark of
use is especially appealing as it indicates that the piece has been concerned
as a comrade in the joys of childhood. It was bought in Connecticut and
is of ash.
The habitat of the Carver chair is defined fairly well. While many of the
earliest and finest specimens are found near the Massachusetts shore, a
considerable number have appeared in the Connecticut Valley and a few
in Rhode Island.
The delightful variants in type cannot be correlated to locations with
any degree of satisfaction. No two of these chairs are alike, nor are they
so similar as to be confused with each other for a moment. Nevertheless,
there is a mark of unmistakable family likeness. The date may be 1630-70.

[198]

THE bringing to light
of several fine side Car
vers of late, has added
much to our interesting
specimens. The example
here, belonging to the '
author, was found on the
South Shore. Its date is
early, because the posts
are heavy, being 2 inches
in diameter. Perhaps
1630-50 would be a fair
date. The object of very
great interest regarding
it is the remarkable
similarity between the
finials and those of the
great standard Brewster,
page 185. The feet of
this chair are pieced,
and correctly. The rungs
are too low to take
another set below them.
Compare the chairs on
the next page.
Another side Carver
has been heard of better
than this, it having never
lost its feet. The speci
men is not now available
for a picture. A pair
of such chairs would
certainly supply a fine
setting with a great arm Carver.
When we use the name Brewster we do not intend to convey any
idea that a recognized style, like that we call a Brewster, existed. The
three or four known examples of Brewsters, all different, do not give
sufficient data for a style.

[ 199]

A PAIR of Side Carver Chairs, the property of Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
The arm chair in a Carver style is the usual thing, so much so that some
do not know of the existence of the side chair. We have before us a pair
made to match, and though somewhat worn down, still having their original
finials. There is very rapid declension in size from the arm chair. Perhaps
a dozen to a score of side Carvers have been discovered and all but three
are of this light type. It will be seen that the turning of the three vertical
spindles is an almost precise counterpart of that in the arm chairs.
Date: 1640-80.
These two chairs were found in Southern New Hampshire. The seats of
the Carver side chairs were generally low, which indicates that they were
probably made for sewing chairs and all their dimensions point to their
being designed for the feminine portion of the family.

[ 200 ]

A CARVER Chair, P
owned by the author. .
This piece is somewhat [
stocky, the diameter of ;
the legs being two and
a quarter inches. Itis
original except the balls |
on the front posts. It • '
is painted black. The
simplicity and generous
size of the turnings in
dicate a date from
1630-1650. In this case the arm
is turned simply. The
three vertical spindles
are unusual, being ra
ther fat, and apparent
ly made from a vague
memory. It was found
on the South Shore of
Massachusetts, where
perhaps Carvers are
most numerous, as
would naturally be the
case. Fine furniture,
in the sense of expen
sive and ornate, is not
found to any consider
able extent in the Ply- ;
mouth colony as the
poorness of the land and the original condition of the colonists, who were
seldom men of substance, leads us to look for simple furniture in the vicinity
of their settlements. At the same time, we gain a native flavor, and ex
amples of early Yankee ingenuity, in the provision of our forefathers for
themselves of articles which they were unable to buy either from lack of a
market or a purse.
Often the Carver is found converted into a rocker and cut down from one
to three inches, and the balls of the front posts are usually lacking. It is
hardly probable that the original seat remains in any of these chairs. At
least it is absurd to maintain that the seat is original as there is no possible
way of proving it. [201 ]

 ,.„._..-.¦   „..,.... ..

ON the left is what we have named a
pilgrim slat back. It is of the same
period as the Carver and Brewster.
Its only variation from the Carver is
in the back, which has from two to four
slats. This specimen dates about 1650.
On the next page is a truly superb
example of a "four back" pilgrim chair.
Owner: Mr. Dwight Blaney. It is the
finest of this type that we have seen.
The arms are flat. It has a massive
intermediate spindle. The finials are
almost Gothic. The turnings are some
what later than the earliest chairs, which
never show any decorative turning
below the seat. The slats are most
fascinating. The chair is very large.
The date, from massiveness should be
1640, but judged by the turning we
place it 1670-80.
It is more difficult, to the surprise of most collectors, to find fine examples
of pilgrim slat backs, than good Carvers. The light types, with four or
five slats, dating 1700, are common. Of course one would be unwise to
presume that more than a score of the first pilgrim generation of these
chairs exist.
One should very carefully distinguish in the use of the term "pilgrim
slat-back." It is often confined to three slats, sometimes to only two, and
never more than four. The simplicity of the turning and the great weight
of the chair, mark it as of an earlier period than the New England slat-
back. It is only necessary to see the two sorts together, for they vary
greatly in massiveness. For instance, the examples on pages 204 and 205
are obvious 17th Century pieces.

[ 202 ]

[2°3]

A HEAVY Pilgrim Slat-back Chair. This example is probably unique
as to its massiveness. The total hight is 38 inches and the seat is 22^ by
15^2. It seems not to have been cut down more than an inch, yet the
seat is but 13 inches high. It is owned by the author. Date: 1620-50.

(204)

[205 ]

ABOVE are a pair of pilgrim "three back" side chairs. Of course the
seats should be rush. Their stocky appearance leads us to determine the
date at about 1670-90. They belong to the author.
On the next page is a large chair with arched slats, molded. Owner:
Mr. Geo F. Ives. Date: 1630-60. The general appearance of the chair
suggests Italian influence. The chair, however, came from the remote
country district — Vermont.
The seat of this chair is 18x21 inches and 20 inches high. The back is
48 inches high.
On the preceding page is a heavy pilgrim slat-back. Owner: Mr. Chaun
cey C. Nash. Date: 1630-50. This stocky chair, with the fine flavor of
the first pilgrim generation, has recently come to light. Except that the
tips of the finials are missing, we can give the strongest endorsement to
this pleasing appealing example. It is in the soft natural color, with excellent
surface.

[206]

(207]

THE Child's High Chair here
shown, with five back spindles
is an interesting variant. The
owner is Mr. Geo. F. Ives, and
the date is perhaps 1700-20.
The top and bottom rails of the
back are flat pieces. The turn
ing of the arm suggests the 17th
century. The balls, or pear
terminations of the front legs
have suffered somewhat.
The lore of high chairs is an
amusing study. The author
has photographs of about fifty,
of low and high degree. The
question whether a foot rest is
correct for an early chair must
be answered in the affirmative.
Likewise we may say many
early high chairs had no foot
rest. This one has a worn rung
which served as a foot rest.
Whether the love for children
has grown cold, or for whatever
reason no fine child's chairs are
made now-a-days.
In case there was no bar
across in front of a child, a
leathern thong could be strapped
across attached to the posts.
In this case they show wear as
if from such use. The equili
brium of the chair was better
maintained without the project
ing foot rest. in the best examples it has been lost.
There is no trace of the use of a tray attached to a high chair. In modern
use such trays are thought necessary, but the early use was confined to
meal time only, and children were obliged to behave with decorum — if
we believe all we read. Besides, the feeding of babes by Eve's method
was the rule in those days.

[208]

A BANISTER-BACK Child's
High Chair. Owner: Mr. George
Dudley Seymour. Date: 1700-20.
The chair was found at Milford,
Connecticut. The banisters are
reeded. The cresting or top rail is
profiled and pierced to produce the
"crown and heart" design. A part
of the top rail is missing. The
turned intermediate spindle under
the arm is excellent. The chair is
maple, was never painted or restored.
It has lost something in hight. It
was given to Elizabeth Davidson of
Milford by her father. She married
Abner Perry in 1795, and the chair
has been held by their descendants
till the owner bought it in 192 1.
On page 210 we begin to show a
fine collection of mushroom chairs, a
variant and successor of the pilgrim
slat back.
One readily sees that the horizon
tal spindle, under the arm, served
to strengthen the chair, to keep its
occupant in place, and to enhance
the appearance of the chair.
The transition from an all-turned
chair to a banister back was in the
interest of comfort, as the flat
banisters were agreeable to lean
against, whereas turned spindles were
not. Further, no bending was re
quired as in the Pilgrim slat-backs.
Compare with chairs on pages 259
to 262, where we find the inspiration for this chair.
We are compelled by the exigencies of assembling the volume to place
this chair out of its proper position.

[209 ]

I 2IO J

[211]

ON page 210 is a small mushroom chair. It is owned by Mrs. W. B. Long
of Boston. We cannot too often impress the reader with the fact that nothing
is, or can be, shown in scale. This is of cdurse true of all furniture books,
but especially true here, because we are trying to show details, and often
give a large cut for a small piece. Date: about 1700.
On page 211 is a very fine mushroom chair owned by Mr. B. A. Behrend.
It was in the Lyon volume. Date: about 1690.
On this page are two mushroom chairs owned by the author. The ban
ister-back helps us date these chairs. The style of enlarging the top of the
front post came in, occasionally in the 17th Century, and continued into the
early 18th Century. The chair on the right has the slanting arm, an early
and good style. It dates about 1700; the other possibly a trifle later. They
were found near Boston. The slant arm chair is in ash. The other is maple,
and a more suitable, but later, wood.
On the opposite page is a humorously huge mushroom chair in the
author's collection. The chair also rakes sharply backwards, seven inches
from the perpendicular. The mushrooms, in seasoning, have flattened
nearly a quarter inch. It was found in Southern Connecticut.
Size: Top slat, $H inches wide; each slat below diminishing a quarter
inch. Width, over all, 32^ inches; seat 28^2 x 22 inches; back posts, 46^2
inches; front posts 30^ inches. Date: 1680-1720.
[212 ]

A GREAT Double Mushroom Chair; further described on opposite page.
It was evidently designed to be the father of chairs of this type.
[213 ]

THE room shown is the fine reproduction of antique framing in the
parlor of Mr. B. A. Behrend's house. It is a suggestion to those who have,
as he has, fine examples of Seventeenth Century furniture and who wish
to form a proper setting for it. It is true that old materials may often be
secured and worked into such a room with a greater quaintness of effect and
a closer approximation to the mellowing influence of the past. The room
shows pieces most of which are elsewhere described in this volume, though
the quaint little stool with only one leg in the back is not elsewhere seen.
It seems an adaptation of a milking stool, with a back rest. Here I pro
pound the subtle inquiry, why was a milking stool made with three legs
while of all seats made in the world it needed to be better based than the
ordinary chair? So far as our views are concerned we want to say that
from experience with the portion of the cow suggested, we enter a proposal
that all milking stools should have five legs, like one in the collection of
Mr. Geo. F. Ives.

[ 214]

THE Chair at the right
has very large mush
rooms. The large chair
at the bottom of page
217 is a combination of a
pilgrim slat back, a mush
room, and a Brewster
suggestion. The little
child's chair by its side
is the only mushroom in
that size known to the
author, who owns the
three chairs. Date, on
the "combination," about
1680; on the others 1690-
1710. At the top of page 216
are two mushroom chairs
of excellent type. The
"sausage" turnings on
the chair at the left,
together with the slant
arm, give it merit.
Owner: Mr. Arthur W.
Wellington. On the right on page
216 is a mushroom chair
with a finely scrolled set
of slats.
The sizes of posts of
chairs are generally above two inches if they reach back to the first pil
grim generation. The largest posts are hardly two and three quarter
inches. After 1660 we begin to find posts of two inches diameter the
rule. After 1680 the posts are often only an inch and three quarters.
Something must be allowed for the style of the chair, and its size, in
general. Side chairs have posts averaging about a quarter inch smaller
than those of arm chairs, of the same style. How the term side chair,
for a chair without arms, originated, we do not know. In some regions
side chairs are called "lady" chairs. That is, they were intended for
woman's use.

I 215]

ON the next page, at the top, from the author's collection, a Pilgrim slat
back with three slats rounded in the most usual fashion but with very good
finials. The front balls are missing. The arms are in what we may call the
flat turning; that is to say, turned pieces which are substantially flattened
for comfort and convenience, and which preceded the so-called shaped arm.
The slat back chair persisted to a late date, well into the Eighteenth Cen
tury, in fact, whereas the Carver and the Brewster ceased to be made.
The rather common side chair with slats which was used in kitchens
throughout the Eighteenth Century was merely a lighter type of the Pilgrim
slat back, and was made in very small turnings. On the other hand the arm
slat back seems to have gone out of use earlier than the side chair, which is
one more mystery connected with antique furniture.
Size: Hight 42 inches; seat hight 15 inches; seat size 23^4 by 16 inches.
A "Near" Carver appears on the right, from the author's collection. It
is heavily turned.
Returning to the large chair on page 217 at the bottom: It is in all
respects original except a bit of slat, and the large fist-like balls which are
turned as a part of the posts are extraordinary. An inch or two has, however,
been lost at the bottom. We can conceive no use in the row of spindles
in front except to strengthen the chair. Thus, while this truss work pre
vented side rack, the spindles under the arms prevented racking fore and aft.

I 216]

[217I

TWO Cromwellian Chairs, owned by the author. Date: 1640-60. The
chair on the left has more turning than the other, but is not therefore any
earlier. These chairs are marked by low backs, with a somewhat narrow rest,
vertically. They are called Cromwellian, because the era of simplicity under
the Commonwealth revolted from the more luxurious furniture of the earlier
part of the century. With the restoration comes in the florid, rich school of
Charles II. Of course these chairs are American, being maple. The cover
ings for this sort of chairs were in a great variety of materials, but preferably
leather, "iai **¦"*¦ -^»**«v^J>' *-**» *** A*******-,- S^JU^-tu-^Mtt. wt*^ ,
These chairs are to be distinguished sharply from the Spanish style which
prolongs the back post above the frame, and ends it with molded face. Such
chairs were perhaps made in America, but we refrain, lest we err, from
introducing them into this book.

I 218]

A CHAIR generally called "1
Jacobean. It is more accurate to I
give the daie merely, as this chair • i
persisted many years, and most of
those found in this country were of
the time of Cromwell or of Charles
II. The date of this chair may be
1660-1700. The chairs of this
type have been set forward in date
somewhat by the discovery of a
date as late as 1699 on a very fine
specimen. The leather covering of chairs
is very satisfactory, conducing to
cleanliness, durability and a sense
of the mellow past. They are
inviting — the best compliment we
can pay to a chair. This ex
ample belongs to the author. It
was found in New Hampshire, and
is of maple and birch. The nails
are those usually found; the very
large oval nail head is more likely
to be Spanish.
All the original leather seats are
thoroughly studded with nails, so
much so that it sometimes seems
as if an effort was made to insert
a nail wherever space could be
found for it.
The ovaling of the top and
bottom of the back panel, on a surface so arranged that the surface of
the doubled leather is flush with the wood, gives an excellent effect.
Chairs of this style in England are sometimes very high. The American
examples known are usually of the hight of an ordinary chair. We have
elsewhere commented on the almost total lack of American cross-stretcher
chairs.

[219]

A LEATHER Back Chair. The
simplicity is restful and in very good
taste. The chair is all original except
the leather, which is restored in the
natural color taken from another old
chair. Leather backs, such as are
shown here and on the preceding and
following pages, are more rare than
banister-backs; and if we regard
style, perhaps we should count them
just as good, if not better, than the
banister-backs. The date of this chair is about
1670-90. It shows the quieting influ
ence of the Commonwealth time.
The wood is maple.
The method of construction of
chairs was unfortunately governed by
style more than by sound cabinet
principles. Most of the chairs of this
and the cane type are frail in the
back. This is especially true, when,
as usual, the back slants at an angle
beginning at the seat, so that a
cross-grain strain occurs. Not all old
furniture was good. Only the best
survived. Luxury was not lacking in the
homes of the 17th century where
there were means to indulge it. The inventory of the chair coverings in a
17th Century house startles us by the rich material it reveals.
Table linen also in ordinary households was common. Indeed, one would
infer it was more common, in good patterns, than it is now. Napkins in
large numbers are enumerated. The bed linen also was often real. Where
a housewife was forehanded she often had a store of linen for many years
ahead. The homes were not wholly without silver and glass, with some china,
though the last named was not made in England. The bulk of the table
ware was in pewter, with much wooden ware in the poorer families.

[ 220 ]

A LEATHER-BACK
Chair. Date: 1670-90.
The high stretcher is a
desirable feature. This
chair is a variant from
the cane chair, and is of
the same period. It be
longs to the author. It
is maple, and practically
all original, except the
leather, which is old.
It is regarded as a very
serious loss if the feet of
a chair are missing, but
even more important are
the finials, nevertheless
any relic of a dignified
article of furniture two
hundred years old is
worth possessing, and if
a chair has lost both
finials and feet it must
be, if so old, wept over.
In the re-upholstering
of old chairs care should
be taken to keep the
padding low. The effect
is spoiled by plump pad
ding. It is true all old
chairs have had so much
use that we cannot say
just how the seats orig
inally looked. But they
certainly are not in keep
ing with their age unless
the seat is pretty well
flattened. The backs
sometimes did and some
times did not have pad
ding. In case the back was padded the leather was often doubled and
padding placed between so as to show leather at the back of the chair.

[221 ]

AT the left is an Original Seventeenth Century Rocker, in the author's
collection. We use the phrase here "Seventeenth Century" more as an
indication of style than of precise date . The piece has all the characteristics
of the Pilgrim slat-back, except that the bottoms of the posts have enlarged
turnings unmistakably designed to receive rockers. The writer owns an
other chair of the same type. They are extremely rare, yet seem to have
come to light in three or four instances lately. They lack massiveness, this
piece being about 40 inches high; the seat 15^2 inches high with an area
of 20^ by 16 inches. The rockers are shaped to prevent an overturn.
On the right, a high desk chair. This piece at first appears to be a high
chair for a child, but the size is that of an ordinary chair, namely 17^2 by
12^4 inches on the seat, which, however, is 22 inches high; the back being
37^2 inches high. It is very substantial, though the posts are rather light.
It is all original, except the rush.
Date problematical, perhaps 1 700-1 740.

[ 222 ]

ABOVE are two high chairs of the finest style each in its kind. The
left chair belongs to Mr. G. Winthrop Brown. The right chair is delightful
from its flaring base.
One never knows where to stop on children's chairs. They are too delight
ful to leave behind us. They add more to the home sense than any other
furniture. A high chair, similar to Mr. Brown's above, but with three slats, is owned
by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash. Had the makers taken a little more pains, as
in the right hand chair on page 278, we should have had a remarkable
Pennsylvania arched slat-back.
Turned chairs, which to us appear most desirable, were at first made as
substitutes for wainscot chairs, and were not highly regarded. The turning
lathe, run by the foot, with all parts made of wood, was without question
the earliest wood-working machine in America. John Alden was amply
competent to make a lathe and no doubt did make one. The labor was
far less than was required for any other sort of chair. An ax was sufficient
to prepare the rough sticks for the turner.

[ 223 ]

AN unique arm chair which was found in Connecticut. The back is
hollowed from a single board and shows, besides the three hearts, a peculiar
scroll which are together called the "heart and crown." The piece has
been very much admired. It was in the former Wallace Nutting collection.
Date: 1690-1720.

[224]

TWO Turned Slat-Back Chairs. Owner; Mr. George Dudley Seymour.
Date: 1710-40.
They are from the Capt. Chas. Churchill house, Newington, Connecticut,
built 1762-63. They are now in the Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford.
These chairs bear the name of New England Slat-Backs. This distin
guishes them from the arched slat forms whose habitat is Pennsylvania.
Also it means, though the name does not show it, a New England chair
succeeding the pilgrim type. The earliest of them dates about 1700. From
that time they were popular, always growing lighter, through the century,
as every day chairs.

I 225

ON the left appears a five-back New England chair. It is in the author's
collection. The hight is 34^ inches and the seat 15^ inches, the size
of the seat is extreme being 25 inches wide by 19 inches deep. This gene
rosity is attractive. The hight of arm chairs used to be considered to be
properly 18 inches, as well as the side chairs, but many measurements of
ancient arm chairs disclose the fact that not a few were made lower than
the side chairs, which later usually have a good hight to be used at a table.
The arm chair, however, which in this case shows the elongated ball or
pear-shaped foot, has not been cut down, which indicates that it was built
for comfort by the fireside. The so-called sausage turning so often seen on
a New England slat back is here very prominent. The roll-shaped arm
suggests a simple plain variant from the more elegant Jacobean type and
helps us in the date of such a piece, making it 1690-1710.
On the right appears a turned four-back arm chair in the author's col
lection. It is all original, is painted black with some late decoration. The
finials are good for the period. The leather seat has been added, but it is
so substantial that it may well remain.

[226I

TWO fine high backed New England turned chairs, the left hand example
being a very perfect type, having five backs; complete in its turned scheme,
and with sausage rungs not only in front, but at the sides.
The other chair is remarkable for its wealth of rungs, all alike, twelve in
number. The spacing of the back is a characteristic feature, the slats
increasing in width and in spacing, from the seat upward. What it is in
this chair that is so attractive one hardly knows, but all eyes linger on it.
The dates are about 1710-30.

I 227]

THE Chair above with four waved or serpentine slats is owned by J.
Milton Coburn, M.D. It is very rare. Chairs of this general type were
made, sometimes, with rockers. We are not certain in this case, whether
the rockers are original.
The other chair, a three-back, is owned by Mr. G. Winthrop Brown.
It appears that the turnings of the two chairs are identical, so that they
were made by the same craftsman, or one was copied from the other. The
date may be 1730-50. These lighter turnings were not used much before
that date.
The arms are short, and are reinforced for strength by running down to
the first rung. The style must have been popular.
Comparison of these chairs with the baby's chair on page 277, at the top,
on the right, indicates that the little chair is of an earlier date, as the arms
belong to the 17th century. Another example of a reinforced arm, with
two bearings, appears on page 230. In the earlier style the front post of .the
chair would have sustained the arm. The change was not wise. It also
interfered with the rushing.

[228]

ON the left is a rare, possibly an unique Chair, owned by Mr. B. A.
Behrend. It has on the rear legs small rollers like those used on trundle
beds, though of course much smaller. We have here then the genesis of
the caster. The chair is apparently a 17th Century piece — just coming
inside that limit. The ends of the arms are sawed off.
The other chair, owned by Mr. W. of Boston, is a Pennsylvanian or
Knickerbocker product. It is called a name chair, from the inscription of the
lady's name, to whom it was doubtless presented. The turnings and finials
are in accord with its origin — two little balls, and a central finial being
applied at the top rail. The chair has the "panel" seat.
On the back above the name is a flying cherub, carved. The piece is
altogether very quaint.

[229]

[230]

The chair at the right
has that much to be de
sired, six-slat back. The
type is Pennsylvanian. It
introduces the arched slat.
It is characterized also by
ball-feet, turned larger
than the post, though in
this case a restoration
failed to take note of that
fact. We admit chairs are
found without the enlarged
foot. This chair is light and
attractive. It is common
with four slats, not rare
with five, much sought for
with six, and found in one
or two known instances
with seven slats. Another
mark of these chairs, when
made with arms, is the
cutting away of wood un
der the arm, for lightness.
We know of no exception
to this rule, in the best
style. This chair, those on page
233, and the chair at top
of page 234, belong to Mr.
Francis D. Brinton, West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
ON the left at the top of page 230, there is a curious chair. The turnings
have enlarged shoulders. The obvious object was to secure greater solidity.
The posts are left square, except the finials behind and the section under
the arm in front. One or two other examples have been seen with this
sort of turning. We do not count it at all important; it is merely an oddity.
Date uncertain; perhaps 1710-50.
Another chair on that page has "sausage" turnings not only in front,
but on the intermediate spindles below the arms. The date may be 1700.
The left chair, bottom page 230, is a good example of 1710-30.

[231 ]

[ 232 ]

The chair on page 232 was bought in Albany. It is one of the most delicate
imaginable. The finials run to a needle point. The slats are very thin.
The piece is maple.
The right hand chair above is a fine example of the Pennsylvania side
chair, with six slats.
The left hand chair above, corresponding with the arm chair on the
next page, has fancifully scrolled slats. They were evidently made as
part of a set. The chair above shows the "blunt arrow" formation of the
front right-hand foot. This is also a feature of the earliest Philadelphia
Windsors. The front spindles of these chairs are generally very hand
somely turned, in the Queen Anne style.
These chairs date from 1720 to 1750.

I 233 1

The chair on the left is mentioned
on the preceding page. The chair at
the bottom of this page, while its
rockers are an addition, is of a massive
fine design.
The Flemish chair, on which we
here enter, became popular among the
well-to-do in America at the end of
the 17th Century. It was the age of
walnut, but native woods that were
convenient claimed attention. Vir
ginia walnut was not found where these
chairs were made.
The feature of the Flemish chair
that most impresses one is the famous
Flemish scroll, seen to good advantage
on the beautiful chair on the next page.
The chair there shown is owned
by Mr. H. W. Erving and the one on
the next page following, slightly dif
ferent, by Mr. G. Winthrop Brown.
A fine feature of each is the so-called
ram's horn arm, which gains this name
when it curves outward as well as down
ward. The back legs are never carved. There
is sometimes a sharp — too sharp, backward
angle of the rear leg beginning at the seat.
The chair is weak at that point. In the
case of the arm chair the arm acts as a
brace. On the side chair there is a fre
quent fatal weakness.
These chairs are a far cry from the sim
plicity of the turned chair. They represent
very well the reaction against Puritanism.
While they were never common in America,
owing in part to their expense and their
too ornamental character for a new coun
try and a simple generation, they are found
in considerable numbers. The caning of these chairs is of the finest
character, and some of it remains in the examples we show. The finish
is preferably natural, but many specimens are painted black.
[234]

[235]

[236]

[237I

AN Arm Chair with turned base and Flemish back, and a Flemish side
chair. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston. In the backs of both of these fine chairs
the Flemish scrolls are strikingly prominent. The wood is "fruit" wood —
a term indicating apple or pear.
On the preceding page a chair with a strong English appearance, but said
to be American, is shown. Owner: Mr. Stanley A. Sweet of New York.
On page 239 appears the most perfect example I have seen of a pair of
Flemish side chairs. They are owned by Mr. W. of Boston. They are
painted black.

I 238

[ 239 1

AT the left is a beautiful Flemish chair. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston. A
rare and winning feature is the shape of the molded panel. The color is
black; the wood we cannot certainly name.
On the right is a chair, present owner unknown, with rarely fine Spanish
feet. Such feet bear study, as there are so many inferior ones. Spanish in
this sense means the Spanish Netherlands. The date of Mr. W.'s chair is
1670-90. The other is about 1700. [ 240 ]

AN Arm and Side Chair, Flemish style. In fruit wood. Owner: Mr. W.
of Boston. One should note that the arm chair, as often occurs in this style,
is lower in the seat than the side chair. The boldness of the scrolls, com
bined with the delicacy of the connecting carving, and the beauty of the
carving on the arm are notable. The inward spiral of the foot is called the
English scroll. The date is 1670-1700.

[241 ]

ON the left is a Flemish chair owned by Mr. W. of Boston, on which the
carving of the side stiles of the panel is inside a reeded member. The wood
is very hard — possibly beech.
The other chair, present owner unknown, has a handsomely scrolled panel.
The plush back is a bad addition which does not fit the panel. The carved
stretchers sometimes, but by no means always, match the top rail, as in this
case.

[ 242 ]

THE left hand chair belongs to Mr. Stanley A. Sweet. It is very elab
orate, showing every feature of the Flemish style. Date of this and the other
chair: about 1690.
The reader will have noticed two distinct types of top rail on Flemish
chairs. The earlier in date, and the handsomer, is that in which the rail pro
jects beyond the posts, such as the chairs on page 240. The other sort is
much less frail; for the rail is wholly between the posts into which it is
entered by mortise and tenon, as in the chairs on this page.
The chair on the right is the property of Mr. W. of Boston.

[243 1

A SIMPLE Flemish
chair belonging to the
author, and accorded
rather more prominence
than it deserves. Still as
a type it affords oppor
tunity to point out that
the elaborate chairs here
tofore shown are too rare
to be within the reach of
the average collector.
This chair, with the
simple reeded sides of the
back panel, and an abso
lutely plain bottom rail
beneath the panel, is
more like what we see as
a rule. The work on the
two carved members is
worthy so far as it goes.
It will be seen also that
all preceding Flemish
chairs have had cane
seats as well as backs.
This chair has a rush seat
which in old days was
counted not so good as
cane. This chair of maple
dates about 1690-1700.
It will be noted that
the cane chair has a
middle stretcher. The
rear stretcher, therefore,
is placed very high.

[244]

A BEAUTIFULLY
carved Flemish chair, be-
longingto Mr. W. of Boston.
It is reported to have been
the property of William
Penn. The date is about
i 670- i 700.
The reader should be
warned that in large photo
graphs made close to the ob
ject there is no little distor
tion, so that as here the base
of the chair looks too heavy
in proportion to the back.
This blemish is inevitable,
under the conditions neces
sary for procuring these
pictures. The small scroll on the
legs into which the carved
stretcher is mortised, is a fine
touchof design, as if intend
ed to receive the stretcher.
Many Flemish chairs, even
those of the very highest
character otherwise, lack
this detail.
There is generally a "shoe"
or knob on which the foot of
a Flemish leg rests. But in
the English scroll, this shoe
is regularly lacking.
Attention is called to the
extremely narrow band of
caning in the back, in this
chair. This "gesture," as the
French say, is very effect
ive. Never mind about the
comfort . The seats of Flem
ish chairs, in the better
styles are strongly molded on the outer side, as here.
Note how the scrolls on the top rail cunningly intercept one another!
[245 1

A DOUBLE-PANEL
Cane Spanish Foot Chair.
Owner: the author. This
example has a great deal
of stylish feeling. The
back follows all the curves
of a Grecian bend, with a
few to spare. The outward
rake of the foot behind is
particularly "fetching."
The skirt is a thin piece of
applied wood. Owing to
the lighting, the Spanish
foot shows in a different
color from the leg above,
but it is all original. The
rolling scroll of the top rail
is delicate. The stretchers
also are effectively scrolled .
Altogether the chair pre
sents many features differ
ent from the ordinary.
; The chair is painted and
decorations in gold were
discovered when a modern
upholstered seat was re
moved. It was originally
caned. The habit of be
ginning the cabriole curve
of the leg, not at the
frame but after an inter
vening spool-like ornament
is the regular style. Date:
i 690-1 700.
On the next page is a very delicately carved pair of Flemish chairs be
longing to Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow of Cambridge. The carvings above
and below are a more perfect counterpart of one another than we have
elsewhere noticed. Of course the upholstery on one of the chairs is a later
addition. Date: 1670-90.

[246]

[247 1

A PAIR of Carved Cane Chairs, with Spanish feet. Owner: Mr. Francis
Hill Bigelow. The feet are in very good style. The roll at the top of the
rail suggests comparison with that on page 246. The turned stretchers
are very bold. A touch of carving running about the rnolded back and
on the squares of the legs, is interesting. Date: 1700.

[248]

A PAIR of Panel-Back Chairs. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston. The small
skirt resembles that on page 246. The painting is decorated with bands of
gold. These chairs were found at Salem and are said to have belonged
to Nathanael Hawthorne from whose former residence they came. There
is a very striking resemblance between these chairs and those on the op
posite page. There the decoration on the squares of the turnings in the
legs is carved. Date about 1700.
We approach, in the form of the molded back frame, the early Dutch
style which shortly followed these chairs.

[249

THE Chair on the left, belonging to Mr. Brooks Reed of Boston is in a
style immediately following the Flemish, and far more generally seen in
America. Date: 1700-10. All the stretchers are ornamentally turned.
The style of the arm, while a declination from the more elegant Flemish,
is the proper type for this chair. The only carving is on the cresting.
The chair on the right has five banisters, a feature counted worth while.
While the chair is supposed to be later than the Flemish, it has the imposed
not the built in, top rail, an early feature. Date: 1690-1700. Owner:
Mr. B. A. Behrend.
Banister-backs are the usual "old fashioned" chairs in America, having
been immensely popular. They divided this supremacy with the simpler
"New England" slat back. The dates were coincident. But the slat
backs began sooner and lasted later.
The method of turning the banisters was to glue two pieces of wood
together, with a paper between. After the turning was done, the pieces
could be separated by inserting the point of a knife, and a smooth surface
without loss of shape through planing, was obtained.

[250]

vttv

SPANISH Foot Banister Backs. Owner: the author. These chairs
while not precisely alike in every detail, were evidently made to match.
The stretcher of the arm chair is huge. The turner loved to show what he
could do when he tried. The arm is better shaped than usual. It is seldom
one sees such large ball turning in the side stretchers. Date: 1700-1710.
The growth of the turner's art from the Egyptian bow string lathe to the
present, presents many aspects of interest. All early work in America was
done on foot-power lathes. Having made this statement we await a state
ment from some one that water power was sometimes used. It is possible
in sporadic cases. It was not possible to turn very small articles because
the back rest was not invented until long after our period.

[251]

A CANE Chair with
Spanish Feet. This some
what simple but effective
design has good ram's
horn arms, and like the
Flemish style, a middle
stretcher. The back is
done in the molded style
of the Dutch chairs. The
stretcher is not as satis
factory as one could wish.
In tracing the develop
ment of style, much at
tention should be paid
to physical geography.
While a furniture maker
might bring his materials
from far, in special in
stances, yet the cost of
transportation was great.
Hence, after a little, an
artisan would look about
him, and learn to adapt
the materials that lay
ready to his hand. If no
cane was available, he
used rushes. If he had
no walnut he had a fine
-"' wood in maple. The
banister back gave springiness lacking in a slat back. Style is developed
more through necessity than through deliberate design. The abundant
pine, found in America, furnished the logical wood for the interior of cabinet
pieces, and to take the place of the oak wainscot of Europe. The pine was
so wide as to overcome, to a large degree, the necessity of small panels. Any
one with a little ingenuity could construct a crude lathe. The all-turned
furniture of the earliest period was more easily produced than any other
kind. The only tools used in putting a turned chair together were auger
and mallet. And the work stood.

[252]

(253 1

ON the preceding page is an unusual chair owned by Mr. Stanley S.
Sweet. It is peculiar in that the arm post is not a continuation of the leg,
but is set back on the frame of the chair. The broken line is pleasing to the
eye, but probably no improvement from a structural point of view. There
is a fine arm and back, and altogether, after the Flemish period, the chair
is as handsome as could be desired. Date: 1690-1700.
Above, on this page, on the left, is a fine Spanish foot banister back side
chair owned by Mr. B. A. Behrend. It is one of a pair. It was not feasible
to present both of them. Date: about 1700.
On the right is a rich Flemish chair treated on the following page.

[254]

ON the preceding page: the
Flemish chair is owned by
Mrs. John Marshall Holcombe
of Hartford. It is very close
in its lines to that on page
241 . It belonged to a clergy
man in Warren, Connecticut.
Date: 1 680-1 700. Its details
are very rich.
Above on the left is a chair
which carries in its top rail a
crown, repeated below in the
stretcher, and having spiral
turnings. This chair is in
maple, and is stoutly defended
as American. We have failed
to find the owner of the fine
chair on the right.
It very strongly resembles
the chair at the top of page
243 . The manner of marking
in the carving of the legs, the
place for the stretcher is good.

[255 1

A NEW ENGLAND Slat
Back. A large chair. The seat
is 2i>^ inches wide, and 19
inches deep — an extraordinary
depth. Its hight is 17^; and
one may see, by the wear, that
it was 18 inches. The back is
no less than 46^ inches high.
It leans 3 inches. The chair
had been used with candles on
the front posts. Several such
chairs have been seen. The
candle holders were usually con
structed with hollow cone bases
to fit over points on the posts.
The wood of this chair is maple.
It is owned by the author.
Date: about 1700.
The remarkable chair on the
next page is owned by Mr. Mark
M. Henderson of Norwich. It
is the extreme specimen of turn
ery, as we know it. The fine
scrolls of the back should not —
and they will not — escape us.
^_ -pm^-B The arrangement of the balls
and rings looks easy, but is in
reality very difficult if the symmetry be maintained. Date: about 1710.
The play of fancy in a maker's mind whenever it is allowed to materialize
as when one works for one's own use, is a valuable as well as an interesting
embodiment. By such exuberance a worker makes a flourish which proves
that neither he nor nature have exhausted themselves.
It is a question whether the turning in such a chair is not slightly overdone.
For instance, the chisel has cut so deeply that the strength is imperiled.
Yet it has stood the test. But if these posts were turned down evenly to
their smallest diameters very little would be left.
The shape of the slats suggests paired salamanders. They are very
effective. Had the maker gone still farther and given us five slats!
Altogether the effect is sufficiently striking. But when one starts out
to see what he can do we are just human enough to inquire why he did not
go on?

[256]

[257]

A BANISTER-
BACK Spanish Foot Side
Chair. It was in the
Webb- Welles house,
Wethersfield ; and its pres
ent ownership is unknown.
It has a sense of restraint
although it bears no little
embellishment. The wri
ter was always fond of
the chair. Date: 1690-
1700. ON the next page is a
turned arm chair, with
heart and crown back,
and an intermediate
spindle under the arm.
It is owned by Mr. George
Dudley Seymour. Date:
1720-30. Wood, maple.
A large chair, combining
lightness, grace and
strength. It was found
in Milford, Connecticut,
and is now in the Wads-
worth Atheneum, Hart
ford. The reader is again
warned that, in chairs of
I this size,the camera great
ly enlarges the front at
the expense of the back.
When viewed with the
eye the proportions are
more harmonious. The
posts are really of mod
erate size, but they look
very small. One sees a
molded or rather beaded line on the arm. The Spanish feet of the chair on
this page are cut from the solid, and are not glued on as is often the case.

I258]

[259 1

[260]

ON the preceding page
is an arm chair, with heart
and crown crest, inter
mediate spindle under the
arm, and with ornamen
tal turning on all the
rungs — an unusually full
degree of decoration. The
chair is all original, in
cluding perhaps the seat.
It was probably brought
from Connecticut, but it
was bought in Boston
in 1921. Owner: the
author. Date: 1720-30.
On this page is a New
England five banister-
back chair, owned by
James Davidson of New
London, Connecticut.
The three hearts in the
back are similar to a low
back on page 224. An
effort was made at some
ornateness in this piece,
as the top and bottom
rails of the back are
both scrolled. The arms
are done with a hollowed
surface. However, the
special peculiarity of the
piece is the apparent
mixture of styles. We would like to see the secondary spindle under the
arm lower down and in a horizontal position. Finding it, however, where
it is, we would not expect the scrolled arm with it. A casual glance
would suggest that the arm had been added, but a careful examination
seems to indicate that the piece is all original. Date: about 1720-30.

[261]

A REVERSED
Banister-Back Chair.
Owner: Mrs. John Mar
shall Holcombe. The
intermediate spindle un
der the arm is very rare
in a chair of this style.
The fashion of rever
sing the banisters, show
ing the rounded side in
. front, we used to regard
as a markoflackof
knowledge in the cabinet
maker. We are now com
pelled to believe that the
action was deliberate, ta
ken with a view to con
forming the spindles, or
banisters, with the posts,
which in this instance is
perfectly accomplished.
Date: about 1700.
On the following page
is a wonderful high chair
owned by Mr. Hollis
French. It is the only
instance known of a spi-
raled, open-work rung in
an American chair. The
Spanish feet and the fine
arm add to its attraction.
The first introduction of
a Dutch back into this
volume, as here, indi
cates the dawning of that fine style; while the under body has still the fea
tures of an earlier time. Date: about 1700. The upper rung was used as
a foot rest. Special foot rests were very early.
The writer has never personally examined this chair.

262 ]

[263 ]

A REVERSED Banister-Back
Side Chair. Photograph furnished
by Mr. Geo. S. McKearin of Hoosick
Falls, N. Y., the owner. It has a
rather striking crest, and the lower
rail of the back is shaped. The feet
are remarkably long and light.
At the bottom of this page is a
remarkably well-done chair, belong
ing to Mr. J. H. Stiles, of York,
Pennsylvania. It has the mushroom
arm, such as are shown on pages
210-216. With its six "sausage"

turned stretchers and tasteful finials,
and especially with its uniquely
turned front posts, it stands well up
in its class. Date: 1700-20. It seems
to have lost perhaps an inch at the
bottom, but the balls there are still
visible. This chair carries out strictly the
proper agreement between the spin
dles and the posts, thus securing an
effect often lost by failure to attend
to this detail.

[264]

THE Left-Hand Banister-Back Chair is owned by Mr. Arthur W. Wel
lington. The great turned rung and the semi-circular molded crest, remind
ing us of .the backs of day-beds, are the striking features. Date: 1700.
The right-hand chair is the property of Mr. G. Winthrop Brown. The
long bevel on the top and bottom back rails makes more of a feature than
one would think a slight thing could make. The great rung is remarkably
effective. Date: 1700.

