Le collectionneur
Private
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2015
- Messages
- 12
The Syndicate further informs us that the United States restricts or bans German toys, with the initiative coming from the 25th President, William McKinley himself. It is clear that the cause most dear to the President of the United States was protecting American economic interests through a rigorous, protectionist economic policy. McKinley’s presidency is marked by rapid economic growth. He and his administration defended the Dingley Act of 1897, which protected American industries from foreign competition by imposing extremely high tariffs—among the highest in U.S. history, initially 52% and later 47%.
“It is known that a bill from President McKinley prohibits the importation into the United States of ‘wooden, rubber, or tin toys, painted in German-made colors,’ under the pretext that the paints used on these toys are dangerous. The little ‘green chalets’ from Nuremberg or the lead soldiers from Berlin no longer bring joy to young ‘Yankees.’ The report from the ‘Society for the Hygiene of the States,’ on the basis of which the President made his decision, recommends toys from ‘certain French companies,’ and even gives late praise to Eugene Turpin, who seemingly invented, about ten years ago, non-toxic toy coloring. And thus, the much-talked-about ‘boycott’ turns against Germany, benefiting France.”
It is worth noting that, at the time, the American army wore spiked helmets and was influenced by Germany , this was represented by the McLoughlin brothers, active from the 1880s to the 1920s, who procured their supplies from German toy manufacturers . They imported soldiers from Germany and also produced them with this distinctive uniform. Manufacturers like Spenkuch, Heyde, and Norris also dominated the American market with their products.
In this regard, Henri d’Allemagne provides us with interesting information in his work discussing the toy exhibition at the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis, which gives a clearer picture of the size of the German metal toy industry and the scale of its exportation to the United States: “Finally, this type of industry (tin, little soldiers) occupies 20 factories in Nuremberg and Fürth, employing 150 workers, with the number of artisans working on assembly and painting outside being three to four times higher. The price of these items varies greatly, ranging from 5 marks for a large box containing 800 soldiers to 5 marks for a single, much more detailed and finely crafted piece. The production of tin toys is estimated to be one million marks, with two-thirds of it exported. German toys exported to the United States account for a third of the industry’s total exports.”
The Germans also dominate the British market: “In 1908, England imported 30 million toys, 26 of which came from Germany and 4 from France. German manufacturers benefit from three key factors in the economy: transport, tariffs, and banking support.”
“The toy manufacturers’ union mentions a second case of “poisoned toys,” without providing a clear, verifiable source. “Under this title, on December 31 and January 8, a widely circulated newspaper published accounts of two child poisonings in Montauban and Pacy-sur-Eure; the newspaper attributed these unfortunate accidents to children sucking on toys. These incidents, brought to the attention of the Syndicate, deeply moved them, but they were left completely skeptical. However, they recognized the importance of verifying the claims and conducted an investigation. From this inquiry, it follows that there was no poisoning the French toys are harmless; there was an urgent need to protest such insinuations.” Once again, these accusations of poisoned toys are baseless. The German soldiers I examined seem no more dangerous than their French counterparts. French manufacturers capitalize on widespread anti-German sentiment to discredit the German toy industry, eliminate a competitor, and deflect attention from the numerous cases of lead poisoning caused by French toys. There is no evidence to suggest that German toys are more dangerous than their French counterparts. On the contrary, the examples we have show that many German products, such as Norris soldiers, are of superior quality compared to their French counterparts.
