In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C H A P T E R 2 The Gilbert and Barker Manufacturing Company The Springfield Gas Machine, a lighting system now almost wholly forgotten, was the product of the inventive minds of two remarkable men, Charles N. Gilbert and John F. Barker. In the years immediately following the American Civil War, each man became aware of the existence of portable or self-contained gas machines for lighting buildings beyond the reach of municipal gas systems and with the problems inherent in their current designs. Barker, a skilled machinist, designer , and inventor, eventually crafted a remarkably simple yet effective gas machine unit. When he retired from the firm in 1911, he held over fifty patents on gas machine equipment. Gilbert, principally a businessman and entrepreneur, saw the sales potential for a safe gas machine system that worked well. The combination of men like Gilbert and Barker was an essential ingredient in the industrial and technological revolution of the nineteenth century. As technology historian Ruth Schwartz Cowan has noted, “Inventors invent: they create things that have never been created before,” while “entrepreneurs innovate and diffuse: they figure out how to enter the marketplace to make money with the things that inventors invent.” She continues: “Inventions turn into innovations when they fall into the hands of entrepreneurs who are willing to provide the funds or the hard work or the managerial skill that is necessary to turn an invention into an innovation.”1 While the combination of inventor and entrepreneur was essential, so was timing, and, in the case of Gilbert and Barker, timing was everything. Cowan and others have pointed out that the “years between 1870 and 1930 were the golden age of entrepreneurship,” as economic support was growing and regulation was almost nonexistent. Successful inventors and entrepreneurs such as Gilbert and Barker, notes Cowan, “were people who had the vision to understand the potential use of new technologies coupled with the political and economic skills to create and sustain large, complex organizations.”2 Public sentiment was also important for the acceptance of the new portable or self-contained lighting technology under development by Gilbert and Barker and others. At the most basic level, there was a clear demand by the public for gas lighting in rural areas, particularly the expanding suburban landscapes around 32 The Gilbert and Barker Manufacturing Company cities. Some suburban homeowners even piped their homes for gas light in anticipation of the arrival of gas mains or machines. For example, Gilbert and Barker customer and speaker of the Connecticut House of Representatives Charles Ives noted in 1868 that “hoping that I might in some way before long light my new house with gas I had it piped when it was built, and for the last eight years I have been on the look out for some invention that would enable me to make my gaspipes available and enjoy once more the luxury and increased safety of a gas illuminator ; I was unable to satisfy myself however until I learned about the apparatus which your company manufacture.” Ives was not alone in this approach, as many builders recommended this course of action to their customers for suburban and country homes. As discussed in chapter 1, the rise of the corporation, particularly large, monopolistic gas companies, engendered a level of public fear and apprehension about connecting to a centralized supply of power. The central gas plant’s reach into the home, with its tentacle-like gas mains and supply pipes, was viewed by many as an unwanted intrusion in the private sphere; the portable or self-contained gas machine provided an alternative to the tyranny of corporate control. The “introduction of technological systems [such as utilities],” Cowan notes, “brought politicians , landlords, industrialists, and managers of utilities into the equation.”3 Gas machine companies reacted to these concerns with targeted marketing campaigns touting their systems’ “independent” production of light. While some companies just hinted at the “freedom” provided by their units, others boldly advertised “Every House Occupant his Own Gas Manufacturer.”4 Gilbert and Barker customer Nathaniel Lamson addressed the corporate world of gas light in a partially tongue-in-cheek testimonial. Explaining that he provided light to his home and business and a block of stores on the main street, he wrote that “each occupant has a meter, and pays his gas bill to me quarterly, as he would to a ‘grinding, heartless’ coal gas corporation, if he lived in the city. I own all the stock in the...

Share