Incorrect Information About Chic Gaylord Here&Holstory

Status
Not open for further replies.

BCO Holsters

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
12
Reaction score
40
I am trying this for the second time. I was told by my Great Uncle the following information and asked me to post it here.

My Uncle is the US Copyright Holder to HANDGUNNERS GUIDE. He was a close personal friend and business associate of Chic Gaylord. His name is B.E. (Lefty) Lewis, founder of BELL CHARTER OAK, the successor of Chic Gaylord New York Custom Holsters.

When my Uncle received a copy of HOLSTORY as a gift from a friend, who apparently thought he would be pleased because it devoted a chapter to Gaylord who was his mentor, he was unpleasantly surprised to find otherwise. To say the least my Uncle was disturbed by much of what he read, therein. I mentioned that I had read some recent posts here on the Forum and discussed that with him. He was not pleased by that either and was irritated further. So I'm going to try and resolve the matter.

Mr. Witte and Mr. Nichols reprinted and infringed upon copyrighted intellectual property and trademarks owned by my Uncle, without his permission in their book HOLSTORY. That is an undeniable fact.

To add insult to injury, there are statements made about Chic Gaylord that are grossly inaccurate, or entirely untrue, in their book and subsequently some have been repeated on this Forum.

One example among several. Gaylord never used flatbed machines to stitch holsters. He used Campbell Bosworth and Union Lockstitch needle and awl machines exclusively. My Uncle states that he knows of no "rag trade" flatbed machine that could possibly stitch 7 to 10 oz. horsehide or cowhide using heavy 346 cord, during that time. The reverse stitching observation is correct, though kept a confidential proprietary technique until Theodore stole it from Gaylord for his SEVENTREES outfit. The only other makers that were clever enough to identify this technique, were Matt DelFatti and Derry Gallagher, both good friends of my Uncle Lefty.

Another one or two. Gaylord died from Cancer, not kidney failure as stated in the book. Gaylord was never a "toy maker" as stated in the book, that in itself is preposterous. He did design and make all the rigging for Mary Martin in Broadways "Peter Pan", but that was as close to toy making Chic ever got! Gaylord's association with Paris Theodore was merely coincidental with the fact that Chic was acquainted with Paris's Mother and Aunt by his association with the theater. That's where that started, so my Uncle says.

Chic used a rubber stamp with his logo on the reverse side of the belt tunnels on the rough out portion sometimes, on small holsters, black or gold leaf depending on the finish color. Otherwise his benchmark was die struck, and BELL CHARTER OAK still has the original dies, along with all original Gaylord holster cutting dies. It's not that he didn't care that much about his makers mark, according to Lefty. Chic was frequently asked not to mark the holsters by his clients, who long before Theodore, was trading with black bag spooks and other of that ilk.

There are other inaccuracies from the authors, who at best owe my Great Uncle their public apologies. The footnotes refer to Rob Garrett's interview of Chic shortly before his death as some kind of substantiation of the authors remarks. My Uncle ARRANGED the interview and WAS PRESENT for the entire interview, which later appeared in COMBAT HANDGUNS magazine in three parts. This footnote should not be interpreted as substantiation of the authors claims regarding other statements about Mr. Gaylord. I hope this sets the record straight.

God Bless You All;
Elmo
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
We (Witty and I) do keep an errata sheet for Holstory and it is available on the Holstory website page. We made every effort to ensure accuracy of our information and did not absolutely rely on the accuracy of the sources; articles by and about Chic Gaylord included. If we have made a material misrepresentation of fact I apologize publicly for that.

I do think it's unlikely that we have breached any copyright under the fair use doctrine; but I'd welcome a PM outlining what Lefty thinks about that. It is not uncommon for misunderstandings about intellectual property to cloud the issues that are perceived. I expect the forum will not welcome a public argument about all this but I bow to their viewpoint on that.

An example of that would be the matter of stitching the holster upside down. From your comments I expect that Lefty believes this was a trade secret of Chic's, in that you've stated that Paris 'stole' it. I'll correct Lefty in this matter of intellectual property: in matters of trade secret, it is specifically legal to "reverse engineer" it; what's not legal is to be entrusted with it and then disclose it. I won't apologize for being smart enough to see that both Chic's and Paris' holsters were stitched upside down. Wonder why anyone would do that on a harness machine? My local saddler's flatbed machine sews the same leathers with the same thread; and it's how parachutes were made. Then there's the matter of the feed dog marks on their holsters; harness machines of the era didn't have feed dogs.

I'll make this point: the purpose of footnoting is only to refer the reader to the source. It is not intended as 'proof' of anything; it only points to where the information came from and the reader is free to consult it for error if any; and Lefty did that. Mission accomplished. Indeed there are more than 2000 sources for Holstory and not all could be included; so again, on the Holstory page with the errata page link there is also a full listing of all our sources; including those many relating to Chic and Paris.