[265]

A CHILD'S Turned
High Chair. The "sau
sage turnings" are rare
on high chairs. A still
more rare feature, how
ever, is the original turned
foot rest, the only one
known to the writer. The
general contour of the
back is like that of a very
early slat back. The
chair was found, and is
left, in red. Date: about
1700. Owner: the author.
It would appear as if
some one had substitu
ted for the original arms
two pieces adapted from
rush seat rungs. It is
possible, but barely so,
that the arms were origi
nally as now.
The ascertaining of
the age of a chair from
the wood of which it is
made is hardly possible.
We know, it is true, that
oak is the oldest material,
but the oldest chairs we
have, except perhaps a
half dozen wainscots, are
of ash. Both Carvers,
Brewsters and 'Pilgrim
Slat Backs are usually of that wood. But one of the finest and earliest
known is of maple. Birch is not unknown in 17th Century chairs, and is
frequently found in tables of that date. We have seen one Walnut all-
turned 17th Century chair. Beach is also known. Cabinet makers re
garded it more brittle than maple.

[266]

A CANE Ram's Horn
Arm Chair. Owner: Mr.
Dwight Blaney. In the
cabriole leg the coming of
the Dutch style casts its
light before it. The stretch
er is well scrolled. The
back has unusually fine
lines. Date: 1700-20.
We earnestly desire to
impress on the reader that
wherever in this work any
human figure appears in a
room of furniture, it is
because there is no other
available picture. We have
eliminated as many such
pictures as possible, but
after taking expert advice,
have followed it in allow
ing the few such pictures
shown, to remain. In al
most every case they are
subjects that never come
to the attention of the
public. The writer is no
longer engaged in exploit
ing such pictures. He
would vastly prefer to
eliminate them were not the loss to the book too great. He has discarded
hundreds of negatives for this reason and has gone to no end of pains to
find other subjects to take their places.
We do not wish in this volume to show the cabriole leg. Its genesis
may, however, be traced back to a suggestion in some Flemish chair.
The piece before us is an interesting mixture of styles, the back agreeing
with earlier types.

[267]

ON the left is a fine specimen of a New England five-back arm chair. It
has the flat arm. The effort at uniformity in the back slats is different from
the usual varied spacing. Owner: Mr. Arthur W. Wellington.
The chair on the right is a rare piece owing to the slanted and shaped arm,
terminating in a spiral. The strong crest is scalloped. Owner: Mr. Geo.
S. McKearin.
In the estimation of furniture, too much attention is given to the matter
of age. If a specimen is in fine condition, and is worthy in itself, it is better
than a wreck of any period. Again, mere rarity is thought too much of.
Sometimes an appeal is made to a collector, regarding an article, that "it
is the only one of its kind." He may sometimes answer that he wishes there
were none of its kind. While all that is good is old, not all that is old is
good.

[268 ]

A BANISTER-BACK High Chair.
The turning is very graceful. Date:
about 1700-10. Formerly at Hazen
Garrison house, Haverhill. Owner:
unknown. At the bottom of the page is a low
baby chair, in which the regular order
of Carver backs is reversed, and the
third rail introduced at the bottom
instead of at the top of the back.
Such good turning is rare in baby
chairs. It has lost most of the feet,
as is usually the case. The primary
object of a baby chair, from the baby's
stand-point, is something to move. It
is on the go most of the time, and
more a cart than a chair. The posts,
front and back, are worn flat, and the
feet disappear. An unworn chair would
not be worth carrying away. Owner:
Mr. B.A. Behrend. Date: 1680-1700.

The existence of various types of
chairs is probably forgotten. They
have no doubt become as extinct as the
dodo. It is all the more important
to record every worthy variety we can
discover. In this way nothing more
will be lost. That is one of the prin
cipal objects in issuing a work of this
kind, by the art which preverves all art.

[269]

ON the left is a fine five-back chair with a very high back. Owner:
J. Milton Coburn, M. D. Date: 1700-20.
On the right is a delicately turned New England chair, belonging to Mr.
Henry S. Stearns, of New Hartford, Connecticut. These chairs are the
first we have shown which use an arm cut away back of the post, as is more
plainly seen on the next page.
On the next page we have the glorified specimen of a New England chair,
to show what it may be like. Every feature of the best style is present.
The intermediate arm spindle is especially delicate. Yet the chair is rugged
where it needs to be so. It belongs to Mr. George Dudley Seymour, and
was found in the Capt. Chas. Churchill house, Newington, Connecticut.
It is now in the Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford.
We have seen somewhere a similar chair, except that the arm is turned
and overruns the post. The turning was sufficiently heavy, and the result
was an all turned chair.

[270]

[271 ]

A HEAVY early example of the corner chair. Later the chair would have
been made with splats in the back instead of slats.
Happily the feet are not wanting here. The heavy turnings are, strangely,
not symmetrical, but the two bottom rungs are alike, and the two upper
rungs are alike. The chair belongs to Mr. Mark M. Henderson of Norwalk.
The corner chair possesses so many merits that we are always surprised at
their comparative rarity. The date is about 1700-20.

[272]

MR. Arthur W. Wellington is the owner of the possibly unique corner
chair above. It is called a courting chair. Why it is any more so than any
corner chair does not appear, but let the name stand. We like it. It varies
the usual low back and round back of the corner chair by carrying the back
to a great hight, at right angles to one another. The date may be 1710-30.
On the right is an odd chair belonging to Mr. Geo. S. McKearin. It should
be relieved of its rockers. The peculiar feature is the method of attaching
the arms. It results in requiring spindles, under the arms, of varying hight,
and so of affording a pleasing outline. Date: 1720-40. The style of the back
coincides with that of a number of 18th Century braced arm rockers. The
owner questions the authenticity of the arms. They are at any rate in
teresting. The mania for adding rockers is shown on this chair, to an
extreme degree.

I 273 1

MR. JAMES N. H. CAMPBELL is the owner of the banister-back
arm chair above. The roll-over of the arm is pierced by a circular open
ing. The usual straight top back rail is varied by a contour like early
panel tops. Date: 1710-30.
The round-about chair is owned by Mr. G. Winthrop Brown. Such types
are more frequently seen in England. The secondary imposed back or comb
turns the piece into what is often called abroad a barber's chair. A chair
like this was the precursor of the Windsor chair, though in this case of heavy
construction the spindles did not continue, in one piece, through the main
back rail. Many are of opinion that the sack-like back secured by numerous
spindles was to support a temporary upholstery, as a shawl, to ward off
drafts.

I 274 1

THE Low Backed Chair is for
a spinner's seat, or high stool like a
monk's stool. It was used to rest
a spinner while she continued at
her work. Date: 1 700-1 750.
The five-banister back is marked
by a huge stretcher and a concave
back rail.
The rockers are a later addi
tion. Date: 1720-30.
On the chair below the rockers
are added. It belonged to the Rev.
Samuel Newell, Yale, 1739; first
minister of the First Church, Bris
tol. There is a touch of Friesian
carving on the arm end. Owner:
Mrs. Niles Lewis Peck, of Bristol.
Date: 1700-30.
Hight, 45^2 inches. Posts
maple, rungs oak.

[275 1

THE Child's Chair on the left is the property of Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
It is of graceful outline and larger than is usual. It has the rare merit of
having preserved its feet, or enough of them to keep its rungs well up from
the floor. Date: 1700-30.
The baby's wing chair was formerly supposed to be English, but now on
investigation is counted American. It has a good hand-hole at the top of the
back. On the next page are four chairs for children, all remarkable, all distinc
tive. On the left is an early Dutch chair.
On the right is a three-back with reversed wave. It is a treasure. Mr.
Geo. F. Ives, the owner of all these chairs, has a room, probably unique,
furnished entirely with baby furniture and very complete in all details.
There are several rare pieces in the room which are a little too late for this
work. In addition to the two at the top, described on the preceding page, we
have below a rush stool and a corner chair. All but the Dutch chair prob
ably come within the 17th Century.

[276]

[277]

TWO low baby chairs in the author's collection. The left-hand piece has
a prettily turned front post. The over-running arm, projecting beyond the
post and capping it, is later than the arm which is dowelled into the post,
which latter extends above it and has a finial. This piece, therefore, would
be an early 18th Century production. The right-hand chair is an interesting
example of the Pennsylvania arched slat back, with a scrolled arm, of about
the same date as the other, but perhaps superior to it in style.
They are about 8 inches and 6 inches respectively, in hight, of the seat.
Baby chairs dispense with one row of rungs, as the space is so short.
They exist in almost all the styles in which adults' chairs are found,
but are not common in good forms. Several shown in this work are unique.
As a rule the arm chair is found. The theory that a child needed holding
in was strongly intrenched in the parental mind. Cords or bars across the
front were common.

[278]

WE present three more chairs for little people. That on the left is the
only one we have seen with a slant arm, and is therefore cherished. The
middle chair is provided with rather pretentiously high finials. This sort
is found in a number of instances. The right hand chair has flat turning
in the back. The chairs date respectively, about 1700; 1690-1700; and 1740.
They are owned by the author.
We are very happy in the recent great progress of nomenclature in
furniture. Terms are now common enough, descriptive of antique pieces
which were unknown a few years back. The jargon of the collector may
sooner than anything else disclose the fullness and accuracy of his informa
tion. Later in this work we supply a list of names applicable to the pieces
or parts of pieces shown.
No doubt the process will proceed, and we shall shortly have a name for
everything. Names add humanity to furniture. And they obviate the
need of diffuse explanation.

[279

THE left hand baby chair, with wings, is covered with decorative paint
ing. It is an effort, rather unsuccessful and amateurish, to imitate the
more pretentious decorated pieces.
The middle chair is not the usual "elbow" chair. The finials mark it as
somewhat late. The stool may be of almost any period in the 18th or early
19th centuries. The dates respectively may be: 1740-70; 1720-50; 1710-70.
Owner: the author.
Many rare baby chairs have passed out of sight, but very early foot
stools, of which vast numbers existed, are practically unknown. The very
high chairs were all provided with foot-stools, to escape the cold of the floor.
Low stools were called crickets, in some sections of New England. Of
course our word stool is practically the same as the German word for chair.
This etymology suggests that at one time chairs with low backs were called
stools. The middle piece above has a seat ten inches high, and was therefore
intended for a late stage of babyhood. Stools vary from five to eight
inches, those intended to be used as seats of course exceeding the latter
figure.

I 280]

A CHAIR recently seen, belonging to Mr. I. Sack, which has a swinging
tilting table that may or may not be original with the chair. The contri
vance is a two-part box-bearing fitted to the post by fastening the two parts
together. An arm was then attached and the little round table, rather small
for writing, was hinged to it. The affair is interesting by comparison with
the Windsor writing chair, which came in very shortly after the time of
this chair, perhaps 1720-30.

[281

A DECORATIVE
Spanish Foot Dutch Side
Chair. Owner: Mr. W. of
Boston. We seem obliged,
within the limit of 1720,
to show a very few Dutch
backs — so long as they
have the Spanish feet.
This piece, with the rush
seat, dates perhaps 1720.
It is well decorated on
black paint with gold lines,
constituting an intricate
scroll on the splat and
curve of the top rail. The
decoration extends to the
very feet, a part of which
are missing. The center of
the splat is done in colors.
If we recollect that the
date named was the time
of lacquered furniture, the
art of which scarcely ex
isted in America, we can
understand the American
effort to do with paint
what was being done in
the more pretentious me
dium abroad. We are not
sorry that America was
driven to that effort be
cause many of the pieces
of painted furniture were truly artistic.
The question is sometimes raised whether the decoration on a piece of
furniture was added at a later period. It is not always possible to de
termine this matter. In the case before us we regard the decoration original
because it agrees with the period. The decoration of furniture in America,
in the early period we treat, was very rare. Knowing their inability to
reproduce the exquisite foreign lacquers, makers as a rule left their work
plain.

[282 ]

THE Arm Chair is an early transition Dutch model, which instead of a
splat has four reeded banisters. The Spanish feet, rather worn down, and
the style of arm, suggest as a date, 1710-20. It is from a picture furnished
by Mr. Henry V. Weil.
The leather chair is owned by Mr. George Dudley Seymour. It is of
maple, with stretchers of beech. It was bought in Hartford and is supposed
to be of local origin. We look for a chair with this outline to have a splat
back. This earlier piece was a feeling out of the style to follow. The date
is perhaps 1710-20.
The richer, more artistic Dutch chairs, beyond our scope, are not, to our
thinking, any more attractive than the earlier furniture. They were the
best artistic furniture of any period. But the chairs we have shown mostly
have the flavor of a new country.

[283]

WITH the single example
of a Windsor chair before
us we leave the subject of
chairs, which is most en
grossing. In the author's
work, "A Handbook of
Windsor Chairs," that im
portant subject is given
careful attention. The high
chair here shown was
brought to light after that
little volume was issued.
Since that time one or two
others like it have been
found . It was brought from
Philadelphia by a woman
who died at Exeter at 95
years of age. The sturdy,
humorous spread of the
legs, the holes in the front
arm posts for a bar, the
massive comb and especially
thefine Queen Anne stretch
er, all bespeak the earliest
type of the Windsor. It
may go back to 1720, cer
tainly within a decade of
that date. One easily sees
how the chair arose. The
English type perhaps de
rived its name from the fact that such chairs were made in Bucks, centering
at High Wycombe, and often went to London by boat from Windsor.
Attention has already been called to the "blunt arrow" turning on the
front of the Pennsylvania slat back chairs. The same terminals mark
the earliest Philadelphia Windsors, and the same stretchers. These chairs,
therefore, beginning just as our century closes, about 1720, mark the
opening of a new epoch in style of the wooden seated chair, at first made
ostensibly for gardens, but shortly commending itself by its many merits
so that it usurped all other styles for ordinary uses. For the parlor the
Dutch style made its place good. For all other rooms the Windsor was
popular. But this popularity was shared in the Middle States by the
arched slat back, and in New England by its plain slat back.
[284]

A PAIR of unique cross-stretcher stools with beautifully curved stretch
ers. The legs are in the style of the six-legged highboy. This pair of stools
was found in Newburyport. They are the hight of an ordinary chair, and
are apparently all original. For similar American subjects see pages 336
and any of the six-legged highboys and dressing tables.
The wood of these stools is very light, probably bass. The style is scarcely
adapted for strength, and if more of them existed, one can easily see that
they would have gone to pieces before this date. Nevertheless, they are of
exceeding interest .
The covers were worked many years ago and are in fine condition. They
are not, however, original, though very well adapted for their purpose.
It will be noted that no two of the turnings on these stools are of the same
size, a very common occurrence. The date would be the same as that of
cabinet furniture in this style, namely 1690-1720. Owner: the author, who
prizes them more than anything else of a similar sort in his Collection.

[285]

AN Oak Joint Stool, with vertical legs. Date: 1640-60. This possibly
unique, quaint low stool, is only 14^2 inches high. It has lost about a half
inch of the legs . Thus it lacks but that half inch of equalling the hight of
the Robinson chair on page 177. The frame is a scant 13 inches square, at
the feet and at the seat. It thus follows the chair in another particular, as
joint stools generally have legs raking one way. The turnings also are iden
tical with those on the chair, not only as to style but as to length. The
stretcher is the same, so also is the frame. For these reasons we assign it a
date so early, and are further driven to conclude that the stool and the chair
were made at the same time, by the same person. The finding of the chair
and the stool, at different times and places was a remarkable coincidence,
for the stool is probably one of several made to go with the chair, at a time
when one chair was supposed to answer for the head of the house, the other
members of the family being accommodated on stools. It is owned by the
author.

[286]

A MAPLE Splay-legged Stool with a pine drawer, owned by Mr. Chaun
cey C. Nash. This piece is apparently a stool, although it has, of course,
lost something at the bottom. It may have been two or three inches higher,
but even so could have been used as a stool. There is no possible reason
why a high stool should not have done service as a stand just as at the present
time we often place articles in a chair that more properly, in the view of a
precise housewife, should go on a table. A piece of this sort is so rare that
it gets much more attention than would otherwise be the case. There is
charm in small pieces, commonly expressed by the well understood, but in
accurate term "cunning." Top, 11^4 by 18^; hight, 16^.

[287]

ON the right is a joint
stool from which the feet
have been worn off or
disintegrated by decay.
While we are on this sub
ject of the feet of pieces
of furniture, we may say
that the wear was not as
great as the decay. If
the pieces stood on damp
floors as they often did,
or were put into back
rooms, they were often
decayed from one to three
inches. The joint stool, as a
rule, splays in one di
rection, and has a frame
in that respect quite like
that of the butterfly ta
ble except in size. A good number of joint stools have come to light in
very recent years. The author knows of at least a dozen in Boston alone
which have been found since the Great War. Yet they are among the
most prized pieces in any collection. The seat itself is usually rather
thin — about three-quarters of an inch. It projects at the ends several
times as much as at the sides and in most of the earliest specimens had
the thumb-nail moulding on all sides. The frames are sometimes oak,
though maple is more usual. The seat is pine or maple. The hight is
the same as that of a chair or a little higher. There is a dividing line
where it becomes doubtful in some cases whether a piece is a joint stool
or a low table. The use of the joint stool was very common in the ancient
times; probably every house possessed a considerable number. The speci
men here shown dates 1670-1690, and is owned by the author.
The term "joint" is only a variant of "joined." "Joint" or joined is used
to distinguish furniture from that which was turned, and which had no
mortise and tenon. The joined furniture being more valuable, the specifica
tion was made in inventories, to indicate its character.

[288]

A LONG, turned, upholstered stool. Stools of this character always
challenge our careful attention, as more likely to be English than American.
Many poorly joined English pieces are being brought to this country; and
as they are made from old wood, they deceive the novice. The joint is the
point at which the spurious nature of the article may be determined. An
old joint, if it is solid, has an appearance which cannot easily be counter
feited. These pieces were upholstered in various materials, but leather is
the most suitable. In the piece above all is original except the cover.
Below appears a smaller upholstered
joint stool. The ownership of these
articles at present is unknown. Of
course such pieces were turned to match
turned chairs.
It will be noted that the turning on
the piece at the top closely resembles
that on gate leg tables. The turning
of the piece below is quainter and
earlier. The distinction between English and
American joint stools is in the greater
simplicity of the pieces found here,
especially in the stretchers.

[289]

TWO joint stools belonging to Mr. Dwight Blaney. The piece on the left
is the more usual style of the American stool.
The piece on the right is of the heavier, more antique pattern, scarcely
distinguishable from the English stools. The simple carved ornaments
on the bottoms of the frame-rails also assimilate this piece to the English
style, but both pieces are regarded as American. The only manner of dis
tinguishing the English from the American, in the case of oak, is the color
of the wood. While many claim that they can at once detect the difference,
the author frankly admits that he has not only been deceived, but has seen
much more expert judges deceived. It is the same old question of the color
of American oak. If the English oak is darker than our own it may easily
be age, or creosoting by the smoke of hundreds of years. The author knows
that he will be challenged in this statement. What, however, is to be said
when one of the lightest pieces of oak ever seen is pronounced English, and
when pieces which we know came from England, recently, are pronounced
American? There is, of course, in the mind of a man who has a genius for
such things, and who has handled them for years, what he calls a feeling
which warns him if an article is English. If, however, this feeling is un
reliable, it would appear that it is a matter of judgment, and judgment

errs.

The date of the left hand piece may be 1 670-1 690; that of the right hand
piece may be 1 640-1670.

[290]

A SQUAB which was in the possession of Mr. Brooks Reed. This very
remarkable piece is not as large as it looks since no attempt is made at scaling
the furniture here shown. It is about the hight of a chair. The marks of
style which attract the collector here are the high stretcher, the middle
stretcher, the ball turnings, and the hollowed top made for a cushion from
which the name squab is taken. The author has never seen another Ameri
can piece like this. Its date may be 1670-1690.
An interesting question arises with the high stretcher so placed on one
side and not on the other. This construction is not unique. It was easier,
of course, to draw the feet under the stool on the side unobstructed by the
high stretcher. The cushions placed on furniture were, as they are now,
made of every conceivable material. They were often stuffed with flock or
hair and their covering was sometimes of a very elegant character.

[291

A fashion is noted of showing
ostensibly old stools and tables
with the leg coming square to
the floor as if this was a mark of
age or of original condition. In
no case have we ever seen an
early American piece that was
turned above the stretcher, and
was not also turned below it.
Date: 1650-1680.
We cannot reconcile our
selves to the disappearance of
articles so useful as joint stools.
There is nothing in modern
furniture to take their places.
Once they were looked down
upon, their day was over.

ON the left is a joint stool be
longing to Miss C. M. Traver
of New York. It shows better
than most stools the nature of
the seat and its molding. The
date is 1670- 1690.
At the bottom of the page ap
pears a heavily turned joint
stool on which the top is not
original. The turning of this
piece has an English look, but
we are persuaded that it is
American. The stool is smaller
than usual. The average length
may be placed perhaps at 20
inches. Gate leg tables are
sometimes found with turnings
like this stool. We know that
some of these tables are Ameri
can. This piece is fortunate in
showing nearly all the feet,
which are original.

[292

A DAY-BED belonging to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. It is of a simple but satis
factory style. In this instance the posts at the head are turned to match
the other legs, rather than in the usual curved style of a chair leg of the
period. The head in this couch is very plain. Nearly all couches were made
with swinging heads, supported by chains. Many heads have now been
fixed in an immovable position. Upholstery was not originally attached
to any old couch we have seen. There was a movable cushion.
The material of couches was, if the turnings were simple, likely to be
maple; if elaborate or carved, walnut was more usual. Oak had passed out
of use for such purpose — unless in extremely rare instances.
Couches were very light, and readily moved, more so than the later sofa.
They exist in small numbers. Perhaps there may be forty fair examples
known aside from the Pennsylvania day-bed. They are limited to the
walnut period, even when made of maple, that is to say, 1670-1730. This
example is perhaps to be dated, 1690-1710.
The day-bed may be either the most graceful or the most ugly piece of
furniture. But whatever its appearance it was most useful. Without
any mechanism to change it was always available in emergency as a very
comfortable bed. It is gratifying that the great merit of its shape is now
being recognized. It is, however, a misnomer to use the term day-bed if
a couch has both head and foot rest.

[293 ]

A CHAISE Longue, belonging to the estate of Mrs. Reinhold Faelten oi
Boston. Seventeenth century sofas were extremely rare and the writer
is not aware of any existing specimens of American origin. The piece in
the Essex Institute is avowedly of foreign origin. The chaise longue, as it is
called in France, the couch in English and the day-bed in America, seems
to have supplied the place of a sofa. The specimens made with eight legs
are, other things being equal, regarded superior to the six-leg style. The
piece before us has curious Spanish feet, being carved on three sides, on
the second and third pair of legs; and at the bottom being carved on four
sides, an otherwise unknown variety. Probably it was restored wrongly.
The theory of the style of the chaise longue is that it is a truly long chair,
made as if the seat of a chair were drawn out to couch length, while the head
is left without change. Date: 1690-1710.

[294]

THE Parlor Chamber in the Concord Antiquarian Society House, being
the Captain Brown House. The couch at the left is a well known and ex
quisite example of a Flemish type and'has been shown hitherto, but we illus
trate it here in combination with chairs of the same period. The lowering
of the head was doubtless intended to extend somewhat the length of the
couch. Date: 1670-1700.
The couch above with the chair to match, belonged to the Reverend
Peter Bulkeley, the first minister of Concord, and the ancestor of Governor
Bulkeley of Hartford. This specimen is one of the finest found. Another
very elegant example is that formerly in the Dwight Prouty collection.
There are perhaps not more than a dozen known of this grade of merit.
The collection of the Concord Antiquarian Society is very notably good,
being composed of some unique pieces. We know of no other Museum col
lection in a town the size of Concord of equal merit with this, or indeed in
any public collection aside from the two or three greatest.

[295 1

A TURNED Couch, the property of Dr. William G. Erving of Wash
ington. It will be noted that while the legs follow the typical good Jacobean
style, the head has the Dutch style of splat. Also the comparison is worth
while between the methods of attaching cross stretchers in this example and
in other couches. They are near the bottom of the piece and differ from
those in the first chaise longue shown in this book. This construction is
better, since to bore from three directions into a post as in some examples,
at the same elevation, must very greatly weaken it. Also the leg is better
braced by the method shown here. Size: Length, 72 inches; width, 26^
inches; hight of frame, 16^ inches; hight of head, 36^ inches.
In an example shown on the previous page, and all others in this book,
except the Pennsylvanian types, the stretchers are kept low and are far
more effectual in that position.
As an example of turning this couch is attractive. The maker was called
on to devise a very long yet graceful stretcher for the sides. Date:
1700-17 10.
The method of forming the seat was the same as that followed in many
beds of the period. Sail cloth was laced across. This made necessary
the covering of the couch with some sort of cushion. The more finished
cane couch did not strictly require a cover. But to use a cane couch with
out a cover would speedily destroy the cane. And when the cane was
covered there was no need for a seat so elaborate, or fragile.
The custom of using a short couch, in the French style, bringing up to its
foot a lengthening stool, obtained no particular recognition in America.
[296]

A DAY-BED belonging to the Metropolitan Museum. The arched and
scrolled stretchers give us a date practically the same as that of the pieces
whose legs are carved in the Flemish style, namely 1670-1700. The varieties
which we find, some with turned legs and some with carved legs, are merely
a matter of local taste or expediency. It will be noted that the foot of the
day-bed does not carry a scrolled stretcher in any instance. It is usual for
these pieces to be made with both sides alike. This photograph does not
fully show the back, but it is like the front. It is possible that the caning
is original, in some of these ancient pieces; but if so, it must have been pre
served with unusual care. It is always fine, and does not have a finishing
strip on the outside.
We have no record of the first designer of the day-bed. The style is being
revived at present. It is certainly far better than the Empire "lounge,"
to which we bid good-bye with pleasure. It no more needs a back than
does a bed.
Incidentally a bed with a front like a head-board recently came to our
attention. Placed at the side of a room, it compelled the occupant to climb
to the head from the foot and was without foot-board.

[297]

THE simple day-bed above is so nearly like that on the opposite page
that its insertion here is, in part, to show the method of lacing, or trussing
the canvas. This couch is the property of the Metropolitan Museum.
Date: 1690-1710.
Among the woods used in early American furniture the most important
after the period of carving, is maple. That is a statement applying to the
frequency of its use. If we regard furniture from the decorated aspect,
the next wood after oak, in importance, is walnut. ~-
The Virginia Walnut largely used even as far north as middle Pennsyl
vania was perhaps not found in the North as a native wood. The black
walnut is not very uncommon in Northern furniture . The so-called white
walnut was hickory and its use was confined to bent work or places where
great strength was required. Hickory was formerly plentiful in New Eng
land. Growing in forests it was free from knots. "The cattle shake
their walnut bows," wrote Whittier on the edge of New Hampshire.

[298]

AN all turned day-bed, the property of Mr. Hollis French. It shows such
a cushion as was added to the foundation on the couch on the preceding page.
There are at the head two stretchers, a possibly unique feature. One sees
here that the rails are framed into a foot post, whereas in the last example,
we have legs identical with the other pairs. Date: 1690-1710.
Hickory did not enter appreciably into fine furniture. Even in the 17th
century we seldom found it in the spindles of chairs.
It is probable that the colonists did not at first feel its admirable quali
ties. Once the Windsor Chair had come in, hickory found its place.
Beech was less common here than in England. Maple, therefore, forthe
most part took its place. Enough beech was available had it been really
preferable. The woods while of similar grain, can be distinguished with
ease. Ash was the material for great turned chairs. Oak held its place for
framing and carving to the end of the 17th century in cabinet pieces.

[299]

A WALNUT Day-bed with Spanish feet on the last pair of legs, the others
being plain turned. It is the property of the author. There was an ancient
inscription attached to the under side declaring that the piece belonged to
Clarissa Griswold, of Killingworth, Connecticut. The date is about 1690-
1710. There is on the piece as shown an upholstered frame laid on top of
the original frame. The author has now removed this excrescence. In
every case that has come to our attention so far there was a loose cushion
above the reeding, or the caning, or the canvas of the seat. The use of the
chaise longue, so far as fashion is concerned, seems to have gone out in the
first quarter of the 18th century or a little later. It was supplanted in
popular favor by the Queen Anne and Chippendale sofas with the back on
the long side. Those pieces are practically all too short for use as day-beds.
It is too bad that an article so convenient should, at the dicate of fashion,
be disused. In the piece before us the splat at the head would indicate a
somewhat later date since it is purely Dutch. The merging of styles in this
manner is not by any means disagreeable, as the connection is always be
tween two adjacent styles, and marks a growth rather than an abrupt
change. This piece is longer than usual, being 74 inches over all. The width
is 21^4 inches; the height of the head is 37^ inches. The frame is 14 inches
high.

[ 300]

A FLEMISH Day-bed, owner Mrs. Rogers of Hingham. This piece has
often been seen at the annual exhibit of the Arts and Crafts Society at
Hingham. It is a very elegant specimen and in good condition. It will be
noted that the arch of the stretchers is filled in with a scrolled member;
also that the feet or more properly, shoes beneath the feet, are not very
much worn. The head of this piece is especially good, being carved very
well indeed, though its upholstery should be removed. The wood is walnut.
Date: 1670-1700.
The finish of early furniture is a subject concerning which discussion has
grown warm. An English author of much prominence refers to the "nasty
French polish," as if varnishes had not been known and used for many
hundred years, and as if there were something intrinsically bad about them.
Varnish has its place on very old furniture, but not on the class of furniture
shown in this volume.
There is a strong presumption that the earliest turned furniture had no
finish at all. Many chairs of pilgrim date show no trace of finish. The old
surface of such a piece of furniture is very desirable. It cannot be counter
feited.

[301 1

A HANDSOME Spanish foot day-bed, the property of Mr. Martin Gay
of Hingham. So far as we have noted this piece is different from others in
that it has no less than four strings of stretchers. The two lower sets of
stretchers, it will be noted, are totally lacking from all the other pieces
which we have shown. The excellent effect, combined with the greater
strength secured, render these sets of stretchers, very commendable. The
shaping of the Spanish feet is excellent and the head is elegant. Date:
1690-1710. The wood is walnut.
Walnut was the principal furniture wood of Italy at the time of the Re
naissance and afterwards. The rich, ornate productions, with much carving
and gilding, on walnut, which came from Italy to France and England,
brought in the fashion of walnut. The wood, in its lighter colorings, is
well adapted for carvings. The black walnut was somewhat too sombre,
and the grain rather inferior to the Southern walnut, which in old, often
washed table tops, has bleached very greatly. The color can be restored
somewhat by oil as the wood is hungry, as cabinet makers say.

I 302 ]

%

¦

A PENNSYLVANIA Day-bed, the property of Mr. Hollis French. This
style seems to have been popular in Pennsylvania. The legs are turned in
a very heavy form, averaging about two and a half inches in diameter.
The same heavy ball and ring stretcher is used as appears in Queen Anne
furniture and other turned furniture of its date. In the particular specimen
before us the head posts, instead of being shaped, as they are in the example
on the page following, are turned and slanted. It is a curious and interesting
attempt at getting the feeling of chairs without using the usual square post.
The heads of the Pennsylvania day-beds are made of reeded banisters.
The student should notice the difference between this head and that on
the next page which is made solid in the half moon shape, whereas
this one is arched below as well as above. The horizontal end member of
these heads was made to strike against the post when the chains were
drawn up, to prevent the piece falling forward on the couch.
In some examples of the Pennsylvania day-bed the middle stretcher is
placed higher than the end stretchers in order to avoid cutting away so much
wood at one point. While the scheme is meritorious from the standpoint
of construction, the effect is not as harmonious. Borrowing an expression
from automobile parlance, one loses the stream line, by varying the hight
of .the stretchers. The seats or frame of these Pennsylvania pieces were
always reeded so far as we have noted in the dozen examples which have
come to our attention. They are very comfortable, substantial and quaint
articles of furniture. Date: 1710-1730.

[303 1

A DAY-BED, similar to the one on the preceding page. This piece
shows the usual square leg at the head post, which is here roughly notched
to give the semblance of an analogy to the turned legs. The present owner
ship is unknown.
Attention is here called to the marked similarity between the Pennsyl
vania day-bed and the earliest type of Windsor chairs, which were made in
Philadelphia. The stretchers on some of these chairs are identical with
those on the day-bed before us. The leg also is of practically the same con
tour, except that it is smaller on the chairs. This analogy helps us to arrive
at a date. Of course the stretcher is borrowed from the Queen Anne style
and the only difference in style between the day-bed before us and the
Philadelphia Windsor chair base, is that the Windsor legs are raked. Of
course the Windsor stretcher is medial. An example is shown on page 284.
Date: 1710-1730.
This day-bed avoids the weakness at the head shown on the more stylish
Flemish couches, which always have a strongly marked angle in the head
posts beginning at the level of the frame. In the Pennsylvania pieces that
angle is attempted by a kind of half-hearted bend or slight bevel on the
front, in some instances; and in other instances, like that on the preceding
page, there is no attempt at curvature. The effect, of course, is to gain
strength at the expense of grace.

304]

A DAY-BED belonging to J. Milton Coburn, M.D. This interesting
piece may be classed among country-made furniture; that is not to say that
it is any the less meritorious, but that it was made at a point where the
artisan was removed from the direct influence of an established style. He
therefore worked out from memory or from his own ideas the various details
of his construction. In this instance he has placed seven splats or spindles
on the head and has made it fixed, in the form of the earlier Flemish chair
crest in which the posts are doweled into the top rail.
The same interesting evidence of the influence of individuality is shown
in the stretchers. The legs are of a somewhat lighter character than in
the specimens heretofore shown in this work. Such examples as that before
us have the quality of American work, which is always marked by greater
variety than that of the English.
When we attempt to date this piece we are at somewhat of a loss for the
very reason that it is individual. We shall not be far astray in giving as wide
a spread to the date as 1 710- 1740.
In ending our treatment of day-beds we cannot avoid concluding: Their
existence is another proof that our ancestors had not the iron constitutions
with which they have been credited. They found it important to recline
even in the day time when they could afford it — like their children's
children.

[305 ]

A CHILD'S settle and a wing chair to match. These charming little
evidences of attention paid to child life are the property of J. Milton Co-
burn, M.D. They are the only pieces of that character, made to match,
that the author has seen. Each has the same finger holes at the top by
which the piece may be handled. The object of making the holes rather
than cutting out a large piece was to conserve the strength of the wood.
This little settle has its counterparts. The owner once had such a settle
which bore marks on the end showing that it was used as a pung seat, to
take the place in winter of the usual wagon seat so common in New York
State and Western Massachusetts. It was almost identical with the piece
before us. There is no evidence that Dr. Coburn's piece here was ever used
for any other purpose than a settle. We arrive in these pieces at the pine
period and the simpler construction of the humble home. The date is
1730-1780. We give a long range of years because these articles continued
to be made thirty or forty years each side of the middle of the 18th Century.
The settle was the sofa of the poor, or of the well-to-do, for kitchen use.
In English forms, with carving, it is a pretentious piece. We have not seen
an American carved settle.

[306]

IN this picture the figures are seated on a pine settle, with their feet
upon a mat made of corn husks. It is said that the knowledge of mats of
this character was derived from the Indians. The material was unlimited.
We have no picture without the figures, although they do not obscure the
outline of the settle at the end. It is the usual, and formerly common, pine
style, made with the solid back without paneling. The seat, as a rule, is
hinged so as to form beneath it a chest which was a receptacle for wood,
for Indian meal or for any other articles.
The pine settle was moved about a good deal, as in the nature of the case,
it was needed to draw up to the fireplace to shield the back from the cold
draughts which made in toward the fireplace from every quarter of the room.
The use of pine in settles was especially important because the pieces
needed to be light in proportion to their size for easy removal. The contour
of the end board varies very greatly in the different specimens. That be
fore us is counted a very good shape. The length of such pieces varied from
four to six feet; about four and a half to five feet being the usual length.

[307

Beds and Couches in the Scheme of Civilization
IT appears that the northern nations have dignified the bed far more than
the classical nations. The farther south we go the less attention we find paid
to beds. Among the simpler peoples of the Orient, and especially among
the nomads the bed as an article of furniture did not exist. Nations dwelling
in permanent houses of some architectural pretensions, as the Romans, had
very small sleeping apartments, like monk's cells, and their beds were
couches. Architectural beds among the Flemings are wonderful creations. The
Bretons have elaborate bunks, with a screen in front, and a step before
them. A bed in the Quincy Homestead, Quincy, just fills a space built for
it, and is enclosed by two doors. Its date is after our period, but it shows
the tendency to place a bed in a retired position.
On the other hand when, as in Queen Elizabeth's time, great beds, some
of them twenty feet high, were constructed, they became the most
important articles of furniture, and in wills beds with their furniture are
often devised when no other furniture is mentioned. It is known that a few
great carved beds were brought to America. The settlers however found
they could get on without such beds, and they reserved their energies for
furniture more in evidence. To them, up to 1720 or 1730, a bedstead was
little more than a plain frame for the bed and the curtain around it. Far
more attention was given to the materials for covering the frame than to
the structure itself. We find many records of heavy, elaborate and expensive
bed draperies. As the fashion came in of allowing the posts to show, more
care was given to beauty of construction, as in the middle and latter parts
of the 1 8th Century. The Restoration of Antique Furniture
IF furniture is restored so that its age is not readily apparent the advan
tage of the old over the new furniture is lost. This is more obvious in furni
ture of the Pilgrim Century than in later instances. Anything new added
to a very early piece contrasts glaringly with the old. If the old is made
to agree with such additions it must be practically made over. This is a
great disaster. Many ancient pieces of great value are ruined by this
means. The taste for collecting old furniture sometimes becomes edu
cated in advance of the best taste in restoring it. The false taste has often
gone so far as to varnish the interiors of drawers on 17th Century pieces!
The sense of wear and use on early furniture is its greatest charm, and its
highest commercial value. Both of these are destroyed by restoration.
Many fine tops of tables have been thrown away because they were old.
For what then was the old piece wanted ?
[308]

A PINE settle belonging to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. It is 64 inches long. The
arms are 35 inches high, and the back 52 inches high. The seat is 16 inches
deep, and the height is the same. The candle shown is struck by its spiked
base, into the wood. It is not a part of the settle. Sometimes a settle had
a folding central arm-, as a candle rest.
The ten panels here, and in the specimen shown on page 311, are raised,
in the early style .
The advantage of paneling the backs of settles was slight, so far as use
was concerned. Hence most of those found are not paneled. When found
as here, they were the successors of English tradition, or were paneled for
the sake of appearance.
We seem not to find cushions for settles, but no doubt they were some
times used. The seats are never shaped and are rather uncomfortable.
They certainly do not permit a slouchy posture. Tall candle stands, hang
ing Betty lamps, or a candle held in the hand were the means for reading.

[ 3°9 1

A BUILT-IN Settle with
one end only. This settle is
part of the structure in a 17th
Century house in Wrentham.
A board, close to the left
door, would have obstructed
the passage so that this short
settle was built in. It rests
upon the protruding sill of
the house which is cut into to
afford an opening forthe door.
The doors of this house still,
for the greater part, have
their original wooden latches.
This is the only instance of a
built-in settle within doors,
that has come to the author's
attention, though they were
common on the porches of
American Dutch houses.
Date: 1670- 1690, possibly the
oldest known.

Below is a quaint set
tle rocker. It will be
observed that the foot
rest is concaved to match
the ends of the rockers.
It was doubtless designed
to raise the feet from the
floor so as to avoid
chilblains. The piece is
owned by Mr. B. A. Beh
rend. It seems to have
been "built for two" as
its length will not admit
more. Date very doubt
ful, perhaps 1740-90.

[310]

A PINE Paneled Settle, the property of the Rhode Island School of De
sign. This piece is marked by very bold knobs on the fronts of the end boards
and by a strong scroll at the base of those boards. The hood as usual slants
backward slightly. The seat is not designed to lift. It is scrolled near the
ends to avoid awkwardness. Size: 74 inches long; 53^ high and 20 deep.
Date: 1700-1750.
In the same Museum is a second settle very similar. Paneled settles were
much more rare than the plain board backs, and are eagerly sought for.
Even the ordinary board settle is now uncommon. Of course the object of
the hood was the same as that of the wind-ends, and the hight of the back —
to afford protection from drafts at the fireplace — where one otherwise must
turn as on spit unless willing to roast on one side and freeze on the other.
It is, of course, for the same reason that the back of the settle almost in
variably ran to the floor. A practical aspect of the use of the settle is often
lost sight of. When it was placed in front of the fire, it obviously spoiled
the unity or attractiveness of the room, except for those who were seated
upon it; it was an entirely utilitarian object. The only manner in which it
can be placed in a modern house is along a wall near the fireplace.
[3H]

[ 312 ]

ON the top of the preceding page is a New York wagon seat. These
splint bottom seats seem to have been very common in New York State.
They are designed to be placed in a market wagon with sides, which kept
the piece in place. When the vehicle was not in use for persons it was im
portant to discard the seat to make room for freight. Hence the happy idea
was conceived of using the seat as a kind of small settee in the house . Owner:
Mr. Rudolph P. Pauly, of Boston.
The lower specimen on the preceding page is owned by Mr. Chauncey
C. Nash. It is 29 inches high; the seat is 13 inches high, and 14 by 33^
inches in area.
The odd specimen on this page is owned by Mr. Geo. F. Ives. Its base
forms a crude wooden spring. The wagon seats date from any time in the
1 8th Century.

