Info on "Collin's Legitimus No. 986" hudson bay head?

Square_peg said:
... It baffles me that they would use so many variations. That just invites counterfeiting.
Click to expand...

Here are 3 examples of a 7-point crown, from US trademark listings for Collins, each with noticeably different artwork:

from page 11:
books


from page 31:
books


from page 162:
books


Digest of Trade Marks for Machines, Metals, Jewelry, and the Hardware and Allied Trades: With a Synopsis of the Law and Practice Relating to Trade-marks, by Wallace A. Bartlett, 1893
 
Info on "Collin's Legitimus No. 986" hudson bay head?

carcdr said:
. . .I noticed that the real company is called "COLLINS", not "COLLIN'S", so it made me wonder if this Legitimus is actually, well, legitimate. . .
Click to expand...

Bob
 
Looking for records of any court cases in the US regarding infringement of the Collins trademarks, thinking this might provide some clues, so far I've only found this case:

The Collins Company vs. Oliver Ames & Sons Corporation, 1882

Oliver Ames & Sons was a predecessor of the present-day Ames-TrueTemper. As described in the case summary, Ames was marking some of its shovels "Collins & Co.", and sending them to Australia, where Collins tools had a good reputation. Collins sued, and Ames lost.

No revelations about Collins axes, but if anyone finds a shovel stamped "Collins & Co." with a reference to "North Easton, Mass." on the label, it was evidently made by Oliver Ames & Sons.

American Trade-mark Cases Decided by the Courts of the United States: Both State and Federal, and by the Commissioner of Patents, and Reported Between 1870 and 1887, by Benjamin Price and Arthur Steuart, 1887, p. 679
 
Aloha from Hawaii!!

Sorry to revive an older thread, but I recently acquired (off the 'Bay) a "Collins Legitimus" Hudson Bay style axe - but after reading this thread, I suspect its a forgery. The Collins is correct, with no apostrophe, but the crown has 7 points. That said, I'm still pleased to have acquired it - and even if its a fake, that's kind of fun too, in its own way.

I'm a new member, so I can't post pix yet - but I will as soon as I can, if only to add another photo to the discussion.
 
Not at all unhappy to see this thread back up as these questions continue to haunt me.

I will post little tidbits here as I learn more about some of this stuff just for reference purposes.

Another interesting thing about the early catalog listings (A&F, David T. Abercrombie Co, and Von Lengerke & Antoine) for these Hudson bays is that they sometimes offered two handle lengths but there is also indication that these were two different head weights as well. I have seen listings for the 23" model as having a 1 3/4 pound head and the 27" as having a 2 pound head. Another catalog lists the 23" head as 3 1/2"x6 1/2 inches and the other at 4"x7". Weights described varied too. One says 1 1/2 pounds for the smaller axe and 2 pounds for the larger, another lists 1 1/2 pounds for the smaller and 2 7/8 pounds for the larger. These measurements and weight variations point to two head sizes not just 2 handle lengths.

Baring one exception, I have only ever seen one size of Collins marked Hudson Bay and it is the larger of the two. It is the pattern most people recognize as the standard 2 poundish Collins Hudson Bay pattern. The A&F marked axe with the sheath posted earlier in the thread is the exception. That particular axe is smaller and lighter than the normal Collins Hudson Bay pattern and its shape is different as well, having a narrower bit.

My question is where are the other 1 3/4 pound or 1 1/2 pound head Collins Hudson Bays? If they made them you would think you could see an example of one A&F marked or not. Could it be that A&F sourced the smaller from the proposed "fake" Collins" manufacturer ? We may never know.

Another slight difference between early A&F marked Collins Hudson Bays and other Collins Hudson Bays from the same period is the rounding of the underside of the head (area between the heel and where the eye meets the handle). This area is squared off on most heads but smoothed out and rounded over on the A&F heads sold.

As to aging some of these, there is a good article on A&F leather Luger holsters online. A quick search for Abercrombie & Fitch Luger Holsters will bring it up. In this apparently well researched article, the author/collector goes into some detail on the A&F marked snap buttons used on the holsters and gives some date information for two variations. These are the same snap buttons found on early A&F supplied axe sheaths. The snap button variation with the border around the A&F logo such as seen on the sheath of the A&F Collin's axe earlier in this thread dates from the 1920's to 1930's. The earlier style without the border around the logo dates to as early as 1909. I haves seen two examples of A&F axe/hatchet sheaths with the early style buttons so they could be as old as 1909 but not earlier. For me at least, this is more evidence that points to the first Hudson Bays being sold right around 1909, 1910 or 1911. They are absent from the 1907 catalog, the sheath snap buttons can be dated to no earlier than 1909 and the magazine description of the A&F Hudson Bay shown earlier in this thread dates to 1912.