What I'd rather do, vs. simply disagreeing, is have a pile of probative information from Lefty about Chic and his operation; he and I and Witty can work out what's suitable for correction; and the very next printing of Holstory will include it. I think that's a reasonable offer. But please act now; we are preparing our next printing now and the file used for the book's contents can readily be updated.

I do apologize if any offense has been given to Lefty; and in good faith I offer to make amends after any new documentation is provided that is persuasive.
 
Last edited:
We (Witty and I) do keep an errata sheet for Holstory and it is available on the Holstory website page. We made every effort to ensure accuracy of our information and did not absolutely rely on the accuracy of the sources; articles by and about Chic Gaylord included. If we have made a material misrepresentation of fact I apologize publicly for that.

I do think it's unlikely that we have breached any copyright under the fair use doctrine; but I'd welcome a PM outlining what Lefty thinks about that. It is not uncommon for misunderstandings about intellectual property to cloud the issues that are perceived. I expect the forum will not welcome a public argument about all this but I bow to their viewpoint on that.

I showed your remarks to Lefty and while he does not agree with most of your response to my post, he did say to extend his thanks for the apology. As for the "fair use" he say's that is another matter entirely. His position is that the intellectual property protected under copyright, HANDGUNNERS GUIDE and all content, was published for profit, without his consent. He agrees that this is not an appropriate place to discuss that aspect and will decline to extend any further remarks concerning the issue of infringement on the S&W Forum.

Elmo
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great Uncle should be corresponding directly with the authors to address possible errors. The use of a third party and a public forum to discuss such things seems to be the wrong way to go about this.

We don't have any contact info for either author, if you do you have more info than us. There was nowhere else to go with this. They don't print their address in the book you may realize. I only posted this because the book was heavily promoted on the S&W Forum and there are several posts repeating the same inaccurate information. Aside from that I agree with you completely. It is what it is, see the book, see the photos they used without permission from the lawful copyright holder. They are not "fair use" or "public domain" materials. The authors didn't even bother to make acknowledgements or ask permission to use the material. We regret this ever happened, it has caused substantial disturbance personally for us all.

God Bless You;
Elmo
 
Last edited:
Anybody on this forum can be readily contacted by private message. Your message has been received. If your uncle is truly declining to make further remarks then there is no more need for a messenger. Thank you for your message, any future messages should be sent to the recipient privately.
Regards,
John Witty
Moderator
 
Anybody on this forum can be readily contacted by private message. Your message has been received. If your uncle is truly declining to make further remarks then there is no more need for a messenger. Thank you for your message, any future messages should be sent to the recipient privately.
Regards,
John Witty
Moderator

So you, a co author of the book HOLSTORY are using your position as a moderator on the S&W Forum to shut down any potential discussion of this matter in your own interest. I have been dismissed, so it seems. Don't you think that there is some ethical conflict by doing so? Other people have a right to hear about this, because if you and your co author were wrong about Mr. Gaylord, what other facts may you have inaccurately reported? There will be no further remarks from my Uncle, as I said previously. I am new here and did not know about PM's. That is not the point however. The point is re-writing history as many "historians" have done.

What is the value of a copyright? It is to protect intellectual property from others who profit by it's use without agreement or permission from the holder. That is one issue. The second issue is misstatements, which will survive in print for who knows how long? How does one correct that? In a sequel that not everyone may purchase?

In the end, if you haven't, read the copyright statement posted on this forum. It may provide you and others, with some fundamental clarity in understanding the protections this law provides. What's done is done. Peace!

God Bless You All;
Elmo
 
Last edited:
Great Uncle should be corresponding directly with the authors to address possible errors. The use of a third party and a public forum to discuss such things seems to be the wrong way to go about this.

I agree with ColbyBruce. This post is inappropriate in the forum, and there is nothing to be gained here beyond recriminations and ill will.
 
Elmo, I, too, encourage you to encourage your great uncle, Lefty, who many of us hold, with good reason, in high regard, to take this off line. John Witty, Red Nichols, I believe, are stand up guys. It's hard — impossible — to get everything right in a history. The offer to correct in the next edition mistakes in the current is reasonable.

As we get older, Elmo, we all tend to get more curmudgeonly. Good luck, young man, in trying to sort this out.
 
Our good friend, Onomea, is right on the money. I both believe and know that all of the men above are stand up men and I am sure this will be fairly "sorted out". I too believe it should be private. All my very best, Joe.
 
Our good friend, Onomea, is right on the money. I both believe and know that all of the men above are stand up men and I am sure this will be fairly "sorted out". I too believe it should be private. All my very best, Joe.

PM has been sent to Elmo, agreed Lefty's one of the good ones. Suggest to the moderator that the thread be closed? And then the authors will be happy to bring everyone up to speed if there is progress; in the meantime not wanting any further offense to be caused by well-intentioned posts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top