Chester Hallmarks - when exactly was the change from crowned to uncrowned Leopard's Head?

[John Matthews]

There is no evidence that the Leopard's Head was ever used on gold and silver wares hallmarked at the Chester Office before 1720, i.e. not present in the period before the sterling silver standard was restored.

From that time, on gold & silver wares, including watch cases, the Leopard's Head carried a crown until 1822. However, it has now become clear to me that the transition from the crowned to uncrowned head is not straight forward and that the interpretation of the hallmarks of silver and gold watch cases over the period of transition, may be subject to misinterpretation. Further, it is possible that marks previously thought to be 'faux' marks may be genuine.

Part of the confusion arises because the period of transition also corresponded in a disruption in the normal time when the date letter was changed. At Chester the change normally occurred on 5 July, but as can be seen in Cycle VII (reproduced from Jackson) the periods when the letters A, B, C & D, were in force were either less (B) or more (A, C & D) than 12 months.

The footnotes read:

‡ Lion also appears in plain rectangular punch in 1821-23. The Leopard's Head may be found as in 1819. There was also a variant of the city arms. (illustrated as slightly more elongated and the hilt of the sword less pronounced).​

​

§ Leopard's Head may be found as in 1821.​

​

This is at odds with Bradbury, who indicates that the uncrowned heads begins in 1823, corresponding to the date letter 'E'. Jackson shows an 'intermediate' head being used from November 1821. I perceive there is possibly a further complication. From the limited samples I have seen, I think it is entirely possible that the time of transition may have been different for gold and silver hallmarks used on watch cases. This, and the possibility that a different set of gold and silver punches may have been used, may explain the need for the footnotes.

Here are two sets of silver hallmarks from my collection. Note that the second example (which I am certain is genuine) does not correspond precisely to Jackson's thumbnails.

In order to better understand this transition can I please ask anyone who has a gold or silver Chester case, with the date letters A to G from Cycle VII (July 1818 to July 1826), which is housing a genuine contemporary movement to post photographs of the case hallmarks. I am particularly interested in gold cases.

In anticipation, my thanks.

John

 

[eric the bully]

In Ridgeay and Priestley's book dedicated to Chester, the leopard without a crown is from 1809 onwards.
Regards enrico

 

[eric the bully]

In Ridgeay and Priestley's book dedicated to Chester, the leopard without a crown is from 1809 onwards in the summary. But on page 9 it depicts it in use until 1822.
Regards enrico

 

[John Matthews]

Enrico - p.9 is correct - what page the summary?

John

Edit - are you are looking at the tables - p.9 explains

 

[eric the bully]

Yes in the table the shape changes in 1809, an error?
Regards enrico

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Robert Roskell silver pair case, serial number 28610, 30-tooth escape wheel, N/S.


Richard Hornby.(11) Rack Lever.

 

[John Matthews]

Allan

Roskell example is standard date letter for July 1818 to September 1819. The Hornby ‘D’ conforms to the first footnote to the table in post #1.

John

 

[John Matthews]

Here is a composite showing three gold Chester case hallmarks with date letter D that have been posted on the forum. These for comparison with the silver example posted by Allan. In the past there has been discussion on some of these and similar examples as to whether these gold hallmarks are genuine.

and below composites for silver and gold case hallmarks with the ate letter 'C'.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

I don´t know how far you want to go with this, but I have Chester marks for the letter H, which show the leopard punch gets smaller and smaller, they are almost just a blob.?

Richard Hornby, serial number 19749. I have more if you want them.

Allan.

 

[John Matthews]

Allan

I am really only looking for the transition period with date letters 'A' to 'G' and in particular for hallmarks on gold cases. I believe that a different set of punches may have been used to stamp the gold and silver hallmarks and/or the transition may not have been at the same time.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

I think John, you are chasing a bad apple here. I see nothing that indicates faux marks on any of these. The third gold watch on your list above is Identical to the L'eopard´s head punch as I said, just a blob. Just bad management by those in charge at the time, like it´s said, you cannot change history, you can only improve it.

