RIGO Poison Bottles - The Historical Truth and the Owl Drug Collectors Blog

[mctaggart67]

I think you've misread my postings. I'm not questioning clancy_kid at all.

 

[andy volkerts]

ORIGINAL: mctaggart67

RIGO poisons were clearly a hit with druggists under the new poison bottle regulations in Ontario. By 1915, these poison bottles were a regular part of the overall RIGO line. Although Richards Glass focussed upon Canada's most populous market of the provinces of Quebec (explains the French on the bottles) and Ontario, the company also marketed its RIGO poisons across Canada, including British Columbia, home of the Owl Drug Company of Victoria and Vancouver. Below is an advertisement for the entire RIGO line which appeared in several 1915 issues of The Retail Druggist of Canada. I've highlighted in a red box the listing for RIGO poison bottles:

Send the above Rigo ad to mr Levine and maybe he will have second thouts about his rantings about the Clancy_kid

 

[mctaggart67]

Hi Andy (and everyone else):

I didn’t send Mr. Levine a copy of the historical document. However, Levine has clearly sifted through my postings above because he emailed me a critique of the same. Below I’ve copied most of Levine’s email response to me. I say most because some of his response libels another party and I want no part in that sort of nastiness. I’ve taken the liberty of adding my own additions and comments to Levine’s critique. These appear in square brackets mostly after each of Levine’s topical sections, which I have also taken the liberty of organizing.

David Levine to me on January 30, 2013 in response to my posting of this thread on Canadian RIGO poison bottles:

“Glen: Do you think I would put comments on a worldwide blog [Levine’s Owl collectors blog] that have not been researched and documented by the authorities associated with the item itself and others? This is not how I work. [Levine is fallaciously arguing by authority here] . . .

“The item that this seller has put on Ebay is not authentic and has been determined to be a fake or knockoff from China!! It is the same or similar to the bottle he put up for sale a year or 2 years ago. At that time I posted a blog discussing the item showing that it was not produced by the Richards Glass Company but was a knockoff from China. [the bottle is not a knock-off from China – it’s genuine and belongs to the family of RIGO poisons discussed above] . . .

“The label was not authentic either. It was a modern label that was created and placed on the bottle using "modern glue" as documented also by the Richards Glass Company and others. The label itself is not an Owl Drug Company of San Francisco label. They never used red as a color in their labels. [the labels are also genuine and came from a hoard of labels and other materials that were located in Vancouver, British Columbia’s original Owl Drug Store building around twenty years ago (I once posted to Levine’s blog about this, but he removed my contribution – the modern Richards Glass Company (Richards Packaging) has never documented the use of these labels on bottles in produced one hundred years ago because they simply do not have an archives from which to conduct such research nor does it fall within their corporate mandate as a bottle and glass manufacturer and distributor] . . .

“This information about this bottle and the other ones of this type put on Ebay by this seller was given to me by the owner and a bottle specialist at the Richard Glass Company, the Archives of Vancouver British Columbia, and others sources. [Richards Glass’s current owner is a bottle specialist, but a specialist as it relates to the modern bottle business and he is not a serious collector and he certainly is not a researcher of antique bottles, even those once manufactured/distributed by his company, so he surely could not have provided Levine with accurate information about RIGO poison bottles from the early 1900s – the Vancouver Archives does not have any information about Richards Glass, a Toronto, Ontario based company, and the archives only provided Levine information about the officers, locations, etc. concerning the Vancouver Owl Drug Company stores] . . .

“I strongly suggest that you check with the Richard Glass Company directly as well as learn about knockoffs as they relate to Canadian bottles and other products in Canada. Suggest you contact your national government to check on what knockoffs have been introduced into Canada over the years particularly in the category of collectibles/glass/bottles/insulators and other items or products. [this hints at Levine’s fallacious conflation of what Richards Glass has told him about the current state of the glass industry with respect to knock-offs from China; it would appear that Levine thinks what happens today must have happened one hundred years ago – the Canadian government only concerns itself with modern-day trademark and design piracy in China for those goods which play a significant role in today’s Canadian economy; the Chinese are not producing reproductions of RIGO poisons, though I suspect that if they were to identify a Canadian glass antique to fake it would be the quintessentially Canadian Beaver Jar, which would enjoy a much bigger market than RIGO poisons] . . .

