I began researching my family canoe during the summer of 2014 (a 16 foot Morris with 'Manufacturer's Tag' and detailed thwarts and seats). As indicated above, my search quickly led me to Kathy, who graciously shared the wealth of information she had gathered over the years regarding all aspects of Morris and his canoes. At that time Kathy was feverishly trying to complete her book for the 2015 Assembly, so I offered to search for primary sources on various topics in the Harvard Libraries, which I did. During this research I came across two independent sources that included numerical specifications for the Morris Special Indian Model canoes. Identical specifications occur in the 1898 and 1899 catalogs of the John P. Lovell Arms company of Boston and another set of specifications were found in the 1896 and 1899 catalogs of the L W Ferdinand & Co also of Boston. Prior to this the earliest source of dimensional specification for the Special Indian model that I am aware of was the 1901 Morris catalog in the WCHA collection. What struck me was that these specifications were not the same; there were variations in widths and 'Displacement in 4 in. Draft' for some lengths between these Special Indian Models, although they were being sold during the same period. The specifications in the 1901 Morris catalog combines select specifications from each of these sources to create yet another unique set of specifications. What was particularly interesting about these 1901 Special Indian Models was they appear to be narrower in some lengths but were 5 pounds heavier in every length than the Lovell catalog Special Indian Model. I decided after the 2015 Assembly that it would be interesting to collect some measurements on surviving early Morris canoes, which at the time I defined as those that never had a serial numbers. With Kathy's help I was able to identify WCHA members with early Morris canoes and started that data collection, all of whom were helpful and responsive. In the meantime I continued to seek out other primary sources that included canoe specifications. As a result of this effort I located at The Mariner's Museum of Newport News, Virginia an 1895 re-issue of the 1893 Morris catalog that includes the insets referred to in a later 1898 letter mentioned in Kathy's book. One of these insets includes specifications for the Special Indian Model (which match those in the Ferdinand Catalog) and an Indian Model No. 81. This Museum also had a 1900 Morris catalog, which has the same specifications and is almost identical in content to the 1901 catalog. I was also able to locate an undated Morris catalog at the Maine Maritime Museum in Bath, Maine which Dan Miller has dated as 1907 because it contains language that is identical to that in a 1907 Fore N' Aft article. It is particularly interesting because, although it has moved from the Indian Model canoes to the Model A,B,C and D, it specifically mentions the Special Indian Model as the predecessor of the Model A and may represent the first catalog after the switch (The Mariner's Museum also has a later corrected copy of this catalog). I shared research copies of these documents with Kathy and Dan. In addition, I located a Special Indian Model entry in an 1898 (August) catalog of the H & D Folsom Arms (witch match those in Lovell) and two undated Iver Johnson Sporting good catalogs, with content suggesting 1900-1903 dates. These catalogs include Morris Canoes with specifications that match the Special Indian Models in the 1900 and 1901 Morris catalogs. Lovell Arms went out of business in 1900 and was taken over by Iver Johnson that same year so this change from Lovell to 1900 Morris catalog dimensions seems to suggest that this is when Morris made the production change. Finally the Special Indian Model occurs in the 1903 Abercrombie and Fitch Catalog in 18-20 foot lengths. In addition there were the already known specifications for other Morris built canoes included in later A&F catalogs under a host of creative names. Specifications, although slightly different (depth), also occur in the 1903 Morris catalog. This is my reference data on specifications.
The limited measurements on the Early canoes have already proved interesting.
There are several early canoes with width measurements that correlate extremely well with the 1898/99 Lovell and Folsom data when measuring width from the outside edge of the top rail, which in the standard Indian Model gunwales lines up with the canvas and outside edge of inwale. All of these canoes are those with the detailed thwart and seats, including some with the 'Manufacturer's Tag' and some without. The weight of my canoe, which is essentially all original materials except canvas, which was determined before this research, also matched perfectly with this data! The 18 foot canoe at the Adirondack Museum with detailed thwarts and seats does not appear to be a Special Indian Model based on dimensions and is somewhat unique in other aspects. As mentioned earlier, when Lovell was taken over in 1900 by Iver Johnson the dimensions for their Morris canoes changed to those in the 1900 Morris catalog. The canoes with the detailed thwarts and seats appear to be the Morris canoes of the later 1890s (1894-1999)[There are 2 independent sources that place 1894 as a start date for the Special Indian Model]
The widths of the early canoes with the standard Morris thwarts correlate extremely well with the dimensions in the 1900, catalog (and Iver Johnson catalogs) when measured between the inwales. All the canoes measured between the inwales, including a 16 footer and several 17 footers measure either 30 or 31 inches. The 1900 catalog specifies 31 inches for a 17 foot and 30 for a 16 foot Special Indian Model. There are two 17-footers that measure 31 between the inwales, however there are also a few that measure 30. I think the the most reasonable interpretation of this is these canoes may be Model 93 a narrower version of the Special Indian with less tumblehome and are specified as 30 inches width for all lengths. The use of a different width dimension also helps explain the 5 pound additional weight mentioned earlier, since the narrower width appears to be a feature of the measurement not the actual dimensions of the canoe. What is clear is that these canoes as a group are measurably wider than comparable lengths of the detailed thwart canoes of the 1890s. Why this dimensional change? I have no idea!
The evidence is that these standard thwart Special Indian Model canoes began in 1900. If this is correct, the start date for serial numbers would have to be shifted a little later since we have several canoes of this type without serial numbers. I think the earliest confirmed date on the serial number scale is in 1903 so adjustments would have to be limited to 1901 and 1902. We know that Morris built a large addition to the factory in 1903, which suggests significant production increases may have been occurring in 1901 and 1902, which may in turn justify moving the interpolated starting date forward a bit to make room for these canoes. The other interpretation would be that Morris was building two different Special indian Models with the same model numbers but different specification during the late 1890s, which seems to me less likely.
There is one early canoe that may actually represent the Ferdinand version of the 1890s, based not only upon dimensions but thwart placement and woods but this is more speculative.
In order to better evaluate the strength of this argument I would like to gather as much data as possible on all Indian Model canoes (all Morris canoes before 1907) and at least some data on later Model A, B, C, D. My very limited data on the later canoes suggest that width measurements went back to the outer edge of the inwale after the transition away from the Indian Models, but I do not trust this limited data. Evidence also suggests that this dimension (outer edge of inwale/toprail) was used by A&F for width measurements.
I would also like to expand this analyses to the wider models (Indian Model Extra Beam, Indian Model Lake Canoe) where the interpretation of specifications is less clear.
A rather long winded answer as to why I am requesting this data. As can be seen this study, which depends critically upon previous studies and information (particularly Kathy's book), is unique in its detailed examination of numerical specifications and their significance in dating and understanding Morris's Indian Model canoes.
