I have an 1886 Elgin with the term "Patent Pinion" engraved on the plate. I take it that the term "Patent Pinion" was simply an earlier term for "Safety Pinion". My guess is that it is making reference Merrit Burt's patent 44,161 of 1864, but does anyone know otherwise?

Mark, I believe that Craig Risch had an excellent article in the Bulletin a few years back on Elgin's patent pinion. A search of the Bulletin index should turn up the exact reference.

Jerry;
Thanks! This is great information. I knew that George Hunter's 1897 patent was tied to Elgin, but for a watch made in 1886 I was uncertain.

The article I referred to is in the October 1987 Bulletin (time sure flies!). According to the article if the Elgin is marked "Patent Pinion" it has Moseley's patent pinion. It is an interesting early variant and worth taking apart to see how it works.

Movements marked "Safety Pinion" incorporate the later Fogg's patent.

Jerry;
October 1987, you say? I had guessed that the article was about 20 years old after I had checked the Bulletin Index and found Risch's article to be in vol. 29, number 250. Humm, it should make interesting reading as Fogg lived in Waltham, Mass and his work was likely bankrolled by the Waltham Watch Co. So, now the 'fun' begins: locating a copy. Thanks again for your help.

Mark, If you can't find it, let me know. I have that issue.

Burt's patent predated Fogg's patent by a very small margin and Elgin and Waltham were going into litigation over patent infringement when they decided on an interesting settlement.

As part of the settlement, both companies agreed to either allow free use or low cost licensing of all patents. They effectively formed a small technology cartel that lasted 50 years.

After the agreement all watches are marked either patent pinion or safety pinion by both companies.

Tom Seymour;
Thanks very much for the offer. I have send an e-mail note to The Bulletin's publication folks and pending their response I may or may not need to contact you, but I will let you know.

Tom McIntyre;
The solution which Waltham and Elgin reached sounds eminently practical. Was the joint effort expanded beyond the initial participants? It would seem as though the lose of financial strength through litigation would be significantly reduced

Waltham and Elgin collaborated in marketing and pricing in an attempt to drive smaller makers out of business. Obviously they did not fully succeed, but they did capture around 80% of the market between them.

The collusion between Waltham and Elgin (and also the dominant case-making conglomerate of Keystone) was pretty overwhelming. When I was doing research in the Waltham factory records I found a lot of suggestive correspondence regarding secretive meetings at a hotel in New York between the presidents of the three companies. I also found many references and instructions for Waltham sales agents to not make pricing changes without first communicating with Elgin and also to check before making product specification changes. The two companies also agreed on how they would divide up the foreign markets. This is from correspondence I looked at from the time frame between 1900 and around 1915.

Oooo, skulduggery! I should not be surprized though. This was the age of Robber-Barons. People like Rockefeller and Carnegie would have been greater targets of anti-trust scrutiny, so companies like Waltham, Elgin and Keystone would have likely felt that their activies would escape notice, if exercised with a modicum of secrecy. Did
they loose their influence during the 1929 depression?