Allan.

 

[John Matthews]

Allan

Do you really see no difference between the Leopards Head's on the gold and silver cases for these two years ?

As to whether they are genuine is a separate issue.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Of course, I see the difference, apart from the two being silver, and two being gold cases, the problem lies in the poor Leopard punches. Neither gold nor silver, none represents how the Leopard's head should look. This was not a short period of time, if you look at watches stamped in Chester as late as 1837 when the Leopard's head was then no longer used, you will see it is again just a blob of silver. No one seeing it for the first time would ever guess it was a Leopard´s head., yet they would recognise the Lion for silver.

Has you know, I have a very rare watch owned by father and son for over forty years, a watch signed for Robert Roskell in silver and gold. A watch that even then would have cost a lot of money, you would think the Chester office would take some care to mark it well, not true, they used the same shameful stamps. (Or blobs)

The bow, the pendant and the pendant pipe, plus the Dome Snap and Back snap are all 18K, this is clear on the pendant, but just three blobs on the bow. The rest is Chester hallmark´s for silver. The letter F for 1824/25 (see below).







If you want marks up to 1836/7 I will dig them out.

Allan.

 

[John Matthews]

Allan we must agree to disagree.

I have looked closely at many gold and silver Chester cases over the period from July 1818 to July 1824 and over that period inclusively, the Leopard's head stamp is, as I have illustrated, consistently of a different style on gold and silver cases.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

I agree not to agree, has it ever entered your research mind, that the management at Chester knew they were to drop the leopard´s head, and so did not bother to have or renew their punches? If you take a look at the gold watch for 1837 om my Prest visit thread, you will see the letter T and nothing has changed from those you put on earlier, A-G.

 

[Rich Newman]

Davis Watson, & Co. Boston, Mass. Lever fusee, silver pair case, sold by Jones & Horan in 2019.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

I take it Rich, this watch is a Massey escapement? You have to know that after 1822 when Vale & Rotherham started to make their own watch cases they registered at Chester. So the hallmarks would be the same as any other.

Regards,

Allan

 

[John Matthews]

Rich Newman thanks for photograph.

The Leopard's head conforms to that found on Chester silver cases hallmarked between July 1823 to July 1824 with the date letter 'E' ...

This Vale & Rotherham case also carries the subsidiary letter 'z' which is new to me, other V&R cases of the period have 'T'.

Is there any chance you have any photographs of gold Chester cases hallmarked between 1816 'U' and 1826 'H' ? if so any photographs would be much appreciated.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

In a rush, more tomorrow.




Sorry, panic over. I will carry on going on through my Chester hallmarked watches. I have to admit it was a surprise to find one with the letter E.

So there could be other surprises too. So back to work.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Some more.








I must say if there was something going on at the Chester office, that was against the law, then I have to admit all the watchmakers must have joined in. Most unlikely in my opinion. If that were the case, we have to remember that they could not sell their watches till after the watches had been hallmarked, all these above are from watches sold in England, John Muncas, Robert Roskell, Litherland & Davies, Vale & Rotherham, and others, and you would have to involve the case makers too. I am not trying to make the Chester office God's gift to watchmakers, I do think they could not have got away with faux watches in England.



These two are, from Litherland & Davies. So we are nearing a full house from 1818 to 1837.

Allan.

Still looking.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Found this last night. Litherland & Davies 1837. Serial No. 8856. Plus this one by Jos. Penlington.

Allan.

 

[Rich Newman]

I take it Rich, this watch is a Massey escapement? You have to know that after 1822 when Vale & Rotherham started to make their own watch cases they registered at Chester. So the hallmarks would be the same as any other.

Regards,

Allan

Allan, I've not seen the movement and listing was silent regarding whether a Massey.

