Here goes nothing.
The version seen, clearly marked Eisaman & Rome with the 1888 date, patent 394,162, is the one depicted in the drawing from the 1906 patent, number 829,197.
The only applicant on the 1906 patent -- the one that is seen with the 1888 date and marked Eisaman & Rome, to repeat myself -- is Amos Eisaman.
Both Amos Eisaman and George Rome are applicants -- i.e., they are co-applicants -- on the 1888 patent.
Here is what Rome writes in the 1905 application:
"This invention relates to manacles or handcuff's, and has for its object to provide certain new and useful improvements over my former patent, No. 394,162, issued December 11, 1888.
"In particular it is designed to effectually prevent the jaw-actuating cam from being turned past and out of engagement with the rear ends of the jaws and to house the ratchet mechanism between the handle and the stem of the device, so as to protect the palm of the hand of the operator.
"With this object in view the present invention consists in the combination and arrangement of parts, as will be hereinafter more fully described, shown in the accompanying drawings, and particularly pointed out in the appended claims, it being understood that changes in the form, proportion, size, and minor details may be made within the scope of the claims without departing from the spirit or sacrificing any of the advantages of the invention."
In other words, the second patent is for improvements to the original nipper.
Forget the drawing in the original, 1888, patent. One visual version was made, that from the 1906 patent. It just first was made before 1906, in 1888.
The remaining question is was the Rome-without-Eisaman 1906 improved version ever made? I doubt it. If it was, the Eisaman & Rome mark and the original, 1888 patent date were preserved and no 1906 patent date was stamped on it. Hence, it is extremely unlikely it ever saw production.
I hope this helps. It certainly meets the criterion of "any info".