My new obsession

[Fester]

Thanks to all that responded on the Cragg Smith watch, it came in a box with others, mostly Smith & Ingersoll ones. There was however this little beauty. Anyone know anything about the name? Being from East Sussex if find this even more exciting!

Many thanks.

Steve

 

[gmorse]

Hi Steve,

There was however this little beauty. Anyone know anything about the name? Being from East Sussex if find this even more exciting!

Loomes has a 'Tugnott' listed as a travelling repairer in Battle in the 1920s, but no 'Tugnett'. Apart from appearing to be much later than this movement, the name is sufficiently unusual that a transcription error is quite possible. In any event, the London date letter is for 1875/6 and the distinctive mark of 'P:W', (the colon between the letters is most uncommon), for the case maker is Phillip Woodman at 33 Smith Street, Northampton Square, Clerkenwell. The case appears to be much later than the movement, which is more typical of the very early years of the 19th century, so a re-case is a possible explanation, even though the case bears the movement serial number. Replacement cases were often numbered to match the movement.

However, it's not totally impossible that the movement and case started life together, although this movement would have been quite archaic by the 1870s. Could you post a picture of the dial and hands, as well as the outer case, (I assume it's a pair-case), please?

The movement signature is for the retailer, it certainly wasn't made in Pevensey; a retailer in a small provincial town would not have sold over 54,000 watches! It would have been ordered, complete with signature, from one of the watchmaking centres further north, possibly in Coventry.

Regards,

Graham

 

[roughbarked]

I am constantly amazed by the knowledge I could never have known by simply being a repairer of what came before me.
I really do enjoy what I read on these forums even though I will probably never actually have had a fraction of what is talked about, in my hands.

So to speak.

 

[John Matthews]

As Graham has said additional photographs would be helpful.

Movements of this design were still being produced just into the second half of the nineteenth century, but only in very small numbers. They were still being used in watches destined for the Islamic market. It is very rare to find them in watches that were produced for the domestic market.

As you live in Sussex a visit to the local libraries in Brighton or Hastings might prove productive. They may have copies of old trade directories. I have searched through the ones I have electronic copies of. A Walter Tugnet was active as a watch 'maker' from 1890 into the early part of the C20th, based in Hailsham/Boreham.

Not Pevensey, not 'Tugnett' and clearly operating later than the date of the box (inner of pair cases), but I infer that there may have been an earlier family member who sold and repaired watches in the area. So local searches may yield results.

With further research, and close inspection of the watch, you may conclude that there is consistency between the date of the movement, cases and the signature, but it is also possible that the date for the three are all different!

John

 

[Fester]

Hope this helps, I can take more later when I get home.

Steve

 

[gmorse]

Hi Steve,

Thanks, the dial is certainly typical of the case date, but it's slightly misaligned in the case, which is unusual if the dial and movement are original to the case, and also if the dial feet are all intact; perhaps something has been altered or replaced?

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

If you carefully remove the remove the card/paper(s) from the outer case so that you can take photographs of any marks, and also photograph the hallmarks of the pendant we will probably be able to provide further information. It is possible that there is writing on the 'watch papers' - which would also be worth photographing.

if the dial and movement are original to the case

This might also be explained if the dial was not made specifically for the movement. One possible scenario is that an existing dial and case were modified to fit an earlier movement. I believe I can see evidence that there has been some modification to the box, where the movement retaining clip is located.

John

 

[Fester]

I kind of assumed the papers were ther to pack the case out as the watch is very loose inside without them, There is a wax sort of paper at the back, 2 scraps with a couple of numbers on & then one with what looks like Sellens written on it, the owner was a Mr Sellens. Here’s a pic of inside the outer case. Also the face is very loose on the centre spindle so perhaps was assembled from various parts?

Steve

 

[roughbarked]

Face loose on centre spindle?
= Dial feet broken?

 

[Audemars]

I don't think one can attach too much importance to the misspellings of the name. In those days all copies were made by hand, and if an unfamiliar name were to crop up the copyist would likely change it to something he felt was right - in his opinion. It happens to me very regularly, even today.

"…it is a damned poor mind that cannot think of more than one way to spell a word." – Attributed to Andrew Jackson.

Paul

 

[eric the bully]

True, I remember an official document where, on the same page, the surname PIGUET was also transcribed as PIQUET.
Regards enrico

 

[Fester]

So I’ve done a bit of digging & spoken to the Battle historical society, it’s certainly not a local name but the 1881 Census confirms a 35 year old watchmaker called Walter Tugnett living in a village called Wartling which is about 4 miles from Pevensey.

Steve