I 313 1

WE are told that the cradle as an institution has been abandoned. We
lament it. We believe that someone who purports to be wise has said that
rocking a child is bad for its brains. Had hygienic objections arisen against
the papoose board on which the aborigines are strapped we could easily
have allowed that impeachment, but how any child could fail to grow up
strong from so rugged a piece of architecture as that on the opposite page
we cannot understand.
In passing this aspect of our subject we may say that all the English
speaking race up to the last generation were rocked in cradles.
There is a more practical reason for the use of the cradle in the early
days. The housewife who attended her own child in the simple years of
American settlement could not, obviously, be encumbered with a bed in the
fire room, and it was necessary for her, in order to attend to her duties and
to keep her babe comfortably warm, to have a cradle in the room where she
worked. Her foot was applied to the rocker, while her hands were busy with
spinning and her tongue with singing. Her heart beat high with love and
hope, surrounded thus as she was by all the household goods and gear.
The cradle here set forth has a remarkable history. The owner is Mr.
Chauncey C. Nash.
The writer can vouch for the fact that he obtained it from the Cushman
family, who in their turn had it through inter-marriage with the Fuller
family of Mayflower fame. It is an undisputed tradition that it came down
from Dr. Samuel Fuller who was the physician of the Mayflower.
The tale told is that Peregrine White, born in Provincetown Harbor on
the Mayflower, before the landing, was first rocked in this cradle, which
belonged to Dr. Samuel Fuller, the brother of Mrs. White and the officiating
physician. This cradle was available in the lading of the Mayflower, where
as the wicker cradle now on exhibition at Pilgrim Hall, Plymouth, which
belonged to the Whites, could not be reached. The reader may take all
these tales for what they are worth.
Before the day when Americana in furniture was so much sought, the
tradition concerning this cradle would probably have been very dear to the
owner and the public, but now that English furniture is a decidedly second
choice with the collector, not so much is being said about the English origin
of our furniture. The author has doubts concerning this cradle. An odd
circumstance is that the four great panels in the sides are of pine, whereas
the end panels are oak. Experts in wood claim that the oak of which the
piece is chiefly composed is American. In this connection we may call at
tention to an odd fact that the reader may not have observed; unfinished
oak will in process of time show darker on the quartering marks, whereas
a finished piece of oak will show lighter on the quartering marks and darker
[3Hl

in the body of the wood, thus reversing the coloring. The piece before us
bears no evidence of any application of finish nor has it ever been cleaned.
It is satisfyingly heavy and substantial.
It is perhaps unique in having a gallery, not only at the sides of the hood,
but also at the back. The spindles are of beech. A delightful feature is a
half spindle applied vertically at each side of the face of the hood just such
as one sees on chests. This applied spindle is considered among antiquarians
not to have been used before 1650 so that this feature is a further argument
against an English origin.

[315]

IN the Fuller cradle on the previous
page the rockers were missing and were
supplied by the author from surface
wood of the timbers of the Marsh
House, Wethersfield, the oldest house
, in that town. The color of the wood
without treatment is precisely like that
of the rest of the cradle, a circumstance
hardly likely had the cradle been
English. The board of the hood is of pine with
gouge carving all about and a double line of diamond hatcheling.
A cradle shown in a glass case in Pilgrim Hall, Plymouth, which also bears
the tradition of Mayflower ancestry, is not composed of panels but is a plain
pine cradle on which thin narrow boards were nailed to mark false paneling
and one of these divisions is wanting at the foot of the cradle, thus showing
a plain unpaneled board. We must, therefore, consider the Fuller cradle
here shown a finer piece, although the hood of the cradle in Plymouth is
slightly arched and composed of spindles on the top, an extremely rare and
charming feature. The body of the Plymouth cradle is not of oak, which
would speak against an English origin. So far as known four or five of these
great paneled American cradles have been found. The distinction between
them and the ordinary cradle is that these older pieces have vertical sides,
never splayed. They are also heavier and have larger posts. An odd fact
is that all these ancient cradles have been found within very narrow limits,
three of them within five or ten miles of one another on the South Shore.
Until within five or six years there has been no great interest in Pilgrim
cradles, but all the specimens, except that at Plymouth, have been discovered
within that time and there has been the highest degree of avidity in seeking
other examples.
At the top of this page there is another example of a similar cradle which is
in the Metropolitan Museum of New York. Date: 1630-70. It apparently
never had a top to its hood, otherwise there would be no meaning in the
finials at the head. It is supposed that the foot posts of these cradles were de
signed for convenience of the hand in rocking but the writer has such a high
idea of the diligence of the Pilgrim mother that he inclines to the belief that
finials were purely decorative; that she might knit while her foot rocked the
cradle.

[316]

A PANELED Cradle of Oak, owned by the Rhode Island School of De
sign. This cradle is marked by a low gallery of turned work about the sides
and the foot. It lacks the top of the hood. The bracket-like supports of
the sides of the hood remind one somewhat of the cradle in Pilgrim Hall
where there is a brace something like a modillion, but in horizontal position.
It will be noted that the grooving on the rails and stiles here, is different
from that in the Fuller cradle, on the second page back, where it is a true
shadow molding, quite like that in use on the Connecticut chests of oak.
The finials on the piece before us, however, are very good and the rockers
are apparently original. The panels are of pine and the rails are narrower
than those on the Fuller cradle. It is to be regretted and wondered at that
not more of these oak cradles were preserved. Date: 1640-70.
One would naturally presume that a piece of furniture carrying so much
of tender tradition would have been jealously guarded as an heirloom. We
are confident that one more will come to light.

[317]

%ti!$|t; n. :. ,':

.*-. *¦

A PANELED Cradle of Oak and Walnut, owned by the author. In this
example we come to the flaring type, larger, that is, at the top, than at the
bottom. The interesting heart shaped hand holes on the head and foot
boards were also a convenience. The piece is all original and probably of
Pennsylvanian origin, like that on the second page following. The small
knobs on each side of the cradle were used to button the quilt. The scrolled
brackets at the head are a feature to be noted also. The panels are seen to
be shaped like the sheathed paneling found on walls of rooms.
It will be observed that the spindle galleries about the earlier cradles were
designed to admit vision from all sides, certainly not for air.
Below is a pine cradle, a quaint early type — which, while rare, is far
oftener seen than the paneled cradles. Date: 1 680-1 720.

318]

A HANGING cradle of maple. It is difficult to fix a date for a cradle of
this type since very early examples are known, while on the other hand there
are dainty late examples in mahogany, notably at the Essex Institute,
Salem. The one here shown is of somewhat crude though substantial
build, and certainly has advantages over the usual form of a cradle in that
it is more easily kept in motion. Date: 1700-30.
Some very elaborate ancient examples of this sort exist in Europe. Per
haps more than any other family piece the cradle was the handiwork of the
prospective father, who lavished upon it his ingenuity in the long winter
evenings. Cradles in this country are like beds in that they never attain to the rich
elaboration seen in England, a condition to be expected in a new country.
It is known that in some instances nine generations have been rocked in the
same cradle. Not only so, but many successive infants, in one generation.
It is probably not too much to suppose that forty babes may have slumbered
in the Fuller cradle we have pictured on page 315.

[319]

A PENNSYLVANIAN Stenciled Cradle, owned by Mr. I. Sack. This
stenciling is done on the ends and sides in rosettes of parti-colors. Other
examples in considerable numbers are known. This cradle has holes pierced
in the base of the frame through which ropes are drawn in the manner of the
corded bed. The author noticed in the basement of the Metropolitan
Museum a wainscot chair, the bottom of which had been similarly roped.
It was an ancient and popular device in common use within forty years,
but the origin of it is not known, as it probably reaches back to a very
ancient time.
The cradle before us is of pine as are most of the simple cradles. Date:
1710-50. The older the cradle the deeper the sides, presumably for greater protec
tion against cold gusts. The cradle was drawn near the fireplace, its foot
to the fire. Some examples show slight charring.
The connection between rocking chairs and cradles is suggestive of the
origin of the rocking chair. An Englishman of our acquaintance stated
that his mother bounced back and forth as she fondled him in a chair without
rockers, whose posts were worn in a rounded form as a consequence. Rockers
seem to have obtained popularity in America only, and it is very probable
that they were introduced in connection with the care of children. To this
day such chairs in England are spoken of as American rockers.

[ 320]

A PANELED Cradle of Beech. It is in the Branford, Connecticut,
Public Library. The cradle belongs to the Plant family, from the Mill
Plain District of the town. It has been traced back to Jonathan Barker,
born 1705. The sides are not quite vertical, and the head, in this form, is
not so early as that on the Fuller cradle, page 315. The careful paneling
of the head, as well as all other parts, mark a distinguished article of furni
ture. The paneling of the head is perhaps not known in another American
cradle of this date, about 1690-1710. The condition is rather dilapidated,
but by small repairs could be much improved. The rockers seem not to be
original. In the turned and extended corner posts we have a reminiscence
of earlier 17th Century work.

[ 321 1

THE Room above is the parlor chamber in the Saugus Iron Works House.
This house, together with all the chain of houses once in the possession of
the writer, has been dismantled and the furniture dissipated and the houses
are no longer in the possession of the author, nor is iron work now carried on
at this center.
The bed shown here is of uncertain date, belonging to that class of style-
less beds such as were made throughout the 18th and pretty well into the
19th Century. An amusing and pleasing feature is the division of the head
board into two arches, as much as to say, "Here slept grandfather and here
slept grandmother." The method of pushing the trundle bed below the
large bed is here shown.
This room is very large, having about four hundred square feet on its
floor, a size very uncommon in the 17th Century.
A set of hanging shelves on the right wall is dateless. The writer has seen
such shelves still in use and knows that they have been in use for genera
tions. They are plain boards with holes bored in four corners and small
ropes carried through and knotted to sustain the shelves.
A piece of chintz hangs over the edge of the table; it carries a figure of
Washington. We have noted a standing figure of the Father of his Country,
driving a pair of leopards which come perhaps to his knee. The leopards
on wall paper are also shown, attached to a chariot, drawing Bacchus.

I 322 ]

A FOUR Poster and a trundle bed, formerly in the Hazen'Garrison House.
There is no article of furniture of the 17th Century in which we are so poor
as in beds. The massive examples have altogether disappeared, and the
huge English beds are all lost. A piece of furniture so bulky would naturally
not be brought to America, except by the wealthy. When we have before
us a simple bed like the one above, with small octagon tapered posts, alike
at the head and foot, we are at a loss to name a date, because such a bed
could have been used by the original generation of Pilgrims and also as late
as 1820. The earliest beds, however, seem to lack bed screws, and were held
together merely by the tautness of the ropes. This bed has its original
simple white canopy, and the tester is of one piece drawn over a frame, built
on all sides like the old-fashioned curtain with rods run into the hem. This
canopy was carefully laundered and laid away by the dear lady who had
used it. The general method of using a canopy bed is here plainly seen.
The curtains were drawn away in the day time but could be completely
closed in at night .

[ 323 ]

ABOVE is a slaw bed, otherwise called a press bed; that is to say, it was
sometimes set into a shallow cupboard which was of the depth of the portion
that was intended to stand permanently on the floor. The lower part of
the bed closed somewhat like a modern folding bed on the joints seen in the
picture. When the doors were closed, the bed was entirely out of the way.
Below is a trundle bed with a pine paneled head board. Such panels are
rare. Both of these beds are owned by the author. The date of the upper
one is any time in the 18th Century. That of the lower one probably the
latter part of the 17th Century or early part of the 18th Century.

¦i

K^J

1

HHI

j

[324 1

[325]

ON the preceding page is the famous bed in the old jail now in the exhibi
tion rooms of the Historical Society at York, Maine. This is one of the
dozen pieces in this book previously shown in books of furniture, but it is
believed that this is the first photograph which renders the quaint inscrip
tions legible. They are in the form of poems such as were worked upon
samplers. The colorings of the foliage are very rich, especially the greens and the
reds, and the counterpane and valance are a part of the rich and complete
set. Date: 1745.
At the top of this page is a bed belonging to the author. Its width is un
usual, being 60 inches. Date: 18th century.

I 326]

A BED with a canopy on which appears a repeated figure of peacocks in
blue with foliage. The phrase, "tent bed" often used is perhaps derived from
the rounded tops of some canopy beds. Others derive their name from the
fact that the posts are made in two sections. The upper sections were called
poles, hence the term tent bed. No other photograph of the above bed,
except this with the figures, is available. Date: late in the 18th Century.

[327]

ABOVE is a canopied bed with an early printed pattern. One may see
from this picture the slender character of the eight-sided poles which sup
port the top. We cannot too strongly stress the fact that no 17th Century
beds and no early 18th Century beds have been found in America with
carved posts. They are always small as shown. This bed was in the fire
room chamber of the Iron Works House at Saugus, which has now been
dismantled. The earliest beds did not show an arched top but were flat, and the
composition of the frame work at the top was called laths. They were
usually two cross pieces beside that at the head and the foot, and the whole
was pinned on at the corners by iron spikes.
Why a bed is called a four poster is a puzzle as we can hardly imagine a
bed to be without four posts. Possibly the answer lies in the same cause
which gave the thousand-leg table its name.
Obviously the reason for the simplicity of early bed posts was the fact
that they were housed in by the draperies so as to be useful merely as
supports. We do not know when mosquito netting came into use, but the East
Indian protection of netting had not in the 17th Century become a customary
thing in America.

[328]

A HIGH Bed belonging to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. It is said not to have had
hangings at the foot. At this date the statement could scarcely be verified,
but obviously there is no use of the posts without hangings. The bed is a
handsome figured maple, which came into use early in the 18th Century,
when we date this specimen.

[ 329 1

A BED of Maple, in the Geo. F. Ives Collection, Danbury, Connecticut.
This bed is made with a joint in the frame near the head, for folding under
the canopy, the drapery of which may then be drawn down over it. Below
the head was a small cabinet for holding linen. Date: 18th Century.
[330]

ABOVE is an oak four poster. This bed is so far as the writer knows the
only example of an American high poster in oak. He had the good fortune to
find it in Wethersfield, Connecticut. The owner of the last generation had
cut off one of the posts for a ball bat! There is no manner of estimating
its age. It might easily have been in use in the 17th Century.
The Connecticut settler clung as now to his traditions and to the fondness
for past customs which has given his state the name of the land of steady
habits and to which we owe the preservation of more than half of the finest
pieces of 17th Century American furniture. The motive for destroying high
posters, however, was fashion. We know of two ambitious young sisters
who went throughout their house, a great New England mansion, and sawed
off every high post bed, and there were many!
The stuffiness incident to draperies about a high poster can be overcome
by the use of the airy, netted canopy, so that we may retain in modern use
the stately and romantic bed of our forefathers.
We regret not being able to show on the preceding page the bed frame,
which is braced by a base piece.

33i

*$&*" f->fS» "Slf&X

THE Picture is of a small bed with a handsome fish-net stitch canopy,
in which there is a doubled border so that the points of the fringe show in
two lines. It was the early fashion to place such netted pieces over a muslin
ground, to exhibit the net more plainly. A bed draped like the one above
is therefore not complete, but answers the modern requirement of airiness.
Bed spreads were in an endless variety of materials and patterns. The
patch work style was later. Copperplate preceded it, or tufted white coun
terpanes. The heavy woven and colored spreads were in numerous styles.
A fine floral or tree pattern, in color, sewed in a white base, is a rare and
beautiful design.
The lower valance was sometimes separate from the spread, and sometimes
attached to it. When separate it usually matched the canopy. This bed is
owned by the author. Date: 1720 or later.

[332 ]

A COUNTERPANE owned by Mrs. Wallace Nutting. The material
is hand woven linen, and the decoration is in heavy cotton, which in this
case is not cut. The size is eight feet square. The color of the foundation
and of the wicking is all white as always in this style.
Sometimes the material is cut to show the blossoming of flowers. The
purely geometrical patterns are not as desirable. Frequently the design is
cut out at the lower corners for the bed posts.
The date of these pieces is indeterminate as in many sorts of fancy work
which have survived through many generations. They seem to have been
in use at an early date and are being made today, but the modern copies
are more likely to be found in cotton.

[333 1

A HIGH Post Bed in the John Alden House, Duxbury. John and Priscil-
la died in a small down-stairs bedroom, where a later bed now is, off the
kitchen. It is too bad that a place built by the son of these typical ancient
worthies, cannot be restored and kept within and without as a permanent
memorial. The house at Duxbury is at last available to be seen by the public, and
sometime the proper attention will be paid to its restoration.
The construction of the house frame, with its great braced posts and
beams, is clearly shown, and no doubt follows the plan, and may even be
the handiwork of John Alden, who was the most skilled in tools of any man
of the original settlers. l334l

¦

[335 1

fc-

ON this and the next
page are two aspects of
an American oak chair-
table, which is in style
unique so far as at pres
ent known. The unique
ness consists in the com
bination of the cross-
stretcher, scrolled, with a
chair-table. The piece
was found in New Jersey,
a most extraordinary
breaking of the Connecti
cut oak traditions. The
drawer is flush. We
therefore date the piece
about 1 690- 1 700. The
table top is not only
scrolled but has the "thumb-nail" molding. The feet have lost the lower
half of the balls, but in the portion remaining show their full diameter.
The hight is 28^4 inches, and was probably 29^ or a trifle more. The
frame is 1834 by 23^ inches. The seat is now 17% inches high. The top
is 27 by 34 inches. The enigmatical lettering on the under side of the
top has no reference to a date of manufacture. The drawer has not the
grooved runs but has the wide dove tails at both ends, and is oak. The
chair is heavy, strong, in fine condition and a striking instance of oak con
tinued to a late date, similar to the case of the highboy on page 73 . Owner:
the author.
It is not to be thought strange that so little oak is found out of New Eng
land. Wherever an industry becomes established there it tends to remain.
Mechanics happened to be numerous in the Connecticut colonies, who had
worked in oak at home in England. Then the parts of Connecticut where
oak is found are very old.
The use of the chair table as a dining table has even now much to com
mend it. Evidently this table has been moved from the middle to the side
of the room a vast number of times to lose any part of its very heavy feet.
The hugeness of these feet suggest an earlier style than the table would
otherwise call for. It is entirely possible the date has been placed twenty
years too late. The finial is a restoration but there existed a picture with
the old finial to serve as a copy. Every other part is original.

[336]

A HUTCH Table with a pine
top, here shown , is almost precisely
like a dozen known to the author
and similar to twice as many
more. Chair tables are rather
easy to find in Eastern New Eng
land. This specimen has the usual
notches cut on the feet. The date
may be 1700-20.
On the next page is a fine sturdy
old table of the same description,
except that it bears signs of greater
age, and has more attractive
features. The various quaint
scrolls on the boards of the frame
and the cleats harmonize in an
appealing whole. The cross mem
ber of the box, or frame, is as usual
dovetailed at its edges. The table belongs to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. The wood
is pine. Chair tables are rather oftener round than oval. They are oftener of
sufficient size to seat six, and sometimes eight persons. They require to be
moved, if advantage is taken of economy of room. For this reason probably
they went out of use. As rooms grew larger standing tables succeeded.
But they possess too many good features to be discarded. We use the term
chair table to include hutch tables, because they resemble one another
closely, and the hutch supplied a high-seated chair.
The writer has never heard hutch pronounced correctly. Chair tables
are very seldom mentioned in old inventories, only four times in Essex
County records before 1674. A stool-table is mentioned once, whatever
it may have been. A hutch-table is not mentioned at all. In Mandeville
it occurs spelled hucche — as it is pronounced. It was synonymous with
chest. Macquoid applies the name to the church chest, with doors, that
is a cupboard, but never to a chest, in his Age of Oak. It has now become
a common word in furniture discussion, but the meaning is still unsettled.
Some apply to a small chest, others to a small cubby or cupboard.

[338]

. , Mi

A HUTCH Table in the Geo. F. Ives Collection. It has much merit in
the scrolled sides of its trestles and cleats. The hutch tops of such tables
could be used as high seats by the use of stools. Date: 1680-1700.
I 339]

TABLES in a fixed form belong to an established civilization. A very
large table means a great house. Great tables were primarily designed for
dining! They got their form in communities like monasteries or in the re
tainers' halls of nobles. The word table is pure Latin in origin, and thus
etymology enforces the foreign origin of the table itself. Oriental peoples,
especially those who sat on the floor, felt little need of tables. Great tables
were not, so far as old examples show, brought to this country from Europe.
Materials were too abundant here. Given a pit saw and a great tree, a
couple of men could soon provide a board which only needed supports, of
any temporary sort, and hence we have the trestles and board.
The permanent table afforded little room for carving. In a very few
survivals there is carving on the frame. Perhaps in no instance is there a
carved leg on a table of the period before 1670, of American design. The
richly carved bulbous legs of the 16th Century tables found no encourage
ment here. The feeling for solidity and permanence was naturally not as
great in a new as in an old country. The settler did not feel as certain of
his abode, and particularly, when he did build permanently he could not
afford great rooms.
For this reason tables with leaves, and with folding contrivances, or
movable features like those possessed by boards and trestles, by chair-
tables, and by gate-leg tables, were very popular. A large family in a
room of moderate size — the one great fire room, found a great fixed table
most inconvenient. Hence when we arrive at standing tables we find them
not large as they are in England. The few with six legs were mostly for
public purposes, such as church communion tables.
Trestles survived in small gate legs, but the tops were not removable.
Also trestles survived in a few tavern tables. Illustrations of both instances
are found on pages 381 and 448. The use of oak tops in American tables is
practically unknown. Pine commended itself for this purpose as well as for
the finest chest lids. It is in the latter part of the 17th Century that we
begin to find maple and walnut in table tops, to correspond with the bases.
Even so the maple was generally badly warped, though walnut kept its
form better.
No early table top is ever nailed or screwed in place. Sometimes nails
were inserted later to fix more firmly an old top.

[340

KITCHEN of the Webb House, otherwise called Hospitality Hall or the
Yorktown House, formerly the property of the author, at Wethersfield.
This fine house of 1752 is now in the hands of the Society of Colonial Dames
and we may gladly anticipate its continuance as a permanent public heir
loom. A feature of much interest is the bracing of the chimney girt frankly
showing in the room. This style has also been noticed in a room of the Ben
ning Wentworth Mansion at Little Harbor, New Hampshire.
The hutch table on the left in this picture is interesting from the scrolled
upper side of the shoe or base; a similar scroll also shows on the base of the
front board.
On the right appears another chair table with beautifully bleached maple
top, held together with butterfly dowels. The frame is oak, a very rare
feature. The flush drawer also indicates an early date. Both of these tables
may be placed around 1690.
The little child's chair in the center of the room is of pine and has a very
high back; its quaint effect is rarely good.

[34i]

THE Earliest Tables known in America were boards on trestles. The
two mentioned on the next page are the only large fine examples yet found.
The one there shown is the property of Mr. B. A. Behrend. Date: 1620-50.
The exciting hunt for this table, when the scent grew warm, sheds a hu
morous light on the collector's experience. The author directed the hunt by
telephone a thousand miles from the field. This example is peculiar from
its two spindles, resting on the heavy stretcher, to give the top stability.
The rarity of the board and trestle is such that only within a decade has
attention been given to it, and searchers have probably passed by such
mediaeval styles merely because they did not know what they had found.
The one pictured was sold at auction for a nominal sum. Indeed when the
author wired to pay what was necessary to obtain the rarity his agent
wrote back that he could make a better one for three dollars! And the
original buyer at auction valued the piece merely as a Washington relic.
No other article of furniture speaks so strongly of the ancient time. The
Last Supper of Leonardo shows a board and trestles.
The construction of the trestle is simply a double headed T.
In Scott's novels more than one reference is made to these progenitors
of the modern table. The third chapter of Ivanhoe opens with a description
of them, and of their arrangement.
Boards with frames or trestles have recently been brought from England.
The Shaker colonies made such tables within a century. One such
sixteen feet long, with three trestles, was recently in the hands of Mr. I. Sack.
A somewhat inferior board with trestles was not long since discovered
and a well grounded rumor has reached the author that another example,
a counterpart of the one shown on the next page, has recently been found
and sold to someone in Cleveland. As this style comes to the knowledge
of collectors we may hope that other specimens will come to light.
Boards were easily available in America for single-piece tops of tables.
The author has recently seen in New England old forest pines which might
have furnished single board tops five inches wider than that here shown.
A piece of pine 48 inches wide is in one of our New England panels. But
apparently no effort was made to find for tables the widest board possible.
The trenchers used on such boards, in a simple home, were of wood, as also
the great bowls. Each man had his own private clasp knife. Spoons were
wooden, and forks were probably not used.
The trestles and board in the Metropolitan Museum were found by
Mr. Eugene Bolles in Essex, Massachusetts, in an attic.

[342 ]

MORE than half the world eats without tables. Even the early English,
from whom most of our furniture styles were derived, brought in a temporary
table for dining, such as that here shown. It was called a trestle board and
frame, a table board, a long table, a table and frame, etc. A good many
are mentioned in the old probate inventories, though such pieces were already
falling out of fashion when America — or our part of it — was settled. Yet
some families had two such tables, and in a great household, one for the
family was placed on a dais, while two or more, on a lower level, at right
angles to the first, accommodated the servants. Mr. Bolles found the
one in the Metropolitan Museum, while the author stumbled upon the one
which heads this chapter. It was preserved in the attic of the Richardson
tavern at Medway, because Washington had sat at it. One more debt to
Washington! Its base is maple or beech. The long truss rod was, in use,
lightly fixed by large wooden pins. The top was unattached. The length
is more than ten feet, but probably a little has been cut off at one end.
The top is an inch board of pine 25 inches wide.
Owner : Mr. B. A. Behrend.

I 343 1

A Pair of Trestles, and a board about six feet in length owned by Mr. Harry
Long, The ingenious stiffening brace is located at a point where it is wholly
out of the way, and effective, it being let down into a slot in the trestles.
The two stools are half moons in shape. The writer does not know their
origin. Date: 1670-1700.
Below is an X-trestle table, belonging to Mr. Willoughby Farr, of Edge-
water, New Jersey. A considerable number like this but with plain X-
trestles have been found. Date: 1690-1730. It is braced at the center with
a four-sided strut. The manner of pinning the truss or stretcher rod is
plainly seen.

I 344 1

SINCE the trestles and their board must be moved daily, the invention
of the drawing table was induced. No complete American specimen is now
known. That in the rooms of the Connecticut Historical Society at Hart
ford, which is very massive, its legs being nearly five inches in diameter,
is the best of its kind, but it has lost its draw boards. It has already been
illustrated. The natural successor of the drawing table, whose leaves pushed under the
main board, at the ends, was a table with hinged leaves. That shown above,
at the Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford, belongs to Mr. George Dudley
Seymour, and is the only one now known in this style. It is most valuable as
a connecting link between the drawing table and the gate leg, The obvious
thing, for us, would be to add leaves at the side. With only a trestle or a
drawing table before us we should place the leaves as here. Date: 1690-1710.

[345]

AFTER the trestles naturally come the standing tables. Whether any
of those having an extreme length were ever used in dwellings may be ques
tioned . Most of the great standing tables now known of American origin
were like the example above, communion tables. The frame is too high
for domestic use, it having been about 34 inches. No large table above 31
inches high, except a side table, can escape the challenge that it may have
been a communion table. The top here is composed of two pine planks.
The posts we believe are maple or birch. It was owned by Mr. I. Sack.
It is large, but the dimensions are not available. The great size of the posts
and its marks of age, date it about 1660-1690.
About the only use for such tables now, outside museums, is in libraries.
They serve admirably in large rooms to spread many books, but are not
available, owing to hight, for reading.
A table six feet long with carving on the front side of the frame, and other
wise very like the table above was recently found near Exeter, and is shown
elsewhere. The plea that the very high tables might have been for do
mestic use, with high chairs, is hardly allowable. If the fashion was for
high tables in the earliest period, why are not the trestles high? Refectory
tables are not known by that name in the old inventories. "Long, standing,
joined," were the terms used. The name refectory refers to the frequent
use of such tables in college commons. It is a stilted word. Long would
be a better name, though there are scarcely enough of American origin to
require a name.

[346]

AN American Oak Refectory Table. Length, originally about 92 inches;
now about 86 inches, owing to the loss of the end cleats, the dowel holes of
which are to be seen. Width 30 inches, all of one pine plank, originally,
which has now split into three parts. Frame, about 26 by 72 inches. Hight,
about 34 inches. This remarkably preserved and no less remarkably turned
communion table, at one time was discarded and the top seems to have been
used in chopping meat. It was finally restored to the church from which
it came. The parish organization was formed in 1638, and the church
edifice shortly after erected. This original communion table therefore, with
out reasonable doubt, dates as early as 1638-40. The author does not know
of another American oak table at once so old and so meritorious. The turn
ings are seen to be the same as those on the Robinson chair, page 177.
The size of the posts is about 3^2 inches. The pine top is about i-H$ inches.
Owing to fear of endless solicitations, the precise location in Massachusetts
is withheld .

(347

A ROOM with furniture of the 17th Century and with a wall in old natural
pine should have a charm for any one, but especially for the lover of har
mony. There was much variety in the furniture of the same period, be
cause the artificer was not shut around with many artificial limitations.
He loved and wrought according to his loves. He saw a light and followed
without hearing a voice commanding him to finish, in so many hours, a
certain piece of work. Yet like the best artisans he worked rapidly, because
he was eager to see the embodiment of his ideas. When he finished he had
dispensed with a part of himself, yet he was richer in conceptions than
before. No man can make a good thing, without at once becoming able to
make a better thing.
As to the wall decorations of 17th Century homes, old charts or early
ship models are good, and oil portraits would be better. But such portraits
are altogether too rare even to be thought of hopefully. No doubt few
are retained as family heirlooms. What the collector finds is of the early
1 8th Century at best. Of course the old masters are still available but
can scarcely enter into our view here.
Exterior slat shutters admitting light but shutting out vision came into
use somewhat at the close of the 18th Century. In our period there were
possible a few inside shutters, but we doubt if the fact is established.

[348]

AN Oak Refectory Table with light turnings. Owner: the author. The
top is 29^ by 67^ inches. The hight is 2$}4 inches. The frame is 20^
by 47 inches. This is a lighter and later type than that shown on page 347,
and was of course made for domestic purposes. It is obvious that such a
table was much more easily moved about than the heavy sort which we
associate with the word refectory. At the same time the wide everhang
all around this table made it convenient to sit at. Frames of oak usually
point to an earlier date than maple frames. Date: 1690-1710. Origin:
Connecticut .
The so-called "gate-leg turnings" were rather more elaborate than those
on tavern or refectory tables. In the table above one sees the beginning of
the gate-leg style of turning, but with the plain stretchers which gate-leg
tables of handsome types discarded in favor of turned stretchers. The plain
stretcher was stronger than the turned stretcher, an important matter if the
stretcher is long.
The large early English table can usually be distinguished from the
American table of like date by its heavier construction. This is true, not
only of the frame, but of the top. In the instance before us and in a
fine American trestle-board the top is thin. English tables have been
found with pine tops.

[349]

A REMARKABLE Table owned by the Connecticut Historical Society.
It is seven feet and a half long and thirty inches high. The wood is cherry
except the upper frame rail in the back, which is pine, with a molded edge.
The legs are 3;J/2 inches square, also the front stretcher. The back stretcher

is 2y4t by 3^2 inches.

There has never been a leaf behind. The feature of peculiar interest is
the great wear shown on the back and stretchers and the freedom from
wear in front. This is proof positive, since the parts are all original, that
the table was used at the back and ends only. Now the back is the place
where no wear would occur had this been a side table. We must believe
the table was used in a public room, like a court room, or an official's office.
The nature of the wear, besides the hight of the table preclude the sup
position that it was used as a communion table. There is no wear on the
rule joint of the leaf, showing the table was used standing regularly with
the leaf raised. There is a fine molding on the stretchers, and the stretchers
of the gates are molded on all four corners. The front stretcher is cham
fered as clearly seen. The feet show much wear, and one is somewhat dis
integrated .
The joint in the front rail is cut on a radius to permit turning the leg.
The table is carefully made. It has in chalk on the back rail: "Chas. Hosmer,
Hartford, Conn." This gentleman has been called the father of the historical
society there. The legend is probably a shipping direction. We are no
doubt indebted to him for this splendid specimen. His date was 1785-1871.
The table date may be 1730-40. I 35o]

A MEDIAL-STRETCHER Table. Owner: William G. Erving. M. D.,
of Washington. The top and rails are pine, the legs maple; the stretcher ash.
The frame is 24^ by 54^ inches. The hight is 27^ inches. The top is
32^ by 64 inches. The brackets on the frame, next the legs, add strength
as well as ornament; the central scroll being merely ornament. Brackets
indicate a date, we should say, inside the 17th Century. They are impor
tant. Date: 1690-1710.
Below is a remarkable American Oak Table with carving on one side
of the frame. It was found in Southern New Hampshire. The author
can vouch for its authenticity. Its length is about seven feet. Picture
furnished by Wanamaker, New York.

[35i]

A ROOM of all cross-stretcher American pieces, a highboy, lowboy,
chair table, desk, and two stools.
Around the Hearth
Since men have learned how to make a fire, the hearth, for every genera
tion, until our own, has centered around the hearth. Here was the altar.
Here, sitting behind the elders, ardent youths held hands in the silent
wooing of the shadows. Here they were married. Here babes were born.
Here the cradle stood, while the mother watched it at her labors. Here
she presided, the mother of statesmen, poets and inventors. Here her
sweet wisdom ruled, and her wheel and loom clothed the household. Here
the aged sat, in the chimney corner. Here they passed at length into the
unseen world.
From the hearth our fathers got warmth, light, food. Fire was the
first object they recognized, after their mothers. It taught them their
first lesson in self-restraint. Every day till senility claimed them they
gazed into the blaze. Fire was the precious, first focus of civilization.
In the evenings the romantic sense was called out by the fire. The
sagas of the ages were born and sung there. There leaped the ghosts;
there loomed the giants; there played the fairies. Is it a wonder that all
men love, with undying, intuitional affection, the hearth?

(352

A BRACKET Refectory Table, with Drops. Owner: Mrs. John Mar
shall Holcombe. This remarkbly fine example was used in the Grant family,
of East Windsor Hill, Connecticut, as a dining table, before 1700. Date:
1650-1670. It was possibly the property of the settler, Mathew Grant, who
was a surveyor, and whose tripod was among the family treasures
The style of the turning is close to the earliest American work. The
shadow mold on the frame is the same as that appearing on American oak
chests. The brackets are boldly scrolled, and the drops add the last touch
of style to complete the heavy turned table of this date.
The frame is oak. Size of top, 32^4 by 70 inches; frame, 26 by 58^
inches; hight, 31 inches.
It was a surprise to the author, on tallying his information on refectory
tables to find them so few. A beautiful specimen is owned by Mr. H. W.
Erving. One with carved frame was in the hands of the writer. The
specimens here shown nearly complete the list of the other fine examples
available.

[ 353 ]

AT the bottom of the page is a large kitchen table belonging to Mrs.
F. Gordon Patterson of Boston. It has turnings identical with a small
table known to be very early, and its brackets to stiffen the frame are a
feature of merit. The slide is missing. The end leaf may mark a very
early survival, suggesting the leaves of the table on page 345. Some other
features would point to a later date. We therefore endeavor to be safe
by placing it between 1690 and 1730. As we recollect it, the top is pine and
the frame a close grained hard wood, very light in color.
We could scarcely expect to find in kitchen tables subjects of importance.
But the facts prove otherwise. The great rooms in a house of the Pilgrim
Century, were the parlor (dining room) and the hall (kitchen). The term
hall for the room of entrance came later. In the Pilgrim time it was the
porch or the entry, often very meager in proportions. The hall could be
used as a dining room, though in homes of any pretention the parlor was
used for that purpose. It was not till later that the parlor was shut up and
set off as sacred to great occasions only.
The hight of tables is one indication of their use and age. As pointed
out elsewhere a table much exceeding 30 inches high is likely to be, if
large, a church communion table ; or if small, a side table. But such
small tables are scarcely found. If below 29 inches in hight, without the
loss of any part of the feet, tables are for occasional use. Any large table
of only 27 inches in hight, or even 28 inches, should be examined with
care, for in all probability something is wrong. Feet are often so turned
that the loss of one ball is overlooked by any one not expert.

l354l

1

^^^" ¦¦¦¦"
¦
mm tnfi t^ii^MBifi'WBl
mtmgmjmum
SPUR!
'
55Kj^^^^?^^^~^:X-S
^ MMMi
H*
BHra
^¦af '
¦:: •:--'' sss-yx^^i^Si
ixlIk pi m
mjj/m
~^^^^^^^
'
?/,
\}$} ,#
¦¦..
.S:S^SS-:-i
A KNEADING-TROUGH Table with a drawer and cross stretchers;
in the Metropolitan Museum. The drawer, the front of which is built on a
slant, carries quaint carving. The cover removes, opening a hutch, which
was most likely designed as a bread mixing trough. The huge wedges which
hold in place the middle truss carry out the sturdy effect of the piece. The
cross stretchers are slightly scrolled as are also the straddling legs; the ma
terial is pine.
One cannot resist the conclusion that a piece of this sort was a gift con
structed by a young husband for his bride. The honest and not unsuccess
ful attempts at decoration are indicative of affection in the fingers of the
artificer. Such pieces carrying decoration where it is not really required
are always lovable because they mark a generous nature and speak of a
kindly humanity. Date: 1 670-1 700.
[355]
A KITCHEN Table in Pine. The great thickness of the trestles and the
still greater spread of their bases or shoes are points of attraction. The
method of tenon and mortise is certainly crude enough, and possibly afforded
the suggestion of the mission furniture. In reality it is only a make-shift
arrangement to supply the lack of good joinery. This table had a slide, the
groove for which may be seen immediately under the frame. The object of
such slides, which were not uncommon, was partly the extension of the
area of the table and partly an accommodation to a worker sitting by the
table. The lower level afforded a convenience; as for instance, when the
children shelled the peas. The great middle truss or stretcher also served
as a shelf. While an English origin is claimed for this table, it has more the
style of the Pennsylvania Dutch. Date: 1670-1720.

I 356]

THIS curious table is owned by the Metropolitan Museum, but is not
yet on exhibition. It contains a box or hutch below the top, which latter is
made to slide, the cleats being in the grooved form. The panels are en
croached on at the bottom by the base mold of the frame. It would have
been far better style to raise the panels so as to give the same width of rail
above and below. This is a puzzling but an original feature. Of course a
good deal is missing from the legs. The massive character of the piece
renders it very attractive indeed to the real lover of 17th Century furniture.
The top is made with mitered end cleats, which form a part of the top, in
addition to the grooved runner cleats below. The construction has more
than one foreign suggestion, but the table is called American by an excellent
judge of such matters. The only manner of gaining access to the hutch is
of course by sliding the top. Date: The earlier part of the 17th Century.
No true refectory table has a leaf. They were used before the time
of leaves, and a leaf, can only be sustained by a slide. We count tables
with such slides as always later than the refectory period. If in the 17th
Century and earlier a larger table was wanted it was added by placing
tables end to end. The idea of a table as a board was deeply fixed, and
but slowly eradicated. Once the leaf table came in it speedily put all
refectory tables and trestle-boards out of fashion. Their use has never
been revived. Hence their extreme rarity. There is a report that a six-
leg American refectory table exists, but one never gets to see it, and
meantime we claim the right to be doubtful.

l357l

A LARGE Walnut Library Table. It is owned by the author. Date:
1700. The top is 31 by 66 inches. The frame is 25 by 53 inches. The
hight is 29^ inches. There is a little central drawer, as appears, between
two large drawers.
It is now common parlance to name tables of this type library tables,
but no one knows for what use they were designed. The side overhang,
about three inches, is too little to admit of sitting at the side either for
eating or writing. The author uses this table for writing but is obliged to
sit almost facing the end. The tops all being made removable, by four
hand dowels, we arrive at an early date, as the effort was to procure a large
table that could be carried about in sections, like the trestles and their
boards. These tables therefore are a standing puzzle to all antiquarians.
Whatever use suggested raises a very valid objection. And yet the tables
were somewhat numerous. Pennsylvania is their usual "habitat."
They differ from the usual large "standing" table by having drawers,
and by the method of attaching the top. They are also from thirty to
forty years later in date, and are in walnut rather than maple or oak.
They also average a smaller size. On the other hand they are distinguished
from the tavern tables by being larger and having movable tops.

