Greetings All,

Here are some comments on Stickley Bros. trays No. 16 ½ and No. 17. This topic arose out of another topic that was originally posted on the Arts and Crafts Forum at http://forum.arts-crafts.com/e...886045532/m/81710039. Also, this short essay is available in a slightly different format on Flikr where it will be updated: http://www.flickr.com/photos/6...912/with/3603498725/

Stickley Brothers (Bros.) of Grand Rapids Michigan produced a prodigious amount of hammered copper in Arts and Crafts style the early part of the 20th century. Two trays with raised heart and raised dot designs which were likely originally intended to be ash trays turn up commonly in online auctions in dealers' shops: the No. 16 1/2 and No. 17 trays.

The No. 16 1/2 and No. 17 trays do not appear in the Stickley Bros. 1908 furniture and hammered copper catalogue. In the undated Stickley Bros. Russian Hand Beaten Copper Catalogue B the No. 16 1/2 tray with hearts is not listed. I say with hearts because there is another No. 16 1/2 tray produced by Stickley Bros. that was 6 inches and octagonal in shape and listed in this catalogue! The No. 17 tray is listed in the “Russian Copper” catalogue. I have included images.

Mohawk, your tray is actually a Stickley Bros. No. 16 1/2. What appears as 8 (1/8) on your tray is most likely a double mis-stamped 2; the type used by Stickley Bros. and others during the turn of the century for marking copper and furniture (and may other things) utilized a 2 with a decorative curly top. I also have the No. 16 1/2 tray. It has the original patina. See the attached image of the tray below and others to follow. Also note what appears to be the original grease pencil marks with a price of $1.25 on the back! I have also included an image with the Stickley Bros. No. 17 for comparison. This tray has been repatinated.

The No. 16 1/2 tray in question, along with the No. 17 tray are described and photographed in Don Marek's excellent book "Grand Rapids Metals Works 1902 - 1918". I have included images below.

The Stickley Bros No. 16 1/2 tray that I have is 6 3/4 inches in diameter. My No. 17 tray is just a hair shy of 7 inches. Stickley Brothers' "Russian Copper" catalogue lists No. 17 as 6 3/4 inches in diameter. I believe that the No. 17 was designed to be slightly larger than the No. 16 1/2 based on my examples and those in Don Marek's book. Mohawk, your tray appears to be a bit larger than average, which would not be uncommon. You note that your No. 16 1/2 the tray appears to be made of thinner copper. I would put forth that it is the correct gauge, based on your photos and a comparison of my No. 16 1/2 and No. 17 trays; the copper in the former is noticeably lighter than in the latter.

You also note that your No. 16 1/2 tray appears to be a brass wash. I would agree, as it looks like the copper is wearing through in some spots. That it is a brass wash would not be impossible, particularly given the number of different Russian and Syrian metal workers in Grand Rapids that the Stickley Bros. employed and/or contracted from. As a point of comparison, there are examples of Gus Stickley’s hammered copper in (solid) brass, as well (See the excellent Benedict - Syracuse Metal website: http://www.benedictstudio.com/...?0.3053594592831726). All told, you have an excellent example of a wonderful Stickley Bros. No. 16 ½ tray that may actually be a little rarer than other examples, given its size and the brass wash – enjoy!

I do not know of any Stickley Brothers catalogues with the No. 16 1/2 heart tray. How do we determine it is truly a Stickley Brothers tray? I suspect that the style, ubiquitousness, and stamped numbers strongly suggests that this is a Stickley Brothers product. However, if anyone knows of one or would like to comment on this, I would appreciate it!

Best Regards,

Copperoak

Back of the trays.

No. 16 1/2 tray with original patina. Just shy of 7 inches.

No. 16 1/2 tray back. With original patina.

No. 17 tray. Size is just shy of 7 inches. Previous tray No. 16 1/2 is actually smaller at 6 3/4 inches. Not the original patina.

Back of No. 17 tray.

The No. 16 1/2 and No. 17 trays do not appear in the Stickley Bros. 1908 furniture and hammered copper catalogue. In the undated Stickley Bros. Russian Hand Beaten Copper Catalogue B the No. 16 1/2 tray with hearts is not listed. I say with hearts because there is another No. 16 1/2 tray produced by Stickley Bros. that was 6 inches and octagonal in shape and listed in this catalogue! The No. 17 tray is listed in the “Russian Copper” catalogue.

The No. 16 1/2 tray in question, along with the No. 17 tray are described and photographed in Don Marek's excellent book " Grand Rapids Metals Works 1902 - 1918 ". {book link added. L.}

Here's the description to the above image.

Here's the stamped 16 1/2 on the back of the No. 16 1/2. Note what appears to be an original description with a price of $1.25 in grease pencil!

Closer view of stamped on back of No. 17 tray.

Another comparison of the No. 16 1/2 and No. 17 trays.

A great piece of detective work as usual Copperoak! I have never been a fan of brasswashed patina but I do like it better than the reapplied darker patina to the plate on the right. My plate is just a tad over 7" and I agree that it is unique in that respect. It is the only piece of Stickley Bros. work that I have.

Dano

Great images Copperoak! I particularly like the patina on your #17. I have seen some authentic finishes and this looks rather good. Did you have the #17 repatinated or is this how it was found?

Best,
Fred

Hi Fred,

Thanks for your comments on the patina. It's not bad for a re-patina job, and certainly better than the bare metal. I purchased the No. 17 tray from a dealer, along with a No. 271 Gus Stickley pea pod tray. Both were repatinated, likely by the same person, as they have the similar dark hue with highlights.

I like the job you did on your No. 17 tray that you posted a while back. I have shiny Gus No. 272 tray that I would like to have repatinated some day. Maybe I should just strip the wax off and leave it outside to mellow a little...

Have you seen many examples of Gus and Stickley Bros. with dark original patinas?

Best Regards,

Copperoak

Thanks, Dano. I think that the darker patina on the No. 17 tray that I have is better than bare metal. However, I do like the hue on the No. 16 1/2 that I have best of that bunch discussed here. The original darker patina'd Gus, S. Brothers, Benedict, OMS, etc. is hard to beat, though.

Re prices for these pieces, as you've mentioned in your Stickley Bros. Plate post, these pieces are still commanding a relatively high price, particularly given the times. Those three trays (Gus 269, 270, and Stickley Bros. No. 17) were actually in fairly poor condition, with some sort of apparent coating, yet they still initiated lot's of bid activity. Lesser pieces are actually going for a song, but these rarer and more desireable pieces seem to hold their value, irrespective of their condition. Still, there are always bargains...

Copperoak.

I was fortunate to acquire a Benedict ashtray with match holder with an original finish and I sent it to Jason Lamana at Benedict. Before sending it I reproduced the tray portion as a study in manufacture. Not sure where all my documentation is. If I find it I will post.

The examples I spoke of are some I have seen at shops in my travels as well as fine examples online.

Thanks again for sharing with us your research and passion.

Best,