Dennison Howard & Davis - Where was it made?

[DaveyG]

Hi Folks,

I have just noted three early 15 jewel (?) DHD watches for sale on ebay, and subsequently googled images for the movement pictures. If I were a gambling man I would put money on the images that I have seen being of Liverpool (UK) manufacture. They certainly bear some of the standard identifiers of movements from there, Liverpool windows, crows foot markers on the regulator index and the script style of the 'Waltham' marking. The movements I have looked at are all very English in style and one description notes that the centre wheel is solid - would that be another pointer to a UK made movement?

So can anyone tell me, would I win my bet or were Liverpool watchmakers imported to Massachusets?

[Fred Hansen]

Dennison Howard & Davis are American made watches by the Boston Watch Company in the 1850's.

These are at the early end of production for machine made American watches, and with this in mind it is understandable that their overall appearance had similarities to the English made watches that were popular at the time.

Fred

[Jon Hanson]

Hold it--LLs have fuzees!

[Tom McIntyre]

Absolutely, for at least another 20 years after the DH&D were made Liverpool region watches had fusees. These were early relatively high quality going barrel watches.

Dennison did spend time in Liverpool studying English watches and the English system of manufacturing. That is why he thought they could make money competing with them.

When I read the title, I thought we might be discussing Roxbury vs. Waltham. Would any of the DH&D have been made before they moved to Waltham?

[Jon Hanson]

"Would any of the DH&D have been made before they moved to Waltham?"

NO. The earlier watches were different.

[Tom McIntyre]

"Would any of the DH&D have been made before they moved to Waltham?"

NO. The earlier watches were different.

Jon, I know the Curtis and Warren are different and you know I know that. I was asking when the very first DH&D might have been made and/or when did the operation move to Waltham from Roxbury.

I can get our Moore and look it up, but I thought you might recall off the top of your head. :)

[Jon Hanson]

I own the second watch made in Waltham, 02 and it has a handwritten note stating such; it was originally in the Waltham collection.

[Tom McIntyre]

Thank you. :) That answers the question unless they made 1001 in Roxbury before they left. :o

Oops! I reread your comment. Does the note say it was the second one made in Waltham or that it was the second one made?

[Jon Hanson]

The note reads second watch made at Waltham--it is also docummented as such 65-75 years ago.

Remember, there was some elapsed time converting from the Bemis farm. I can look up the months if you require that.

[DaveyG]

Gentlemen, I'm disappointed! The tongue in cheek assertion that these watches may have been Liverpool made didn't spark the debate that I had hoped for.

I was aware that Aaron Dennison had spent time in the Liverpool area. But what was he doing there?

I know that watches made, not just in Liverpool but throughout the UK industry, were fusee but that doesn't mean that going barrel watches were a mystery over here - I have a going barrel watch in my collection dated to 1825. It was simply the view of the English trade that going barrels would never be as good as a fusee. In fact, that view was firmly held until the dying gasps of an industry which could probably be viewed as insular and arrogant. David Glasgow (Vice President of the BHI) in his 'Clock & Watch Making' published in 1891 is entirely dismissive of the going barrel as a fad that simply wouldn't catch on

So, the real questions I suppose are:

Just how advanced was the factory manufacturing process during the 1850's?

Was Dennison sourcing material during his Liverpool holiday in addition to his examination of the English processes?

How much of the early HD&D movements were imported?

[Jon Hanson]

"Re: Dennison Howard & Davis - Where was it made? "

AGAIN, Waltham!

[Tom McIntyre]

Gentlemen, I'm disappointed! The tongue in cheek assertion that these watches may have been Liverpool made didn't spark the debate that I had hoped for.

I was aware that Aaron Dennison had spent time in the Liverpool area. But what was he doing there?

I know that watches made, not just in Liverpool but throughout the UK industry, were fusee but that doesn't mean that going barrel watches were a mystery over here - I have a going barrel watch in my collection dated to 1825. It was simply the view of the English trade that going barrels would never be as good as a fusee. In fact, that view was firmly held until the dying gasps of an industry which could probably be viewed as insular and arrogant. David Glasgow (Vice President of the BHI) in his 'Clock & Watch Making' published in 1891 is entirely dismissive of the going barrel as a fad that simply wouldn't catch on

So, the real questions I suppose are:

Just how advanced was the factory manufacturing process during the 1850's?

Was Dennison sourcing material during his Liverpool holiday in addition to his examination of the English processes?

How much of the early HD&D movements were imported?

We generally use HD&D to refer to the 8 day watch and DH&D to refer to the 30 hour early production watches in Waltham. In between are the Warren and Samuel Curtis, which are yet another subtly different ebauche.

In terms of what might have come from England, it is possible that the hairsprings were imported and there may be some dials on these early watches that were made over there. However, there is no clear evidence of that. The Warren and Curtis watches were made in Roxbury, I believe. The 8 day watches were contracted out to the Marsh brothers. I don't think we really know where they were made.

Watches had been made and finished in the U.S. for probably at least 40 years before the Waltham factory started up. There is no reason to assume small volume production could not have been undertaken before the full volume plant was on line. It is not at all surprising that the watches look a bit like Liverpool production. That was, after all, the main competition.

There is also the mysterious Dennison 8 day watch that has never, to my knowledge, been seen. It is reported that they were all cannibalized by Nelson P Stratton to make some of the later 30 hour watches.

Some very old and very odd reports seem to be a conflation of the Dennison 8 day story and the Howard, Davis & Dennison / Marsh brothers watch story. These reports claim that the 8 days were scrapped out and re-engraved because they did not have reasonable isochronism. I don't have a good source for these stories, I heard it repeated by Dana Blackwell at a meeting in Lake Morey, VT some 25 years ago.

[DaveyG]

Firstly, apologies for the DH&D/HD&D slip, my fingers are obviously faster than my brain on the keyboard.

Secondly, thanks for that comprehensive response. I think the thing that really got me puzzling was the use of the crows foot regulator index which is, in the UK, a fairly exclusive Liverpool/Prescott indicator. Also I wasn't aware of that extent of watch manufacture in the US prior to the 1850s; I knew that watches were made their but I thought that, for the large part, they were finished from imported parts or imported movements that were cased in America.

I have in my collection a Massey 1 escapement by Jos'h Johnson of Liverpool which is housed in a huge silver hunter case with the American eagle stamp in the lid which I would date to around 1815 and a Massey 3 escapement marked for M I Tobias, in a gold case which I believe to be American also (marked D&CO with a rubbed mark).

They do say that 'every day is a school day'! I'm glad now that I asked the question. Thanks again.

[Tom McIntyre]

Your statistics on early 19th century watches in America are accurate. It was certainly a very small percentage that were not imported. However, that does not mean the skills were not available. It was economics of isolated watchmakers vs. the large pool of labor for putting out in Liverpool that made the Liverpool watches too cheap to compete against. Many of those names that appear as "maker names" on Liverpool watches from the 1830's later appear on the employee roles of Waltham and Howard.

Daniel Bucklin Fitts for instance was a watchmaker in Holliston Mass who sold Liverpool watches with his name on them but later invented the ratcheting release form of safety mechanism to protect against mainspring breakage.

William C. Keith, who was an important figure in Waltham development was a watchmaker in the shop of the Goddards in Worcester Mass. The Goddards are the first clearly documented makers of complete watches in America, but there were likely some others in the preceding 100 years of the 18th century.

As you have noted there was a thriving case making cottage industry with lots of different maker's marks.