[358]

A "LIBRARY" Table, with Scalloped Skirt. These tables are rather
rare with such skirts, but, with plain skirts, they are brought out of Penn
sylvania in large numbers, twelve at a time being the spoils of one tour,
noted at a dealer's.
As on the preceding page, the material is all walnut. The top is
removable, and measures 32^4 by 48^2 inches, by 28^ inches in height.
The frame is 28^ by 36^ inches. It will be noted that the drawers in
these tables are seldom paired, but one is longer than the other. If we
named this a serving table, ignoring the higher sideboard table, we should
possibly be making a guess as good as any, since a grounded opinion seems
impossible. We should not hesitate at all in this decision, were not these
tables found, occasionally, in such large sizes. Date: 1700-1720. Owner:
the author. It is humiliating that we human beings, with every facility for making
records, should so often leave our successors in the dark concerning our works
and ways. The pictorial art, using photography, will save the coming gen
eration much trouble.

l359l

A LARGE Walnut Table, with scalloped skirt. It was once in the
possession of the author; the present owner being unknown.
The turnings are much bolder than usual. The stretchers show much
use — a mystery, as one cannot place a foot on a stretcher anywhere with
out hitting the knee on the frame! And on the sharp scallops, at that.
This table has a little drawer in one end. It is about five feet long.
Date: 1700-10.
With this table we pass out of the class confined practically to the
17th Century. The gate-leg table was so much loved that it could not die,
and though it began many years before the 17th Century went out it con
tinued, a solitary example of style, long after its period. Among the many
revivals of early furniture the "library" table and all 17th Century types
except the gate-leg, are allowed to sleep, despite the occasional refectory
type.

[360]

A PENNSYLVANIA "Library" Table. The frame is in maple; the
drawer fronts as well as interiors and the top are in pine. Its sturdy type,
its two drawers with the large knobs typical of the origin, and the plain
end and medial stretchers, afford a piece of interesting character, wholly
original and in natural color. The top is 34 by 68^ inches — a generous
size. The overhang at the ends is 13^ inches! At the sides it is 4 inches.
Had the possessors desired to use this as a refectory table they might easily
have done so. It will amply seat eight persons. Owner: the author. Date:
1700-10. The overhang of this table is so great that unless it were pinned down,
disasters might occur. Hence, we suppose, the pins. Of course the entire
table is a solid weight.
In the restoration of Greek temples the practice is to place a wholly new,
and apparently new, pillar in place of a missing one. Such work can be seen
on the Erectheum at Athens. How meretricious it would have been to scar
and mar a new column to make it resemble the old!
We expect such bad work to be done on furniture by unscrupulous per
sons trying to pass it off as all original and sound. But collectors should
be wiser.

[361]

SELECTIONS from the furnishings of the Hale Mansion, South Coven
try, Connecticut. It was built 1776 by Deacon Richard Hale, father of
Captain Nathan Hale, the "Martyr Spy" of the Revolutionary War, who
was born in an earlier house which was demolished soon after the present
house was erected and which stood but a few rods from it.
The maple gate-leg table is one of the most delicately beautiful specimens.
Size: top, 41 by 52^ inches; hight, 28 inches. Date: 1700-30.
The table on the right is a very rare specimen, called in Connecticut a
Windsor table, from the town, not from the Windsor chair. It is of hickory,
oak and maple. It was found in Hartford. Size: 28^4 by 21 1-8 inches;
hight, 24 inches. Date, about 1700. The owner is Mr. George Dudley
Seymour. The room is beautifully paneled on the fire-place side. Much honor is
due the owner for salvaging this fine old house.

[362]

A FOUR-GATE Table of Walnut. Owner: Mrs. Lewis Sheldon Welch,
of New Haven. Date: 1690-1730.
The very existence of tables with four gates has not come to the atten
tion of many collectors, except as they see illustrations of such tables,
because so few exist. The writer knows of six, has heard a rumor of two
more, and presumes that a dozen may soon be known. This work shows
three; there is a fourth in the Metropolitan Museum, a fifth at the Albany
Historical Society, a sixth in Hartford. Two of these have often been
illustrated. These we show have hitherto appeared in no publication.
The origin of the table here shown is presumably Connecticut.
Of course the drawer handle is not original. The existence of a good
number of Virginia or English walnut tables in New England raises the
question whether such tables were native here. From their style we con
clude they were native and that they were m'ade, as hinted elsewhere,
from walnut brought in from the South, or sporadic trees here. They
were in every known instance found near or on the tide-water.

[363]

A FOUR-GATE Table of Walnut, originally brought by the writer
from Richmond, Virginia, and now in the possession of Mr. Chauncey C.
Nash. It is somewhat small and low, for a four-gate table, and the turn
ings are in the fashion more often found in the South.
In giving these tables the name four-gate, the author feels the in
accuracy and possible confusion that would arise by a term often heard —
double-gate. Those who use that term are thinking of one side of the table.
But as a single-gate table means just what it purports to mean, a double-
gate and a four-gate should mean what the words naturally signify. Date:
1690-1730. Of course the purpose of four gates was to hold large leaves with stabil
ity. Four gates also add very much to the beauty of the table, giving a
little forest of legs, and when the table is open the symmetry is not destroyed.
The top of the table above is mostly original; The plain stretcher we
surmise is more often found in the South. The gate-leg table is now very
rare there, as is all furniture of its date. This is partly owing to the war
of 1861, and partly to the giving over to slaves the ancient furniture,
which they did not preserve.

[364]

A WALNUT Four-Gate Table. Owner: The author. This table was
found near York, Maine, in 1921 . The top was about 66 inches in diameter,
and very nearly round. Restorations are required in the top. There are
two draws. The frame is very solid, and has nearly all the original feet, so
that the effect, whether open or closed is very beautiful. The frame dimen
sions are 20 by 51 inches. The height is 29 inches. Date: 1690-1730.
The great gate-leg in Albany is six by six and a half feet, and the gates
swing from the center, that being the only one known in this country- with
the center swing. It is without question the finest example now known.
The effect of one of these four-gate tables, when opened, in the center
of a room, is startling in its impression of beauty and dignity. The revival
of interest in the gate-leg table is well merited. Beautiful and useful in all
forms, in its four-gate form it is supreme.
The Albany gate-leg has at present no drawer but there are indications
that it once had one or two. It is peculiar in having a small half round
attached to the edge of the center part, next the leaves, to guide the rule
joint.

[365]

THE TABLE above really belongs in the class of stool tables. It
is maple; 21 inches high. The legs spread in all directions. The frame,
at stretchers, is 13^ by 16^ inches.
The table at the bottom of the page is a solid plain frame specimen,
belonging to the author. Date: 1680-1700.

[366]

TWO Gate-leg Tables belonging to the Metropolitan Museum. They
are quite similar in their turnings, varying in the size of the legs and frames.
These tables are of the type commonly known and in good style, having
the stretchers turned.
It is a good point in construction that the leg should not swing out be
yond the edge of the leaf. If the frame is designed in connection with the
top the leg can be kept, in any part of its orbit, some inches away from
the side of the leaf, and so avoid awkwardness of appearance, and still
more important, prevent the collision of human with table legs. This
feature is also assisted by a generous overhang at the ends. There is a
considerable variation in this regard, ranging from four to eight inches;
averaging about five inches, though more is better.
It is not possible in a small table leg to secure bold turnings. Hence
the large legs are prized not only for their early, quaint, massive effect, but
also because they afford room to allow the turner's chisel to cut deeply and
shape fully a strong, rich design for the leg and stretches.
The nature of walnut in table tops is likely to cast some doubt on the
collector's mind. In English Walnut there is an occasional bluish streak,
running with the grain, perhaps every inch or two. This is quite obvious
after one's eye has once been trained to look for it. Black walnut will
bleach to a color like fresh English or Virginia Walnut. On the other hand
these latter walnuts are often very much bleached on old table tops. They
should be examined on the under side.

367

A GATE-LEG Table, with unusually fine turnings, owned by the Metro
politan Museum. One notices the long effect of the frame, in proportion to
the width. This picture shows the slot in the frame above regularly made
to receive the leg top, which is halved to fit in completely. These cuts are
a distinct blemish in any open gate table, as seen at the bottom in this
picture. The table looks best when closed.
The turnings in this case are bold, but they are so, always, at the expense
of strength. If the leg is very large there is leeway for bold turnings.
Gate-leg tables usually have one drawer reaching about two-thirds the
length of the table. If the table is very large there are two drawers. In
the earliest types there is often a central slat under the drawer, on which
it slides.
We do not remember to have seen grooved runs on gate tables, in more
than a half dozen instances.

[368]

A SOMEWHAT stockily turned gate-leg table, in the possession of the
writer. It has lost its feet but is otherwise original.
The turning is usually, as here, a doubled vase and ring. The leg, cut
in two in the middle, would give two identical turnings. But on pages 364,
371, 376 and 382 we have single vases. There is little to choose between the
styles, if each is of the best character, but the double vase is usually better
done. The table above is of medium size, is of maple, including the top and dates
about 1690-1720. It has the tongue and grooved joint, where leaf and center
join, resembling the modern matched board, only less pronounced. This
sort of joint is counted the best, though some very fine specimens are found
with the rule joint, generally called by modern cabinet makers, a table
joint. From the point of appearance the rule joint is better, but later.
We doubt if any gate-leg was made with a plain joint, that is with edges at
the junction, square. The claim is often made of great age for such edges.
The burden of proof is on the claimant.
Tables often have a thin block attached under the leaf, as a stop to prevent
the leg going too far.

[369]

A LARGE Gate-leg Table with fine turnings. One should notice that in
the finest style all legs, including the leg which acts as a hinge, should extend
to the floor, as in this example, as contrasted with the table on the preceding
page. The relation of uniformity, so important in a gate-leg table, is thus man-
tained. It is only necessary to see two tables together, one with and one
without this refinement, to feel the great superiority of the hinged leg with
the addition at the bottom. It is matters like these that contribute to the
charm of this most important style. The table below is a good maple
specimen. The table above is owned by Flayderman & Kaufmann, Boston.

[37o]

A GATE-LEG Table, the property of Mr. J. H. Stiles, York, Pennsyl
vania. Date: 1700-1730. This piece is possibly unique in the use of an
X stretcher. The solidity gained by such a method is apparent although the
top of the table itself would seem to reinforce the rigidity of the frame and
make such a stretcher superfluous. Nevertheless, the design is appealing
and excites our interest.
Of course the top should be oval and not square. Possibly some gate-leg
tables had rectangular tops originally, but no such table has come to the
author's attention. The shape, we say, should be oval, but there are a few
instances of circular tops. The oval is longer across the top than along the
frame. That is, it is short the long way, and long the short way, so to say!
The very marked oval, showing an extreme drop of the leaf is counted most
desirable. But there are many things to be thought of, and confusion of
judgment is easy. It is necessary to tell all the points over, one by one.
Are the balls, or "pears" on the feet; are the stretchers turned; is the tur
ning fine and bold; is the top original; what is its shape; is there a drawer;
what is the wood; what is the leaf joint; the condition; the color; the size;
and many other questions.

l37i 1

A GATE-LEG Table with large bold turnings and the flat gate. Ordinarily
a flat gate is the mark of an English table, but in this instance, and some
others in this volume, it is not so regarded. This table is walnut and has not
turned stretchers; they would not be natural with a flat gate. The unifor
mity of the legs is lost in the flat gate style, nor has the flat gate advan
tages beyond ease of manufacture, and even that is slight. It does not
require to be cut into, to secure complete closing.
One notices in some gate-leg tables in this book an end frame which is*
scrolled on the under side, sometimes with a cupid's bow curve, sometimes
more simply. It is an added touch of style, but, unless the end has a wide
overhang, is a further hindrance to the legs of the sitter.

[372 ]

T

iM

^L '

M

1 jL2z_^-s4 1

^M £ ^mmm* ^^%

\

'
A SPANISH-FOOT Gate-leg Table. Owner: the author. Date: 1690-
1710. These tables are very rare. Perhaps a dozen are known. They are
very fine in connection with Spanish-foot chairs. This specimen is maple.
The top is 45^ by 47 inches. The hight is 273^ inches. The frame is
14 by 33 inches. There is a drawer. The feet project, as they should, well
beyond the square of the leg. These feet are formed of attached pieces.
Practice in this respect varied. Sometimes the foot was carved from the
solid wood on the post. More often the "toes" were glued on. One should
beware of being hoaxed by a new carving on a foot not designed as a Spanish
foot. The failure to project beyond the line of the leg is a plain indication
of the deception, unless the foot is added bodily, being doweled on, which
may be learned by examination.
Such tables have, in the rough, lost some parts of the feet, unless they are
carved from the solid.
[373 1
A SMALL Gate-leg Table belonging to Mr. G. Winthrop Brown. It has
a drawer, and the tongued and grooved leaf joint.
Little tables like this are very much desired, as they are not only beauti
ful, but adapt themselves readily as occasional tables.
The frame of a gate-leg sometimes, as in this case, is made to take the
drawer directly under the top. In other cases there is a cross member, a
half inch to an inch thick on the frame, above the drawer. This member
seems to add strength, but the greater part of the best tables do not have it.
We mention the matter because we have heard this cross member challenged,
but we are certain it was original in several instances.

l374l

A DAINTY Little Gate-leg Table. Owner: the author. The turnings
are especially fine. It is all in walnut. The drawer has an odd hook handle
of wood. The turnings are striped with bands of red paint, which is old,
but not, we suppose, original. The condition is excellent, and original.
it has the tongue and grooved joint on the leaves.
Dimensions: Top, 24^2 by 28^ inches. Hight, 27^2 inches. The leaves
are 10 inches wide; and the top 8^4 inches wide. Such pieces are very rare,
having all the original feet. The difference in condition of feet in tables of
the same age arose from the fact that some of them were kept and moved
about on sanded floors.

l375l

A "TUCK-AWAY" or Single Folding Gate-leg Table, in the former col
lection of the author. The top is pine and the frame, we believe, is maple.
Both the stretchers being turned and the shoe being scrolled both on the
bottom and on the top give greater importance to the piece. This table
was found on Cape Cod. The top is in one piece, chamfered on the under
side. Its size is 25 by 35 inches.
The attachment of the top to the frame is by butterfly hinges.

[376]

A TUCK-AWAY Gate-leg Table. Otherwise called a single- or
folding-gate table. Owner: the author. It is usual for such tables,
which have oval, one-piece tops to swing, so that the long way of the
oval stands up and down. This table swings the other way. It came
from an ancient family and bears a brass inscription with its genealogy,
which we will not quote. It is maple. The stretchers are not turned as
in the table opposite. The top is 20 by 26^ inches; and the hight is
26^ inches. Date: 1690-1720.

I 377 1

AN All-Pine Vase Trestle Gate-leg Table. Owner: Now unknown.
It may be questioned whether the top, with no joint molding, is original,
though old. The effort by a country cabinet maker to produce a trestle
gate-leg is delightful in its quaintness. The shoes, or trestle-feet, are very
thick. They have lost something of their contour by wear. They orig
inally extended somewhat farther on the floor. The scrolled end and bot
tom brace, and the fluting of the end are the principal decorations. Date:
1680-1710.

[378]

A FOLDING Trestle-gate Table. Owner: the author. Wood: mahog
any; this being the only mahogany piece of furniture shown in this book.
We are, by announced design, carrying through the gate-leg tables to
their decline. The style of this table, which came from the South, is early;
it is perhaps an instance of the use of mahogany in 1720-30; The leaf has
the rule joint. So also has the great table in Albany, already mentioned.
That is in walnut. It is impossible to determine when the rule joint came
in but it seems to have been well established by 1750.
When folded the thickness of the table is 6^4 inches. The top is 35 inches
long and 42^ wide — a very strong oval. It has a fine thumb-nail molding.
The height is 24^ inches. The piece has good style with long overhang,
and a large top in proportion to the base.
Mahogany examples are known in the first decade of the 18th Century.

[379]

A WALNUT Trestle-Gate-Leg Table. It is owned by the Metropolitan
Museum. The center board is only 6]/i inches wide and its length is 43
inches. The thickness is three quarters of an inch. The leaves are 10^
inches wide. The hight is 27^ inches. The shoe is 9 inches long and
2)4 inches square. The legs are i^s inches square. The top of the stretcher
is 5^ inches from the floor. The frame is 35^4 inches long. The
examination the author made of the table was some time since, and he
cannot say whether the top is original. The shape is against the presump
tion of originality; so also is the narrowness of the leaf, which should for
the best style be clearly double what it is.
The table is extraordinary, being the longest folding gate we have seen.
It has lost a half inch or more at the base. Date: 1670-1690. Tables in
this style are very convenient, as they occupy little room when not in use.

[380]

A HEAVY Turned Trestle-Gate-Leg Table. Owner: the author. Date:
1660-90. Wood: cherry. It is a very early example of the use of cherry.
It would seem hardly necessary to slot the base for the flat gate, but so we
find it; an unusual form.
The shoes are pretty well worn down, on their uppers, as one may see.
They were once scrolled with a double curve. They have probably lost a
good inch or more. The hight is now 27^4 inches. The thickness, closed,
is 15^ inches; the leaves are \7]/i inches wide each, and the length is 36
inches. Thus the oval is extreme. The top and the flat gates are ^4 of an
inch thick. Tops on small tables, in hard wood, are very commonly of
this thickness. The posts are stocky for so small a table, being 2^i inches,
flush, square. Of course trestle tables can never have drawers.

[381]

.¦'•¦--

A CORNER Gate-leg with a single gate, the property of Mr. George F.
Ives, of Danbury Connecticut. If this piece is not unique at least the
author has never heard of another example. The top, without a doubt
original, is in pine. We count the piece of sufficient importance to show
it both extended, and with the leaf dropped. It suggests a small three-
cornered table in the Metropolitan Museum in its treatment of the corner
posts which are, of course, triangular where they ordinarily would be square.
Corner tables seem always to possess a charm probably arising, if we are
to study the psychology of the matter from their evident adaptation to their
location, and to the sense of snugness, and the utilization of space. In
the same way any corner furniture is popular.

I 382]

WHILE the stretchers of this piece are plain, we count it scarcely less
important for that reason. The turned stretchers are more sought for and
of course more decorative, but it is probable that the very earliest tables
did not have them. The tavern table is a case in point. In gate-leg tables
the failure to turn the stretcher is counted a greater objection than in other
styles; but while this should be true it is not obvious, unless it is because
we have come to think of the gate-leg table as a beautiful piece, and demand
some ornateness in the turning and the carrying out of that idea of
turning as far as possible. Date: 1670-1700. Size: top, 31 inches square.
Hight, 27 inches.
Any one who has not forgotten his pons asmorum may work out the
diagonal. Since picturing this table the author heard of another, only to
discover it was English. One advantage of bringing such pieces to light
is to challenge others to search. We have no doubt other examples will
be reported.

[383]

ABOVE are Two Split Gate Tables. On the left is a very early example
of a card table. The frame being triangular, is adapted for a corner, but the
top on the other hand is almost an exact circle. The scheme of splitting the
gate like a split spindle which shows as a complete leg when the table is
closed, seems to have come in a little later than the gate-leg period and it is
possible that the origin is not English. The top of this piece is soft pine,
a flush inch in thickness. Date: 1680-1700.
At the right is a split gate leg with a gate on each side and with flat plain
stretchers which, of course, are cut into in order to form the gate so that the
stretcher is split, as one may say, as well as the post. This piece is in hard
pine and is reputed to have come from Bilbao. The top is thin, about three-
quarters of an inch, such as is often seen in small foreign tables. Neverthe
less, we are not prepared to pass judgment upon the origin of this piece.
It should be compared with the large split gate-leg opposite. Date: 1690-
1700. This style in tables seems not to have been popular, as there are very few
found, and even today they are not at all eagerly sought by antiquarians.
In this connection it is amusing to note that there seem to be waves of
popularity, first of one sort of furniture, then of another, in the mind of
collectors. The same has proved true in china; the blue china was much
sought for a few years since, being now unpopular. Slight incidents not
properly a logical basis for action, effect these waves of popularity. At
the present moment decorated furniture, butterfly tables and Carver chairs
would seem to be sought for with feverish intensity.

[384]

A LARGE Ball-turned Split Gate-Leg Table. It was in the author's
former collection. Present owner unknown. It is attractive, as a fine
example of its kind, but the kind has not appealed to all. Perhaps there is
a suggestion of weakness in the splitting of the leg, but these tables seem
strong. One hesitates to say to what lengths the love of the gate-leg table may
take some persons. There is an eagerness for their possession, as if speci
mens were few. Fashion demands them. In England there is a specimen
with as many legs as a banyan tree has trunks. The leaves fall on all four
sides. We may account for the rarity of massive examples from the fact
that the very genius of the table demanded closing and moving. One
large table, with four gates, of walnut, weighs 216 pounds!

[385

A WALNUT Gate-leg Table. Owner: the author. The legs are in a fine
state of preservation, and the top has fine large original butterfly hinges.
The frame is ii by 29 inches; the hight, 28 inches; the top, 40^ (with the
grain) by 39^2 inches. An odd instance of a gate-leg table which is actually
longer lengthwise than cross-wise! The turnings are excellent. The original
drawer is lost. The table was found in Southern New Hampshire. It is a
question what was the source of its red, that is, Virginia, walnut. We sim
ply presume that in such cases the piece was long since brought from a
point farther south, or that the cabinet makers on the coast brought up
walnut by coastwise vessels at the time when it became fashionable. Not
a few Virginia walnut pieces of furniture were made in New England.

I 386]

I 387 1

I 388]

A BEAUTIFUL and beautifully preserved slate top table, owned by
Mr. Daniel Stamford of Boston, appears on page 387.
Its frame is of walnut. The top is inlaid with what appears to be apple
wood, with a single marquetry design on one side. The stone is original,
and whole, its size being 14^ by 29^ inches.
The table is in very fine condition. The stretchers are deeply and delight
fully worn on three sides, the fourth side having been, probably, against a
wall. The grandfather of the owner taught school using this table for his desk.
Its top is 40 by 25 inches, the width of the border outside the slate is
$% inches. The frame is 25 by 19^ inches. The hight is 28 inches. The
date is 1690-1710. On page 388 is shown again the table in the Antiquarian
Society at Worcester.
On this page appears the dining room of Mr. Geo. F. Ives.

I 389]

A BEAUTIFUL little butterfly table in curly maple. Owner: Mr. Geo.
F. Ives. The top is the narrowest we have seen, being only six inches out
side the frame, leaving no room for a draw. The wings are quaintly and
unusually shaped. The top is 23^ by 33 inches. The frame at the base is
14 inches, showing a rapid spread. The wings of these tables are always
thin — from a half inch to three quarters of an inch.

[390

AN unique Table belonging to Mr. H. W. Erving. This piece combines
some features of the butterfly with quaint brackets, which are not at all
like the butterfly design. It suggests to us a little the style of the crane
bracket. The turned stretcher and the short T of the turned post which
sustains the main member of the brackets combine several elements of
quaintness. The setting of the bracket under the frame in the gate-leg
style, of course, made it necessary to cut away the remainder of the bracket
except the outside strut which is framed into the horizontal member.
Doubtless the maker had in mind a middle stretcher table and sought to
adapt the butterfly design to it. The result was certainly one of great
interest and rarity. The eye loves to follow the uniform idea of turning
throughout such a piece, a style which indicates a sense of harmony in the
mind of the maker, very satisfactory to our thought. This is one of a half
dozen pieces in this book which have been published previously. The size
is 33 by 37 inches.
Date: 1670-1700. [39i ]

A VERY dainty small Butterfly Table, the property of the Estate of
Mrs. Reinholt Faelten. It is only twenty-one and a quarter inches high.
The turnings are highly meritorious. For some reason very small butterfly
tables are more sought for than the average size. We may presume it is that
defect in human nature which loves the unattainable. The top of this piece
is in pine with the tongued and grooved joint. We would not undertake
to say what parts of this table, and that on page 402 have been supplied.
The molding on the edge of the frame is called by cabinet workers a
stone molding, and is quite the usual thing on many old tables. The
student will observe there is a considerable difference in the rake of the
legs of butterfly tables. In this case the rake is rather extreme but no less
attractive. Date about 1700. I 392 ]

A BUTTERFLY Table in the collection of Mr. B. A. Behrend of Brook
line. This piece has all the marks of wear which are so delightful to the
collector because they enhance the sense of humanness connected with old
furniture. The wear of the stretchers is especially noticeable. The table
is small and has an oval top. The object of slanting the legs of these tables
is obvious. Greater stability was secured, and the slant afforded room for
the bracket to swing back against the frame without awkwardness. When
the leaf fell if reached the slanting leg which seemed to come out to receive
it. The bracket is usually slanted inward somewhat, on the back. Date:
1700-20.

[393 1

A BUTTERFLY Table, having a pine top with tongued and grooved
joint, and a flush drawer. The brackets in this piece are somewhat clumsy
and perhaps not original. In this connection an unsuspected refinement
in furniture is revealed. Any failure of relation between one part and
another instantly asserts itself even if it is no more than one eighth of an
inch difference in a bracket. This piece, of course, has lost its feet, but
the turned stretcher partly compensates. Date: 1700-10.
This may be as good an opportunity as any to refer to the method of
fastening the joints of furniture. Frame work was, of course, always
fastened with square pins preferably oak, driven in round holes and bored
slightly staggering; that is, the hole on the tenon was a trifle toward the
outside of the post. Thus the pin when driven tended to draw the joint
together and originated the phrase, perhaps in the mouth of Edwin Simons
of Hartford, "a draw-bore pin." The tops were also so bored as to assist
the pins in offsetting one another, that is the pins were inserted at different
angles so as to overcome the tendency to pull the top free.

[394]

A SMALL Trestle Table, with leaves and butterfly brackets. In the
possession of Mr. Dwight Blaney. An unique piece. It combines two
much sought for forms, — the trestle and the butterfly table. Of this the
trestle style is more rare. It is compact, quaint, light and convenient
The other small trestle tables we know have either the one-piece top, or
are in the gate leg style. The charm attaching to uniqueness was gained
through the little one-man shops of early days. Date: 1690-1700.

(395 1

A BUTTERFLY Table belonging to Mr. George Dudley Seymour.
Curiously the drawer seems never to have had a handle.
The table came from the Captain Charles Churchill House, Newington,
Connecticut. Built 1762-3. This specimen, made of cherry, may be later
than the usual 1700, and date from Captain Churchill's marriage in 1747.
It may, perhaps, have belonged to his forbears, but its fine condition and its
being made of cherry favor a later date. The table is in absolutely original
condition. It has its original feet and an interesting touch in the curious
bosses at the lower ends of its leaf-supporting wings. The leaves are hung
on large butterfly hinges. The turnery though simple is refined and well
understood. Hight, 27^ inches; top, 40^ by 45^ inches.
Mr. Seymour has a companion cherry butterfly table, also from the
Churchill House in Newington, which table has a rectangular top.

I 396]

A LARGE Square-leaved Butterfly Table, the property of the Rhode
Island School of Design, from the former Nutting Collection. The top of
this piece appears to be original, but in matters of this kind there is no abso
lute certainty, as the top may have been in place for a hundred years. It
is indeed often possible by tearing a piece apart to ascertain certainly the
originality of a top, but the author frankly believes there is no other way of
knowing. This table has an interesting detail in the sockets for the ex
tended cleats of an additional leaf placed at both ends, undoubtedly sub
sequent to the making of the piece. Thus a table of good size was obtained
for a dining room. The oval style is regarded as a better style.
An interesting peculiarity of this piece is a circular hole in the bracket,
enhancing the butterfly effect just as a large spot often appears in the
butterfly's wing, although this opening was cut more likely to give lightness
to the piece where strength was not required. Careful examination by more
than one expert has established the originality of this aperture. Date:
about 1700.

[397]

A BUTTERFLY Table, owned by Mr. H. W. Erving. The design,
while simple, is good. The elongated pear feet which have escaped wear are
a good example of their kind; the turnings are simple. Date: about 1725.
Below is an interesting variant of the butterfly table, in that the posts
are vertical and the top very wide. This style necessitates a different
method of cutting the top
of the bracket so that the
edge of it shall fall into
a slot in the frame.
Date: 1700-30.
Opposite is a small
square cupboard with a
cut corner panel, and
ball feet; also a butterfly
table, which are the pro
perty of the Rhode Island
School of Design. The
date of the cupboard is
about 1 690- 1 700. That of
the table maybe 1700-20.

[ 398]

[399]

A BUTTERFLY Table, with Plain Stretchers. The draw is not flush,
but has the projecting edge with lip, helping us to a date a little after 1700.
The present ownership of this table is unknown. Its legs are very much
heavier than usual, and resemble more the legs of the standing tables of the
17th Century. The top has an edge which we like, though without reason.
It is a rolling edge, without the thumb nail feature. The wood is maple, in
the frame; pine in the top. The size is medium.
Butterfly tables are becoming very scarce in their good forms, or even
in any form. They have appreciated enormously within five years. It
is hardly possible to find a good example within the means of the average
collector.

[400]

A BUTTERFLY Table, in the possession of the author. It has a drawer
with knob, and is all original. It lacks, however, the balls on the feet.
The tongued and grooved joint found on this table and on most pieces
before 1725, is counted desirable as a mark of date, yet some of the finest
tables in existence have the rule joint. The material of this piece is maple
throughout. The size is above the average.
Although Connecticut seems to be the home of the butterfly table, some
are found in Eastern Massachusetts and some in Southern New Hampshire
so that we must doubt the conclusion at which some persons have arrived
that the pieces were all from Connecticut. It is probable that the earlier
types had plain stretchers as here shown, whereas the turned stretcher came
slightly later, but even this is a point about which it is dangerous to be
dogmatic. The turned stretcher is counted more desirable, other things
being equal, but size and general style may over-match the lack of turning.
A feature of these tables is that the drawer is slanted inward at the top
to correspond with the frame, producing a quaint effect. The handles should
always be small wooden knobs. The drawer is usually sustained by a bottom
central runner and in a few instances there is a drawer in each end where
the table is large. Date: about 1700. [401 ]

A CURLY Maple Table with crane brackets belonging to the Estate of
Mrs. Reinholt Faelten. This table has all the characteristics of the butter
fly style, except for the bracket, which is framed together and is very light
and thin . Nevertheless, brackets of this type are stronger than the ordinary
brackets of a single board, which was very liable to split. The explanation
of the rarity of the crane bracket undoubtedly lies in the greater difficulty
of construction.
Curly maple came into use, in some instances, probably before the close
of the Seventeenth Century. It became very popular for a time and then
completely went out after about one generation. The principle of the
decoration is against the use of curly maple in a turning, as a turned piece
of wood is decorative in itself, and to use double decoration at the same
point is confusing to the eye. As a consequence the curly grain should ap
pear only in the plain parts of a piece as the top, the frame rails and the
stretchers. Size: Top, 26^ by 35 inches, an ellipse. Hight, 25^ inches.
Date: about 1700-20. [402 ]

A SMALL Turned-bracket Table owned by Mr. Harry Long, from the
author's former collection. It is in black paint crackled. The very simple
turnings and the odd device by which the bracket member is halved into the
frame, like a gate-leg table, are the special features. The device of the
bracket, however, allies the piece to the gate-leg table in another way also,
for the frame is made vertical, not with raked legs, as is necessary in the
"butterfly" pattern. The table is not as stable as the "butterfly" and hence
the leaves are made narrower. The top is a circle. Date: about 1700-20.

[403 1

A CRANE-BRACKET Table. This piece closely resembles that on the
preceding page in design. It, however, has great beauty in respect to its
turnings, since the crane-bracket is turned to correspond with the rest of the
piece, and there is a middle stretcher to stiffen the center, owing to the thrust
of the bracket at that point. As there are few other pieces to assist our
judgment on dates we must naturally allow a somewhat wide range, but we
shall not be far amiss in naming 1 690-1 710. The original was not available
for a photograph hence this sketch has been made in pen and ink. Of all
leaf tables it has appealed to the writer more than any other. It has the
general appearance of a gate-leg table in all respects except the bracket.
This table and the preceding are often classed as butterfly tables, but errone
ously so, as they have few features in common. The writer has ventured
to add to furniture terms the name "crane-bracket" to apply to these
pieces.

[404]

WE enter here upon a discussion of tavern, or tap-room tables. They
were so called because of the habit, in early times, of bringing a table to a
customer wherever he took his seat. They were therefore small and light,
so far as a table for one or two to dine at, could be. But in our day any
small table without leaves, and larger than a light stand, is called a tavern
table, unless it was clearly made for some other special use, as a dressing
table, for instance.
The table above is a fine example in maple of a medial stretcher. The
turnings are rarely good. The frame is 17^$ by 24^ inches; the top is
23^ by 37>£ inches, and 25 inches high.
Owner: the author. Date: 1700-10. The lateness of the date is marked
by the drawer, which is not flush, as it would probably be, if earlier; The
turnings also, one should note, resemble those on the desk, page 115, more
particularly the stretcher.

4°5 I

THE Ball-turned Table
I with high stretcher and
scrolled skirt, is of maple,
I with pine top. Owner:
the author. Date: about
1680-90. The top is 28^ by 37^
inches — a very wide top.
In a table of this shape
we presume the great
width, in proportion to
the length, was intended
to make a roomy table
for four persons.
One notes the absence of
any low medial stretcher.
Compare with table on page 418.
Below is a small tavern table in maple, with a small leaf, probably ori
ginal. Several such tables have been found. Owner: the author.
Such light turning make it certain frequent moving was intended. This
table has wide end cleats, a part of the top, as usual. In many cases the
cleat was very narrow as in the other table on this page.
The wide cleating was by mortise and tenon; the narrow was merely nailed
on. The drawer is flush, but the lightness of the frame suggest 1700-30
as the date.
In the old inventories tavern or tap-room tables are seldom, if ever,
mentioned. This arises
from the fact that the s
name has lately been
extended, as defined
above. Such tables in
private houses would be
called, if defined speci
fically in inventories,
merely small tables, or
perhaps joined tables.
That they were com
mon in private dwell
ings as well as inns has
been abundantly proved .

[406]

*>w 'im'if^tfmmr.mmmi.msmmrmmm

A TURNED Table with Brackets. Owner: Mrs. Insley Blair. Date
1670-80. A fine example with heavy turnings in the vase pattern. The
thickness of the top, which has lost its cleats, in more than would be found
on a light table. The bracket and the turned drops are marks of good
style, and rare. Compare with table on page 411, but more especially
with that on page 413, which is strikingly similar, except the top.
It is rightly questioned whether such a table was ever used in a tap room.
No doubt this and similar examples, were made for private houses. Indeed
their weight hardly classifies them as tavern tables, but they are placed
here for want of a better place. Almost all heavily turned tables, in this
style, or anywise resembling it, belong in the 17th Century, and not near
its end.

[407]

A SMALL heavy Oak Table above belongs to Mr. H. W. Erving. Its
turnings are the earliest. It resembles those of the chair, page 177. The
size of the frame at the top is 14^ by 8^ inches and it stands 21 inches
high with the feet missing. The date is 1640-60.
At the top of the next page is another very remarkable table. The owner
ship is private. The legs rake in both directions. It is all original and has
a long overhang. The sturdiness and style of the turnings lead us to think
it as early as 1660-70. No doubt tables with tops and this overhang were
designed for two, one sitting at either end.
At the bottom of the next page is a lighter tavern table with stretchers
on the outside. This piece while not important, has much that appeals in
a practical way, because it is so light. It is in violent contrast to the other
two tables which we thus purposely set off by a more usual example. Owner:
now unknown. The turnings are a good example of what may be done with
insufficient size of leg.

[408]

[409]

A HEAVY Oak Table, or Stand. There is here a suggestion in size
and sturdiness of the table on page 408. The top is from another old table
and is probably too short, it being now 25 by 18^4 inches. The hight is
22^ inches. The frame at the top is 13^6 by 8$4. It is of oak with pine
top. Owner: the author. Date: 1660-80. One would say this is rather
too small for a tavern table; and a stand is probably a better name.
The number of American oak tables has not been tallied but all known
perhaps do not exceed three or four score. By a rough approximation one
may presume that about a half of the furniture, left in America, dating before
1700, may have come to light. If we say a somewhat larger ratio of the
great pieces, like court cupboards, is known, and a much smaller ratio of
the smaller pieces, we shall be nearer a fair estimate.

[410]

A WALNUT Heavy Turned Table. Owner: William G. Erving, M.D.
The large cup turning, so striking, appears on one or two gate-leg tables
we have seen. This table is too heavy for a tavern table; it most probably
was used at the side of a dining room. Like most cabinet work of the
period it shows a "stone" molding on the upper members of the frame.
The legs are massive, and the drawer is on side runners. The top of the
table is 29 by 41^ inches. Its hight is 28 inches. The frame is 21 by
32 inches.
Date about 1680-1690. We think of the furniture of our fathers as
heavy. Their passion for permanence was greater than ours. But our
impressions of them are not accurate, judged by their remaining work,
for the heavy work mostly survived, the lighter being lost.

[411]

A HEAVY Oak Tavern Table. Date: 1670-90. Owner unknown.
The crude heavy brackets and the general character show the traditions
of the middle of the 17th Century. The feet are missing.
The tools of the 17th Century were, with the exception of saw mills,
hand tools. The abundant water power introduced the saw mill within a
very short time after the settlement. Hewn timber is not even a sugges
tion of antiquity. Many structures of this generation were hewn, and are
being hewn now. It was a question of nearness to a saw mill. The condi
tion of roads was such that transportation of logs by oxen was prohibitory,
beyond a mile or two. The turning lathe was the only machine except
the saw mill and the lathe was often driven by the foot.
It is necessary to dissect old furniture to understand its structure. Its
anatomy will be known and approved in this process. So many old pieces
are ruinous, requiring to be re-glued, that we are able to trace the motives of
contruction, always a fascinating study, to those who wish to be thorough.
Thus at a very early date turned furniture was popular because it was the
simplest good style combined with strength. The use of oak in the under
body followed the tradition of English strength. The early cabinet makers
had none of the fatuous confidence in glue which marks their successors.
They knew pinned joints would remain good. Thus they pinned and glued,
but if they omitted either precaution, it was the glue.

[412 ]

A HEAVY Bracket Table, with Drops. Date: 1670-90.
know about the top, whether it was originally in this form.
Owner: Mrs. G. C. Bryant, of Ansonia, Connecticut.

We do not

The tools used by the people of the Pilgrim Century were of wood so
far as they could be, as metal was relatively higher in cost then than now.
The most numerous tools were molding planes. A builder recently died
near his hundredth year, in Portsmouth, who had two chests full of mold
ing planes. A cabinet maker in these times has none, because his work is
mostly fitting and assembling. The bit is said not to have been in use.
Augers, chisels, saws, and the broad axe, formed the great part of the
other tools. Sand paper was not in use. The plane marks can be seen on
all early work. The finish was inferior; the substance was superior. The
best of the work was out of sight. Now the best shows.
Tables like the above are increasingly rare. Perhaps a score are known.
In the inventories such tables would be mentioned as framed, joined or
standing, without sufficient description to separate them from other styles.
The drops and brackets are never mentioned. But the love of style was
very manifest, because it was very rare to omit some effort, in turning, at
ornamentation.

[4i3l

TWO Tables of the
tavern size and style.
Their origin is Pennsyl
vania. They were in the
former collection of the
writer. They are of wal
nut. The scroll of the
frame on the upper table
is an interesting effort at
decoration. The feet of
this piece are partly
missing. The table below has
on the drawer a crude
scratch inlay, a scroll filled in with a white wood. Date: 1700-30.
The medial stretcher on these and other tables was an obvious device
to give room for the feet under the table. Incidentally the invention added
to the attractiveness of the table. The strength was hardly less, because
two mortises at the same hight on the legs, necessary in outside stretchers,
were avoided. The turnings of these tables, flattened on the bowl of the
vase, are characteristic of Pennsylvania.

The love of ornament is much more strongly marked on the continent
than in England. The Welsh seem to love ornament more than the English.
But the furniture ornament of America, when not English, was Dutch.
The evidences of Dutch feeling in New
York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey,
in the carving of kitchen utensils and
the decoration of cornices and table
frames is very marked.
One wonders at the failure of Italy
to impress America directly in the
17th Century in the matter of decora
tive art. What we had from Italy
was first modified by passing through
the Dutch and English developments.
This is the stranger since an Italian
discovered America.

