English movement & frame makers

[John Matthews]

Sometime ago I started trying to collate a list of movement / frame makers and posted a short list here
-Identification-of-Lancashire-Movement-Makers'

I have been adding to the list in the interim and I now have a more comprehensive list which contains extracted working dates, principally taken from the Liverpool Museum database. Where possible I have assigned frame stamped initials to names, from references and watch descriptions. Be warned some of the assignments are based on limited evidence. I have marked those which are definitely ambiguous or need further research.

The document I attach is principally for my own use to enable me to try and identify the frame maker's marks I encounter - but others may find it of use for a similar purpose. It is relatively lengthy, and yet it is to be expected to have more names missing than listed.

If anyone has information that can add to the accuracy and completeness of the document, I will of course be very grateful.

John




[pdf]460540[/pdf]

 

[Omexa]

Thanks John, I really like it. Regards Ray

Sometime ago I started trying to collate a list of movement / frame makers and posted a short list here

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

Have you come across this?

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Hi Graham - many thanks.

No, I had not seen this account, but I had read something similar elsewhere, it makes an interesting read. I remember that Wycherley was reported as a fair master, paying in cash rather than using the truck system - I don't remember seeing the favourable comments regarding the Coventry 'men' being good payers.

Regards

John

 

[John Matthews]

I attach an updated document in which sources are more clearly identified.

John

 

[John Matthews]

This morning I have been trying to determine when the movement makers started to stamp their initials on movements and what was the impetus to commence the practice. Despite the fact that the Lancashire was probably established by 1730 and before the beginning of the C19th it had an almost exclusive monopoly to supply London and Liverpool, according to Kemp, movements with initials are extremely rare before 1800 and only started to become common ~1850.

Having checked my own collection and various sources on the WEB, the earliest example in my collection is for ~1850 and that is a mark for John Hutton of London and elsewhere ~1845 Lancashire frame stamped R.B - probably Robert Barrow of Prescot. Thus confirming the dates from Kemp.

I would be most interested to hear any theories as to why the practice only became common at this time.

Does anyone have early examples that they are able to share?

John

 

[PapaLouies]

Hi John,

Allan's Roskell #28015 at Post #387 Thread: Early Single Table Roller Escapements. Pillar Plate is stamped WH.
It's likely the escapement in this watch dates to the 1820s. The WH may be for William Helsby Liverpool watch movement maker.

Regards, PL

 

[John Matthews]

PL - many thanks for this reminder of Allan's double roller - it is a very interesting movement. In my opinion is not as early as Allan believes (sorry Allan). I am going to stick my neck out and say I think it is closer to the middle of the C19th and it is more likely that the 'WH' is the mark of William Hornby who is listed as a watch frame maker residing in Houghton Street, Prescot in 1851 and Derby Street in 1881.

I shall now wait for Allan, and possibly Graham, to apply the executor's axe to my neck

John

 

[Omexa]

Hi John, I have been there many times. Regards Ray

I shall now wait for Allan, and possibly Graham, to apply the executor's axe to my neck

 

[PapaLouies]

Hi John,

Your list, William Helsby watch movement maker. 1841 census-watchmaker aged 50. He was, in fact, 53 years old because his age was rounded down to 50. In 1820 he was 32 and likely producing frames.

Regards, PL

By 1851 the double roller was long gone!

 

[John Matthews]

Hi PL - I cannot deny that it could be William Helsby.

However, I disagree that the double roller was long gone by 1850. When Gazeley wrote Clock and Watch Escapements in 1956, he devoted a section to 'Advantage of Modern Double Roller' In fact in the original discussion of Allan's watch, I referred to that section as the lever dart is very similar to that shown in Fig 111 on p.183 "Swiss double lever showing the dart".

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

You're reprieved, I commented in post #411 of that thread that I thought it was rather later than 1820.

I suspect that PL meant to write 'single roller'.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Hi John,

You're reprieved, I commented in post #411 of that thread that I thought it was rather later than 1820.

I suspect that PL meant to write 'single roller'.

Regards,

Graham

Hi Graham - relief .... my neck is beginning to relax

But, neither was the single roller long gone ...