“I will be happy to discuss these issues with you once you have done your research particularly with the Richards Glass Company and not just journals [again, another false assumption about my research practices – as to “just journals,†these are the authentic historical documents I have consulted (some which have been copied above) as per my training as an historian (I hold a BA and MA in Canadian history and started a PhD but had to withdraw for financial reasons); strangely enough, Levine always knocks others for supposedly not undertaking proper archival research, yet when presented with the findings of proper archival research which refute his spurious claims, he dismisses such findings as being based on “just journals†without confirmation from another authority, even if that authority’s knowledge is incomplete and therefore flawed, as is the case with the modern Richards Glass Company – if Levine were trained in proper historical research methods he would understand this and he would understand that many historical documents offer us in the present solid evidence about the past that stands on its own merits without requiring confirmation] . . .

“As a business owner I have to deal with this problem and issue of knockoffs everyday. Both our governments fail to deal with this issue and just sweep it under the table. Today the Richards Glass Company contracts with other glass manufacturers, particularly in China, to produce their glass products, but tend to produce more plastic bottles instead of glass for cost effectiveness and profitability. [again, more conflation of the present industrial trade situation with the past] . . .

“I resent you[r] comments [the ones made in my original postings in this thread] without you doing your homework or understand[ing] the complexity of this problem especially since I have done my research and documented the problems about this item and this seller. Before you speak and write your comments, you should verify your own information based on the authorities and not just on journal articles as well as broadening your knowledge about fakes and knockoffs. Your criticism is welcome when warranted, but in this case you are way off base and have not a clue about what you speak about. [again, more argumentation by authority and more fallacious reasoning, to which are added some childish personal insults]â€

I feel obligated to post all of this because I find Levine’s tactics so distasteful and, frankly, counterproductive in our great hobby. His manner is even counterproductive to his stated goals, but he simply fails to see that. I think his calumny should, on occasion, be directly answered, refuted and neutralized. My gut feeling is that Levine wants to be an expert in our hobby – and fair enough – but, in an immense ego-play, he deems himself as being the only expert, with nobody else being capable of contributing knowledge and understanding. One only has to read his Owl blog to see this. He maliciously bashes so many, including those long since gone to their eternal reward and current volunteers in various bottle organizations who are trying their best to make things better for so many, and he edits out any criticism, no matter how constructive, of his ideas and opinions. That’s too bad, because he might find that the bottle collecting world is so much more fun and interesting when one collaborates with others. Isn’t that what hobbies are really about, the people?

 

[andy volkerts]

[8D] Hello Glen, I gave up on Mr Levine, he doesnt pass on to his site everything a person posts so things get taken out of context. I do not know what his grudge with the bottle hobby is, but hes not doing anybody any favors withhis one sided views. I have met Fredinand Meyer who is the present Pres. of the Historical Bottle Assn, and you couldnt ask for a better person or more knowledgful person on most bottle subjects, and he hasnt been into the hobby all that long. Mr Levine is quite disrepectful of a lot of people in our hobby who are really quite nice and helpful to collectors. I feel that the best way to deal with this wet blanket is to just ignore him.........

 

[Bixel]

Am I reading in to this wrong, or is Mr.Levine saying that RIGO never produced cobalt blue poisons, and that the RIGO cobalt coffin poisons I see are repro's from China...?

 

[mctaggart67]

Hi Kyle: It's not always easy to pin down what Levine is saying because of his lapses in logic, inconsistent historical research, and conflation of past and present events, but he seems to be saying that the RIGO bottle, with the Vancouver/Victoria, B.C. Owl Drug Co. label, listed on Ebay is a Chinese repro, despite uncontestable historical evidence of this type of bottle's manufacture in Canada around 100 years ago. One would think that the market would be flooded with RIGO poisons if the Chinese reproduced them because they don't undertake repros on a small scale. Regards, Glen

 

[Poison_Us]

Interesting read. I have never followed Levine...so I dont know of his history. But reading what you have listed what he has posted would have definitely made me question his comments. Thanks for the info and insight.

 

[epackage]

Interesting stuff, I remember a discussion about this guy and him removing posts on his blog that don't support his views, a real toolbag of a guy if you ask me. To bad he doesn't haven't a Paterson blog, i'd love to butt heads with this guy...[]