[4H1

A MAPLE Medial Stretcher Tavern Table. The turnings are odd,
but not specially meritorious. Altogether, however, the table has a charm,
partly because it is all original, unfinished and complete, lacking only a
little of the feet. Date: 1690-1700. The drawer has a lip, hence the late
date. Origin: New England.
Vast numbers of tavern tables have been destroyed. When, about a
generation since, the Wayside Inn tables were sold at auction, they were
knocked off four for a dollar. One man had a stack of them like a winter
wood pile, behind his barn. The American bar was the cause of the loss
of these, among other things. Tavern tables, of a kind, which are more
often mere domestic occasional tables, are among the commonest antiques.
But fine patterns are now scarce. Good specimens are still coming from
their hiding places, and as no two are alike, they afford much interest in
the way of comparison.
The slant leg specimens are most valued. The scrolling of the skirt,
the sturdiness of the turnings, the hight of the stretchers, are points of
importance.

[415]

A VERY well turned large tavern table, in the author's possession.
It is maple with a pine top. The frame is 21 by 31 inches. The hight is
25^ inches. The top is 27^ by 40^. The brackets add to its impor

tance. 1700.

Date: 1680-1700. Below is another tavern table. Date: 1690-

I 416]

A TABLE in Birch, with High Stretchers. It is the property of Mr.
B. A. Behrend. The date is 1660-70. Only the feet are restored. It was
found in Milford, Massachusetts, in 1917. The top has a very long over
hang, eleven inches or more, greater at one end than the other, proving it
was attached without measuring. The balls have between them an incipient
ring, and are very sturdy.
The mystery of the high stretcher has never been solved. It was
much more in the way of a sitter than was a low stretcher. Yet we prize
this style most of all. This is the earliest piece in birch that has come to
the author's attention. Occasionally, on the hills, furniture birch was
found in Southern New England. Most of the birch in lower New England
grows in clusters like tufts of grass, of the gray variety, and is punky and
worthless as a furniture wood.
Birch at its best requires a very cold climate. The yellow and black
and "canoe" varieties supply a very fine hard wood, not a whit inferior to
maple, and better than soft maple. When large, the color is fine. The
birch used in the Pilgrim Century was not, for furniture at least, the great
trees with dark wood, but the smaller sort. The yellow variety was dark
enough without finish.

[417]

A HIGH Stretcher, Scrolled Frame Table. It was formerly in the
Prouty collection, and is now owned by the author. It has been previously
illustrated. We feel the public will not object to seeing a dozen old sub
jects among so very many newly shown. The scroll of this frame is
markedly worthy. The drawer has grooved side runs. The turning is a
refinement of the plain ball. Paired plain vases are inserted in the center
of the long turnings. The molding carried around the frame is another
refinement. The frame is 20^ by 23^4 inches. The top is 22 by 30^
inches; the hight 25^ inches. Painted black over red, the wood is birch,
or maple. The brackets on this table are constructed according to the
usual plan. Their ends on the leg are tenoned into a mortise on the legs,
but their other ends are merely nailed down to the frame rail.

[418

A BALL Turned Table, with Open Brackets. This table which is
owned by Mr. Clauncey C. Nash, is simpler than the preceding. It has
the same general features. As an amusing instance of the rapid manner in
which a discovery of such a table arouses interest, this table as soon as
found changed hands five times in five days, the owners being in three
states. It has since been sold twice, and is now apparently where it will
remain for long. Date: 1670-90.
In this connection we have the answer to the question: What is the
source of so many antiques? In the first instance some seeker finds an
antique piece, and sells it to a dealer. Frequently that dealer passes it
on to another dealer, who specializes in that particular subject. It then
reaches a collector. Collectors are mostly elderly gentlemen. If their
fortunes change they may part with their treasures. Their estates, at any
rate, are very frequently dispersed and the process begins again. Thus
one of the best articles known has been owned by nine different persons in
four years. There are not many remarkably good pieces, but they get
into the market many times in a changing world.
[419]

A HANDSOME Walnut High-Stretcher Table, belonging to Mr.
B. A. Behrend. The top is also walnut. The table is one of the most
attractive anywhere to be seen. It is small, as appears from its hight
in proportion to its other dimensions. We place it very high in order of
merit among tables of this kind. Date: 1680-90. Every line is good.
The explanation of the frequent absence of an owner's name lies in
the fact that the author has for years, when he has seen a good example of
very early furniture, procured a photograph of it. Since then many such
examples have passed into various hands which we have not always been
able to trace. We are more interested in the style and the period than in
the personal equation.
It is unfortunately necessary in this work to crowd rare pieces into
small space, and at times to give more than really necessary space. The
advantage however of a description immediately adjoining the illustration
is too important to abandon.

[420]

A HEAVY Turned Bracket Table. Owner: The Metropolitan Mu
seum. A superb example, which should be compared with similar and
possibly somewhat inferior previous tables. The frame is 23^ by 183^
inches. The top is 36-^5 by 36^, intended of course to be square. The
leg is 2>£ inches square. The hight is 26^ inches. There is a four inch
drawer. It is i2>£ inches to the top of the high stretcher, and 4^ inches
to the top of the medial stretcher.
A table so large is an obviously small dining table, or what in modern
times we should call a "center" table — a bad name! Date: 1650-70.
Another fine example of a somewhat lighter larger square table, ap
peared in New York a little time since and was eagerly carried away by a
fortunate collector. Perhaps no table is more desirable. It vies with the
trestle table, the largest gate-legs, and the most important refectory tables.
It lacks no feature counted strong and important.

421 ]

AN Oak Tavern Table. Date: 1670-90. An oak frame is quite rare
and very early. Size of frame, 20^ by 30^2 inches. Top, 26 by 40X
inches. Hight, 263^ inches. The top is pine. The table is wholly original.
It was not built with a drawer. Taste in the matter of tables like these
has advanced very much in a brief period. Many good judges are much
taken with pieces of entire simplicity, if they are in oak and all original,
because they convey a strong feeling of unity with the typical life of the
17th Century. Owner: the author.
With this review, we turn our attention to occasional tables. They are
always fascinating, because so individual. They assume a wide variety of
forms. Before entering on those that could be used for any purpose we
show a few dressing tables. These are among the difficult pieces to find.

I 422]

A CHERRY Six-legged Lowboy, owned by Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
It was originally owned by Anna Rush, whose monument, erected by the
women of Streatham, is in the cemetery.
This important little piece was found in Streatham, New Hampshire,
where it had always been in the same family. It is all original, neither
needing nor having had repairs. Dimensions: top, 34^ by 20 ^ inches.
Hight, 30^ inches. Frame, 29^ by 17^ inches.
The author does not remember to have seen another low-boy with six
legs. Many high-boy bases are masquerading under the name of low-boys,
but their larger size and obviously new tops show what they are. Date:
1700-20. [423 1

A CROSS-STRETCHER Dressing Table. This example has extra
members in the turning of the legs — a pleasing variation. The small drops
are missing. The wood as usual is walnut. The balls of the feet on this
and most lowboys look very large. That was the style. There is a single
arch molding about the drawers. Owner: Mr. Hollis French. Date:
i 690- 1 700.

The derivations of styles of turning, are, like the sources of all things,
obscure. The earliest turnings known on English furniture, on great
tables, beds, court cupboards, and such pieces were crude, and not classi
cal. The Gothic tradition was reponsible for some forms. Later, the vase
shapes are more definitely established and modified to suit the rather
attenuated forms of table legs. Italy and the classic ideals were the sources.
The ball and ring is also a modification of the classical. So long as turners
felt their real purpose of imitation all was well. A turning that cannot
be explained is comparatively uninteresting. [424 1

A TRUMPET-TURNED Lowboy. Owner: Mr. G. Winthrop Brown.
The name of trumpet given to the legs of this piece describes them with ac
curacy, especially as they are at the tops, without the cup, or inverted bowl
turnings of the two lowboys that follow. The double arch mold dates this
specimen a little later, about 1700-20. The X scroll stretcher is very simple.
The feet here are smaller than any others we have seen. Like other exam
ples, it has the thumb-nail molding. Like all, except the first shown, on
page 423, it has the walnut veneer.
The legs of these pieces in walnut, are very often of other woods. Bass
is a common wood, and very unsuitable, as it is weak, and this six-leg style
is always weak in the legs. In fact, in the corresponding highboys, it is
seldom that one or two legs are not broken. On the other hand the scrolled
stretcher on a walnut piece, is generally walnut.

[425 1

A WALNUT Cross-Stretcher Lowboy. With the single arch mold, the
date would be 1690-1710. It lacks, as is often the case, the drops on the
frame rail. A very large finial at the intersection of the stretchers does its
best to make up the loss. Owner: the author.
The trumpet-leg is here capped with a cup, or bell. One notes the bail
handles. Such were used, somewhat, at a period as early as this. The
lowboy was bought not far from Boston. Eastern New England was very
rich in such pieces, mostly lost.
One should measure lowboys and highboys carefully a few times, and
thereafter will never be deceived. On reference to pages 72-86 it will be
noted the highboys are, on the frame, higher, wider, and deeper from front
to back. The lowboy here is 29H inches high; the frame is i8}4 by 31^
inches; and the top is 21^ by 33^ inches. The cross stretchers where used,
are clearly to afford the user greater convenience for the feet.

[426]

A WALNUT Cross-Stretcher Lowboy. Owner: Mr. W. of Boston.
Date: 1690-1700. The huge middle drop is a striking feature. It is perhaps
not necessary to point out that these drops represent the place where legs
would otherwise have been, and show the process of development. In this
case the early type would have had five, not six, legs. The stretchers here
are more boldly and fully shaped than others we have seen. They are very
handsome. One may see that the drops, and the finial on the cross-stretchers are
really only sections of legs tapered off.
There is usually present the thin bent lining under the edge of the frame
rail, and forming by its slight projection, a bead. This piece also has only
one drawer. For what it may have been designed one hardly knows, as
the center drop prevents sitting at it as a dressing table.

[427]

A WALNUT Lowboy, with Outside Stretchers. This odd specimen re
sembles that on page 423 in the style of its stretchers, but unlike that, it
has only four legs. The date, with single arch mold, is 1690-1710. The
author owns it. The drops are not original, and not correct. They should
be larger and bear more resemblance to a section of a leg. This lowboy
catches the light in a way to exaggerate, but by that very means to exhibit
clearly the condition of the veneer on most lowboys. It is hungry for oil
and shows some tendency to chip off.
Though we lament the passing out of most forms of 17th Century fur
niture we do not feel the same way regarding the flat top highboy. In this
we may not speak for any considerable body of collectors. But the impres
sion of fragility which these pieces convey, and their veneer rather than the
solid wood, that preceded them, are not as satisfying. Their greater ele
gance and finer finish probably appeal to a great number of persons.

[428]

A WALNUT Table, belonging to Mr. W. of Boston. This rare article
shows ball turnings with variations of elongated balls and a ring at the
center of the stretchers. The frame also is scrolled, in a half-way con
tour between ogee moldings and a serrated edge. The top is 13^ by 23^4
inches, and the hight 25 inches. The molding on the frame rail adds to its
importance. Though the feet are missing the bottom stretchers are well
up above the floor. Photographed at very close quarters it looks large and
high, as compared with the fact. Date: 1680-1700.

[429]

A BEAUTIFUL and dainty table owned by Mr. Geo. F. Ives. The turn
ings are very delicate. Enough of the balls of the feet remain to show
their beauty. We have seldom seen so much legitimate wear on stretchers —
a thing of much charm. The simple ogee scrolling of the frame, especially
on the end, is very attractive. The turning is perfect of its kind. The date
is 1690-1710. The frame is 19 by 26 inches; and the top is 25 by 39 inches. The hight
is now 26^2 inches, which originally must have been about 27 inches.
It is articles like these that make collecting a joy.
As to the use of such tables, they were admirable for writing or reading,
if one placed feet on the rung, and one did! Possibly also such a table might
have answered in a tavern, for my lady to sip her — sweet cider, in the
parlor.

[43o]

A MAPLE Table, with a false drawer. The property of Mr. W. of Boston.
The hight is 24^ inches; the top is 16 by 25 inches. The knob is original,
but the table never had a drawer. With its scrolled frame and plain stretch
ers the little table boasts no one remarkable feature, but as a whole it is very
attractive indeed, being quite perfect, and in the wood we best love. Date:
1 690- 1 720.
An occasional table like this adds much in the way of charm. It seems
easy to say that. But — find another! When we think of the multitude
that have gone the way of the wood pile, and think of the glory that has
departed, we wonder why we degenerated.

l43i]

AN Oval Maple Table, owned by Mr. W. of Boston, measures 20^4 inches
high, to which to get the original hight we must add a good bit.
The oval is 18^ by 27%! inches. Small tables are more often in this form
than the tavern table. The table on the next page varies slightly from this —
a good test of a quick eye for shape.
One may see on this table the usual cleat running across the frame to
prevent the breaking off of the overhang. These cleats are let, full size,
into the frame. They are very necessary as the tops are thin, generally
of pine, and easily split off.
The heavy plain stretchers are early. Date: 1680-1710. It is very light
and a joy for convenience.

I 432]

If'1

\

^K A\-

ii ii

l

\\tm/

>JaJ

AN Oval Maple Table belonging to Mr. W. of Boston, similar to but a
little larger than that on the previous page, the scale being smaller. The
hight, minus the feet, as it stands, is 21^ inches. The top is 20 by 31
inches. Date: 1690-1720.
On the right is a little table which one might say was a joint stool, so far
as size is concerned, but the rather slight turnings incline us to count it a
table. It has slant legs, one way, like joint stools — and tables! It is 19
inches high; the rectangular top is 12 by 18 inches, just right for a joint
stool. A pleasing doubt arises. Let us call it both, and we have, as the
original owners had, two articles in one. The hight is not objectionable for
a stool, as at one period chairs ruled higher than this. Of course one must
add balls to the feet to get the first hight, and then we have a table! Date:
1 690-1 720.
We have in the three pieces shown on the two pages open before us a re
markable series, for their harmony, and the strong presumption is that they
were made to go together, as now.

[433

A LITTLE Square Stand
of oak, with chamfered legs
and square stretchers. It
came from the Churchill
family, Newington, Con
necticut. The top and
drawer are of pine, and the
top has notched carving at
the ends like that seen on
many chests, bible-boxes
and stand-feet. It is in
the Wadsworth Atheneum,
Hartford, and is owned by
Mr. George Dudley Sey
mour. Date: 1670-1700.
We usually infer in the
case of a table with cham
fered rather than turned
legs, that no lathe was
available for the workman.
The method of chamfering therefore was used, as on great beams in house
construction. It is an attractive style, but required more labor than turn
ing. Pieces to be turned were never sawed first, always they were split.
At the bottom of the page is a rare table, present ownership unknown,
with the legs slanting in
both directions, and a very
well scrolled frame. The
feet are well preserved. The
few tables of this sort have
for the most part plain
stretchers and rectangular
tops. The date is 1700-
1730. The noggin on the
left and the other articles
were in general use at the
date named.
These tables are marked
by a wide overhang of the top .
Lacking that, one suspects
that something is wrong.
Table tops are the continual
bother of a collector. I 434 1

A SMALL Octagon Table, in the author's collection. This piece was
found in Plymouth. The piece is very perfect and has never been tam
pered jwith, or restored, nor does it require it. The top is pine. The paint
is all original. The points of merit are the boldly scrolled skirt and the fine
condition of the feet and the unusual shape of the top. There is much satis
faction in a piece of furniture which may be left wholly as found.

Size: Top, 27
Date: 1680-1700.

inches; hight, 26^4 inches; frame, 2\yA inches square.

[435]

problematical, but in the 18th Cen
tury the shoe base of tables seems
to have been abandoned almost
wholly, even at the beginning.

Pine when knotty as we now find
most of it, is difficult to work. But
the clear pine available in the 17th
Century was a delight. Furthermore
where not subject to wear, it is far
more durable than oak. Old side
wall shingles of shaved pine never
decay. In table tops however it lit
erally wore out. In process of time
our fathers learned how to use best
the woods in their new country. For
many purposes pine is the best wood
in the world; far better than was
available in England.

A SKETCH, since a photograph
was not available, of a very small
table, with hinged top and a hutch
under it. The rudimentary vase
shape, the simple shoe, the touch
of a scroll on the cleats, all sug
gest, with the heavy fine construc
tion, an early country-made piece
of no little charm. It is about
two feet high. Date: 1670-90.
Below is what we will name an
instep table from the odd shape
of the arched shoe. The sides are
apparently identical, top and bot
tom. It is a light, quaint little
affair in pine. Owner: Mr. Chaun
cey C. Nash. Date: 1680-1700.
In the construction of both
these little trestles the uprights
are mortised into the shoes. The
dating of such pieces is frankly

[436]

THE Porch of the Iron Works House, at Saugus. This room is formed by
a square projection in the center of the side of the house, about nine feet
wide, and the result is much to be commended in its effect. There is a
probability, however, that it was shut off from the stair and the doors,
which open on either hand, by a partition, on the house line, under the
main girt. There was no need of that partition, as neither the porch nor
the stair was heated. This house, no longer owned by the author, ought to
be, and may be, sometime redeemed as one of the finest examples of its
kind. The porch is a restoration, but the mortise holes in sill and on girt
were found, also the slant showing how the covering gable had been cut on
the roof boards.
Incidentally the porch exhibits a perfect setting for 17th Century furni
ture, and already some drawings have been made of the house, with the
purpose of copying it. We cannot too greatly regret that no early collec
tion is yet housed in a sympathetic setting.

[437]

A SPLAY-LEGGED Drop-leaf Table, in the former Nutting Collection.
This piece, although it has lost somewhat from the feet, is a stocky, quaint,
very early specimen. It differs from the usual splay-leg table in this, that
the legs spread both laterally and longitudinally. The scrolling of the
wide skirt is another interesting feature. It extends around the ends as
well as at the sides. The top is altogether original and the leaves are at
tached by hinges riveted through, an early and a very substantial method.
The maple top has acquired the beautiful bleached effect so much sought for
in the quaintest and earliest tables. While smaller tables are often made
in this style they are extremely rare with leaves. It will be noted that the
leaves are narrow so that, contrary to the rule, the top is longer following
the grain than across it.
The overhang is very marked and it is possible to sit up to the table with
out any interference of the legs.
Tables having stocky legs are considered more desirable, in the Seven
teenth Century styles, as a sturdy character is consonant with the period.
The table was made without a drawer.
Size: 44 by 52 inches, the long dimension being with the grain. Date:
1 670- 1 690

[438]

A THREE-LEGGED Table, with a one piece top, in the author's former
collection. These tables are sometimes made with three drop leaves, and
sometimes with solid one piece tops. This piece is all original. In most
cases the feet have to be restored. The advantage of raking the leg was
found in increased stability. Three-cornered tables are rare, especially in
the Pilgrim century. All that the author has seen have plain stretchers.
The tables vary from medium to small sizes, this piece being two and a half
feet across, a very large size for the type.
Date: 1690-1710.

[439]

AN Oak Triangular
Table owned by Mr.
Chauncey C. Nash. It
is 25 inches high and
28^ inches across its
round top. Date: 1690-
1710. Below is a triangular
table, in the Metropoli
tan Museum, already
published, which has
three drop leaves oper
ated by swinging the top
on a swivel of wood,
when all three leaves
drop. Date: 1690-1710.
A drop leaf triangular
table has been seen, the
top of which did not turn.
The leaves were held up

by slides, pulled out from the
frame, just under the top.
Other things being equal, the
slant leg three-cornered table is
regarded better than the vertical
leg. The three-cornered table was
so made for decorative reasons
only, as the cabinet work was
more difficult than in the usual
form. Such tables have no
drawers. The lower table here
is very rare in having two ball
turnings below the bottom rails,
rather than the usual pear
turning, corresponding with
vase above.

[440I

A BEAUTIFUL and rare table belonging to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. Except
for the loss of its feet it is in fine condition, and one of the most interesting
pieces so far found, of the sort. The turnings are bold, with outside stretch
ers. The scrolls on the frame are different on the sides and the ends, but
in both cases very good. Not once in a blue moon is such an article found.
With so narrow a frame so deeply scrolled there could not be a drawer.
Such pieces were of course made for the "best rooms" and we suspect
not a few, with drawers, were dressing tables. Sometimes they were con
venient as sewing tables. And when a table goes by no other name "occa
sional" table will do. For use out of doors they were very convenient, for
our fathers lived out of doors more than we do.
The date is around 1700. This turning was used for some little time
before and for many years after that date.

l44i 1

439 it is much smaller and lighter.
candle stick, to hang or carry, and a
sand glass rest on it.
A feature of maple, of value to the
turner, was its susceptibility to a
smooth finish. As it comes from the
tool, without polishing, it has a de
lightful smoothness as if rubbed. Oak
on the other hand is rough. Birch and
beech also turn smoothly, the latter
being remarkable in that respect. Pine
turnings were little used, as being
weak. Hickory was smooth, but ash
became rough. Yet ash was popular
because it split in a smooth, straight
line, and was thus quickly and with
little effort prepared for the turner.
As soon as saw-mills become numerous,
we note the disappearance of ash from
turnings, as maple was better.

A

A SMALL Stand, beauti
fully turned. The present
owner is unknown. The top
is not original, and may be
three inches too small. There
is a resemblance in the turn
ing between this and that
on the previous page, with
the preference perhaps in
favor of that table. A good
feature of this table is the
bracket effect on the frame
secured by merely cutting
away. This stand is exactly
square, and the top is a cir
cle. Date: 1690-1710.
Below is a triangular stand
of small diameter, owned by
Mr. B. A. Behrend. Com
paring it with that on page
good Betty lamp, a very odd

[442 ]

TWO small stands owned by
Mr. W. of Boston. The upper
one of maple, is 23^ inches high,
and has an oval top 17 by 23^
inches in diameter. It is dainty
in its turnings, in beautiful con
dition and has plain stretchers.
Date: about 1700. The stand
below is only 21 inches high, and
the top is 14^ by 15 inches. It
has a drawer. The all turned
frame is very attractive. We are
surprised at the smallness of the
top, and at its being square. This
is the smallest well-turned stand
the author has seen, containing a
drawer. Date: 1690-1710. These
tables, with those on page 432
and 433 are a rare conjunction
under one roof.

One readily infers that the scarcity
of little stands like these arises from
the fact that a simpler construction,
with a single center shaft was usually
adopted. In that style two pieces
or at most three, took the place of
the eight turned members appearing
here. Stability and beauty are found
in greater degree in the articles here.
The use of the lower piece was per
haps as a work stand, with a candle. I
Candles were placed on lower levels
than our lamps, in order to be very
near one's work. Such pieces were
also convenient at the bedside, or
for temporary out-of-door use. Thus
the "cobbler's" light was devised
to bring it almost in contact with
his work. To the introduction of
better lights inthe "kerosene period" j
we owe the destruction of stands. [443 1

AN Oval Stand, with legs slanting in all directions. It is of maple, and
belongs to Mr. W. of Boston. The hight is 2i-H$ inches; and the diameter of
the top is i8?4 by 25^ inches. Date: 1700 or thereabouts.
The all-slant leg stands have been called common. It is very seldom one
is seen. We know of a dozen or so in different sizes. Of what size a piece
must be to be counted a stand rather than a table is largely as one pleases,
on the dividing line between 16 by 21 and 20 by 26 or something of that area.
Below the smaller size one should not doubt that the piece was a stand, that
is, made to sustain a candle or other small object rather than for general use.

The preference of the early cabinet-makers was for square rather than
turned stretchers, because they secured greater solidity with the square
stretcher. The turning of the stretcher was purely for ornamental reasons.
One should not therefore look for something better than a square stret
cher. It is found on the earliest and best furniture.
[444]

ON the right a stand,
with a frame 12^ by
i$}4 inches; a top 2i}4
by 24 inches; and a hight
of 23^ inches. Period of j
1680-1700. The top is
oval. It is all original.
Owner: the author.
At the bottom is a
small table with a band
box of wood. The name
was acquired through the
use of such boxes for
starched bands before
their use for bonnets and
hats came in. The cover
snaps on with a wooden
spring. The table is pret
tily turned, and is all
original. It is the prop
erty of the author. The frame

is

14K by 2oyi inches. The top is
18 by 27 inches; and the hight,
24 inches. Date: about 1700.
The literature of band boxes
comes under a later period, but it
may answer some question to say
that the quaint paper on band
boxes was put on them to match
the rooms in which they were kept
for guests. Thus, whenever the
room was repapered the band-box
had another layer added, and was
thus kept fresh. A box like that
here shown was for transportation
with its handle, and so made of
wood. The leather hat box was
not so early.
The name trunk early appears in
inventories. It is therefore not
an Americanism, but an English
survival.

[445 1

A SCALLOPED Frame
Table belonging to Mr.
Geo. F- Ives. The top
is 24 by 31 inches. It
is 27 inches high. The
idea of the wide frame
rail, against the legs, is
to secure great rigidity.
The effect is good. The
turnings are odd. Com
pare this table with that
on page 444. The date
is about 1690-1700.
The distinctiveness of
local types of furniture
arises from the difficulties
attending transportation
in the early days. There was much moving, owing to the unrest felt in
a new country, and the desire to take up land in quarters beyond. But
in such cases auctions were frequent. So that which was made in one
district remained there unless it could go by stream.
Below is a stand with a large
pewter pitcher. They are the prop
erty of Mr. B. A. Behrend. It is
small in the frame, but like most
small tables of the period has a long
overhang. Date: About 1700.
Curiously the name stand does not
appear in the early inventories.
Table was made to do service for
stand . We find standard very rarely,
but its meaning is somewhat doubt
ful. We fail in the published
inventories of this time to find even
a wash-stand. And it is always a
candlestick, never a candle stand.
A discussion as to what was used
for a wash-stand cannot be dismissed
by the flippancy, "they did not
wash." Small tables were used.

[446]

A SMALL Stand which passed through the hands of Mr. Henry V.
Weil of New York City. The feature of special attraction, of course, is
the turned cross stretchers, combined with the raked leg. We ask our
selves in wonder why pieces of this sort which are so captivating were not
oftener constructed. We must, with humility, conclude that our race is
not marked by prevailing good taste. Let us at least seek in furniture for
that which possesses some charm aside from the purely utilitarian aspect.
It was very convenient to draw between the knees.

[447

A SMALL High-stretcher Trestle Table, the property of the author.
The top is pine and the rest maple. The features of special attraction are
first the trestle form and second the high turned stretcher. This piece is
altogether original and unrestored. It was found in Connecticut. The
chamfered shoe appears as in the rare great trestle tables. The convenience
of such tables is apparent, as they can be drawn very close to the sitter, and
were available as tap room tables, light stands, or for any purpose where a
light removable piece was desired. The use of a foot or shoe of this char
acter seems to have gone out completely about 1700. A curious feature of
construction is that the cleat is almost precisely of the same contour and
size as that of the shoe so that we really have a double T, braced together
and surmounted by a board.
Size: Top, one piece, 30 by 18^ inches. The shoes are 153^ inches long.
The hight is 2$% inches. Date: 1650-1680.

[448]

A SMALL Trestle Table owned by Mrs. Anna H. Howard of Whitman,
Massachusetts. Comparing it with that on the previous page we see this
has two turned trusses, while that has one, but that has a high truss. This
has an oval top, that a rectangular top. They are great rarities. Date:
1660-1680. A peculiarity here is that the shoes are wider than the posts. These
tables belong with the trestles and boards, but date a little later.

[449]

THE Parlor in the John Alden house, Duxbury. The picture was
made in 1921. It is understood that wherever paneling appears in a 17th
Century house it represents an addition to the original finish. The paneling
here may have been added around 1720-30. It is quite unusual for an
arch to show on a colonial fireplace. This instance therefore is full of
interest. The author remembers generalizing on one occasion, with the
statement that the fireplaces of the early American house had a flat top.
Here is the low arch! The spinning jenny at which Priscilla is always
drawn by artists is shown here awaiting her. Also the candle stand, on
the floor. It is of tin, at the base, a simple and good sort which is else
where shown in other shapes in this book.
The effect here of the five small panels above the large fireplace panel
is very good. The corner cupboard was originally, of course, without a
door above, and was oval at the top.
This house is owned by an association of the Alden family, and is thus,
if it escapes fire, destined to become a shrine of the highest interest to
Americans. In process of time, we may look for restorations to be made
in the house, at least in the kitchen, though the paneling in some of the
other rooms might well remain. No other spot except Plymouth Rock
has so many fine associations connected with it.

[45o]

THE subject of little stands, and candle stands proper, has never
received much treatment, and we therefore have laid special stress on
placing them before the reader in some profusion.
On the left is a little trestle stand belonging to Mr. Chauncey C. Nash.
It much resembles the larger stands on pages 448 and 449. It will be
noted that in the true trestle styles the shoe and the cleat above, whether
or not attached to the table, are similar, so that the effect is that of a capital
I with the horizontals much extended and chamfered nearly to a point.
Date: 1660 or thereabout.
The other stand has a movable rod in a socket, with a wooden thumb
nut to secure it. The minute feet, mere pins, are droll. Little adjustable
stands are often called shoemaker's. It is quite impossible to date this
piece accurately. We may say 1700-30. It passed through the hands of
Mr. Henry V. Weil who furnished the photograph. In its turnings and
general contour its like is hardly known.

[451]

TWO Candle Stands of which the left hand one is maple. Its heavy
construction and general lines make it desirable. The cross-base is very
good. It is maple. The hight is 26^ inches. The diameter of the top
is 12 inches. Date: 1670-1700.
The right hand stand is of walnut. The hight is 25^2 inches, and the
round top is 12 inches. The foot is neatly molded. The post is set on the
base quartering, and is fluted part way up, showing the influence of the
architecture of 1720-60. The date may be 1710-30.
The feet of this piece have worn down somewhat, so that it may be said
to be suffering from fallen arches; but the other pieces were created flat
footed. They are both the property of the author.
The need of candle stands in the old days was imperative, as one
reading required the feeble light directly beside his text. We remember
seeing old people read, holding candles in their hands.

[452]

[453]

A PAINTED wall and stair in the hall of the Warner Mansion at Ports
mouth. This picture is inserted here to suggest the relation between decora
tive furniture and painted walls. The construction began on the Warner
House about 171 2, it being perhaps the earliest example of a gambrel-roof
in this country. The wall decoration is fairly well drawn, but without the
slightest reference to perspective. It is carried from the base of the stair
to the second story, spreading out in the well room above the landing to a
wide extent. What we see here is a dog protecting a child from the attack
of an eagle or vulture; behind is seen the mother of the child at a spinning
jenny. The photograph appears indistinct, but the fact is that the painting
itself is so injured by time that a better effect is perhaps not possible.
Various figures of persons and animals appear on the landing.
The furniture of this house is to a considerable extent of the period of its
erection, or only a little later.
The painted wall came in as a substitute for panel work, just as a little
later wall paper served the same purpose. The panel was retained in the
form of a dado only to a hight necessary to protect the plaster
[454]

THE Latch-string is out. We are "at home."
When we wish to be private we pull it in. The
courteous understand.
The latch is all of wood, and will outlast an iron
one. Let us go in and see some of the details of 17th
Century work. The edge of the drawer shows the
construction of the period 1640, with the great nails
and the beginning of the groove on which the drawer
runs. The other drawer edge shows the early style of dove
tail. The other end of the drawer was sometimes
dovetailed and sometimes nailed. The bottom of the
drawer was set in as a panel at a later period. Before
1700 it was usually entered in a groove of the drawer,
front, but on all other sides was nailed. In the vast
majority of instances these interior construction
pieces were of pine. Sometimes, very early, the sides
of the drawer were oak.
The right hand example has an oak side and a pine bottom. It is
from a court cupboard of 1650. The other example is from a chest of
drawers of 1700.

[455 1

A CHAMBER in the Nathan Hale birthplace at Coventry, Connec
ticut. Mr. George Dudley Seymour has at much pains restored this fine
old house. But the time he has expended on it is still more valuable.
The picture shows an oak bed. The correctness of the restored feet, the
owner states, may be debated. The date may be late 17th or early 18th
Century. There are in this picture three excellent candle stands, each a type
of a class. That with a circular base has three ball feet. Hight 28 inches;
diameter of top 16^ inches. Date: about 1720-50.
The remote stand has a spider base, with arched oak cross members,
supporting a maple shaft, mortised to receive a profiled cleat sustaining
the round pine top. Hight, 27 inches; diameter, 16 inches. Date: 18th
Century. On the right is a T-base stand, so made that the part supporting
the shaft is between the feet of the sitter, who placed his feet on the other
cross member. The post is maple. Hight, 25 inches; diameter of top,
17X inches. Several such stands are known; another is shown in this work.

[456]

OF all Candle Stands this
one, which has only one or
two known counter-parts, is
thought most desirable. Its
merit consists in the complete
carrying out of the idea of a
screw post, which is adapted
also to the small wood hand
screws under the candles, in
order to lift them as they
burn down. The writer who
found the stand in old Con
cord, does not know the pres
ent owner. The round table
screws up and down on the
post, as well as the candle
bar. The parts are all maple;
the diameter of the little table
being about 14 inches. The
stand has never been painted,
but is in the natural maple.
The date is impossible to fix
but is thought to reach back
to the 17th Century. The
table has a slight lip; the ends
of the bar have small turned
knobs. The metal sockets on such
early stands are usually of
tin. The use of heavy brass
is always suspicious, showing
probable restorations from
Russian candles. It is im
possible to know whether tin
candlesticks are early. While
these adjustable stands were
of course used by cobblers
it is a mistake to restrict them to that origin. They are too good for that
use, many being quite ornamental. They were reading or sewing lights.
The best homes required something of the sort.

[457]

ON the left is a poor relation, owned by the author, of the stand de
scribed on the previous page. A considerable number have been found,
and they are prized, having both bar and table. The right hand piece is a
ratchet candle-stand, having a device to take the place of the screw in
raising and lowering. It is owned by Mr. Geo. F- Ives. These pieces,
and similar stands, were made all through the 18th Century. Some of
them may go back farther than that. The crudeness of some of them
indicates that they were mere work stands, for cobbling, or any close work
requiring good light. A toggle arm bracket of wood attached to the wall
was also used. It was made like the modern five-foot sectional rules.

I 458 I

^JtTl

ON the left is Mr. B. A. Behrend's stand surmounted by a Knicker
bocker or Pennsylvania carved spoon rack — a good decorative piece, with
all the flavor of Dutch love for decorating simple things.
The stand on the right, Mr. G. Winthrop Brown's, is very fine in its
style. The heavy shaft with its huge ball at the base and the well-turned
legs are notably good. A well-decorated pipe box and a Betty lamp, on a
standard, are on the top. This is a rare form of the lamp.

I 459 1

A QUAINT Stand has its cross-bar
raised and lowered by inserting a peg in
holes at intervals on the pole. The third
light, on the top of the pole, was the one,
probably, left burning when a member of
the family was out late! The other two
stands are very simple. On the left hand
stand we see a wedge inserted in a hole of
the bar beside the post, to keep the bar
in place. Others similar are known. The
other stand which has a square, rather
than a turned, shaft, on good feet, holds
up candles caught on its bar by the
handles of the candle sticks themselves.
Originally a better balance must have been
devised, as the candles tip too much.
There are other endless varieties of
little stands. It was necessary, on oc
casions of importance, to supply something
like a hundred candles in a sizable house.
One may imagine a corresponding variety
of stands. One servant was deputed to go about snuffing the candles.
In summer without screens the insects must have been almost intoler
able. But nothing is said of what everybody bore as a necessary evil.
Since the author began to write this work the interest in
candle stands has led to some remarkable achievements on
the part of the unscruplulous. Some stands, on examination,
prove to be made by inserting spinning wheel legs in an
adapted bed post ! The mortise holes should be looked for
as they can be seen easily, though carefully filled. Again,
stands are sometimes "improved" by new tops, new legs
and new candle sticks until their original makers would
remark, as a widow did of a portrait of her husband, painted
from memory: "That's he; but how the old man has
changed !"
Of course the question often arises what is allowable in
restoration. But the question ought to be speedily settled
in the case of unimportant pieces that are half gone. The
author recently saw in a single shop, a half dozen all-new
candle stands, all masquerading as old.

[460]

MR. HENRY V. WEIL furnishes the picture of the left hand stand, an
amusing instance of solidity. The maker, like the maker of the one-hoss
shay, determined to build one that couldn't be knocked over. It has an
octagon top. The ends of the feet are notch carved on three sides. Date:
i 680- 1 700.
The other stand, belonging to Mr. B. A. Behrend, is a notably sturdy
specimen, with notch carved toes, chamfered square post, and large round
top. There is sufficient weight to permit a top larger than usual. We
incline to date this stand inside the 17th Century.
In the construction of these stands the tapered cleat at the top, on the
better specimens, is connected with the post by mortise and tenon. The
cross base is halved together. The top is nailed from below through the
cleat. We have reason to believe that the stands of wood were much more
numerous than the iron stands. The convenience of changing a candle
stick from a stand to a table was no small item.

[461]

THE Parlor at the Nathan Hale Birthplace, owned by Mr. George
Dudley Seymour. In the foreground on the left is an original rocker. The
rockers are of oak. The posts are shown turned with a taper proving they
were designed to dowel into rockers. The profile of the fine arms does not
show. The hight is 45 inches. The origin was Willimantic. Date: about
1700-20. The pair of spindle-backed mushroom foot side chairs are maple with
hickory spindles. The turnings are unusual and fine. From the Capt.
Charles Churchill House, Newington. The chairs may be called transitional.
Date: 1700-30.
The table in the center is an excellent example of a small 17th Century
turned table with square stretchers.
This room has a narrow door in the paneling at the left of the fireplace,
opening through a closet and a kind of secret passage to the so-called "Judge
ment Hall" or room at the rear. The passage is called the fat man's
misery, but a recent very large President of the United States got through,
though minus certain garments.
The table on the remote left, with scrolled edges, is a little late for this
work, but was a worthy specimen of its time.

[462]

ON the left is a ratchet candle stand, date around 1700, and a Betty lamp,
on a piece of Virginia pottery. They are owned by Mr. H. W. Erving.
The feature noticeable about many candle stands, as here, is their huge
bases, to avoid the danger of oversetting them. The Betty lamp shows
plainly the spike and hook. The Betty lamp standard is of red clay with a
coarse black glaze, and is from the old pottery formerly at Morgantown,
W. Va. It is similar in texture to the folk pottery of New England and
Pennsylvania and is of early 19th Century date.
The candle stand on the right belonged to Mr. Henry V. Weil. It is
odd in having a mere shaft on top of which the candle was fixed. The
simple stick leg device, which preceded the Windsor chair type, was used
not a little in very early stools and other small pieces as long ago as the 17th
Century. It seems to be dateless, continuing to be made in this form now.
A certain largeness of view must be maintained regarding dates, and
regarding uniqueness. We wish to go on clear record here as giving dates
only on the opinion of the best judges. "Sports" in furniture, born out of
due time, are known. And a thing that is unique today may not be to

morrow.

[463]

A WEDGE-BAR Candle Stand on the left belongs to Mr. Hollis French.
The base is more strongly arched than usual. Date: about 1700-10. The
middle stand belongs to Mr. B. A. Behrend. It is adjustable; the lower
part of the post being hollow. The right hand stand, with the same owner,
presents the oddity of three bars on any of which a candlestick can be
hooked to change its elevation. These two pieces may date any time in
the 1 8th Century.
There ought to be some systematic effort under responsible persons, to
bring to light the remaining 17th Century furniture. At present intrusive
and often uninformed persons press their way into residences remote from
the great cities. The householder is suspicious and often has a right to be so.
If some of our reputable societies could father a scheme to make a
careful census, by accredited agents, of all our older settlements, no doubt
a hearty response would await inquiries now rebuffed. A photographic
record could be made and a fair valuation given if desired to prevent subse
quent exploiting by the unscrupulous.

[464 I

A FINELY Turned Stand here
shown, is the property of Mr. Geo.
F. Ives. It properly has not a
whirling table, as the screw is cut
too high to serve for that purpose.
The turnings are very good. The
feet have an extreme and humor
ous spread, so that they are nearly
horizontal. Date: about 1 680-1 700.
Among the societies which have
interested themselves particularly
in very early furniture, the Wal
pole Society, a small social or
ganization of collectors, which has
also published valuable literature,
may be mentioned. The Society
for the Preservation of New Eng
land Antiquities more particularly
directs its attention to old houses.
It is, however, gradually acquiring
some early furniture by gift.
The Metropolitan Museum,
through acquiring the Bolles Col
lection, stands at the head in the
number of its important pieces.
The Rhode Island School of Design
is slowly acquiring such furniture
to supplement its wonderful Pen
dleton collection of mahogany.
Collectors are humanly sensitive
regarding their gatherings. One
must therefore tread warily, es
pecially in New England, among
private collections, if one wishes to live there. There are, it is true, some
collectors too proud to show pride. Their generous enthusiasm is hidden
behind the New England reticence. We must take it for granted that
rare judgment is not found among the boastful.