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

...But, neither was the single roller long gone ...

Quite so, and neither indeed were Masseys and Savages.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Tom McIntyre]

One of the interesting things about the Internet is that these "rare" escapements and features that were believed in the mid 20th century to be long forgotten ancient artifacts are actually fairly abundant and were being produced at least pretty close to 1900.

A lot of us Americans also seemed to believe that the double roller was the only reliable mechanism for a watch that was carried. That was probably influenced by a conspiracy (informal) between manufacturers and watch inspectors to pump out more goods.

Center jeweling and extra cap jewels are similar questionable improvements. I really like the English watches jeweled through the 3rd with caps on pallet and escape wheel where they might actually do some good. I think that design was only made by the Nashua Watch Co. in the U.S.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Tom,

...these "rare" escapements and features that were believed in the mid 20th century to be long forgotten ancient artifacts are actually fairly abundant and were being produced at least pretty close to 1900...

I've just seen a movement being offered for sale which has a single roller English lever escapement, dating from around 1900 . . .

An example of the innate conservatism of the English watch trade and its customers?

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Hi Graham,

I also have been checking for late single rollers, in this rare and possibly only time, I can go a few steps further ... how about Rotherhams single roller made in 1931, jewelled to the third. Perhaps being machine made it doesn't count ....

Regards

John

 

[PapaLouies]

Hi Graham,

Like I said, by 1851 the double-roller was long gone. In 1851 Liverpool, the dominate escapement was the STR. At this time the modern day double-roller with roller table had not yet emerged.

Regards, PL

 

[John Matthews]

PL - while I agree that the STR dominated, Penlington was making inverted double rollers at this time and the style of the construction, despite the inversion, bears a resemblance to this example - I may be digging a hole for myself, but given this resemblance and the 'Swiss' style dart, I still think this could be ~1850. It certainly is not a 'modern double roller'

Regards

John

 

[PapaLouies]

Hi John,

I would say your knowledge of English escapement is far greater than mine. The dart on Allan's Roskell #28015, because it is blunt and the method used to affix it to the lever, is much closer to J. Grant's dart of 1800 than a Swiss style dart.
See WATCHES by Clutton & Daniels published 1965, Item 376-7 and Fig. 45.

Regards, PL

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

I have a Rotherhams wrist watch movement, (yes, there were English-made wrist watches then!), probably from the 1920s, which has a double roller of a very similar form to Allan's Roskell 28015; the impulse jewel is carried in a short bar, not a table.

PL's reference to the Grant lever is interesting. Grant was experimenting constantly and made many different variations on the lever; as mentioned on page 114 of Clutton & Daniels, "Grant seems rarely to have made two escapements alike and his work is always interesting". I think the lever in Allan's Roskell has other features suggesting a later date apart from the shape of the safety dart, namely the proportions of the lever and its 'waisted' profile. The experimental aspect is confined to the banking arrangement and it would be interesting to know whether it has draw.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Hi Pl - I would definitely not agree that my knowledge of English escapements is greater than yours. I am still very much on a very steep learning curve.

That said. I am still struck by the design similarities of Allan's roller and that of the ~1850's inverted rollers, this more than style of the dart. I can see what you mean by the blunt termination of the dart, which is similar to the fig 45 of Grant's lever, in Clutton & Daniels, but I am not sure how significant that is. However, I think the differences between the Grant lever escapement and Allan's are greater than the similarities, e.g. Grant's is a straight line lever escapements, rather than being of tangential design, which was the common design being used in Liverpool from 1820s. So taken with Graham's observations regarding the waisted shape of the lever, I still feel that Allan's movement was made nearer to the middle of the C19th than in the first quarter, but that's just my opinion.

Regards

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

PL - many thanks for this reminder of Allan's double roller - it is a very interesting movement. In my opinion is not as early as Allan believes (sorry Allan). I am going to stick my neck out and say I think it is closer to the middle of the C19th and it is more likely that the 'WH' is the mark of William Hornby who is listed as a watch frame maker residing in Houghton Street, Prescot in 1851 and Derby Street in 1881.

