This lantern was created as a replacement for a stolen G & G lamp, originally made for the Gamble House; once the original was recovered, this copy
was auctioned off to raise funds for the Gamble House's upkeep and education programs was sold off - see below. It sold at auction last weekend for $2,500, a bit lower than the expected $3,000 - $4,000. There are several excellent images on the ebay auction page.
reader John Hamm of Hamm Glass Studios writes in to give us the straight dope on this:
I do not know where you received the infromation stating that the Gamble House profited in any way from the sale of this lantern but it is completly false. The Gamble House had absolutely nothing to do with the sale of this piece, and in no way made any money from its sale. The "gentleman" that located the original that was stolen from the house many years ago was given the reproduction as a thank you, at a public ceremony no less, for allowing the Gamble House to purchase from him the original lantern that he located and purchased on E-bay. He then in turn put the repro. up for auction and profitted soley from its sale - an action that I personally find repugnant. You may verify this by calling the Gamble House and speaking with the director, Ted Bosley. It would have been a kind gesture if the profit from the sale had been directed back to the Gamble House, but no one there knew about the sale until the auction was about to take place.
So basically the owner profited twice: he bought stolen property (something that people are often punished for!), which was then bought back from him at the Gamble House's expense; and then he sold off the lantern that was given to him and profited from that as well. Certainly within his rights, as the radical capitalist portion of the antique-selling trade have reminded us on this very forum within the last few weeks (when I questioned the ethics of selling pottery ebay for a huge markup without telling the buyer they could buy it for less from the potter directly) - but not very ethical behavior! Thanks to John Hamm for setting us straight on this.