This also reassures parents and presents a new selling point: at the close of the 19th century, the catchy labels “harmless toys” first appeared, prominently featured in advertisements and on toy box lids. The Syndicate further informs us that the United States restricts or bans German toys, with the initiative coming from the 25th President, William McKinley himself. It is clear that the cause most dear to the President of the United States is to protect American economic interests through a rigorous, protectionist economic policy. McKinley’s presidency is marked by rapid economic growth. He and his administration defended the Dingley Act of 1897, which protected American industries from foreign competition by imposing extremely high tariffs—among the highest in U.S. history, initially 52% and later 47%. “It is known that a bill from President McKinley prohibits the importation into the United States of ‘wooden, rubber, or tin toys, painted in German-made colors,’ under the pretext that the paints used on these toys are dangerous. The little ‘green chalets’ from Nuremberg or the lead soldiers from Berlin no longer bring joy to young ‘Yankees.’ The report from the ‘Society for the Hygiene of the States,’ on the basis of which the President made his decision, recommends toys from ‘certain French companies,’ and even gives late praise to Eugene Turpin, who seemingly invented, about ten years ago, non-toxic toy coloring. And thus, the much-talked-about ‘boycott’ turns against Germany, benefiting France.”[1] It is worth noting that, at the time, the American army wore spiked helmets and was influenced by German toy manufacturers, such as the McLoughlin brothers, active from the 1880s to 1920, who imported soldiers from Germany and also produced them with this distinctive uniform. Manufacturers like Spenkuch, Heyde, and Norris also dominate the American market with their products. In this regard, Henri d’Allemagne provides us with interesting information in his work[2] discussing the toy exhibition at the 1904[3] World’s Fair in St. Louis, which gives a clearer picture of the size of the German metal toy industry and the scale of its exportation to the United States: “Finally, this type of industry (tin, little soldiers) occupies 20 factories in Nuremberg and Fürth, employing 150 workers, with the number of artisans working on assembly and painting outside being three to four times higher. The price of these items varies greatly, ranging from 5 marks for a large box containing 800 soldiers to 5 marks for a single, much more detailed and finely crafted piece.
The production of tin toys is estimated to be one million marks, with two-thirds of it exported. German toys exported to the United States account for a third of the industry’s total exports.” The Germans also dominate the British market[4]: “In 1908, England imported 30 million toys, 26 of which came from Germany and 4 from France. German manufacturers benefit from three key factors in the economy: transport, tariffs, and banking support.”[5]
[1] German Toys Prohibited in America, Ibid., No. 24, July 1898.
[2] Toys at the World’s Fair in 1904 in St. Louis (U.S.) and the History of the Toy Manufacturers’ Guild in France, Henri-René d’Allemagne, 1908.
[3] The 1904 World’s Fair was held in the American city of St. Louis (Missouri) simultaneously with the Olympic Games. At the time, it was the largest fair ever organized. It took a week for the 20 million visitors to explore the 1,500 buildings connected by 120 km of roads. Sixty-two countries participated in the exhibition, providing an opportunity for each to showcase its culture and industry, including the toy industry.
[4] David D. Hamlin, Work and Play – The Production and Consumption of Toys in Germany, 1870-1914 (Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 2007).
[5] Michel Boutin, Les jeux de pions à la Belle Époque, (Board Game Studies 7. 2004).
“It is known that a bill from President McKinley prohibits the importation into the United States of ‘wooden, rubber, or tin toys, painted in German-made colors,’ under the pretext that the paints used on these toys are dangerous. The little ‘green chalets’ from Nuremberg or the lead soldiers from Berlin no longer bring joy to young ‘Yankees.’ The report from the ‘Society for the Hygiene of the States,’ on the basis of which the President made his decision, recommends toys from ‘certain French companies,’ and even gives late praise to Eugene Turpin, who seemingly invented, about ten years ago, non-toxic toy coloring. And thus, the much-talked-about ‘boycott’ turns against Germany, benefiting France.”
It is worth noting that, at the time, the American army wore spiked helmets and was influenced by Germany , this was represented by the McLoughlin brothers, active from the 1880s to the 1920s, who procured their supplies from German toy manufacturers . They imported soldiers from Germany and also produced them with this distinctive uniform. Manufacturers like Spenkuch, Heyde, and Norris also dominated the American market with their products.
In this regard, Henri d’Allemagne provides us with interesting information in his work discussing the toy exhibition at the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis, which gives a clearer picture of the size of the German metal toy industry and the scale of its exportation to the United States: “Finally, this type of industry (tin, little soldiers) occupies 20 factories in Nuremberg and Fürth, employing 150 workers, with the number of artisans working on assembly and painting outside being three to four times higher. The price of these items varies greatly, ranging from 5 marks for a large box containing 800 soldiers to 5 marks for a single, much more detailed and finely crafted piece. The production of tin toys is estimated to be one million marks, with two-thirds of it exported. German toys exported to the United States account for a third of the industry’s total exports.”
The Germans also dominate the British market: “In 1908, England imported 30 million toys, 26 of which came from Germany and 4 from France. German manufacturers benefit from three key factors in the economy: transport, tariffs, and banking support.”