[465]

1 1 I 11

ON the right is a Pair of Rare Candlestands, which were evidently made
to go together, as the turnings strongly resemble one another. The lower
piece shows the desirable type of a heavy shaft into which turned legs are
inset at an angle giving sufficiently broad base. These pieces are the
property of George F. Ives, who is to be congratulated upon their possession
since they are perhaps unique taken together.
On the left is a fine example of a wooden candlestand, the property of Mr.
Ives. It is peculiar in that the small table is not fitted with a screw to rise
and fall, but sets upon a shoulder formed by the turning. The finial of this
piece is in brass. Date of all three stands: about 1690-1720.
[ 466 ]

FOUR Candle Stands belonging to Mr. B. A. Behrend. Similar types
have already been shown, except the second stand, which with a large
saucer shaped hub, exhibits some differences. The pieces date from 1690
to 1730.
The fine but small collection of 17th Century furniture in the Concord
Antiquarian Society's rooms has already been referred to. The Essex
Institute of Salem has a few important pieces, but their wonderful costumes
are their chief asset . The Brooklyn Public Museum possesses a considerable
collection. The Worcester Antiquarian Society collects only that furniture which
has an historical flavor. The Wadsworth Atheneum and its allied societies
possess or have on loan many good pieces. The Deerfield Museum has a
few very early specimens. Pilgrim Hall at Plymouth has a few priceless
relics. Unfortunately the local historical societies are often warped from their
higher usefulness by the social feature which compels them to accept un
worthy furniture. Gradually, it may be presumed, they will adopt rules
by which nothing late can be accepted, and nothing of any date accepted
without being passed on by experts. One such organization, outside of
New England, has been sadly hoaxed.

[467]

A PAIR of Candle Stands both with unusually well shaped feet, but
otherwise not claiming description other than that already given. Owner:
the author. Date: about 1690-1710.
Private collectors in America have within the past twenty or thirty
years gathered to themselves the most of the best 17th Century furniture.
The private collector has the advantage of all necessary authority and
enthusiasm on the spot where a particular article comes to public attention.
Since each collector specializes on, or at least best loves, certain classes of
objects, the result is that the important articles are gathered and classified.
Thus, leaving out of account all mahogany furniture, there is more than
one private collection more important than any public collection with the
possible exception of the Metropolitan Museum.
Up to the present time no great museum has systematically sought
Americana in furniture.

I 468]

A CANDLE Stand of much attractive
ness, and out of the ordinary is that on
the right, which passed through the hands
of Mr. Henry V. Weil. It is beautifully
made. It has its lower and its upper table.
The upper table stands on a small sliding
standard, which is held at any desired
point by a wooden pin thrust through a
hole in the standard. The lower, larger
table has a good rim. The base and up
rights are maple; the shelves or tops are
pine. Date: 1700-1750.
Below are three simple stands, one with
a perfectly square hardwood chamfered
base. This sort was in most common use.
The wedge adjustment is not as crude
as it looks. It was the quickest, most
secure device of all.
The burning of tallow candles was at
first too expensive. The bayberry furn
ished a wax much used, and now revived by lovers of the quaint. The pine knot
was the commonest original light.
The influence of artificial light on social
habits might become an interesting
study. No doubt the pilgrim habit of rising
with the sun was induced by an early
and successful effort at daylight saving.
"Early to bed" made one wealthy.
"Burning the candle at both ends"
passed into a proverb. One who
passed through the tedious process of
9 'Jmmm\ \^m^ -s-AJtfc,. making candles, as the author did
when a boy, was not likely to waste
them. A thrifty habit was supposed
to be shown by careful use of candles. The classic story is that of a
dying man who on seeing two candles burning, uttered as his last word,
and with a deeper pathos than he intended, "One candle is enough to
die by."

I469I

AN Octagon Hub Candle Stand, with sturdy
turned legs. In this specimen the candles were
stuck directly into the holes in the candle bar,
without tin sockets, and were held in place
by a good fit only. It belongs to the author,
and dates about 1700.
The principal occupation of the early home,
aside from food preparation, was the manu
facture of the household textiles, none of which
were bought. Wearing apparel, aside from
buckskin and fur, was exclusively made of
wool or flax. The housewife was complete mis
tress of the art of taking raw wool or flax and
carrying each through every process until the
product of the flock or the field appeared in
the completed garment. The flax process
consisted in ripening, beating and hatcheling.
The wool process was carding. Then each,
carried so far, must be spun and woven or
knitted. This process occupied in many cases
more than half of the waking hours of a house
wife. On the right is
a tape loom.

The art of weaving as practiced by our fore-
mothers was carried on sometimes in a special
room, as a full-sized loom occupied a large
space. The parts of the loom were very heavy,
traditionally, to prevent vibration. Hence the
Biblical phrase, "a weaver's beam" as a simile
for great size and strength. The bleaching
was done as now in Ireland, by exposing the
finished linen to the sun and rain on the
grass. The dyes had nothing to do with the
manufacture of munitions. Indigo might be
imported but butternut was a standard for
men's wear, and various vegetable dyes locally
concocted answered for all other shades.

[47o]

owned by the author. There is one in the
Stanton House, Clinton, Connecticut, and
Mr.H. W. Erving of Hartford, also has one.
The construction almost suggests the shape
of the chair frame. The double treadle, of
course, added greatly to the convenience of
the operator, especially if she were not
thoroughly skilled . A feature of this piece
is that the hand screw at the left near the
top of the post, when loosened, permits the
head to be swung upward and inward so as
to be out of the way. Incidentally also,
when the head is lowered again it can be
set at any degree of tautness, a great con
venience, as the pulley was inclined to
stretch.

THE distaff on spin
ning jennies varies from
the staff here to a less
elaborate sort as seen
in the piece below. This
is prettily turned and
very daintily made. This
spinning jenny has the
well wrought wheel, the
spokes of which are neatly
turned. Such wheels, of
course, are made in seg
ments and are turned
with beads, and in some
cases are very decorative,
especially when made in
parti-colors. Owned by
the author.
Below is a rare form of
a spinning jenny, with
double treadles. It is

[47i]

THE LADY spinning above was caught in the act, not posed for the
occasion. She is using the ordinary spinning wheel which accomplished in
wool for household uses the purposes of the spinning jenny for flax. The
wool wheel was used up to a later period than the flax wheel. The spindle
was attached in leather; a turned stick called a "wheel pin" was used to
avoid the blistering of the fingers in turning the wheel. The lady above
stands in a recessed porch. She was eighty-four at the time this picture
was made and had always spun for herself everything needed for the mit
tens and socks of the family.
The hand-spun yarn was usually rather coarse and soft and made warm
material when knitted. For weaving it was necessary for good work to spin
a finer yarn. The attics of the country still hold many thousands of wheels
like that above. They are in no respect desirable in modern homes, except
to fill a vacant space, which certainly they are amply qualified to do as they
are large and awkward . A sharp contrast is suggested between the time when
all such work was done by hand and the present period when it is estimated
that one firm of cotton spinners is making as much yarn as every woman in
the United States could spin if she devoted all her time to the work.
[472]

A DOUBLE Spinning Jenny is a
rarity. The one here shown is arrang
ed to spin two threads at once. It
must have required a spinner of wonder
ful skill to keep it going. Fingering
four part music on the piano would be
easy in comparison. The double wheel
was the foreshadowing of the machinery
that was to follow, so that one spinner
could attend an entire battery of
jennies. Date: 1 8th Century. Owner:
Mr. L. C. Flynt, of Monson.
The wheel below is a bobbin wheel.
On it was wound the yarn to prepare
it for the loom. The bobbins were
placed within the shuttle. It was a
long and intricate process. A card for
combing the wool lies oa the frame.
The various contrivances for making butter and cheese are too simple to
require illustration further. Hulling of corn by wood lye; braying of corn
in a great mortar, before the day of mills; the manufacture of hominy,
called now in the South
grits; the sanding of floors;
were a part of the duties
with which a housewife
could amuse her leisure hour.
If any time remained there
were candles to dip, scour
ing to do, braiding of mats,
boiling of rush lights . Every
one was supposed to be
busy when not asleep.
The men in stormy days
had clapboards to split, J ^T"^
shingles to shave, ax and
scythe and fork and shovel
handles to hew. The littlest
girls were knitting with
grandmother. The young boys made birch brooms with grandfather, and
always, when all else failed, children were told to think of their sins. This
method prevented them from thinking up new ones,
[473 1

[474]

ON the previous page are four forms of reels for taking the yarn off the
spindle where it was spun. They all have some device for checking the
lengths into skeins.
The lower left one with rare bent legs belongs to Mr. B. A. Behrend; the
others to the author.
Above is the process of weaving rag rugs, such as that on the floor. Weav
ing is still done by hand in the South, and Northern people have encouraged
a fad for "homespun." It wears well but has little other merit.
[475 1

ABOVE is an embroidery frame of much interest. It is owned by Mr.
W. of Boston, and the construction is a nice piece of work. It has the trestle
foot, or shoe. The frame swivels on the posts, and
is held in the proper angle for work by two hand
screws. The work was kept taut by turning the
wooden nuts on the side bars, thus making the frame
adjustable to any length. The worker stood before
the frame. All parts are turned. We are unable to
fix anything like a definite date. We regard it as an
18th Century piece.

The other smaller frame was adjustable in hight
as well as in slant to the convenience of one sitting.
There is a universal joint of wood, the female mem
ber of which is split and adjusted rigidly by a hand
screw. The hoop is wound with cloth and a second
hoop is clamped over it, avoiding any need of
basting.

476

A SPINET with Spanish feet. Made by Thomas Hitchcock. Date:
about 1690. It is said the frames, and the pine music drawers were made
in this country. Hence, the piece is introduced here. The strings are
plucked by quill plectrums. The feet are a specially good adaptation to a
light leg, and are a good example of how the thing could be done. Atten
tion is called to the matter, since there are so many awkward Spanish feet.
These instruments have but one brass wire to each note. The piano had
not been invented. One should notice that the figures after a maker's name
on the early instruments are not a date, as so many suppose, but the number
of the instrument. This piece was in the Hazen Garrison house, Haverhill,
and we think is now in the Brooklyn Public Museum. The shape is quite
like that of a baby grand piano. The wood is walnut, with inlays in front.
The tops of these instruments were so thin that in most cases warping
cannot be prevented in a modern house, where the air is too dry for the
good of any furniture. A method of cutting very fine parallel lines, with a
saw, on the under side of a warped top is advised. The cuts stop short
of cutting through to the opposite surface. The board may then be flat
tened easily, and kept in place by working into the narrowed saw cuts
a composition of sawdust and glue, or very thin pieces of wood.

[477]

A HARPSICHORD, that is, a harp-shaped instrument of music. It is a
larger and more elaborate, and a better instrument than the spinet. It was
the immediate precursor of the piano. Some of these instruments were very
large — even exceeding in this respect the modern piano.
There were spinets and harpsichords both square and upright in shape,
but the style here is the finest. There was usually more than one string to a
key, sometimes as many as four. There were sometimes two keyboards,
for soft and loud effects respectively. These instruments were regularly
used in all dramatic music. The instrument shown is in the Benning Went
worth Mansion, Newcastle, New Hampshire, near Portsmouth. These
instruments are of the 17th and 18th Centuries.
As to fine musical instruments as well as clocks, the 17th Century was
too early to develop such articles to any extent in America. We find Ameri
can cases, or parts of cases. The works were probably all imported. The
wood is quite generally walnut indicating a date between 1670 and 1730.
In most households a pitch pipe or a tuning fork was all the instru
ment that could produce musical vibrations, except the fair throats of the
pilgrim daughters. The words were lined out in church, and comical tales
are told of audiences mistaking some interjected remark of the leader for
words of the hymn, whereupon they proceeded to sing with fervor "My
throat is very sore, I scarce can speak any more." Happily people can
do what they must. Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon to prove it was
a sin not to sing. Were he living now, in an apartment, he would know
better.

[478]

A SPINET formerly belonging to the niece of David Brainerd, missionary
to the Indians. It is owned by the author. He procured it in Haddam,
Connecticut, from the family in which it had always been handed down. The
name is Jacobus Kirckman, (Londini fecit) .
The base is maple whereas the case is handsome walnut inlaid in front.
The method of adapting the frame to the instrument was curious. At
the top of the frame were little iron spurs, pointing upward. Wherever the
case is set down these spurs sink into the wood and prevent movement.
But the placing of the frame must be about right to get the instrument to
cover it perfectly. These spurs are an argument that the instruments and
the frame were not constructed at the same place and time. Thus the case
can be lifted off bodily, without tools. The brass hardware on these instru
ments is of very fine pattern and workmanship.
There was no special change in most musical instruments used at an early
period in America, to warrant their introduction here. Of course even the
spinet was rare. Small musical instruments prevailed, such as the harp,
violin and pipes.

[479]

A ROOM arranged with highboy, lowboy, early Queen Anne looking
glass, 17th Century high stretcher table and three Carver chairs. The
fireplace is of the style closed in summer with variously painted fireboard.
The minute pewter cup on the table was probably for medicine — it is too
small even for the strongest strong waters. The warming pan is of the early
variety, having the iron, rather than the wood handle. A foot stove such
as was carried to church, and used in sleighs on cold rides, appears. The
material burned was charcoal. The arms are somewhat earlier than the
revolution and are preserved mainly because this room shows the gun room
of the town of Framingham in the revolution.
Powder horns were often carved as in the one showing here. Good horns
were translucent so as to reveal by holding against the light the amount of
powder in reserve. The fireplace is twenty years late for our period.
After a careful inquiry the author is unable to find any authority to in
form us when braided and drawn-in rugs were first made. The Indians
understood braiding, but so also did the colonists. We shall probably never
know how early braid was worked into rugs.

[480]

A ROOM in the Ipswich Historical Society's house, otherwise the Sal-
tonstall house. It is in some respects the most interesting early American
house, but not to go beyond our province, we show the great fireplace as a
suggestion of the manner in which utensils and furniture were grouped
about it. Mantels are often a later addition.
The tin oven also is after our period probably. The oven is in the wall
in the rear of the fireplace, and never by the side of it.
The churn, in winter was drawn near, or placed far from the fireplace,
according as the temperature of the cream required "to make the butter
come." A swift, or yarn reel, attached to the table on the extreme right
is the only one of the sort we illustrate. It was later than those that stood
on the floor.
A broom made of one piece of birch shows. A large stick was stripped
down in shreds and tied down, the remaining stick forming the handle. It
was very serviceable.

[481]

Tp~r^

A ROOM giving a 17th Century arrangement of a Hadley two-drawer
chest, a "tuckaway," or folding gate-leg table, a Carver baby high chair, a
Flemish-legged highboy, a 17th Century pine desk, a scrolled-foot side
chair, a joint stool, a wainscot chair and a leather back chair, all original.
Also a Spanish foot gate-leg table. The shutters are a little late for the
setting, but only a score of years. Such other articles as appear may explain
themselves. The requirements in furnishing an entire room with ample intervals, if
the space is about 16 feet square, are ten to a dozen pieces. More are here
gathered at one side for a picture's sake, than would be wholly appropriate
in use. The attraction of early furniture consists mostly in its grouping.
The museum method is necessary perhaps for study, but charm is gained by
a room setting.
Paint may have been used on walls, as we know it was in a decorative
way, on furniture in the 17th Century; but the presumption, in America,
is against it.

[482]

THE Chest picture above was received too late to supply data. It is a
very interesting variant of the Hadley chest found early in this volume.
The introduction of the sunflower or aster ornament, so generally found
in the Connecticut sunflower chests, allies this specimen more closely with
Connecticut. The other Hadley chests, obviously, were free from that
influence. The photograph was furnished by Mr. Geo. Dudley Seymour.

To fit 17th Century furniture a room may have a wall covered with pine
sheathed panel work. Every other board is thin, like a panel. No attention
is paid to the widths of the boards. A long bevel forms a tongue to fit a
groove. Thus the thin board has a tongue on both sides. There is no true
panel with four sides, a thing which came later, of course for wall work.
The ceiling may be composed of open work of small floor joist framed into
larger timbers, while the floor above forms the cover. To deaden sound
material may be placed between the floors. Or plaster, never smooth, may
be applied between the joists.

[483]

THE three finials above are from Brewster and Carver chairs. Of those
below the larger are from Carver and Pilgrim chairs, and the others from
chairs dating later, about 1700. The plates are both half size — the only
pictures made to scale in this volume.

[484]

THE Attic of the Webb- Welles house at Wethersfield, Connecticut.
The attic is the most beloved spot a collector knows. It is one of "The
loved spots that our infancy knew."
Into it went for two hundred years the discarded because "old fashioned"
furniture. Many a New England house has today great treasures in its
attic; which are unsuspected by the occupant of the house. And it is high
time to add another sentence to that. Many an attic has worthless furniture
which its possessor values at a fortune. The house-holders are gradually
awakening to know that old furniture is good, but their knowledge is at
present, and ever must be, confused. So they may sometimes count the
worthless priceless, and the priceless worthless.
If articles are highly valued why are they kept in attics, where the excel
lent collector cannot come ? Or if he comes, he arrives after much negotia
tion. If all the hidden things were revealed today where would be the
sport of collecting for the coming generation ? Yet we deprecate the sar
donic grin, or the complacent aspect, of the collector who has "arrived",
when he endeavors to comfort the collector who has not arrived, with the
saying that there are just as good fish in the sea as ever were caught — the
sea, in this mixed metaphor, being an unknown attic.

I 485]

A ROOM with a low Oak Bed, which our first fathers used. Two
chests also appear. We are presuming that the collections of a family
for a century are here drawn upon, with some articles which were newly
purchased about 1720.
The literature of the settlers would not, aside from the Bible, make
enlivening reading now. Although many of the books of the period are of
much historical value, and of present interest because of their quaintness.
In musical instruments they were especially poor. Music had charms
for them, but those charms were regarded as inspired from below, as so
much doubtless was in their English experience.
Hunting was an important occupation rather than a sport, because they
needed the spoils of the chase. Fishing was, after agriculture, the first
industry in importance. They became too weary for much athletic recre
ation. There was before them the big job of conquering a continent.

[486]

AN old "hall" setting. The hall in this sense is the main room in the
house. What was later enlarged to our hall was then merely a porch or
entry. At the fireplace the flip iron was heated and thrust into the potation for
the evening. The cheese could be toasted on the slehder long fork shown
on page 549. The chairs were made comfortable with, cushions unless the
seat was rush, which required no cushion. Children occupied stools.
There was no effort to keep any room, except the great room, that is, the
"hall," warm enough to sit in. The great chimrtey itself warmed somewhat
the rooms above, and the floor even in a good house was not so tight but
that heat could rise through the narrow cracks.
The winter evenings were spent in basket making, spinning, weaving and
knitting. The musket was kept where it would not rust and the powder
would be dry.
The width of the floor boards was such that they shrunk in winter and
swelled in summer about a quarter of an inch. In this crack the sand of the
floor sifted. The first homes being by the sea fine white sand was available.
The windows being very small required little drapery.
[487]

COLLECTORS' DON'TS
I. DON'T collect restored furniture. Get it "in the rough."
2. Don't collect furniture with new paint, which covers a multitude of
sins.
3. Don't seek for bargains. Low prices on choice articles, at a dealer's,
prove something is wrong.
4. Don't aim at rarity alone. An object must have intrinsic interest.
5. Don't hesitate when you are sure. The best things are lost by a day,
or an hour.
6. Don't trust your own judgment in all things, because you are experi
enced in certain classes of things.
7. Don't forget Franklin and buy what is cheap, unless you need it.
8. Don't leave behind what you have purchased. People change their
minds. Possession is nine points of the law. *i
9. Don't fail to keep sweet because you meet people who will not part
with their treasures. Others have rights.
10. Don't restore more than is necessary. New furbished 17th Century
furniture loses it charm. Mahogany is different.
n. Don't forget that an inheritor is often the poorest judge of the age and
merit of his property. Traditions should not be bought.
12. Don't give attention to historical furniture. Don't "buy stories."
They are good backgrounds, for good things only.
13. Don't fail to study both books and the furniture itself. Half the
pleasure is in knowing.
14. Don't mix styles very much. The beauty of an old room consists in
approximate harmony.
15. Don't make a house a museum. It is not as interesting as just enqugh.
16. Don't regard the discovery of specimens like rare pieces you already
have, as a disaster. We ought to be glad for every good thing that
comes to light.
17. Don't fail to let the knowledge of beauty and quaintness in your
possession become public knowledge. We owe it to our generation
to diffuse good taste. Patriotism calls for an adorned country.
18. Don't despair of getting what you want, if you seek long enough.
Hunting is better than fishing.
19. Don't neglect to become an authority on some one thing at least, if it
is only a tinder-box.

[488]

A ROOM with furniture of the year 1700, some of it a little earlier, some
a little later. On the wall is a cocked hat box, three-cornered. It has a
rest, within, for the hat. A flax wheel and a yarn reel are shown, with a
leather back and a late Carver chair. A middle stretcher tavern table,
candle stand and other articles, like the "ancestor" on the wall may
tell their own story. The Obligation to Materials
We have no right to misuse wood. We did not make it. We found it,
like air, water and grass. The only possible manner of acquiring any rights
over it is by putting the stamp of character upon it. The theologians tell
us of sins, as if we were under obligation to a spiritual world alone. But
sheer wickedness in the use of materials ought to cause even a materialist
to shudder. Wood is one of the best things we have. Whether Grinling
Gibbons puts his tool to it or we make a milking stool of it, men will measure
us by the manner of our handling it.
Only people with a sense of reverence for materials can make good citizens.
A man must use wood well, or he will mistreat his neighbors.

I 489]

INTERIOR DECORATIONS OF THE 17TH CENTURY
Floors: Kitchens or Halls; Sand or Rushes; corn husk mats.
Parlors, Dining Rooms and Chambers: Drawn-in, otherwise called
hooked rugs, made on a burlap base; braided rugs; knitted rugs.
Ceilings: Open beams and floor joist with the rough boards above.
The beams chamfered. Sometimes the entire ceiling was. whitewashed.
A second scheme was to plaster between the joist, with rough plaster.
There is not yet any evidence found that ceilings were paneled in the 17th
century. But inasmuch as panels were used shortly after the century went
out, simple large panels, preferably unpainted, may be used.
Walls: The most effective early style was in sheathed paneling. Every
second board was a panel with a very long tongue. Every second board was
grooved on both sides for panels. The boards ran to the beam, girt or
cornice, and to the floor, or sill. The tongued boards sometimes were
furnished with beads or quarter round molds to meet the panels. The style
may be seen still in many old houses.
There was no half-way panel. The work ran from floor to ceiling. In
this style the corner posts and the beams were left uncovered, being
smoothed by the plane. The boards were pine, the timbers oak.
Plaster was used sometimes in the 17th Century, especially on the ex
posed walls. On the walls abutting on other rooms a finish all in wood was
common. The sheathed panel work may sometimes have been painted.
Preferably it was left natural, with no finish whatever, either oil or stain.
The doors were cleated, of the same construction as the wall sheathing,
precisely. Beds: The material of the canopy was cotton, linen, wool or silk.
It varied with the means and taste of the owner. Plain or plain colored
linen covered by netting was used. Copperplate came later. So also did
hand stamped calico.
Windows: These were small and all the light was needed. Shades
were not used. A single material to push away at the sides was the style.
The same material as used on the beds was proper.
Upholstery: Cushions were made of leather, linen or silk. Cupboard
tops were covered with rich cloths and cushions were placed on such covers,
on which again were placed the finer pieces of plate, pewter or china. All
wooden seats were probably provided with cushions, except simple stools.
Couches (day beds) had cushions made in the same style as the chairs.
Table and Bed Linen: It was linen, in great variety and richness.
[49o]

[49i ]

ON the next page following are a remarkable pair of quill-work sconces.
Owner: Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow of Cambridge, who has kindly furnished
the author with some data regarding them.
The size of each is 21 by 9 inches. The frames are in all respects similar
in style and materials to looking glass frames of the period. The obvious
reason is that the looking glasses themselves were often used with sconces.
The designer of these sconces went farther and filled his frames with decora
tive materials, designed to catch the light in front. The frames are of
walnut. 1
The vase design, with the rosettes and border are of paper, gilded on the
edge. The flowers, principally carnations and tulips, are made of wax,
which is perhaps mixed with mica. Each petal is edged with silver wire.
The colors are red, blue, purple and white, of varying shades. The whole
sparkles from the light of the candle below.
They were made by Ruth Read, daughter of the Hon. John Read, a
lawyer of distinction in Boston between 1722 and 1749.
In "Gold and Silver of Windsor Castle," 191 1 (p. xxxi), Mr. E. Alfred
Jones refers to this pair of simple scrolled candle brackets as being typical
of such in use in England during the reign of Queen Anne. None of the
English specimens seem to have survived the melting-pot. Similar brackets
may be observed in Hogarth's engravings, "The Laughing Audience" and
"The Analysis of Beauty." This pair of brackets was made by Knight
Leverett of Boston (1703-53), and is engraved "RR 1720."
We distinguish here between the sconce brackets, which hold the candles,
and the sconces, which are the portion against the wall — the framed section.
The pieces are supposedly unique. Their effect is excellent.
In not a few instances glasses probably had sconce brackets which have
been lost, the sockets even being removed, so that there is scarcely a trace
of their former location. The effect of looking glasses with candles was not
overlooked by the designers of the period. The fashion of using such can
dles was continued into Chippendale's time and even later, only in the later
time the candles were placed at one side rather than in front of the glass.
We may suppose that the fashion of cutting the surface of the glass in orna
mental forms was a persistence of the decorative idea such as appears in the
pair of sconces before us.

[492

A PAIR of Sconces in quill-work. The property of Mr. Francis Hill
Bigelow of Cambridge. They are veneered, apparently in walnut; three-
quarters of an inch wide, and are now painted black. More fully described
on preceding page.

[493 1

A DECORATED looking glass, the property of Mr. Mark M. Henderson
of Norwalk, Connecticut. The frame is small, and is decorated by painted
scrolls which do not show in the picture.
It is said to have belonged to Peregrine White, though what the evidence
is we do not know. He lived into the 18th Century, and was a substantial
citizen, whose dwelling remains to this day. Many articles came down to
us from him, and are in the Pilgrim Hall, Plymouth. It is natural since he
was the only original member of the Pilgrim Fathers who lived into the
18th Century that we should know and have his relics. John Alden, who
is said to have been the youngest signer of the famous compact, was a
young man when Peregrine was born on the Mayflower in Provincetown
harbor. Though Alden outlived all the other signers he died a score of years
or so before Peregrine White.

l494l

A FRAMED Petit Point Needlework Picture of the 17th Century owned
by Mr. H. W. Erving. This picture with its rich coloring, quaint drawing
and perspective is characteristic of the period, and is particularly interesting
by reason of the fidelity of the costumes displayed. It is introduced in
this work, however, on account of the frame, which is of pine, well moulded
and with a wide gold lining. In order to show the cloud effect the top is
made with a double arch, and should be compared with the sconce on
page 491.

l495l

A LOOKING GLASS, formerly provided with sconce brackets.
The glass itself is original. The author owns the piece. The frame is pine.
The places where sconce-brackets were affixed at the bottom are clearly
designed for such a purpose, being practically the same in the contour of
the frame as other glasses provided with brackets. Date: 1710-30.
The frame has been gilded and blacked. It is left as found, "in the
rough," some parts of the gilding having scaled off.
The possession of a large glass, in the period we are treating, was counted
a luxury. Little glasses crudely framed in pine, and painted, or in leather
are found.

[496]

A LOOKING GLASS.
dating about 1700. It
is all original, but there
was a decorative scrolled
top which has been lost.
It is owned by the
author. The frame out
side is 27^ by 3134
inches. The wood is
walnut veneer. The glass
is 18^ by 22 inches. The
bevel is discernible.
Whether the bevel
originated in a desire to
reflect light as from
another face of glass after
the manner in which
precious stones are cut,
we do not know. The
bevel adds to the beauty
of the glass.
The early bevel was
very flat and soft. The
edges blended more gently
with the main surface
than in the modern bevel. It is sometimes impossible to see the bevel
on an old glass at some angles. The surmise that the bevel was cut to
fit the glass more easily and securely in the frame is untenable. It will
be seen as we proceed that the earliest looking glasses were nearly square,
because the glass, expensive in any form, was least so in this form. Later
came the two glasses, the one over the other, as a measure of economy.
The very earliest frames mentioned in America have stump embroidery
but the only one known has been illustrated, and was not American, anyway.
Whether any glass as early as 1700 is American cannot now be known.
The glass itself was imported. We believe that some frames as early as
1700 were made here. The glass industry was, in the heavy plate form at
least, too specialized for a new and a poor country.
Cheap frames, or frames to be decorated, were often in pine. Fine wood
frames were usually walnut, which also indicates their period.

[497]

THE GLASS itself on the next page is 13^ by 16 J< inches. It has a
three inch convex satin wood frame, with walnut outside edge. It is inlaid
with thuya and tulip wood. The top has three inset panels of corres
ponding design. Originally the inlay covered the entire top. The veneer
between the panels is now missing. A very rare glass. Date: 1710-20.

The word "mirror" in the quotation, "now we see in a mirror, darkly,"
means of course a metal mirror. Polished metal did not give the excellent
reflection of glass, especially when, as shortly was the case, it became
tarnished. Hence it was said "we see darkly." The significance of the word
"looking-glass" is felt at once when we remember it was contrasted with the
earlier mirrors which were not glass. The beauty and elaborateness of
looking-glass frames arose largely from the expensiveness of the glass
which must be honored by appropriate richness in frame.
Good mirrors, belonging to the Pilgrim Century, are more difficult to
obtain than any other class of objects. They were unusual even in their
period. Breakage has done for the most of them. Lack of appreciation of
their merits is responsible for the loss of most of the remainder.
The loss by fire of 17th, and even 18th, Century articles is immense. An
instance comes to our minds where a collector was burned out, but per
severed and made a second collection, which was also burned!
Some of the finest work in the country is still in very precarious sur
roundings. The influence of commerce on the diffusion of furnishings for homes is
almost a history of civilization. The early Americans were a maritime
people. Sea captains were not only on the lookout in foreign lands for
cargoes to sell in America, but they were in the habit of bringing back to
their wives objects of interest from all parts of the world. Thus the early
china came from China, as well as from English importations. Early
mirrors particularly were brought home because there were no such things
to be had in America. We have instanced such a mirror being brought from
Venice. It was from such articles that the American cabinet workers de
rived their styles. They often made in pine what had come here as walnut.
But they did not hesitate to attempt more precise and elegant reproductions.
We know that sometimes mirror glasses were imported without their frames.

498

A FRAME belonging to Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow. Further particulars
are given on page 498. The reader is reminded that these looking-
glasses are not shown in any scale.

[499]

THE looking glass frame above has its perfect original glass, but the
silvering has been cleaned off and the coat of arms inserted. The frame is
beautifully decorated with marquetry of the period of 1700. This glass was
sold from the Wayside Inn, Sudbury, at the auction of its contents some
fifty years since. It had been painted, so that when sold its character, as
a walnut and inlaid frame, was not suspected. The cresting is missing,
but the condition of the frame otherwise is quite perfect.
It is the property of Mr. Hill, the post master of South Sudbury, who in
herited the glass from his father, the purchaser at the auction. The arms
are those of the family who for many generations conducted the inn.

[500]

A LOOKING GLASS owned by Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow. The glass
measurement is 21 by 32^ inches. The frame, on its flat surface, is \}i
inches wide. It is of walnut, with boxwood edges, inside and outside.
This is a large glass for so small a frame, and indicates what so many glasses
did not that its principal office was use. Date: 1730-50.
When, as was sometimes the case, the only glass in the mirror was cut
in some design, we infer of course that the chief purpose was decoration.
In the case where, as in later examples, a sconce bracket was attached near
the center of the frame the motive was the same as in light-houses, to in
crease the light as much as possible. When light was scanty, as in those
days, reflection became important for any sort of satisfactory illumination.
This purpose of course lay behind the numerous mirrors found in a single
rich French room. This connection between mirrors and artificial lighting
is often forgotten by us who enjoy such full and easy means of illumination.
In the invention of looking glasses the method of coating their backs with
quick-silver was as important as the skill required in producing the glass.
Since the ancients used mirrors rather than looking glasses, obviously no
practical method of silvering mirrors was known in classical times.

[501]

vs$m,

u

1 .'v ti
r

3v\

/<

^

&3

v

'A

VV

^

>x

rq

X'

5^1 ¦

!4

ml

~^L

A LOOKING GLASS
belonging to Mr. Francis
Hill Bigelow. The glass
is n^ by 17^ inches.
It has a two-inch walnut
frame with convex mold
ing. The style of top is
frequently seen in Eng
lish mirrors, but with a
crown and other royal
emblems in the fret work.
The presence of such em
blems does not in itself
prove that a frame having
them is English. It only
establishes a stronger pre
sumption to that effect.
During the reign of
William and Mary and
Queen Anne the loyalty
of the colonists was such
that royal emblems oc
curred here. Yet the
mere fact that one lived
in America showed that
a seed of democracy was
working. These fretted frames
appeared as late as Chip
pendale's time but with
smaller margins, and the
fret work extending on
the sides. Date: 1710-30.
The backs of American
frames are as a rule of
pine, the edges of the backing being beveled. A thickened piece of wood
near the top, with an opening for a hanging cord, was common. The top
as shown here was stiffened by long splints run down on the main frame
and often set dovetail fashion into it.

[502]

THIS Looking glass is also owned by Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow. The
glass is 16 by 19^ inches; the frame is 4 inches wide in addition. It is of
walnut convex, inlaid with satin and tulip woods. This mirror evidently
had a top which has been lost. Many, however, were complete as seen here.
The inlay here was doubtless imitated in the glass shown on page 494,
attributed to Peregrine White. Only in that glass the imitation was a
painted decoration, to take the place of inlay. The date is 1700-20.
One should notice the marked resemblance between some mirrors of this
period and the period of 1850. We have the same width of frame, but so
far as we know, the late mirrors are always of concave contour on the frame.
The earlier were generally convex as here. The latter mirrors were also of
course in mahogany. But a complete novice might be deceived.
The late mirrors never had a scrolled or fretted top, and the glass in them
was not beveled, nor often plate.
The convex mirrors, when seen sidewise, remind one, by their quick
outward sweep of frame, of the blocked fronts of some early chests, from
which very likely they took their style.

I 503 ]

THE Glass here shown

measures 15^ by 10^4
inches. The frame adds
much more, the molding
being \% inches wide.
This fine specimen is
owned by Mr. Francis
Hill Bigelow. It is in
applewood veneer, show
ing end grain. In cases
where we have covered
the glass to avoid con
fusing reflections it may
be understood as a rule
that the glass is beveled.
On this frame the scroll
is simple but effective.
The shape so common, in
the middle of the century,
of the "broken arch,"
seen also on door heads,
seems not to be found in
the early years of the
century. The date is
1700-20. Looking glasses like the
above are more rare than
the long glasses, in two
parts, which bear the name Queen Anne. If we are to use an English name
to mark the period, William and Mary is proper for the style before us.
The old glass in these frames is highly valued by collectors, whatever its
condition. This is true partly because it seems impossible to obtain com
mercial plate cut on the old bevel. Many old glasses have been resilvered,
but the result is not fully satisfactory. It seems quite impossible to silver
an old glass and secure a perfect adherence everywhere of the amalgam.
Formerly mercury was used in an alloy with tin. Pure silver is sometimes
used now.
The direct rays of the sun will soon ruin the silvering on a mirror. It is
for this reason that old mirrors appear as they do. The suspicion arises
whether new plate is not sometimes submitted to direct sunlight to give an
old effect.

504]

THE Looking Glasses here are both the property of Mr. Francis Hill
Bigelow. That on the left has a glass measuring 21 by 33^ inches. The
width of the side molding is i}4 on the flat part. The edges outside and
inside are gilt. The frame is in burl walnut.
At either side below the glass are marks showing where plates, with sockets
for candle brackets, were attached. Date: 1720-40.
On the right, the glass measures 11^ by \6}4 inches. There is a two-
inch convex walnut frame. Date: 1700-20.
The question sometimes arises whether the tops of these frames were made
flat and acquired convexity by warping, or whether they were made convex.
As wood does not shrink or swell endwise, the tops as they swell from
dampness must either warp or split. A thin board too, which is veneered
on one side only, is sure to warp in time.

I 5oSl

THIS picture shows what is prob
ably a sconce glass, since there are
two holes at the bottom of the frame
showing that a plate with a socket held
a candle bracket.
The glass is 7^ by 20^ inches.
The frame is one inch wide, on the
sides; the wood is maple, stained.
The scroll below bears a remarkable
resemblance to that seen on the frame
rails of tables of the period, or a little
earlier. Date: 1700-30.
The plain semi-circular top is un
usual. Very narrow glasses of this
character often came in pairs, and it
may be that this specimen once had its
mate. It is owned by Mr. Francis Hill
Bigelow. One should compare the
molded frame of this glass with the
similar molding running around the
back of walnut chairs of the same
period. It was a great favorite with
the cabinet makers of that day who
were capable of getting into ruts like
those of the present. "We refer," as
Dr. Hawes, of Hartford used to say,
"to those to whom we allude!"
The back of any early looking glass,
if it has not been tampered with,
shows a mellow even pine surface which
cannot be mistaken for modern work. One is never likely to be misled,
who has once examined a looking glass back. This undisturbed condition
is a merit much regarded by collectors.

[506I

A WALNUT Frame,
with a glass 13^ by 2\y£
inches . The frame is only
one inch wide. It carries
a band of gilt inside and
out. Owner: Mr. Francis
Hill Bigelow.
The date of this piece
is later than we should,
perhaps, include in this
book. This glass shows the
characteristic feature of
the Queen Anne period —
the shape of the scroll.
At the very beginning of
the scroll, where, on the
side, it sweeps inward a
trifle, is a motive found
on great numbers of the
looking-glasses of this
time, 1730-50.
It will have been ob
served that the relatively
wide glasses are made in
one piece, whereas the
narrow glasses are more
than likely to be in two
parts. The object of
making the frames narrow was probably to make possible the use of
small plates. The cutting of the scrolls on some of the simpler glasses
was a work in which the makers of that day seemed to delight. This
simple frame, for instance, has a glass full of curves and angles, the cutting
of which, as a commercial matter, seemed to cause no hesitancy in the mind
of the merchant.

[507

Utensils and Hardware before 1720
WE have included in this volume, for reasons already given, most of the
hardware in use up to the 19th Century. But in the pilgrim century the
householder himself made, or had made, most of these things. The first
vessels were made by John Alden. Large and small vessels for liquids
were nearly all made of staves with hoops. Thus dippers, noggins, pip
kins, firkins, runlets, barrels and hogsheads, each one a little larger than
the preceding, served as containers for liquid and dry commodities. The
pewter was at first imported, also the iron up to 1640, when a beginning was
made here.
The trenchers, trays, troughs and bowls were of wood, turned, burnt
out, or fashioned by hand. Vessels of bark, and of splint were common.
Basket making began early. Any knowledge our fathers lacked in this
art they learned from the Indians. But then as now the bartering for
baskets with the Indians was common.
The settlers hewed the handles for all their tools, whether for carpentry
or the farm. A broadax man could hew a log half as fast as a primitive
up and down mill could saw it. A forge must have been set up at once.
Though they imported iron and steel tools, they kept them sharp with the
forge or grindstone. They bent their own ox-bows and rake-bows.
The furniture was turned where possible. Crude beds in crude houses
were made to answer. One has only to know how quickly woodsmen will
erect log houses to understand why the houses of the first generation had
such low values in the inventories. Probably not a particle of iron entered
into the first houses. Even in England oak pegs still exist driven in slate
or shingle. Floors at first were ignored. Hard clay answered; then halved
logs, flat side up, called puncheons. Doors were hung with wooden pins
and closed with wooden latches. The windows were holes closed by solid
shutters, or a little later filled up with paper or wee panes of iridescent
glass, with lead divisions. The windows were the most difficult thing to
make; some of them were probably imported.
As to brick houses, one often hears, as if it were a necessary or remark
able thing, that "the bricks were brought from England." Brick kilns
existed in America as early as brick houses. Bricks were brought from
England indeed, but as ballast: the heavy lading of ships was on the return
voyage. The settlers were in need of fine manufactured articles, rather
than weighty freights.
No doubt the vast majority of the pieces of very early furniture were
thrown away as soon as better specimens were available. There are only
a few thousand pieces of American 17th Century furniture, and only a few
hundred very fine important pieces. [508]

X

A LOOKING GLASS,
with a stained maple
frame. The glass
measures n}i by 17
inches. The narrow part
of the frame is \y& inches
wide, and convex. The
sheer simplicity of the
design is rather pleasing.
The odd button ornament
and the somewhat wan
dering uncertain lines of
the scroll are interesting
gropings after beauty.
The date is about
1700-10. It is often alleged,
even in this book, that
maple in furniture means
American work. In a
looking glass frame that
allegation can probably
be supported successfully.
And of course where we
see maple, the burden of
proof is on the person
who calls the article
English. Nevertheless,
maple was used in furni
ture in England, especially
in turnings, to a consider
able extent. What study
we have been able to give to the subject, however, inclines us to tne opinion
that the 17th Century tradition was so strongly in favor of oak that maple
would surprise one, in an English piece. Thus Flemish and other turned
chairs in maple are generally conceded to be American.
As a general proposition the nearer we approach the date of the first
settlers in America, the variation between English and American types
becomes less. For the first score or two of years the settler, not having
tested the woods unusual in furniture in England, would keep closer to the
original types. Thus oak frames in dwellings, not a whit better than pine,
continued through the century, with exceptions.
[509]

ON the next page on the left is a looking-glass, measuring inside, 13^5
by 33^ inches. The flat walnut frame is 1^4 inches wide. Owner: Mr.
Francis Hill Bigelow.
The glass in the top is beautifully engraved in a floral design, with birds,
and conventional scrolls. Date: about 1710.
A glass as large as this forms an important part of house decoration.
Whether the glass cutting on mirrors is to be counted as pure art, or art
out of place and therefore untrue to itself is a matter to be decided. One
feels that the introduction of looking glasses of a pretentious character,
being an innovation, was accompanied by cut decoration partly as a tour
de force, to show what the manufacturer could do.