I shall now wait for Allan, and possibly Graham, to apply the executor's axe to my neck

John

Hi John,
You cannot go round cutting of the heads of people, simply because they have an oppinion. I would have answered sooner but you may have notticed the magic machine was not working till late this afternoon. I then had to catch up on the above-plus the Pennlington watch. (I think if you look under the dial you will find another number for Nicole Nielsen)? Pennlington is a very interesting Liverpool watch manfacturer, who in later years had the jewellers shop Pennlington and Batty in Castle Street on the corner of Castle Street and Derby Square.(Very near Church Street) Pennlington was working at different address's in Liverpool for at least sixty years-he was in his eighties when he retired. He would of course have known Robert Roskell very well-never working more than a few strides from Roskell's shops in Church Street-he at Parker Street, and it goes without saying he would have known Roskell Jr. All you can say about the Pennlington watch-is that it was sold by his shop some sixty years after Roskell 28015.(See David Penney's site for another Pennlington c1880).

Since I posted the the last set of photographs on Roskell 28015, I also sent copies to those I thought would be interested in the Uk. All have not sent in their replies, but each one was very pleased to see what Robert Roskell had been up too in c1820. It would not be fair to discuss what these people have to say until all have given there oppinions. I will of course keep you informed.

For those who think the watch was made in the middle of the ninteeth century I would ask you this. Did you look at the balance wheel? did you look at the bell shaped cock? did you know that Rack liver rough movements had the banking pins already in location? Did you take a good look at the lever arm that is not at all wasted?-(It is narrowed to the guard pin) I think not-ask yourselves why would any one build a watch like that in the middle of the nineteeth century and use an old Roskell watch-A lot of skill and honest workmanship went into that watch-I think you should take a closer look.

Going on to your work on the movement makers John, again a great help to those interested in Liverpool and Coventry watches. Thank you.

Regards,

Allan.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Allan,

Have you considered the possibility that the watch was indeed made in the 1820s but the escapement was 'updated' later in the 19th century? As you're aware, it can be very difficult to detect forensic signs of this type of conversion.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Hi Graham,
It's nice to know you agree the watch was made in the 1820's. Have you considered what could have been in the watch before it was mutilated.

A quote from David Penney. Roskell No. 2053 is also a watch of great interest. It has in effect a one.tooth rack lever escapement, in which the rack and pinion is replaced by a form of detached
lever fork action. This was sold at Chrities New York in 2010. Like the old song says- "anything goes".

Regards,

Allan.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Allan,

...It's nice to know you agree the watch was made in the 1820's. Have you considered what could have been in the watch before it was mutilated...

To be a little pedantic, I didn't agree that it was, I proposed the possibility that it was. If indeed it was, and a lever of some sort was originally fitted, then it seems reasonable that in the absence of redundant pivot holes or other alterations to the plates, it was one of the earlier forms of detached lever; take your pick!

We must not forget that the detached lever existed for much of the latter half of the 18th century, following Thomas Mudge's invention, but that there were only a few of the very best makers experimenting with it, Leroux, Emery and Grant to name but three. It was only when Savage and Massey took up the cause that the escapement began to be fitted in appreciable numbers of movements within the reach of more of the population who weren't extremely wealthy.

I'd say that a 'one tooth rack lever' is pretty much a Massey type I.

However, I fear we're digressing from John's original intentions for starting this thread.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Lychnobius]

John, congratulations on this enterprise. I have been preoccupied lately with what I suppose I may call the opposite end of the spring-driven spectrum, namely phonographs and gramophones, and have only today seen your document.

Oliver Mundy.

 

[John Matthews]

Oliver many thanks for your comments.

I have updated the document and added thumbnails from my collection - the recognition of which started this exercise. As is obvious, and as pointed out by references such as Kemp, the assignment of names to the majority of the initials found, is often open to question. especially when dealing with uncased movements. For this reason thumbnails may be assigned to more than one maker.

I would draw the attention of those how have a particular interest in this subject, to the examples I have tentatively assigned to Joseph Preston snr - there are at least 4 different styles. As I indicate Kemp has assigned the JP initials to Joseph and separately John Preston. More detailed research may resolve these tentative assignments,

John

[pdf]460542[/pdf]

 

[SKennedy]

This is a really great resource. Wonderful to have all that information complied into one place.