These are interesting things, perhaps to me alone....I still have no answer for the apostrophe. That is really the big question!
 
Last edited:
I was just looking back over this thread yet again - in post#28 rjdankert posted some pictures of a seven point crown and Abercrombie stamped on the flip side. Mine does not have Abercrombie on the reverse, but otherwise the name and the logo look identical to the photos posted in post#28. (Including the wear pattern on the middle of Legitimus - which I presume is truly a wear pattern, not a stamping error.)

It is VERY interesting the variety of crown configurations - as well as ARM configurations - that the logo seems to have gone through over the years (some shorter or longer, more or less detailed, vertical versus angled - and others.) I recognize that the intellectual curiosity of these questions is probably limited to a very small group of people - but what a great chapter this would make in a history book of axes.
 
Beautiful example you have there, I would soak that in vinegar and hit it with some flitz and a piece of cotton. :thumbup:
 
Kuehjo said:
...what a great chapter this would make in a history book of axes.
Click to expand...

And it seems like even the historians can get the story wrong, sometimes. I recall an article written by Allan Klenman (author of Axe Makers of North America) where he identifies an Abercrombie & Fitch axe, with a "No 986" stamp, as being made by Mann Edge Tool Co., of Lewistown, PA.

Klenman had never before seen the "No 986" stamp, so he surmised that the 986 was most likely an Abercrombie & Fitch designation. Mann Edge Tool, he said, was "owned by O.A. Norlund" (but perhaps he meant to say that Mann owned Norlund), and he claimed that the Hudson Bay pattern of the A&F axe was taken from the Norlund axe, with Mann using the same dies for the Norlund and A&F axes.

Regarding the Collins version of the Hudson Bay axe, Klenman said that Collins used the same design after Mann purchased Collins in 1966.

As an aside, Klenman noted that "John French, of London, England, says he has seen Abercrombie & Fitch axes in the United Kingdom," which leaves me wondering whether those sold in the UK were fakes.

Information comes from an article titled Abercrombie & Fitch Axe by Allan Klenman, The Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association, March 1999, Vol. 52, No. 1, p. 38
 
That Klenman article, or at least part of it, is on page 47 of Axe Makers of North America. That one small A&F axe inset box contains 22 sentences and of those at least a dozen contain wrong information. I am sure we have things on this thread that are wrong too but the number of errors in that article is shocking and seems sloppy for a historian. I appreciate his body of work in terms of axe history but reading the A&F axe info, it makes me wonder what other info in the book is incorrect.

There is actually a A&F axe that is the Norlund pattern Hudson Bay but it was sold much later, sometime around the late 1950's and 60's. That axe does not have a 986 mark. It appears to be the Norlund pattern Hudson Bay head and is stamped Abercrombie &Fitch "Safari" as much of their stuff was during that time period. It even had the same orange sticker over the top of the head that the Norlunds were sold with.
 
Last edited:
I figured that Klenman article deserved a mention in this thread. Thanks for the additional information.

grafton said:
That Klenman article, or at least part of it, is on page 47 of Axe Makers of North America. That one small A&F axe inset box contains 22 sentences and of those at least a dozen contain wrong information. I am sure we have things on this thread that are wrong too but the number of errors in that article is shocking and seems sloppy for a historian. I appreciate his body of work in terms of axe history but reading the A&F axe info, it makes me wonder what other info in the book is incorrect.

There is actually a A&F axe that is the Norlund pattern Hudson Bay but it was sold much later, sometime around the late 1950's and 60's. That axe does not have a 986 mark. It appears to be the Norlund pattern Hudson Bay head and is stamped Abercrombie &Fitch "Safari" as much of their stuff was during that time period. It even had the same orange sticker over the top of the head that the Norlunds were sold with.
Click to expand...
 
The last name of the founders was "Collins" so I find it doubtful they would have used Collin's at any point in time as that would be incorrect it would be far more likely to have been marked Collins's or possibly Collins', although there is a small chance it is a grammatical error I wouldn't put any weight into that.
 
Kuehjo said:
Aloha from Hawaii!!