[510]

THE left hand glass is mentioned on the preceding page.
The right hand looking glass is very large, 15^4 by 43^ inches. The
cut glass top is a simple design. The frame is 2y& inches wide, in burl wal
nut, and with the convex molding.
It is also the property of Mr. Francis Hill Bigelow. The date is about
1710. The scrolled lines have a decisive simplicity that is quite satisfactory.

l5"l

A SCONCE Glass of
burl walnut. Owner: Mr.
Francis Hill Bigelow.
The date though well on
in the 18th Century,
perhaps 1730-60, will not
exclude it, as we wish to
make a somewhat com
plete showing of glasses
with sconce brackets at
tached underneath, as in
the earlier period. The
size of this glass is 17^2
by 29^ inches. The
frame is gilt inside and
out. It bears "engraved"
brass plates with sockets
for candle brackets.
This piece may have
come from south of New
York. It shows the car
touche decoration in the
center top, which we look
for at a late period. Yet
walnut was not much
used for mirrors after
1750. If we set the walnut
period as ending at that
date we shall, it is true,
include some examples of
¦ 4 a decidedly late type,
since there was no hard
and fast rule. The plain rectangular glass, the only one we show, is
decidedly late. The setting of the plates for sconces at one side is
another mark of change from the earlier period.

512]

A LOOKING GLASS the
outside measurement of which
is 1 8}4 by 48^2' inches. The
frame is walnut. The decora
tion at the top, which shows
somewhat indistinctly, is a very
good inlaid design in tulip wood.
The great hight of the mirror
makes it more important. The
glass is not original. It had of
course two glasses. Owner: the
author. Date: 1710-20. The
frame is walnut ; the width being
iy4 inches; in the convex
pattern. The adaptability of walnut
to the purpose of furniture
making was recognized in the
south of Europe at a period so
remote that all record of the
matter is lost. In the veneer
it was used sometimes too thick.
In the modern method we may
hope it will hold its form better.
With the mutations of two
hundred years and more it has
done well, but the tendency to
curl is noticed in most heavy
veneers. We take it for
granted that the running of the
veneer across the grain of the
pine foundation was designed as a better decorative effect, as the grain of
the wood is not very marked, and advantage was taken of every feature
possible. It is very remarkable that the early cabinet makers were able
to make a veneer that lasted as their work did.
The pine backing of so many early looking glasses is proof that pine
was found almost necessary in England as the basis of the best veneer.

[513

4%

A WALNUT two-part
looking glass. It is original
in all parts. It was found in
Eastern Massachusetts.
The full hight is 37 inches.
The cutting on the upper
glass represents that bird,
sometimes called a phoenix or
a pheasant, but which is not
always recognizable by any
of Audubon's illustrations !
It was at least a bird; and a
touch of mystery is rather an
advantage. This frame is somewhat
heavy, as in the earliest
styles of the two-part looking
glasses. The date is about 17 10.
Owner: the author.
In these glasses, the upper
one lapped over the lower,
and the rabbet on which the
glasses rested was cut deeper
in the upper section. The
object of lapping the glasses
was to give a continuous
glass surface. Old mirrors,
becoming a little shaky, are
very liable to let the upper
glass slip down. Hence many
were broken.
The wood of this frame is somewhat bleached, showing how light walnut
may gain a quite charming color. In this connection it is worth consider
ing that new English walnut is by no means so much lighter than our
northern black walnut as to make the distinction always easy.
Unbleached black walnut, however, is very dark, and unless it were exposed
to brilliant light for a long period it would not bleach, naturally, to a
great extent.

[514]

A MOST interesting looking
glass, belonging to Mr. Chauncey
C. Nash. It has in the upper
section, instead of glass, a
wooden panel, on which is re
presented a ship in full sail. The
colors are now very quiet but
entirely distinct. All parts are
original. The date is about 1710.
We see in this glass an in
teresting prototype of the
immensely popular 18th and
early 19th Century mirrors,
bearing painted representations
of ships, and everything con
ceivable on the upper glass, the
painting being done on the under
side. Here, on a wood panel,
was possibly the inspiration of
some of the later work.
The use of wood as a ground
for pictures is extremely early.
Though at first thought it seems
not to be a suitable substance,
yet the mutations of years have
proved that it has some great
advantages. The work done on
it is more permanent than that
on glass or canvas. Though the
surface may scale the subject is
never utterly destroyed.
Of course the painting on
glass was an easy substitute for cutting, and being brighter it appealed to
the declining taste on which it rode to popularity. The tops of long glasses
were too high to be useful, hence they were made ornamental. We may
presume that, in case a clear glass was used in the upper section, the intention
was to have the glass low enough to secure the benefit of its entire length.

[515]

AN exquisite
specimen of a great
mirror of about
1740 which closes,
perhaps, too late,
our period. The
property of the
author. The hight
is 69 inches.
The gradual sha
ding off of mirrors
in this style from
the early Queen
Anne to the Geor
gian, without a ra
dical change, is a
case of persistence
of a beautiful type.
One must get the
date from details
rather than the
general contour.
The earlier mirrors
had two glasses,
and the bird or
other design was
cut in the upper
glass. In this mirror
the carving im
mediately about
the glass is incised
in the wood of the
frame. The other
carvings are ap
plied.

[516]

A MIRROR of which
the bill is still preserved in
the Griswold family where
it still is in Connecticut.
It was bought in Venice, in
1737, and so absolutely
fixes the date at which this
beautiful style attained its
finest proportions.
From the crest of the
bird to the bottom of the
mirror the measurement is
78 inches! It is the finest
example of its type with
which we are acquainted.
All parts are original. While
such mirrors were made in
England and presumably
here, the source of the pat
tern is made clear by this
piece. As it has been here
ever since it was made, we
venture to include it.
Of course the material
is walnut. Before the com
ing to light of the date
of this mirror it would
probably have been placed
later. The elegant and the
rich in all sorts of furnish
ings may be looked for any
time after 1700. The public
taste was probably as good
in furniture at that period,
as it ever was. The time
of poverty had passed.
Painting flourished. Ex
quisite work was produced in
nearly all the arts. Amer
ica, removed from the seats
of culture, bought well.

[517]

[5i8

519

ON page 518 is a fine early example of a Queen Anne mirror, of date
1720-40. It is above five feet high. Owner: the author. It is all original
except the feather ornament.
On page 519 are two looking glasses belonging to Mr. Francis Hill Bige
low. Their date is about 1720-40. That on the left is in walnut, the frame
being i}4, inches wide, gilt inside, and with a gilt shell. The-glass is 14^
by48M. The other example belonging to the same owner has a molded pine frame,
\i/& inches in size. The glass is 16 by 40 inches.
The frame is grained in imitation of rosewood. It is gilt inside. The
stencilling in gilt was probably added in the 19th Century.
The mirror on page 516 is 69 inches in hight, and is original except
the bird. The wood is mahogany. All carved parts are gilded. It is owned
by the author.
Such mirrors must have required at least ten-foot ceilings. In an ordinary
colonial house the bottom comes very near the floor.
Date: 1735-50.
With this we close our treatment of mirrors, which really should have a
volume by themselves. But the designs confined to the Pilgrim Century
are limited and it seems better to show them here, with a few exhibiting
the flowering of taste into the richer, larger designs toward the middle of
the 18th Century.

Mirrors in very small forms were used in the 16th and possibly in the
17th century as decorations on the person. They were attached to the
trimming of gowns to catch the light. The effect must have been striking.
Allusion to such use is made by Shakespeare and others.
Little mirrors for shaving, too plain to require illustration, are yet very
quaint. The use of oak for mirror frames is found in England in Queen
Elizabeth's time. The frames were well carved. Examples are shown in
Benn, "Style in Furniture."
It is not to be supposed that the Plymouth pilgrims had looking glasses
to any extent, for many years after landing.
The Puritans, however, owned many. More than twenty are named in
Essex County inventories before 1664 and more than thirty in the next
ten years. As this was the era before walnut we much wish to know what
the glasses were like.

[520]

A LARGE home room furnished as of the date 1700 or thereabout. The
court cupboard answered for a sideboard.
The various appurtenances of the fireplace, like the warming pan, with
iron handle, the earlier sort, the weighted jack for turning the roast; Pil
grim chairs; chests; and general household gear, are set forth.
The atmosphere of continuous occupation by the same family, the great
charm of an old home, is highly important in forming a mellow habit of
mind. We need an historical perspective and unless we gain it we are like
nomads in the desert.
Dignity becomes the home of men. They have fought their battle through
unknown ages. They have mastered so many sources of power and beauty,
and arrived at so much knowledge that they deserve to honor themselves
with something better than riches. That something is to surround them
selves with the rich past in order to make the present richer. Hitherto in
America we have lost what is behind us as rapidly as we have gained what
is before us. The real wealth of life is to keep the best of the past, because
manhood means more than ruining one age to build another.
l52i]

IN the 17th Century, at least in the
part of it when oak was still king of
woods, we had not in America arrived
at any such pitch of diversity in civil
ization as to make clocks. We must
content ourselves with at least one
type of English clock, the bird cage,
otherwise called the sheep's head,
from the shape of the wood bracket
on which it was placed. This clock
was built with the bob pendulum, in
use in the earlier years of the 17th
Century. It was adapted to the long
pendulum, which came into use more
or less in the last decade of the
century. These clocks had but one
hand, the spaces being marked so that
one could tell the time within five or
ten minutes.
The works were brass and the fret
work in various patterns is the means
by which the age is determined. This
clock belongs to the author, dates
about 1640, and has been shown in
several previous volumes. It has been
in America a great many years. Itwas
the invention of the long pendulum,
keeping better time, that induced the
making of tall clock cases to protect
the weights from meddling. They were too tempting for a child to resist.
The first clock cases made in America were probably of pine, and very
simple. Some cases remain which are of uncertain date, bordering the
time of the incoming 18th Century. They are very crude, being merely
for protection to the clockworks. The idea of decorating these cases,
however, was too appealing. Eventually, a family had a decorated clock
case, though the entire house might contain nothing else as good.

[522]

AN interesting and odd
Clock, probably of Knicker
bocker origin. The face is
carved; the entire front about
the face being of one piece
with it. There is a music box
above. On the hour a tune is
played on the zither which is
strung on the back, below the
face, protected by open scroll
work carving. There are a
multiplicity of weights and as
each has two cords we have a
whole battery of lines running
down the front. We have no
accurate means of dating this
clock. It belongs to the
author; was brought many
years ago from New York to
Providence and is in good run
ning order. The color is a dull
orange, some sort of paint
having been used to give an
appearance of mellowness. It
is all original. It requires to
be hung high on the wall, to
give room enough for the long
range of the weights.
Some European musical
clocks are very ancient indeed.
The watch, invented at
Nuremberg about 1500, was a
Pilgrim possession. A wooden
wall holder for a watch is
not infrequently found. It
was made with a circular 1
opening through which the '
face of the watch showed. Sundials were common. Crude marks on a
window ledge sometimes served instead. They were accurate twice a
year, and by a little calculation were made to answer for the entire year.

[523

A "DUTCH" Clock.
Owner: Mr. L. C.
Flynt, Monson, Mass
achusetts. This clock
may serve to represent a
large family under this
name. They are exceed
ingly quaint. The pen
dulum is short. They
date late in the 17th and
early in the 18th Century.
The rather elaborate
example here shows all
the usual features — the
pewter ornaments in great
number, the turned wood
en feet, the mermaid, and
the hood or roof which is
sometimes omitted.
We make no attempt
at showing later clocks;
nor can we find any 17th
Century clocks of Ameri
can make. Leads which
we have followed dis
closed, later on, European
clocks. That is to say our
American tall clock in a
17th Century setting is
an anachronism. That
some American clock
cases exist, made before
1720, one cannot suc
cessfully dispute.
Their works, however,
are presumably not na
tive. A simple Dutch
clock, called a "wag-on-
the wall" was the most
popular style of early
clocks.

[524]

A KITCHEN of the latter part of the 17th Century. Makes clear the
method of treating the fireplace when the bricks were not left exposed.
Here the drawing in of the bricks above the chimney tree permitted a wood
finish. As we are soon to take up the matter of hardware we now call at
tention to the fireplace furniture. In this case there is no crane, but a pole
above the line of the chimney tree.
The cooking was done in two ovens opening diagonally in the rear of the
fireplace. It is supposed that the designation of this house for a garrison
is responsible for the two rather than one oven. On opening the cupboard
doors one may see the bee hive shape of the ovens.
One should not look for the side oven with its separate flue and fire box,
until about the time of the Revolution. The crane also gradually came into
more general use, as it "saved the face" of the fair housewife. Hence the
hanging of the crane (which could be shipped in or out at pleasure) signified
not only the setting up of a new family, but a gallant act on the part of
the husband to save his wife from broiling herself with the dinner over the
fire, as was necessary with the lug pole. The scene is in the Hazen Gar
rison House, Haverhill.

I 525]

THREE little wall contrivances. The wider one could have been used
for candles on a pipe box. Such little wall pieces are very good adjuncts
in the furnishing of a house with antique objects. Sometimes baskets are
designed to hang against the wall, like pockets. Little spice boxes, boxes
to hold the scouring brick, boxes for candles and for pipes and tobacco,
and many other purposes, were used.
Where an early house lacked pictures, as most did, conveniences of the
above sort assisted in the furnishing as well as the decoration. There was
usually small closet room in 17th Century houses. The kitchens lacking
our kitchenettes, were arranged something like a ship's galley, with the
utensils arrayed about the walls. Tin sconces, brooms, the implements
of the chase , also contributed to the numerous list , until the walls of a thrifty
householder's kitchen looked like an assemblage of the movable family
property. It is often impossible to know the special use of an ancient
article. We must presume that all little wall pieces were made for a par
ticular purpose. When one does not know he naturally takes refuge in
the term spice box. But candle boxes of wood were also common.
The loss of numerous articles, and their names also from our common
life, makes it more difficult to understand many passages in early litera
ture. We lose the local tang. The next dictionary maker should care
fully go through a museum of utensils.
The small wall pieces, when simple, were usually of pine. When more
elaborate they often appear in walnut.

[526]

qX;

PIPE boxes, a hanging box and an hour glass, owned by Mr. Arthur W.
Wellington. The pipe box was a very decorative piece. It was invariably
made to hang upon the wall and usually in two vertical divisions.
Others are shown in this work.
The little hanging box is initialled and dated. It is too early for matches
and its use is not known, but it would have been convenient for many
purposes. The hour glass is made in two parts. While such pieces usually go by
the name hour glass, a sand glass is the proper term. They were more often
regulated for one, three or fifteen minutes than for an hour, and are found
very convenient today.
Below are five different devices for striking fire, all the property of Mr.
H. W. Erving. The first on the left is the usual tinder box, with the place
for the candle. It contains a piece of flint, a piece of steel and a piece of tow.
The next two pieces are to be carried in the pocket and are very daintily
chased. The next is a combination knife and pick and sparker. The wheel
sparker at the right was used by striking metal against the revolving wheel
and thus dashing a spark into the tow.

[527]

ON the right is an unusual pipe box belonging to Mr. H. W. Erving.
There is a long, deep vertical partition in the back, into which were stuck
the church warden pipes whose long, slender stems demanded a specially
safe place. At the bottom is the tobacco drawer.
On the right of this box is a good example of pipe tongs. One cleaned out
the pipe with the nail-like piece, which also served as a guide for the prongs.
The tongs were to seize a coal for lighting the pipe. The flat thumb piece,
at the end of the goose neck, was for pressing the tobacco into the bowl.
Fine pipe tongs are among the rarest articles found.
The pipe box on the left belongs to the Metropolitan Museum. These
boxes date from the earliest settlement to a time near the close of the 18th
Century. They are often of pine, but later maple, cherry and mahogany
appeared. No two are alike. Good ones are rather rare and are now
eagerly sought. The drawer always has a small handle, generally of wood.
There are sometimes two pockets for pipes. The kitchen was at once, in
small houses, the den, the nursery, the living room, the library and the
dining room.

L528]

A List of Odd Names of Early Utensils
Alchemy. A mixed metal like brass, for spoons, etc.
Beaker. A large drinking vessel with a wide mouth.
Chafing-dish. A vessel to hold coals for heating food.
Cob irons. Small andirons.
Cotter el or cottrel. A small iron window-bolt.
Cowl or cowle. A cowl-shaped covering for a chimney to avoid smoke.
Creeper. A low patten worn by women.
Dial case. For a sun- or possibly a clock-dial.
Fire dogs. Small andirons. Cob irons.
Fire pan. A vessel to carry fire.
Hatchel — hetchel, hackle, heckle. Iron teeth for cleaning flax.
Hake. A hook, especially a pot-hook.
Hanger. A short sword; also a pot-hook.
Keeler. A small shallow tub.
Lattenware. Made of mixed copper and zinc. Like brass.
Noggin. A mug of wood.
Peel. A long, flat shovel of wood or iron, for handling food in ovens.
Pipkin. A small wooden tub, with a prolonged stave for handle.
Porringer. A small, handled basin of pewter, iron or silver, for por
ridge, etc.
Posnet. A small vessel like a porringer, or more fanciful.
Pottle. A two-quart measure, for liquors, etc.
Runlet. A small barrel of 18 gallons.
Skillet. A small metal vessel with long handle and legs.
Slice. Same as peel (above).
Tankard. A drinking vessel, larger than a cup, and generally covered.
Tap. A wooden faucet.
Trammel. An adjustable pot-hook, with holes or saw-teeth.
Trencher. A plate, usually of wood.
Voider. A tray or basket for clearing a table.
Warming pan. Usually of brass, with cover and handle. Used with
coals for moving about in a bed to make it tolerably warm.
We have, in the above list, omitted all modern well-known names.
There were many utensils whose names are contained in no dictionary, and
whose very use is now unknown. The inventories take it for granted
that the names will be understood. Invention proceeded so rapidly that
an old world was lost.

[529]

TURNINGS. That on the left shows the
turned portion of the leg of the gate-leg in
the Albany Historical Society, which has four
gates. The size of the corner posts is two
and seven-eighths inches. The inner, or gate
legs, are smaller. The ancient turnings were
strong and bold rather than delicate. This
arose from the crudeness of the lathes of the
period. Yet in some instances the approach
to delicacy was very close, and a great
achievement considering the handicap. Very
small articles could not be turned. The age
favored solidity.
The earliest traditions of furniture turning
followed the Gothic. The prototypes of all
the fine examples of wood turning may be
found in the pillars, windows or screens of
cathedrals. Flat turnings for comfort in chair construc
tion were not rare, in the arms and the back.
Turning came to be a fashion, almost a fad.
Hence half turnings, otherwise called drops,
or split spindles, and bosses were applied on
stair posts, cupboards, chests, chests of draw
ers, and various other articles. In fact,
wherever there was a space where applied
turnings could be used, they were used, at
the end of the 17th Century. It was com
mon to turn finials on stair posts, and prob
ably bed posts except where the construction
demanded that the body of the post should
be square. The happiest effects, and unfor
tunately the rarest, were in the turnings of
standards for candle stands. The so-called
square turnings on stair posts were taken
bodily from cathedral finials.
It is curious that the applied turnings did
not come into vogue on looking glasses till a
hundred and twenty years later. It appears
that, before our time, discursive minds
wandered back to early styles and revived
such as seemed worthy.
[53o]

'

xxV^
' . h . fl -> £ ./% ¦ •?

^ssfeCr-^

A BURL Bowl, probably of maple. Owner: the author. The extraordi
nary character of the piece, owing to its size, the diameter being 23 inches,
also its having ears carved upon it, and the great beauty of the wood,. renders
it highly important. It is presumed that the Indians found here by our an
cestors, carved bowls like this, and that our ancestors imitated them. It is
known, however, that they are made abroad also. The object of using the
burl which is a growth — resulting from a wound on the trunk of a tree, rather
than a root or a knot, was to secure a material which would not split. The
grain is wholly distinct from that found in the crotch of a tree; it is snarled
in every direction. Of course much beauty also attaches to the finished
piece, owing to the grain, and a copy of it would make a beautiful wall paper
design. The date may be any early period.
Below is a similar small bowl and a scoop of the same material, from the
author's collection.

m

wM
mgmMs. . ^
mmtK^'--'' ¦ ¦ ¦''+y^mmmmmW
HaF^ - mjmmmmm\ ^LW
* j£
-W&ffiy:*-
"** '"Tj£'<« ^w
;^Hwcri7t^« '• ¦ ^* *%
"•-.* ...is"' 'JpX2r
%':k'~ -
[531]
A SERIES of Utensils. The great mortar is rough shaped and is almost
all a man can lift. In such mortars the corn was pounded if a mill was not
available. Ordinary mortars, turned and unturned, are on the right and
left. The shovel is large, and all of wood. The bowl beneath it is of burl.
The handled vessel was used for dipping water. It is called a dipper.
The knife, blade outward, in a haft, is afroe. It was placed on the end of a
straight-grained small log of oak or ash with the point of the knife at the
center. A blow with a great mallet, followed by successive changes in
position of the froe as a pie is cut in wedges, resulted in making clapboards,
thin at one edge.
All the early clapboards were made in this manner, and the writer has a
nice bunch of oak clapboards made to test the matter. After the splitting
one or both surfaces could be smoothed by a draw knife. As soon as our
ancestors learned that they could shave pine shingles more rapidly than they
could make clapboards, they did so. The shingles were more durable.
On the rear of the John Alden side wall they are probably original. The
long shingle is quainter. It could be used only where the best straight-
grained pine was found. We frequently see long shingles on modern
houses but unless they are shaved they will not be durable. The sawed
shingle is cut always somewhat, and often very much, across the grain.

[532]

A PAGE of burl bowls, accompanied by quaint wooden spoons or ladles.
The property of Mr. Albert C. Bates, of Hartford. The little instruments
between the bowls, above, are Indian tools, consisting of minute parallel
knives, for stripping up wood for basket work. The Indians made bowls
and the settlers learned from them. It is often impossible to say whether
an object is of Indian make or not. The bowl below has a decorated edge.

[533 1

THE room is the old kitchen in the Cooper-Austin House, the oldest
house in Cambridge, and in the ownership of the Society for the Preservation
of New England Antiquities. It shows a vast fire place. The Society's
seven houses are, sad to say, at present rather bare of early furniture.
In time that lack may be remedied.
There seem inseparable difficulties at the present time to the gathering of
proper furniture of the pilgrim period in a proper house. There is furniture,
and there are houses, and there are persons interested in one or the other.
To our thought a museum is not a satisfactory place for the exhibition of
such furniture. It should appear in its natural home. The home thereby
becomes attractive and the furniture no longer looks queer and out of place.
Not until we abandon the thought of catering to persons who must be pleased,
as the saying goes, shall we get down to the scientific assembling in a charm
ing unity of the furniture in the house, neither to be accepted unless each is
thoroughly right. Otherwise we shall learn little, and the objects so
desirable will not be attained.

[534 1

ON the right is the Parlor, no longer thus furnished, of the Iron Works
house, Saugus. The fireplace opens nearly ten feet, and the room being a
parlor, the fireplace was plastered inside and the inside corners were rounded .
The great chimney trees of such houses were of oak, sometimes more than
twenty inches through vertically. Where, as here, the hearth was of
brick tile we can understand that a chair moved back and forth upon it for
a hundred years would wear down to the rungs.
The other picture shows a spinning attic in the Wentworth-Gardner house.
Herbs were hung about the sides of attics. This attic over the main hall
afforded fine facilities for carrying on the spinning, though the heat of
summer and the cold of winter were not escaped.
The walls of this room are paneled sheathing. The furniture is some
what late for our purposes.
Below are a set of fine lanterns, the property of Mr. Rudolph Pauly.

[535 1

THE means of locomotion in the
early part of the pilgrim century were
limited to boats and to "shanks'
mare." The pretty fiction of Long
fellow, in placing Priscilla on a led
bull, was not intended, we imagine,
to be taken for a gloss on pilgrim
customs. Bulls were worked in the
yoke, but were hardly available for
riding. The boats did not help
much inland from the New England
coast, except on the Charles and the
Connecticut. Edward Winslow went
on foot when he visited the Narra-
gansetts. Snow shoes, with "gaiters"
attached, an ancient pair, are above.
A shovel in quartered oak, though
worn, still does good work. The
churn was handed down in the Alden
family. The barrel, probably worked
out from a hollow tree, would have
been scorned by John Alden, who was a cooper by trade. For a description
of the quaint subject on the left we refer to the next page.
I 536]

THIS great Burl Bowl is somewhat like a hat in shape. It has ears worked
upon it from the solid wood. It belongs to Mr. Albert C. Bates. The
object of cutting a bowl from a burl was to escape the danger of splitting.
Burl is the result of loss of orderly impulse in the tree, so that the grain
is like a tangle.
At the bottom of the preceding page is a smoke jack, such as was used
to turn the spit. The scrolling of the face plate is quite elaborate. The
handle shows how it was wound up. The chain belt is not shown. The
object of the wheel at the top was to give it a spin after winding, for the
weight was carefully graduated so as merely to keep the spit moving very
slowly. See another sort on page 548. We have here a worm gear, so much
heralded in automobiles now. It is one of the oldest human inventions.
There was a clock work jack invented and patented by Simon Willard, the
famous clockmaker, but at a very much later date, for a vertical tin or
copper oven. The spiders had very long handles, to keep one away from
the blaze. The Dutch oven was a cast iron pot with a cast cover. It was
placed on the coals; coals were also heaped on top of it, so that the bread
could be cooked evenly. Hence the phrase, "between two fires." At the
very first, some fireplaces had no brick ovens. Everything was cooked
in or on the fire.
Boiling was a much more usual method of cooking than now. As in
Europe our fathers cast into a great pot whatever edible* things they found,
to flavor the contents or to add to its strength. It was all in "one boiling."

[537]

ON the left is a barrel of red-elm
bark, belonging to Mr. Albert C. Bates.
It is said the Indians used such articles.
The wood of hollowed out barrels which
has been called hornbeam, is beech or
birch . They were once not uncommon .
Below are four pairs of bellows.
One pair is flat, without decoration.
One pair has a turned ornament. A
third pair has stencilled ornaments.
The fourth pair has a convex face and
is well decorated with stencil work.
This is the best sort. Bellows were a
necessity with open fires. They add
much to the furniture of the fireplace,
especially since they are useful now.

Great kettles of iron or brass were a necessity in every family. It required,
unless there was a crane, two strong persons with a pole to remove the great
kettle from the fire. Those were "the days of real sport."
The carrying of fire from hoiise to house arose merely from improvidence
in keeping dry tinder. More use for the fire carriers was found in taking
coals from room to room, for fires in the various fireplaces.

[538]

. . . ^

¦**

THE ordinary wall sconce in use for generations beginning soon after
the country was settled is shown above in three styles of painted tin. It
had the advantage of safety, convenience of moving, and cheapness. Some
times these sconces were decorated with stencil or other painting.
The iron vessel is a cast Betty lamp. They are less common than the tin
or hammered iron. The saucer base was designed to catch the drip. A
hinged cover had a small opening at the lip end, where the wick protruded.
The little wooden wall box with door and drawer is a fine example of the
undefinable home made articles that gave charm and individuality. The
little row of decorative knobs was whittled out.
Below is a series of articles, which require no explanation.

I 539 1

HARDWARE preserved from St. Stephen's Church, East Haddam,
Connecticut. Mr. Morgan B. Brainard, of Hartford, interested himself to see that
this hardware was preserved, before the church perished. He has now
mounted as above all the hardware on the doors of the church. While the
period is not very early, there was less change in hardware than in furniture,
from the 17th to the 18th Century. The Episcopal Society which erected
the church was organized in 1791. The edifice was finally completed in
1795, and consecrated by Bishop Seabury.
The long push bar and the hinges are especially good. A handle like this
we show elsewhere. We see here the transition from the plain guard and
striker, driven directly into a door, to the same pieces mounted on a plate
and attached by nails or screws. By this date screws were generally used
in domestic architecture. l54o]

1-83

1-74

1-GZ

1-63

THE Hinge 8i is a ram's horn. It is a simplified form of 74, which in
turn is greatly simplified from the scrolled Renaissance hinges so often found
in Europe but not known in our Colonial hardware.
62 and 63 are two forms of the cock's comb hinge. On the left the example
is hackled on the neck. The other form is slighter and more angular, but
more generally found.
The cock's comb hinge was often made of cast brass. Its more usual
application was on small cupboard doors. But at least one house which the
author has visited had this hinge on all the room doors. It varies in length
from three to eight inches. It is never found except on good woodwork, as
it was considered a refinement and somewhat of a luxury.
None of these hinges were common. The upper examples were used with
gudgeons, which were never ground but merely hammered.
The fastening was by hand wrought nails. It was custom to use a bit of
leather, through which the nail was driven to secure a binding fit. This
system is found in the best houses, as is also the clenching of the nails on the
opposite side.

[54i]

IjX'lUpnfelfW

ol*J !! I, 'V ofl 'L_iL_!— i-«!°l'i|

1-Z1

I '# :|.° I'1* \°'f '¦' «.' °^i^L^lxi^xi

1-36

1-3 Z
THE Hinge 21 is made with an offset on the short end of about an inch,
or whatever the thickness of the material was to which attachment was
made. It is called a chest hinge, though the usual chest hinge on American
work was a pin hinge, like the cotter pin, two loops of tapered wire or larger
iron hooked together.
The regular chest hinge above is occasionally found on cupboards, or
wherever it was desired to lift the door as well as to open it. The European
varieties of these hinges are sometimes richly wrought with intricate scrolled
patterns. In 32 we have a very ancient example used still in the same form.
The gudgeon is ragged, that is hacked to form small barbs, so that, once
driven into the wood it cannot easily be removed. The more elaborate
gudgeon, 38, is furnished with a scrolled end, in blacksmith's parlance a
pigtail. It is not exclusively ornamental, as a nail was driven into the flat
to brace the hinge.
The buck horn hinge, 82, was used on dwelling house doors. The scroll
end afforded nail holes which did not follow one line and saved splitting
the wood.

[542 ]

A PAGE of Hinges, of which the rarest form is 3 . (In these notations I
signifies iron and will not be noticed further.) The name is HLL. The pur
pose of the L was to strengthen the hold in the wood. The commoner form
is the HL, number 2. At the top of a door it was placed as we see it. At
the bottom the mate to it was reversed. In 12 we have the modified form
with small decorative work at the ends, over dignified by the word scroll.
In 31 we have a hammered form in which the branches not only taper but
grow thinner toward the arrow end. This form also was attached by the
pin, or gudgeon, and is earlier than the ordinary H and HL hinges, made
of sheet metal. The plain H hinge, number 1, is the commonest of all
forms; somewhat ornamented it becomes number n. Number 13 is a
hammered HL hinge with star and arrow ends. It was used on small work.
The butterfly hinge 52 was used after 1700; the cruder form, without a pin,
51, was in use before 1700. Number 366 is a little latch for a small door
made like an H hinge.

[543 ]

wxy.

'-^^^^^%t^§l§^l^2:^W^A " '" A -.'w.s.fyl
, ¦¦ '*~  ~"  wt.^™.../K..'fltr rJ ^^w/. _jji.* •A,'' .IP

*'"^'".'&^;fe#i-.*^ >'*««,
THE Iron Works House above, as restored, at Saugus, no longer used for
that work, has one of the most attractive roof lines.
The lean-to was not original but was added about 1750. The ell fol
lowed about 1800. The chimney stack is a model of its kind.
The hinges below are described on page 548.

1-37

1-45

l544l

4°4

406

401

IN this Page of Andirons, 404 is the simple form, with a ring top. The
heart pair, 406, is very rare. The crook neck octagon ball, 401 , is a popular
style. The hook on the inside of the standard is for the spit rod rest. The
goose necks, 403, are quaint and were much used. The straight ball pair
were heavy and high. The flat ball, with crook neck, 409, differs from those
immediately above them in having plain rather than octagon balls. These
patterns vary from 12 to 20 inches in hight. Unless otherwise noted the
hardware in this section of the book is photographed by the author from
original examples once in his possession. There is one exception.
All this work was hand wrought. Cast iron was very early used, but its
forms are so manifold we can notice only a few.

4°3

409

[545 1

THE first pair of andirons differs from the last shown in that these balls
are not flattened. The heavy flat scrolls, 402, were seldom found. They
too much obscured a view of the fire. The pig tail scroll, 400, has a flattened
section on top, where a small porringer might be placed.
The andirons below all belong to Mr. Geo. F. Ives. The cast pair of
Hessians face away from each other — an error in photographing. The
right hand pair of Washington andirons are rare. The Hessians have been
so much copied that the original, like these, are the choicer, as imitation
enhances the value of the original. The middle pair, with brass tips and
flat feet, are extremely rare as the brass is made in a square molded section.

S46]

THERE is shown above the wonderful old fire room and fireplace in the
Iron Works House. It is about ten feet across. In the same side of the
same chimney in the lean-to is another fireplace, so that the chimney on the
ground floor has dimensions of about n by 18 feet and the question of the
fireplace furniture becomes an important one.
The clock-work jack, shown in position above, turned the rod below which
rested on the large andiron. This method antedated many years the tin
oven, which was a declension from the earlier, stronger style.
The small andirons in the rear, holding up the back logs, were called fire
dogs. They were for use while the larger andirons were for ornament or
to hold the spit. The meat of Queen Victoria was cooked on an arrangement
like this during all her life.
The bunches of red ears of corn are hung here to season. On the right,
on the wall, is a candle box of tin.
The pole hung from the ceiling was for hanging articles after ironing,
a kind of suspended clothes horse.

[547

ON Page 544 is shown, in 37, a hinge with a screw gudgeon which passed
entirely through the door post and was fastened on the opposite side, in the
next room, with a diamond shaped washer and an ornamental nut. In 41
we have a 17th Century hinge named the strap and butterfly, a crude form
ofwhichis42. This was used on good houses. A modification is the wedge
and strap, 43. An offset hinge with ground joint is 34. The plain thumb
end of 35 is commoner but not so good as the arrow end, 41.
On this page, on the left, is shown a smoke jack, which the author took
out of a chimney in the Wentworth-Gardner house, photographed, and
returned to its place. It was revolved, in the flue, by the draught. The
bigger the fire the faster it turned, The long shaft, with worm gear at one
end, at the other end stuck through the chimney breast, six or seven feet
above the floor, and was connected by a pulley and chain belt with the spit
rod below. A remarkable affair, dating 1760.
The cranes are various types, spiraled, braced, scrolled and plain. They
should extend about two thirds of the way across the fireplace. The crane
hangers are eyes with a shank which is built into the brick work. The
upper end of the bearing was made long so that the crane could be un
shipped.

548

14*>6 (I4b7

J

THE two Forks on the left are called tormentors. Some ask why. Evi
dently they are not familiar with the preaching of the past generations.
The forks were used to take the meat out of the pot.
The slender little forks, third and fourth in line, were for toasting. The
basket work affair last in line, was used for broiling an egg or chop. It had
a swivel so as to reverse and cook on both sides. In the group on the right
of the page, 460 is a skewer holder and its half-dozen skewers. An iron
hook for sustaining the hole for drying articles in front of the fireplace is
473. The attachment called a jamb hook, 448 and 449, was fastened, on
either side of the fireplace, to steady the shovel and tongs. The long
rod, 474, rested on the hooks of the andirons, carried a little hollowed rim
wheel at the end for the clock work jack, and revolved the meat attached
by the skewers.
The other articles are hammered ladles and a perforated brass skimmer.
We do not seem to find cast ladles. The hammer marks on early iron
are often eagerly looked for. But in the finest work those marks were
often carefully avoided, so that they prove nothing except that the piece
is hand wrought. They do not testify to age. Of late the market has
been flooded with a great quantity of crude, spurious iron work.

I 549 1

1-479

1-478

1-477 m

[550]

ON the preceding page, number 457 is a good early toaster. The handle
is hammered in a quaint design, and the bars of the toaster are spiraled. A
plain grill, or rest for a vessel over the fire is 479. A whirling spiral grill is
450. This and all articles on the page except the kettle, are hammered.
A charcoal broiler or cooker is 470. The top is hinged for renewing the
charcoal. A trivet, spiraled in its bracing, and scrolled in its table, is 478.
It has a handle of wood. A trivet with a heart-shaped brace is 477. There
is a detachable crane. A little fire on the trivet in summer; but in winter
the entire trivet placed over the blaze.
On this page are various pieces of iron belonging to the author. The long,
narrow trough is for boiling the rushes in waste fat. An excellent pair of
early pipe tongs is on the right. The right hand group on this page shows
the notched and the saw tooth trammels and pot hooks. The word trammel
has an origin now forgotten. It confined, or held at the desired elevation
the pot over the fire. The saw tooth trammels are rare. Some beautiful
examples from the South have scroll work — "etching" — on the haft.
The trammel was a daily necessity. The pot was adjusted to bring it
into direct contact with the blaze. The hight varied according to the size
of the blazing logs. With a lug pole the same method, together with
chains, was used.

L55i]

t

A SERIES of shovel and tong handles. None of these tops are brass;
all are hammered. The third and the seventh are scroll shovel handles.
The shovel itself was not used for ashes — a great shovel was brought in for
that purpose — but for putting in and taking out food at the oven. This
shovel was also called the slice, or the peel, because it peeled as it were the
food from the oven bottom. It was sometimes made of wood.
The fourth and the eighth forms are tongs, the latter being best, with
strong outward scrolls.
The round headed handles, some of shovels, others of tongs are good in
their way.
The brass fireplace utensils came in much later, though in a few rich
homes they might possibly, and rarely, be found.
The most used utensil at the fireplace was the tongs. The falling
pieces of log required readjustment and powerful tools were necessary.
Pokers were not in use. They go with a coal fire, or at least with grates.
A broom of birch stood by the fireplace to keep in their place the scatter
ing ashes. The bellows, a long spider, kettles, pots, Dutch ovens (cast
iron baking dishes), made up part of the furniture.
The ashes produced by the hard wood fire were all carefully saved for
making soap. Also the lye made from them was used for hulling corn.
In the backs of the fireplaces, well up, were niches for holding tinder, and
the tinder box, or anything small that must be kept dry.
In the large chimneys recesses were provided, upstairs, for hanging ham
and bacon to cure.

[552

SEVERAL daintily wrought examples of pipe tongs have came down to
us. At the top is the pair captured at the siege of Fort William Henry, by
a scion of the Williams family in South Easton. They are engraved to
that effect, with the date 1754. A pair owned by the author, 180, is not
nearly so good. The little thumb piece for pressing the tobacco into the
bowl was perforated to prevent putting out the fire.
The pair with an acorn end is hardly equal to the next pair 183, perhaps
the finest example found. In addition to what one can see, there is on
the hinge a series of little notch "carvings," and a flattened or halved acorn
terminates the base of the spring. More properly it is a tear drop.
The bottom pair is a poor relation of the others. It merely supplies
clumsy figures for the tongs, and resembles a pair of pincers. The delicacy
of much of this work, very light and paper thin, is the highest achievement
in American colonial hardware.

[553 1

ABOVE are an array of candle sticks, lamps and a heart waffle iron. Also
unique three-fingered snuffers. Below on this page are two fine candle
stands of Mr. W., of Boston, with Betty lamp, snuffers and pipe tongs. On
Page 555 is a wonderful table candle stand, the most interesting we have seen.
A series of lanterns at the bottom of that page shows examples of differing
dates. The fourth is of wood. The fifth is a ship lantern. The third and
last are late. The second was in use about 1800. The first is for carrying
before one, or for use as a sconce.