Do you know when Harry Prybus took over the JP business?

Edit: To answer my own question I've had a look at the relevant issue of AH that you've used as a source. It would seem as though it was a gradual shift towards Mr Prybus taking on all of the work as other workmen retired? A process that seemed to have started around the turn of the century. But he must have been producing quite small numbers of watch movement frames by the 1920s according to the comment from Mercer's book.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Seth,

According to Alan Treherne, Harry Pybus, born in 1875, took over the Preston firm in the early years of the 20th century and died in 1952. What changes he must have seen.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Continuing with my efforts to search out movements with frame/movement makers initials, I acquired this movement specifically because it had two sets of initials, one from Lancashire - JW for John Wycherley and a second from Coventry - SY Samuel Yeomans. When I looked beneath the balance cock, I found a third, JC that is possibly that of John Chesworth also from Lancashire. I think it is a nice example of a movement that started life in Lancashire, finished in Coventry and retailed in Birmingham.

I have a small number of Yeoman watches and the serial numbers appear to follow in chronological sequence and this leads me to believe the watch was made towards the end of the C19th. Interestingly, about the time that the Coventry Watch Movement Company was formed by Yeomans and Errington to compete with the Lancashire Watch Company and in the expectation that the supply of Prescot raw movements might become in short supply. I suspect that this watch may have been made shortly before the formation of the two rival companies.

In addition, to the photographs of the movements, I attach an updated version of the pdf file.

John


[pdf]357553[/pdf]

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Hi John- Just to few photographs for your research.Daniel Morice Fenchurch Street, London 1796-1819.
Single Table roller.



Edited by Bill Stuntz to remove duplicate photos

 

[John Matthews]

Hi John- Just to few photographs for your research.Daniel Morice Fenchurch Street, London 1796-1819.
Single Table roller.

Sorry Allan -I cannot find any frame maker's marks on any of the photographs you have posted.

john

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

In addition, to the photographs of the movements, I attach an updated version of the pdf file.

Further to your entry for Richard Doke in your excellent document, there were two Richard Dokes, roughly contemporary. Alan Treherne in his South West Lancashire article writes:

'Richard Doke, the movement maker, (see Fig. 26)
should not be confused with the Liverpool
watch manufacturer with the same name[26] who
was born c.1796, and was described on his bill
heads as a Manufacturer of Watches, Jeweller &
Silversmith. He sold signed lever watches in the
UK and exported many to the USA.

[26]. From information supplied by Dennis Moore, and the Census returns for Liverpool. The relationship between Richard
Doke the wheelcutter and Richard Doke the watch manufacturer is not clear.'

Richard 'Dickie' Doke was a specialist wheel cutter and would not in all likelihood have put his stamp on a pillar plate.

Regards,

Graham

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

Here's another name for you: Henry Westrap of Earlsdon Terrace in Coventry, with recorded dates of 1823-1889.

Sources here and here.



Regards,

Graham

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

Sorry Allan -I cannot find any frame maker's marks on any of the photographs you have posted.

john

Sorry John I thought you would tell me who put the 18 size 0 on this early watch.

 

[John Matthews]

Hi John,

Here's another name for you: Henry Westrap of Earlsdon Terrace in Coventry, with recorded dates of 1823-1889.

Graham - my thanks for your earlier kind comments and also for the reference and photograph pertaining to Henry Westrap, which I have added to the document.

Regards

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

...Richard 'Dickie' Doke was a specialist wheel cutter and would not in all likelihood have put his stamp on a pillar plate...

Having re-read the Alan Traherne document, I can see that he does state that Dickie made movements in the early part of his career, before leaving the Molyneux family in 1844 and returning to Lancashire, where he specialised in wheel cutting for the rest of his life. Alan is a little ambiguous regarding signatures in places, but David Penney's opinion is more than good enough for me.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

Hi John,

Having re-read the Alan Traherne document, I can see that he does state that Dickie made movements in the early part of his career, before leaving the Molyneux family in 1844 and returning to Lancashire, where he specialised in wheel cutting for the rest of his life. Alan is a little ambiguous regarding signatures in places, but David Penney's opinion is more than good enough for me.