Sorry to revive an older thread, but I recently acquired (off the 'Bay) a "Collins Legitimus" Hudson Bay style axe - but after reading this thread, I suspect its a forgery. The Collins is correct, with no apostrophe, but the crown has 7 points. That said, I'm still pleased to have acquired it - and even if its a fake, that's kind of fun too, in its own way.

I'm a new member, so I can't post pix yet - but I will as soon as I can, if only to add another photo to the discussion.
Click to expand...

See Post 82 above.
 
Whoo hoo! A 7 point crown Collin's. Good spotting rjdankert! It's one thing to dupe well-heeled recreational outdoorsmen with lookalike HBs but another to get into the commercial axe market. For sure it wasn't China, India or Mexico making these. It would be interesting to evaluate the steel quality of these knockoffs, seeing as Sheffield and Solingen companies were proven to be implicated in some of this 100 years ago.
 
My son and I just picked this one up at a flea market. Covered in black paint which came off quickly with a wire brush and exposed a lovely patina underneath. Not much pitting from rust at all. The head was slightly mushroomed, which I've corrected. We'll sharpen it up and hang it and he intends to use it.

Seven pointed crown without the apostrophe or the space indicating it would be there.



 
grafton said:
These Apostrophes are driving me nuts. I think just for my own sanity, my new theory is that there was a disgruntled, rogue Collins employee running around putting apostrophes on stuff...;)
Click to expand...

I notice that the space between the 'N' and the 'S' at the end of "Collin's" has been increased to make space for the apostrophe. So it's a unique stamp.

Square_peg said:
Has it occurred to anyone that someone who would put a false Collin's stamp on an axe might also put a false Abercrombie & Fitch stamp on that same axe?
Click to expand...

This statement still stands. Both companies had a good reputation. It would make sense for a counterfeiter to capitalize on both good names. A&F could not have unwittingly sold fakes. They know who they paid for their axes. It seems unlikely that they would risk their relationship with Collins by intentionally selling some fakes. So I think it's most likely that an A&F apostrophe Collins is not only a fake Collins but also a fake A&F.
 
Square_peg said:
I notice that the space between the 'N' and the 'S' at the end of "Collin's" has been increased to make space for the apostrophe. So it's a unique stamp.



This statement still stands. Both companies had a good reputation. It would make sense for a counterfeiter to capitalize on both good names. A&F could not have unwittingly sold fakes. They know who they paid for their axes. It seems unlikely that they would risk their relationship with Collins by intentionally selling some fakes. So I think it's most likely that an A&F apostrophe Collins is not only a fake Collins but also a fake A&F.
Click to expand...

Certainly collectors and people interested in axes today would be interested in the A&F stamp. I’m not convinced the general consumer of the time would be paying more for the same axe just because it is marked A&F, especially if he isn’t buying it from A&F. I’m not understanding how the counterfeiter would be capitalizing by adding an A&F mark. Seems more of a red flag than anything. He then must sell directly to the user of the axe and not to other retailers or hardware stores who wouldn’t be openly selling A&F products. I don’t think a guy that wants an A&F marked axe is looking to save a dime by buying it out of the back of a car in some alley. Certainly a risk to try that kind of selling anywhere near the commercial districts of NYC at the time without some trouble.
 
Last edited:
Square_peg said:
...It would make sense for a counterfeiter to capitalize on both good names. A&F could not have unwittingly sold fakes. They know who they paid for their axes. It seems unlikely that they would risk their relationship with Collins by intentionally selling some fakes. So I think it's most likely that an A&F apostrophe Collins is not only a fake Collins but also a fake A&F.
Click to expand...

grafton said:
...I’m not understanding how the counterfeiter would be capitalizing by adding an A&F mark. He then must sell directly to the user of the axe and not to other retailers or hardware stores who wouldn’t be openly selling A&F products.
Click to expand...

Since 35+ companies (or individual cases) were successfully taken to court by Collins for copying their axe trademarks, the counterfeiting seemed to be a significant problem, and I think it's reasonable to assume that there were some others who weren't caught. And I think it's reasonable to assume that there were various ways that people were sold knockoff goods back then, as there are today.

Such as some itinerant salesmen driving from town to town, or tavern to tavern, selling premium brand axes (and other merchandise) that "fell off the back of a truck" or was being "liquidated" at a low price? This type of sale can be more like an impulse purchase, instead of a pre-planned decision to buy an A&F axe that day.

(As usual, this is just my opinion, and YMMV.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top