very unexciting I know - a small cream or milk jug with the No. down low on the inside wall. I'm sure this isn't already on the Board's Registration archive, so a small addition to the list of designs from a very well known Sunderland maker. circa 4" in height.
Thanks for showing this, Paul.
thanks Fred - I very carefully looked at all of the Greener Nos. and didn't see anything for this No. - just ignore then as assume not wanted.
Have just tried again with the same negative result. Section 06 in the Glass Gallery for Registered Designs - enter Henry Greener and press search, which gives five pages - and 103434 not included.
Are there two Glass Galleries ?? The one I looked at appears to have been last up-dated on 6th August, so assume it's current.
I think you may be over-complicating the search, Paul.
When searching for an RD number in the database I always start by initially simply typing in the number then add more search parameters if I get no results.
If you open the site at http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/, you don't even need to log in. Simply click on the blue 'search' tag at the right-hand end of the line below the 'log in' tag to open the 'search' menu at http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/search.php and ensure that the 'title', 'captions' and 'keywords' boxes are ticked, then type in the RD number 103434 in the 'search' box - then the 4 thumbnails should appear.
You can, of course, log in to the site and get then same results.
Typing Greener 103434 in the search box also bring up the thumbnails, BUT Henry Greener 103434 does not, for some reason. This may well be because the entries were made with the RD number being attributed to Greener & Co., Sunderland rather than Henry Greener. I used Thompson's attributions on page 15 of 'The Identification of English Pressed Glass 1842-1908' where she indicates that all Greener registrations from RD 38582 of 23 November 1885 onwards were by Greener & Co., Sunderland.
Hope this helps. If not, then Anne may be able to resolve the issue.
thanks for taking the time to reply Fred - this is the way I've searched previously, so getting it wrong my end no doubt, although have to say assumed my approach seemed logical. No matter, you've assisted greatly. thanks.