 

[Lychnobius]

I was going to submit Joseph Johnson no. 3272, but I see John already has this; it is the gold example with the incuse initials of Edward Jones and the date-letter D. My date for the movement would be 1819 rather than 1823, but such time-lapses between completion and casing of a movement seem not to be uncommon. I believe the case (gold, with 'sea-shell' chasing) is an honest English one; it has a stem of circular cross-section with a spherical pendant, rather than the wide flattened stem favoured by the Americans.

Perhaps it should be clarified that Jackson's table is not specific to watch-cases; the 'king's head' duty mark did not appear on these items after 1798 when the special tax ordained in 1784 was withdrawn for watch-cases, whereas on gold and silver ware in general it lasted until 1890.Thus I believe we can still rely on the assumption that when the king's head (or something vaguely like it) appears on purportedly English gold cases with date-letters implying the 1820s (usually an F for 1824-25), it is evidence that the marks are false.

Oliver Mundy.

 

[John Matthews]

Oliver your point regarding the 1798 Act is well made.

I have a photograph of the (1824/25) case Johnson #6464 with the duty mark. If you have photographs of other examples I would appreciate copies via PM. Thanks in anticipation.

Incidentally, year mark 'D' could be as early as November 1821, noting that the uncrowned head is found on gold cases with the year mark 'C'.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

I went to the bank and got this one out, John. I had forgotten the date letter was H so all the better. This is one of the very best watch cases ever made or seen made in silver from Liverpool at the period you are researching. It was sold by Ferrer of Hull to a landed gentleman and politician, Geroge Druwer. My private thoughts are the watch was made in the workshop of Joseph Penlington of Liverpool. The dial photograph shows the watch standing, it is not held or supported.


Standing. Laying flat.


The hallmarks from the outer and inner of the case. Made by the Helsby Co.


Original bull´s eye glass, and the top plate of the watch. I do not think a better example of a Liverpool watch can be found today.

Allan.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Just for the record, I now do agree that the poster from Jackson, In post one is correct, and I see no difference now we have seen so many cases on this thread.

I have one question for members, does anyone have a Chester case with the hallmark letter "B."?

Allan.

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Last night while looking for a case with the letter "B" I stumbled across this pamphlet "SOME ACCOUNT OF LIVERPOOL WATCH CASE MAKERS 1785-1798" The authors were Dennis S. Moore and Philip T. Priestley. The AHS published them in the summer of 1994.

CPDL (Chester Plate Duty ledgers)
Quote, "The existence of the CPDL is linked directly to the Plate Duty Act of 1 December 1784 introduced to raise money for the Napoleonic Wars. It mandated all workers in gold and silver to submit their wares to the Assay Office for the additional mark of the sovereign´s head signifying that duty had been paid. The penalty for non-compliance with the Act was a 50 GBP fine and forfeiture of the goods, while the penalty for counterfeiting the duty mark or selling wares with counterfeit hall-makes was death as a felon, without the benefit of clergy. It can, therefore, be safely assumed that evasion of the hallmarking rules was virtually nonexistent immediately following the introduction of this Act. In the light of the preceding information, the opportunity has been taken to revise previous conclusions regarding certain case makers and their marks as detailed in Jackson and Priestley. In particular, it is now considered that Gabriel Smith, Myer Tobias, Robert Green, Robert Jones, Thomas Appleby and Nicholas Cunliffe mentioned in Priestley were not practising watch case makers during the period 1785 to 1798.
The Plate Duty Act probably led to eight established Liverpool case makers registering for the first time at the CAO (Chester Assay Office) in 1784/5 and, with the exception of William Tarlton and Henry Rigby, their marks are to be found on the first Chester Copper Plate of 1701 to 1840. (?) Presumably, they had been making cases before then but had unlawfully declined to submit them for assay at Chester. It must have been so tempting to box watch movements into cases and ship them directly to the Americas."

People, as they are, were always tempted by the quick dollar, as it is today. Does anyone have information that any Liverpool case makers had their heads chopped off for breaking the Act?

Allan.