The date on such work is im
possible to fix with any degree
of accuracy but it is safe to say
that they are at least pre-Revolu-
tionary. The variety of designs for
holding candles, or oil, for light
ing, is only surpassed by the
multiplied modern fashions.
But there is a quite notable
scarcity of artistic forms. The
elaborate European styles are
scarcely represented in early
American work. All efforts to
trace the origin of the tall stan
dards for candles have proved
vain. We know they were in
use in England. Spanish exam
ples are numerous, but have been
excluded here, except in one case.

[554

[555

ALL the articles on this and the next page belong to Mr. Geo. F. Ives.
The first above is a horn lantern. The next a quaintly scrolled candle stick.
Then a pistol sparker and a gun lock sparker. A petticoat lamp follows,
and a bull's eye. Below is a good chandelier with a crystal center. This,
while not original, was provided for in the construction.

[ 556 ]

ABOVE is first a curious ladle or flagon. Next a reflector lamp, then a
triple wall sconce with reflector. Next a swiveled pewter lamp made to
hang or carry, and last a tinder-box combined as usual with a candle stick.
Below we have on the left a fine pair of reflecting sconces.
The other pair on the right may be unique. If not they are extremely
rare. Their simple three branches are effective and seem to be the produc
tion, here, in iron, of the richer sconces produced abroad in silver.
Beautiful plates serving as backs for sconces in Sheffield ware appeared
later. The best thing in use in our period seems to have been such
reflecting sconces as those on the left. They were in their finest forms,
composed of small segments of silvered glass. Their effect is very
beautiful.

I 557]

A PAIR of Sconces belonging to the E. B. Leete Co., of Guilford, Connec
ticut. The tips of the iron candleholders are of brass. The use of a spike,
so common in Spanish work, for affixing the candle, is rare on American
pieces. These sconces have been for generations in Connecticut, and their
simplicity suggests that their origin is colonial.
There is an iron hook, the beginning of which is discernible, which goes
over the back of the wooden support, resting in a slight slot. Thus the
iron portion may be removed and hooked elsewhere. The pieces are
designed as they stand, to rest upon a table. They are presumably unique
and very attractive in their quaintness.
Hight, 17^ inches; hight of wooden base, 9 inches. On the right is a
very large pair of tongs, with teeth, for filling a warming pan.
[558]

0

uJ

THE hanging sconces here shown may not in all cases be of American
make, but they were all found here, except the first. The second is a nice
piece of lamp work, of two saucer-shaped pieces of iron brazed together.
The rooster, stopper and the turned ornaments are of brass. These hang
ing lamps were used at looms, as well as for other purposes. The third
example is made with a sliding joint and spring to shove up and down.
The last is a trammel form candle stick and rush light.
Below is a quaint little affair, a candle holder to be thrust into a wooden
support or to be hooked to a mantel or a "high backt" chair. It was
found in Connecticut, and is owned by Mr. Malcolm Norton.

')

[559 1

A MOST attractive form of chandelier or "branch", as such pieces were
called. The central portion is a wood turning eleven inches high by six
inches in diameter. To it are nailed the sheet iron strips which form the
branches. They are rolled over on their edges for finish and strength.
The staple and the S-hook at the top are for attachment to a hook in the
ceiling or a chain adjusted to the hight of a room. It belongs to Mr. Geo.
F. Ives, as do the lighting fixtures at the bottom of the next page
On the top of that page is a twelve candle chandelier the design of which
the author had sketched from an ancient example. This piece is all in metal.
The dates of these chandeliers are entirely conjectural, beyond the state
ment that they belong in the 17th and 18th Centuries, and there is no reason
why some should not have been made until the time of the common use of
the whale oil lamp.
The low ceilings in 17th Century houses where furniture of that period,
left to us, was originally used, did not admit of central "branches" like
the above, except in rare instances. The individual candle branches are
about n inches each, horizontally. The hub is of pine. Similar pieces
are now being eagerly sought. But there is little hope of discovering
more than a very few. The author has lately seen one with two circles
of branches, on different levels.

[56o]

THE piece above was just described. Below are, on the ends, two very
rare examples of Betty lamp stands, with the lamps. The Betty lamp was
designed to hang, but obviously that was sometimes inconvenient. The
second and fifth pieces are candle sticks, the fifth with square base being
very odd. The fine wall sconce with minute facets for reflectors is a very
rare example in this good state of repair. The fourth piece is a hanging
candle, the fish hook shape of which does not clearly show.

[561

A SECOND good example of a wood and iron chandelier owned by Mr.
Geo. F. Ives.
The use of oil in the Betty lamp, which copied the classical form, was very
early, but coincident with the use of candles. Metal or glass lamps with a
wick and whale oil as a filler were of a later date. This brief survey covers
most of the antique methods of lighting in this country until the introduction
of kerosene. All lamps designed to burn it are too late to be called antique.
The ordinary lights for general room illumination were as they should have
been, at the sides. A chandelier was ordinarily objectionable owing to the
low ceilings. Wall sconces of various degrees of elaboration were common.
Ordinarily speaking no effort, except in ball rooms, was made at general
illumination. The light was small and movable to be placed where most
needed, hence the stick lamp, the hook lamp and the candle stick; some of
these being attached to the back and others even to the front posts of a chair.

[562]

A SERIES of tall iron candle stands photographed from various ex
amples. All except the last, which has more of a Spanish suggestion, were in
the author's possession. These three have bars which adjust at any hight de
sired, a spring or two securing them. The second one came from the South,
and is good and peculiar, perhaps unique, in having little arched braces to
stiffen the high standard. In most cases the standard is four and a half to
five and a half feet high. There is a cast and turned brass tip on the top of
the standard. The candle sticks are sometimes iron, generally brass, and
the latter are often cast. These candle stands tapered toward the top
and are rather delicate in the old patterns.
The brass tip is always small. The more elaborate the specimen the
more likely it is to be an imitation. The little frame containing the
springs is called a cage. The light, when pushed down, was for reading.
When elevated, it served to illuminate a room. We have never seen one
of these early American standards with four lights. But there has been
found a wooden stand with short T arms at the end of the bar, as if to
take two candles at each end.

[563]

r-

A

\]

J*

ft

ft

r\\ r\\ /^v

IN the first stand we have a scrolled foot. In the second the candle bar is
scrolled, from a narrow section. There is a brass disc as part of the decora
tion, just above the tripod. In the third example, the candle bar is com
posed of a very wide scroll. In the fourth example, the bracket is more
artistic than usual. At the base simple scrolls between each leg are added
for decoration. This piece belongs to the city of New York, and is in the old
City Hall.
Tall iron stands are now very difficult to obtain. When found they are
generally in a dilapidated condition. It may well be that some of these old
stands are not native. Most of them have a bar for two candles, but per
haps a dozen are known with a single bracket, for one candle. A few are
found with wooden blocks for bases. These are usually simple and are not
relatively good.
The classical stand was for burning oil in a lamp like a gravy boat, or
Betty lamp, of elegant workmanship, in bronze.

[564]

OF the stands above those at the sides are short and slight. One carries
three candles. That on the right has a three pronged rest for an ordinary
candlestick which is not attached to the stand. The middle specimen shows
a hanging pair of snuffers and feet with curled up toes.
The matter of lighting was so important as to give the name chandler
(candler) to merchants in many kinds of trade. We have only to consider
what the oil and electric development is today to understand how large
was the matter of candles in the old days . The wealth of New England came
largely through the whaling fleets, which brought in oil to take the place of
candles, or spermaceti for the best candles. The preparation of rushes for
lighting was by peeling, except for a small shred on one side, and dipping in
hot tallow. Rush lights are shown farther on.
A history of artificial lighting might disclose some odd chapters in human
experience, from the pine knot to the 300,000 candle power light now being
installed, to cast a beam eighty miles out to sea.

[565 1

TWO interesting stands
owned by Mr. Geo. F. Ives.
That having three lights has
practically no bases as drip
basins for the candles. It must
have been used where this defect
was ignored, on an earth floor.
Several other good lanterns
belonging to Mr. Rudolph
Pauly, are shown at the bot
tom of page 535. One has a
wooden frame and small wooden
finials, and is of great interest.
Horn lanterns were not sub
ject to breakage and were in
general early use.

A lantern such as that shown is now
called, by the perversity of a fad, a "Paul
Revere lantern." Of course it would have
been impossible to see the light from such a
candle, in a church belfry. These lanterns
are simply tin perforated by nail holes.
They were in early use and have continued
up to the last generation in many country
neighborhoods. They are now made in
quantities. A few days is sufficient to coat
them so effectively with rust that they
look older than necessary. They are some
times made in very large sizes [566]

**"i~-«**«iL^.

WALL Sconces that could not be
moved were on that account ob-
jectional. Our fathers were accus
tomed to carrying lights in the
hand, in doors and out.
The double sconce above is a very rare form whose origin is not known.
The snuffers are hand wrought. Steel snuffers are of small account. They
are always more fanciful.
The attractive, extremely rare, double table candle stand with shades
has a brass post and handle at the top. The rest is iron. An important
specimen. Below the
lanterns are not very
early forms. They were
used on shipboard or in
public halls, on walls.
Almost every man
seems to have made his
lantern to his taste. The
forms are numberless.
Few are very ancient.
The materials were
either wood, iron, tin,
brass, horn. They
should not be adapted
to electric light. To do
so is thoroughly incon
gruous.

[ 567 ]

ON the left is a rare swinging bracket
torch holder. The ornaments are quaintly
good. The date may be 18th Century.
Small plates are nailed to the wall to sus
tain it, moving through a half circle.
The small single wall sconce on the same
plate dates from the 18th Century.
The use of torch holders seems to be
confined, of necessity, to light out of doors.
Such holders were filled with any resinous
wood. They marked the approaches to
stately dwellings.

The table candle stands on the right
vary little from the high stands already
shown except in hight. The feet of
the one on the right are more delicately
made with hammered enlargements.
It has nicely shaped little scrolls on
the springs.
On the left at the bottom is a pole
torch, the pole of course being missing;
and a flip iron — a thing much sought
after now — of course as a curio.

i

I

U

s\ X^

We suspect certain blacksmith's tools
have been made to do duty as flip irons
or toddy sticks. We are sure that the
gophering iron, thrust into a hollow
holder, is often called a flip iron. It
was used in England, and perhaps here,
to heat the gophering iron on which ruffles
or flounces were smoothed. After the
fashion of the gophering iron had passed
out its original purpose was forgotten,
but obviously no toddy iron could need a
sheath, as it would be cold when taken
from the toddy.
A loggerhead, served the same pur
pose, and, if too much toddy were taken,
the imbibers sometimes used the logger
heads on one another's skulls.

[568]

THE Bracket Candle Sconce, on a swivel, above, is one of the oddest
affairs ever found. By means of a thumb nut and a toggle joint the candle
holder may be changed in hight and extension. The little holder itself is
on a swivel weighted below to keep it steady. Such a contrivance would
have supplied a good reading light. Below are three forms of rush light
holders. The writer was asked recently whether any holder for rush lights
is American. Our fathers used rush lights not a little. So simple a thing
could hardly have been imported in every case. These specimens were
found in America, but there is nothing to prove they were not brought here.
The left hand holder has a side prong for a candle, to use for guests. Mean
time the weight of it kept the nippers closed on the rush, as shown on the
right example, which has a spring for that purpose, and iron legs. The mid
dle piece has a nicely turned base.

[569]

A REMARKABLY good set of
three sconces, each with the
lights, is owned by Mr. Geo. T.
Ives. They have the true colonial
feeling, much simplicity, but very
good taste. The curl with which
the pieces terminate is made useful
as well as ornamental.
So far as known these specimens
are unique. No doubt the less
artistic reflecting sconces were
found better for lighting. Hence
the rarity of such examples as
these. Below is a much reduced picture
of the corner fireplace in York jail,
now converted into the local
historical museum. The feature
of great interest is the raised
hearth, English-wise, which wastes
heat; and the corner treatment in
general, which is delightful.
In the fireplace, the error is

often made, when preparing it for a
setting of early hardware, of doing the
work too daintily. No glazed trim or
pressed brick should be used, no colored
mortar, and no arch allowed.
The hearth should be of old, or at
least rough, red brick tile, about 7^
inches square. The rest of the work
should be in common brick, old if
possible, laid in common white mortar.
The larger the fireplace the better.

[57o]

THE Brass Box Lock was used on fine houses from about 1725 to 1795.
When the author was rummaging among the unknown treasures of the
Metropolitan Museum, he found a second specimen like this. They are
the best examples that have come to light. The ordinary brass box lock
was cast with perfectly plain square edges. The molded edge is one feature
of beauty and rarity. Most old locks are screwed on from the face. This,
in common with the better sort has a back plate screwed to the door. To
this plate, the lock is attached by hooked studs and slots. One screw placed
in the edge at the closed end, holds it securely. The striker is attached in
the same way.
These locks, at least in the early period, were never made rights and lefts.
The lock was simply turned over to accommodate itself to a door opening
the other way. There was no outside keyhole, this being an inside door lock.
Thus the polished plate was clean except for the drop handle. A bolt was
shot by pushing the little stud shown on the bottom edge. Knobs are
much later. Below is a drawing of the pine tree shilling, our first coin.
The die was made by Joseph Jencks, ironmaster.

%Ai

^'^.ly'Ss^insi'

[571]

OF the Latches the left hand one, in iron, is now on the back door of the
hall in the Webb house, Wetherfield. It is above nineteen inches long.
The second example is in brass. The third was taken from an old church
door — we hope not without leave. Its length is sixteen and a half inches.
The latches on the other plate are outside door patterns. The left hand
one has fine hatcheling on the small triangles. One should notice the orna
ments across the centers of the handles. The right hand example is called
the triangle latch. The middle one ends with spear or arrow points and
has extra little quirks at the bases of the circles.
No such rich hardware as is common abroad showed itself in America —
at least none remains. And we do not regret it. These simpler designs are
sufficiently attractive and mark the decorative sense of the colonists better
than the mere importation of something on which they had not put out
their skill.
The bars of these outside latches, which date in some cases earlier than
1700, were large, running to fifteen inches. Dependence was placed on a
large wooden bar across the door within instead of locks.

I 572]

OF the numerous knockers here shown, all in iron because the brass
knocker is later, 302 was found on a door of a 17th Century house near
Haverhill. It is like 306, except that it has stamped on it a series of decora
tive rings.
305 is a rope twist found in Newfoundland, as was also 300. The origins
of the others have been lost sight of. 3 10 is a kind of cock's comb knocker.
301 is a simplification of 300. 308 and 307 are merely rings with balls. 303
is composed of several twisted strands gathered into a ring.
Some of these knockers were also latches. On swinging the knocker a
latch bar was lifted by means of a post running through the door. This
devise was doubtless the origin of the drop handle on brass box locks.
The three great latch handles in the right plate run from 22 y4. to 27 inches
in length. Their shapes are quite suggestive of the finials on a Brewster
chair. Of course, they are a reminiscence of the Gothic.
Such latches were used for the most part in America on church doors,
or state buildings. They are among the rarest articles of American hard
ware, and what is worse, there is little chance of more of them being
found. They are so prominent as to make their whereabouts known.
One recently came to light with notch carving on the thumb piece. But
it was not in this heroic size.

[573 1

THE Fourth Latch in the line above is found on many good houses. It
is the best design of the five. The handle portion is shaped more than in
the others. This one was on the back door of the Wentworth-Gardner house.
It was used as an inside and outside latch, in differing sizes.
The third latch is scrolled to secure a slight departure from the triangle,
but the type is not so good. The other three latches differ mostly in the
ornamental bars across the handle. They are common design, rather lack
ing in style. The large specimen was on an outside door.
Iron latches of this period are never attached with screws but always by
clinch nails, which hold far more securely than any wood screw ever devised.
The length of the thumb piece was accommodated to the thickness of the
door and there were no adjustments to get loose. The hammering was so
done as to leave the iron thinner and narrower near the plates, which them
selves were thinned at the edges, like early brass cabinet handles.

l574l

LATCH 249 has the Heart shaped Plate. The large well scrolled latch,
250, was on a church. The striker, 270, shows a scrolled support into which
a nail was driven. The shaft was also ragged. At the top is shown a shaped
thumb piece. There are also two examples of latch bars, 275 and 276,
which have scrolls to lift them by, independent of the thumb piece. Below
are examples, 202, 203 and 204, of various hooks, used with staples.
On the right hand side of the page, 212 is a quaint "round triangle" design.
The other examples need no explanation.
Large latches were not used indoors. The latch with a turned handle
and back plate was a 19th Century device, and was attached by screws,
with its striker, and we therefore omit it.
The box locks with a patent mark, very numerous, are omitted for the
same reason. There was a good design of a Pennsylvania latch with long
twisted levers having flat enlargements at their ends, like half knobs. They
are on the third story rooms of a Newburyport house.
Early hardware was, in the first designs, not made of plate iron, but
was invariably thinned at the edges or ends, where less strength was
required .
Owing to the quality of the iron used it was more free from rust, at
least in the remaining examples, than our present iron.

[575 1

A SERIES of Shutter Fasteners. The modern blind was first used in the
last decade of the 18th Century, in one large old coast town. The spring
fastener on the right was the latest and poorest type. It continually got
out of order. The others are earlier, operate by gravity and cannot go
wrong. The crude S fasteners should be compared with the somewhat later
design, 390 on the next page. The types at the left are later than the S type,
since they are attached by plates.
The shutter was solid or had a small opening, a star, a clover leaf, a moon
or something of the kind to prevent total darkness within.

r

1-2 81

1-2 83

1-2 8 O

Below on the left are three types of spring
latches of iron with small brass knobs. They were
in use in Portsmouth in 1760, and earlier. Another
name is the wishbone latch, from the shape of the
spring. The one in the center is shaped with some
attempt at artistic design. The attachment of the
strikers by nails is a change from the earlier simpler
method of a driven in striker.
A door having one of these latches and with HL
hinges, all done in black, presented an effective dis
play, especially if a square bolt were added above,
and a little removed from, the latch. These latches
were the last stage of progress towards the mortised
spring latch with knob. These are much less likely
to get out of order The passion for hiding con
struction was a mark of declining taste.

[576]

1-353

1-361

1360

1-391

1-3 90

1-392

THE Scrolled Bolts were in use, the large ones on large outside doors
in Portsmouth.
352 and 353 are cupboard catches of rather dainty and very rare design.
360 and 361 are the common slide bolts, though 360 with a square section
is the older.
391 is a C shutter fastener; 392 is a J fastener, and 390, already mentioned,
an S fastener. The last, in huge form, was also used as a chimney or brick
wall tie, to prevent spreading. It is seen on colonial houses of the late
period shortly after the revolution.
365 is the swing catch used in securing lattice casements — a very early
device, reaching back to the first settlement.

I 577]

1-520

1-522

1-523

[578

1-509

1-504

1-503

I-SOO

1-501

1-502

579]

ON page 578 are shown the codfish weather vane, and the rooster vane,
the latter on the First Church, Springfield. The other examples were found
in America.
On page 579 are examples of door scrapers. The quaintest and best is
507. It was attached to the wide outside base board of the house. It was
found in a Boston antique shop. 505 and 506 were similarly attached but
are simpler models. 509 is a Philadelphia pattern. On a Saugus double
step cut from one stone is on either side the scraper, 503 . The other exam
ples are more commonly seen. At a time when roads were nothing hut
mud, and no rubber shoes existed, scrapers were a necessity of civilization.

All the persons are very kind who have assisted by affording the writer
opportunity to secure pictures. Their names are set forth at large through
the volume.
Among the great number of pictures in this volume, are a very few which,
collected through many years, cannot be traced. The indulgence of the
owners of the articles pictured is begged by the author. Nothing could be
farther from his intention that to fail of crediting an article to its owner.
Certain friends who have assisted in the way of facts or pictures have
declined to allow their names to be mentioned . They do good deeds secretly.
Finally the author begs a kindly judgment on his work, trusting it will
be understood all has been guided by fidelity in dealing with the work of
faithful artificers of the Pilgrim Century.

[S80]

INDEX

[581]

INDEX

Alden House, John, bed: 334; parlor: 450.
Andirons: 545-547.
Attic, Webb House: 485; Wentworth-Garden
House: 535.
Author, the: see Nutting, Wallace.
B
Barrels: 536, 538.
Bates, Albert C, bowls and utensils: 533,
537, 538.
Beds: 322-334, 456, 486.
Behrend, B. A., boxes: 104, 105, 107, no;
candle-stands: 459, 460, 461, 464, 467;
chairs, banister-back: 250 — carved 254,
Brewster transition: 188, Carver: 191,
194 — reversed baby: 269, mushroom: 211,
trundle: 229; chests: 19, 25, 31, on frame,
small: 89, 96; desk: 114; parlor: 214;
settle with rockers: 310; stand: 446, trian
gular: 442; tables, tavern: 417, 419, 420;
trestle-board: 343.
Bellows: 538.
Betty lamps: 463, 539, 554.
Bible-box: see box.
Bigelow, Francis Hill, chairs, carved cane:
247, 248; looking glasses: 499, 502, 503,
504, 505, 506, 507, 509, 511, 512, 519;
sconce glasses: 506; sconce reflectors: 491,
493-
Blair, Mrs. J. Insley, cupboard, court: 130,
136; table, heavy tavern: 407.
Blaney, Dwight, box: 100; chair, carved
cane: 267, heavy, Pilgrim slat-back: 203;
chest: 40, 41, 46; cupboard, press: 131;
stools: 290; table, butterfly-trestle: 395.
Bolts: 540, 577.
Boston Museum of Fine Arts, cupboard: 167.
Boards and Trestles: 342.
Bowls: 531, 532, 533, 537-
Boxes: 90-111; band: 445; carved: 97-107,
109; decorated: no; Friesian: 97, 106,
109; carrying: 445; cocked hat: 166; pipe:
526, 527, 528; tinder: 527; wall: 526,
527, 528, 539-
Brackets candles and lamps: see branches.

Branches: 556, 557, 559-562, 567, 569, 570.
Brinton, Francis D., chairs, five-back: 234,
Pennsylvania six-back: 231, 233.
Broilers: 550.
Brooklyn Public Museum, cupboard, press :
126; spinet: 477.
Brown, G. Winthrop, candle-stand : 459 ;
chair, banister-back: 265, carved cane: 236,
high: 223, serpentine slat-back: 228;
chests: 32, 36, 49; table, dressing (low
boy): 425, gate-leg: 374.
Brown, Mrs. Hulings Cowperthwaite, chest :
42.
Bryant, Mrs. G. C, cupboard, press: 142,
143; table, heavy tavern: 413.
Buek, G. H., 1. C
Campbell, James N. H., chair, banister-
back: 274; chest: 12, 29; cupboard, court:
133, 137-
Candle-stands, iron: 554, 563-565.
Candle-sticks: 554, 557, 558, 569.
Chairs: 175-284; baby high: 195, 196, 208,
209, 223, 263, 266, 269, 284; baby low:
198, 217, 269, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280;
banister-back: 250, 251, 254, 258-265, 268,
269, 274, 275, 283; Brewster: 182-185;
buffet: 272, 274; candle: 256; cane: 235-
249, 252-255, 267; carved: 234; Carver:
189-201; Charles II: 235-255; children's,
see baby; corner or buffet: 272, 273, 274,
277; Cromwellian: 218; Dutch: 277, 282,
283; English scroll-foot: 241, 242, 244;
leather back: 219-221, 283; miscellaneous:
276; mushroom: 210-217; New England
turned: 222, 225-228, 230, 256, 257, 268,
270-273, 275-281; Pennsylvania: 231-234;
Pilgrim: 182-207, 217; late: 208, slat-
back: 202, 203-207, 217; transition: 186,
188; rockers, later: 228; serpentine: 222;
roundabout: 272-274; rush-bottom, ban
ister-back: 259-266; 203, Spanish-foot:
240, 248, 251, 252, 253, 254, 258, 262,
263, 282, 283; spinning: 275; Standish,
Myles: 185; tables: 336-341; wainscot:
175, 181 ; Windsor: 284; writing-arm: 281.

[583]

Chaise longue: 293-305.
Chandeliers: see branches.
Chests, architectural: 1, 30; ball-foot: 14, 36-
38, 40, 42, 45, 49, 50, 51, 54; bosses or
drops or applied spindles, with: 8, n, 12,
13, 15, 16, 23-26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 38-42;
carved: 1-34; decorated: see painted; geo
metrical: 35-40, 42, 43; Hadley: 17, 18,
19, 20, 21, 22; initialed: 16-22, 26, 30, 35;
little, on frames: 85-96; name: 18; painted:
16, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 57; palm-panel: 10;
pine, carved, board: 31-34 — uncarved : 48-
51, 56-58; small, on frames, decorated: 90-
93, 96; sunflower: 12, 13, 15, 33; tulip:
8, 9, n; walnut: 30; whitewood: 47, 52.
Chests of Drawers, see also Highboys: 59-71 ;
ball-foot: 61, 66, 67, 68, 69; painted: 62-
63 ; pine : 60, 70.
Churchill House, Captain Charles : many
references under Seymour, George Dudley.
Churn: 536.
Clocks: 522, 523, 524.
Coburn, Dr. J. Milton, chair, five-back: 270,
serpentine, slat-back: 228; chest: 14, of
drawers: 71; day-bed: 305; settle: 306.
Collector's "Don'ts": 488.
Collings & Collings, Brewster: 183.
Concord, Antiquarian Society, day-bed: 295.
Connecticut Historical Society, box: in.
Cooper-Austin House: 534.
Couches: 293-305.
Cradles: 314-321; Fuller, Dr. Samuel: 314,
15; galleries, with: 314, 15, 317; hanging:
319; pine: 318, 320; plant: 321; wainscot:
314, 315, 321.
Cranes : 548.
Crickets: 285-292.
Cross-stretcher furniture: 352.
Cupboards, carved panel: 145, 151, 156;
court: 124, 125, 130, 133, 134, 138; demi-
dome, plain: 156; fasteners: 577; pine: 146,
147, 149-156, 158, 164, 165, 166, 167-174;
press: 123, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132,
136, 137, 139, 140, 141, H2, 143; shell
top; 168, 170, 171, 172, 173; suspended,
corner: 165; sidewall: 160, 165, 166.

D

Davidson, James, chair, banister-back: 261;
highboy: 74.
Day-beds: 293-305.
de Silva, Paul, chair, wainscot: 175, 176.
Desks: 1 14-122; pine: 114, 116, 117, 120,
122; walnut: 114, 119, 121.
Dipper, rush: 551.
Drawers, construction of: 455,

Dressers: 152, 153, 155, 157, 158, 159, 161,
163.

Embroidery frames: 476.
Erving, H. W., boxes: 99, 101, 103, 105,
109; pipe: 528; chair, carved cane: 235;
chests: 5, 9, 13, 23, 26, 28, 39, 41, 43, 54;
desk: 122; framed worked design: 495;
point work, framed: 495; sparkers: 527;
stands, candle and lamp : 463 ; tables, but
terfly: 391, 398, heavy tavern, or stand:
408.
Erving, Dr. William G., chest : 7 ; day-bed :
296; table, refectory: 351, heavy tavern:
411. F
Faelton, Reinhold, estate of, day-bed : 294 ;
tables, butterfly: 392, 402.
Fairbanks House, dresser: 157.
Farr, Mr., trestle-board, X end: 344.
Fastener: see Lock; casement: 577; lattice
window: 572; shutter: 576, 577.
Finials: 484.
Fireplaces: 157, 172, 173, 307, 328, 341,
343, 362, 450, 453, 462, 48, 483, 487,
521, 534, 535, 547, 57©.
Flynt L. C, clock, Dutch: 524; spinning
jenny, double: 473.
Forks: 549, 551.
Framingham Rooms (Wallace Nutting) :
348, 352, 480, 482, 486, 487, 489, 521.
French, Hollis, boxes: 109; candle-stand:
464 ; chair, high banister-back, carved : 263 ;
day-bed : 299.
Frizzier: 549.

Gay, Martin, day-bed : 302.
Goddard, John, of Newport: 112.
Goodwin, Wm. B., chest: 2.
H
Hinges, cock's comb: 541 ; H, HL and HLL:
543-
Hale, Nathan, birthplace: 362, 456, 462.
Halford, John H., chair, turned heart-back:
224.
Hanger: 549.
Hardware: 536, 539-580.
Harpsichord: 478.
Hartford Historical Society, great table: 350.
Hasps or Hooks: 575.
Hawthorne, Nathaniel, chairs supposedly
owned by: 249,

[584]

Hazen Garrison House, Haverhill: 323, 327,
483, 525.
Henderson, M. Mark, chairs, New England
slat-back: 257; roundabout: 272; looking
glass, decorated: 494; tongs, bed warmer,
coal: 558.
Highboys: 73-85.
Hill, Mr., looking glass, marquetry: 501.
Hinges: 54Q-544-
Holcombe, Mrs. John Marshall, chair, ban
ister back, carved: 262, cane, carved: 254;
table, refectory: 353.
Hour glasses : see Sand glasses.
Howard, Mrs. Anna H., trestle stand: 449.
I
Iron Works House: 322, 328, 343, 437, 547.
Ives, George F., beds: 329, 330; branches:
556, 557, 560, 562; candle-stands: 458,
465, 466; chair, Carver: 190, baby, low:
277, Pilgrim: 207, spindle-back, high: 208,
table: 339, transition: 187; chests: 34, 53,
57; cupboard: 154, 166; day-bed: 293;
highboy : 79 ; lanterns : 556 ; settle : 309 ;
ship model: 57; table, butterfly: 366, 390,
corner gate-leg: 382, 383, small: 430, 441,
446; wagon seat: 313.

Jacks: 536, 548.
Jaffrey House, cupboard: 167.
Jamb hooks: 549. K
Kas: 148.
Kettles: 549, 550.
Knockers (Iron) : 573.
Koopman's, Boston, chest: 55; of drawers: 60.

Ladles: 533, 549, 551.
Lamps: 463, 539, 554-559-
Lancaster, Public Library, cupboard, press:
128, 129.
Lanterns: 555, 556.
Latches: 540, 572-576; wooden, construction
of: 455-
Leete, Mrs. E. B., highboy: 84; sconces: 558.
Leete, Governor, chair, wainscot: 181.
Lights, loom: 559; rush: 569; table: 550,
55i, 556, 557, 558, 567, 568, 569-
Lincoln, Mrs. Francis, chair, Brewster
(Myles Standish): 185.
Littlefield, C. C, wardrobe: 162.
Locks, brass box: 571.
Long, Harry, chest: 38, of drawers: 70; cup

board or corner dresser: 153; desk: 115;
trestle-board : 344.
Long, Mrs. W. B. chair, mushroom: 210, 212.
Looking glasses: 490-519.
Loom, carpet: 475; tape: 470.
Lowboys: 423-428.
Lyon, Irving Whitall, M. D., Colonial fur
niture: 8, 136. M
McKearin, Geo., chairs, banister-back: 264,
268, 273.
Metropolitan Museum: see Museum.
Miner, Dr., of Greenfield: 18.
Mirrors: see Looking glasses.
Miscellany: 471.
Mortars: 532.
Museum, Brooklyn Public: see Brooklyn.
Museum, Metropolitan, box, pipe : 528 ;
chests: 35, 45; cradle: 316; cupboard,
court: 138, paneled: 156, press: 123; day-
beds: 297, 298; tables, gate-leg: 367, 368,
folding gate-leg: 380, kitchen: 355, 357,
tavern, heavy: 421, triangular: 440.
N
Nails, in early furniture: ill.
Nash, Chauncey C, box: 104; chair, baby
low: 276, Carver: 189, Pilgrim, arm: 205 —
side: 200; chests: 22, 40, 49, 51; small, on
frame: 87; cradle: 314, 315; desk: 118;
highboy: 75 ; looking glass: 515 ; stand: 436,
440, 451; trestle: 451; stool with drawer:
287; table, dressing (lowboy): 423, four-
gate: 364, triangular: 440; wagon seat:
312.
Norton, Malcolm, chests: 16, 24.
Nutting, Wallace, beds: 324, 326, 332, 489;
bellows: 538; bowls: 531, 532; boxes: 102,
108; chairs, baby low: 278, 279, 280,
banister-backs: 251, 260, Carved cane: 244,
246, 252, Carver: 192, 195, 197, 198, 199,
201 — modified: 217; Cromwellian: 218,
desk, high : 222, high, sausage-turned three
back: 266, leather backs: 219, 220, 221,
mushroom arm banister-back: 212, 213,
215, 217, mushroom, slat-back: 213, New
England slat-back: 230, 256, 279, 280, Pil
grim: 204, 206, 217, rocker, XVII Cen
tury: 222, table: 336, 337, wainscot: 177;
chests: 3, 10, 15, 20, 21, 44, 47, 50, 59, of
drawers: 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, small on frame:
95; clocks: 522, 523; cradle: 318; cup
boards: 149, 160, 165, court: 124, 125;
day-bed: 300; desk: 117, 121; hardware:
539, 540-555, 559, 560-69, 571-579; high
boy: 73, 76, 82; kas; 148; looking glasses:

[585]

496, 497, 513, 5H, 5i6, 518; reels: 474;
secretary: 113; stools: 285, 286, 288;
spinet: 479; spinning wheels: 471; stands,
light: 452, 458, 468, 470, trestle: 448;
tables, butterfly: 401, dressing, (lowboy):
426, 428, folding (trestle) gate-leg: 379,
381, four gate: 365, gate-leg: 365, 369,
373, 375, 377, 379, 381, 386, library: 358,
359, 361, refectory: 349, small: 435, 445,
448, Spanish-foot gate-leg: 373, tavern:
405, 406, 410, 415, 416, 418, 422, tucka
way: 377; utensils: 531, 532, 536, 538, 539.
Nutting, Mrs. Wallace, bedspread: 333.

Parmenter, Josiah, cupboard, court: 124, 125.
Patterson, Mrs. F. Gordon, chest, small, on
frame: 93; table, kitchen: 354.
Pauly, Rudolph P., lanterns: 535; wagon
seat: 312.
Peck, Miss Mary Miles Lewis, chest: 47.
Pennsylvania furniture: 159, 161, 162, 223,
229, 231, 232, 233, 234, 278, 303, 304,
318, 320, 358, 359, 360, 361, 414, and
perhaps others not traced.
Pierson, Rector, chair, wainscot: 179.
Point work, framed: 495.
Pot-hooks: 551. Q
Quincy Homestead, cupboard: 172.
R
Reed, Brooks, chair, banister-back, carved:
250; chest: 17, 37, of drawers: 67; stool,
squab : 29.
Reels: 474.
Rhode Island, School of Design : see School of
Design.
Richardson Tavern: 342, 343.
Robinson House, cupboard and paneled wall:
164.
Robinson, Thomas, chair, wainscot: 177.
Rogers, Mrs., of Hingham, day-bed: 301.
Rooms, general views of: 157, 172, 173, 214,
295, 307, 322, 323, 326, 327, 328, 331,
332, 341, 348, 352, 362, 437, 450, 453,
456, 462, 480, 481, 482, 483, 485, 486,
487, 489, 521, 525, 534, 535, 549-
Rowlandson, the Rev. Jos.: 129.

Sack, I., chair, New England writing: 281;
chest of drawers: 70; cradle, Dutch: 320;
desk: 119, 122; dresser: 152; highboy: 85;
table, pine kitchen: 356, refectory: 346.

Saltonstall House, Ipswich: 481.
Sand glasses: 527.
Scrapers: 579, 581.
Skimmers: 549, 551.
School of Design, Rhode Island, chest, small,
on frame : 90 ; cradle : 317; desk : 116;
settle: 311; tables, butterfly: 397, 399.
Schwartz, Morris: 1, 2.
Sconce glasses: 496, 506, 512.
Sconces, iron or tin: 539, 555, 556, 557, 558,
559, 560, 561, 562-570; reflecting: 491,
493, 557-
Secretaries: 112, 113.
Settees: 310, 312, 313.
Settles: 306-313.
Seymour, George Dudley, bed: 456; boxes:
97, 100, 103, 106, 107, no; candle-stands:
456; chairs, banister-back, carved arm: 275
— high: 209 — turned: 259; Carver: 193,
leather back: 283, New England five-back:
271, rocking: 462; chests: 4, 8, 14, 27, 45,
47, 48, 58, of drawers: 66, 69; cupboard,
court: 141; stand: 434, light: 456, 462;
tables, butterfly: 396, gate-leg: 362, transi
tion drawing: 345.
Shelves, hanging: 168.
Shilling, Pine Tree: 571.
Ship Model: 57.
Shovel, iron: 552; wooden: 532, 536.
Shreve, Crump & Low, dresser: 163.
Skewers : 549.
Slices: 552.
Snow shoes: 536.
Snuffers: 554, 565, 567, 570.
Spalding, Philip L., chest: 18; cupboard,
press: 132.
Sparhawk House, cupboards: 173.
Sparkers: 527, 556, 557.
Spinets: 477, 479.
Spinning Wheels, bobbin: 473; linen: 471,
473 ; woolen: 472.
Spit rods: 547, 549.
Stairs: 437, 454.
Standish, Myles, chair: 185.
Stands: 432-437; 442-447; 451; candle, for
table: 550, 551, 556-558, 567-569; light:
451, 452, 456-470; trestle: 448, 449.
Staniford, Mr. Daniel, table, dressing, stone
top: 387.
Stanton House, Madison, cupboard, press:
139-
Stearns, Henry S., chair, New England five-
back: 270; chest: n.
Stiles, J. H., chair, banister-back: 264; table,
X braced gate-leg: 371.
Stone House, Guilford, chair, wainscot: 181;
chest, 52.

[586]

Stools: 277, 280, 285-292, 344.
Sweet, Stanley A., chair, carved cane: 243,
253; chest, 30.

Tables, butterfly : 389 ; communion : 346, 347 ;
corner-gate: 382, 383; dressing: 423-428;
cross-stretcher: 424-427; gate-leg: 350,
362-386, corner: 382, 383, folding: 376,
377, 379, 380, 381, flat-gate: 371, 381,
four-gate: 363-365, Spanish foot: 373, split-
gate; 384, 385, X-braced: 371 ; hutch: 436;
kitchen: 354, 355, 356, 357; library: 357-
361; mixing: 355, 356; occasional: 423;
octagon: 435; refectory: 346-353; small:
429-441 ; Spanish-foot: 373; splayed frame,
leaf: 438; split-gate: 384, 385; stone top:
387, 388; tavern: 405-422; trestle-gate:
378, 379, 380, 381; triangular: 439, 440,
442; tuck-away: 376, 377.
Toasters: 549, 550,
Toddy iron: 568.
Tongs: 552; bed-warmer, coal: 558; pipe:
528, 551, 553-
Torch holders: 568.
Tormentors: 549.
Trammels: 551.
Traver, Miss C. M., chest, small on frame:
89; stool: 292.
Trestle-boards : 343-344.
Trivets : 550.
Tufts, John, chair, Brewster: 182.
Turning specimens: 484 (finials): 530 (legs,
etc. ) .

Utensils: 526.
Vanes, weather: 579.

U V
W

W., Mr. of Boston, candle stands, iron: 554;
chairs, carved cane: 238, 239, 240, 241,

242, 245, 249, Dutch: 282, turned Ameri
can Dutch: 229; chest: 56; cupboard: 146,
147, 151; day-bed: 303; desk: 120; em
broidery frame: 476; highboy: 81, 83;
stands: 432, 433, 443, 444; tables, dressing,
(lowboy) : 427; small: 429, 431, 432, 433,
443, 444; wardrobe: 145.
Waffle irons: 554.
Wagon seats: 312, 313.
Wall decoration : 454.
"Walnut, The Age of": 140.
Wardrobe: 145, 162.
Warner House: 454.
Way Side Inn, chest, small, on frame: 86, 88.
Weaving: 475.
Webb House: 156, 170, 171, 331, 341.
Weil, Henry V., candle-stands: 461, 463,
469 ; chair, Dutch ram's horn arm : 283 ;
chest of drawers : 66 ; stand, adjustable :
451, splay-leg: 447.
Welch, Mrs. Lewis Sheldon, table, four-gate :
363-
Wellington, Arthur W., boxes: 101, pipe,
wall, and sand: 527; chairs, courting: 273,
mushroom: 216, New England five-back:
268, round-about: 274, slat-backs, side:
225; chest: 51, small on frame: 91; cup
board base: 146; cupboard, press: 135;
dresser: 161.
Wentworth, Benning, House, corner cup
board and dresser: 158; harpsichord, 478.
Wentworth-Gardner House, attic: 535.
Wethersfield, Webb-Welles House: 341, 331.
Whipple House, Ipswich: 481.
Williams House, cupboards: 168.
Worcester Antiquarian Society, chair, Brew
ster high: 196; table, stone top: 387.
Y
Yale University, chair, wainscot: 179; cup
board, press 127.
York Jail, Museum of, bed: 325; fireplace:
570.

[587]

3 9002 00467 8554

I i