“The toy manufacturers’ union mentions a second case of “poisoned toys,” without providing a clear, verifiable source. “Under this title, on December 31 and January 8, a widely circulated newspaper published accounts of two child poisonings in Montauban and Pacy-sur-Eure; the newspaper attributed these unfortunate accidents to children sucking on toys. These incidents, brought to the attention of the Syndicate, deeply moved them, but they were left completely skeptical. However, they recognized the importance of verifying the claims and conducted an investigation. From this inquiry, it follows that there was no poisoning the French toys are harmless; there was an urgent need to protest such insinuations.” Once again, these accusations of poisoned toys are baseless. The German soldiers I examined seem no more dangerous than their French counterparts. French manufacturers capitalize on widespread anti-German sentiment to discredit the German toy industry, eliminate a competitor, and deflect attention from the numerous cases of lead poisoning caused by French toys. There is no evidence to suggest that German toys are more dangerous than their French counterparts. On the contrary, the examples we have show that many German products, such as Norris soldiers, are of superior quality compared to their French counterparts.
This also reassures parents and presents a new selling point: at the close of the 19th century, the catchy labels “harmless toys” first appeared, prominently featured in advertisements and on toy box lids. The Syndicate further informs us that the United States restricts or bans German toys, with the initiative coming from the 25th President, William McKinley himself. It is clear that the cause most dear to the President of the United States is to protect American economic interests through a rigorous, protectionist economic policy. McKinley’s presidency is marked by rapid economic growth. He and his administration defended the Dingley Act of 1897, which protected American industries from foreign competition by imposing extremely high tariffs—among the highest in U.S. history, initially 52% and later 47%. “It is known that a bill from President McKinley prohibits the importation into the United States of ‘wooden, rubber, or tin toys, painted in German-made colors,’ under the pretext that the paints used on these toys are dangerous. The little ‘green chalets’ from Nuremberg or the lead soldiers from Berlin no longer bring joy to young ‘Yankees.’ The report from the ‘Society for the Hygiene of the States,’ on the basis of which the President made his decision, recommends toys from ‘certain French companies,’ and even gives late praise to Eugene Turpin, who seemingly invented, about ten years ago, non-toxic toy coloring. And thus, the much-talked-about ‘boycott’ turns against Germany, benefiting France.”[1] It is worth noting that, at the time, the American army wore spiked helmets and was influenced by German toy manufacturers, such as the McLoughlin brothers, active from the 1880s to 1920, who imported soldiers from Germany and also produced them with this distinctive uniform. Manufacturers like Spenkuch, Heyde, and Norris also dominate the American market with their products. In this regard, Henri d’Allemagne provides us with interesting information in his work[2] discussing the toy exhibition at the 1904[3] World’s Fair in St. Louis, which gives a clearer picture of the size of the German metal toy industry and the scale of its exportation to the United States: “Finally, this type of industry (tin, little soldiers) occupies 20 factories in Nuremberg and Fürth, employing 150 workers, with the number of artisans working on assembly and painting outside being three to four times higher. The price of these items varies greatly, ranging from 5 marks for a large box containing 800 soldiers to 5 marks for a single, much more detailed and finely crafted piece.
The production of tin toys is estimated to be one million marks, with two-thirds of it exported. German toys exported to the United States account for a third of the industry’s total exports.” The Germans also dominate the British market[4]: “In 1908, England imported 30 million toys, 26 of which came from Germany and 4 from France. German manufacturers benefit from three key factors in the economy: transport, tariffs, and banking support.”[5]
[1] German Toys Prohibited in America, Ibid., No. 24, July 1898.
[2] Toys at the World’s Fair in 1904 in St. Louis (U.S.) and the History of the Toy Manufacturers’ Guild in France, Henri-René d’Allemagne, 1908.
[3] The 1904 World’s Fair was held in the American city of St. Louis (Missouri) simultaneously with the Olympic Games. At the time, it was the largest fair ever organized. It took a week for the 20 million visitors to explore the 1,500 buildings connected by 120 km of roads. Sixty-two countries participated in the exhibition, providing an opportunity for each to showcase its culture and industry, including the toy industry.
[4] David D. Hamlin, Work and Play – The Production and Consumption of Toys in Germany, 1870-1914 (Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 2007).
[5] Michel Boutin, Les jeux de pions à la Belle Époque, (Board Game Studies 7. 2004).