Regards,

Graham

Hi Graham - thank-you for this additional comment, it is difficult to be absolutely certain, as with many of these initials. I did go back and checked through the Liverpool database and compared it with Alan's paper. Alan identified Richard Doke's training as follows

"He was born in St Helens in 1823, trained first by his father in Lancashire and later, from 1840-44, by the Molyneux family in London (who had also migrated from Lancashire). He then moved back to Prescot where he died in 1906, aged eighty-three."​

After he returned from working in London with the Molyneux family, his working activity as I interpret it from the Liverpool database is

1854 watch movement maker (Mannex directory)
1855 watch movement maker (Slater's Northern directory)
1861 watch wheel cutter (census)
1871 watch wheel cutter (census)
1881 chronometer wheel cutter (census)
​

From this we might infer, as you say, his movement maker period, was early in his career, but this might just be a function of how he recorded his occupation in the census returns.

Alan also includes this quote from Frank Mercer

"While on a business trip to London, Mr Doke was so disheartened with his poor success that sitting on the church steps inLombard Street he was compelled to cry;gaining fresh heart however, he visited Charles Frodsham, who recognising the perfection of his movements, boughthis stock and told him to go back and make more. Mr McCabe preferred his movements to all others, and for over 50 years Mr Doke cut practically all the English chronometer movement wheels."
​

Pity we don't know when he made his trip to London - but members fortunate to have Frodsham or McCabe movements, might do well to look for R.D stamps under the dial.

Regards

John

 

[PapaLouies]

Were some of Allan Purcell's Posts deleted at the request of Mr. Matthews?

PL

 

[John Matthews]

PL - I had a 'conversation' with Martin & Allan and we agreed to tidy a couple of threads where Allan had difficulty posting on the new software..

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

PL - I had a 'conversation' with Martin & Allan and we agreed to tidy a couple of threads where Allan had difficulty posting on the new software..


John

Just to tidy things up John-Identification-of-Lancashire-Movement-Makers.

Allan.

[pdf]362421[/pdf]

 

[Niall]

Hi John,

Attached an image of initials "BB" for Bahne Bonniksen, Coventry found on a Karrusel movement, wasn't sure if you wanted to add this to your list

 

[John Matthews]

BB" for Bahne Bonniksen, Coventry found on a Karrusel movement

My thanks Niall - patent stamp with initials noted. Unfortunately I am not sure if I will ever be able to acquire one to add to my collection - I understand one's signed by him are very rare. David Penny's archive has a number that were made for and signed by mainly Coventry & London 'makers'.

John

 

[Halda Sweden]

Dear Horological friends!

I have a pocket watch signed; "Rich Doke Liverpool No 1562"

Best regards
Peter B.

 

[Halda Sweden]

 

[Rich Newman]

John, your work on frame makers is great. This example of a conjoined "TE" is on an English automation watch from 1803 that depicts the Battle of the Nile. I wrote up the history in a Bulletin Article in 2006 but forgot about the frame maker mark until I decided to add English watches to my research website, www.colonialwatches.com. It is signed "George Graham Carr". Carr may be a small town or first owner. Haven't figured that out yet. Dust cap has maker's initials "LF". Silver pair cases by London maker, Thomas Carpenter, dated 1803.

 

[John Matthews]

Rich - many thanks for sharing this, as I don't believe I have seen this mark before - but I have a very vague memory of seeing something similar, but I cannot remember what it was.

I don't suppose Thomas Earnshaw junior made automation watches did he?

I will read your article and come back to you.

John

 

[Allan C. Purcell]

While you wait, these might help Rich.

Pigots 1840 - Kent

WATCH & CLOCK MAKERS





BARNARD Frederick, (& silversmith), Blue town


FORSTER William Henry, Mile town


KAYSER J, Mile town


MUNN William, Mile town


NICHOLASS Robert, Mile town

 

[Rich Newman]

Thanks Allan. Forster & Barnard must have been together for a short time because the partnership is not recorded in Loomes. Makes sense that this watch would appeal to customers, navy brass(?), in Sheerness. Maybe it was ordered through Forster & Barnard.