I recently purchased this Coventry made verge fusee, signed by Richard Kevitt Rotherham: I believe there is sufficient evidence to infer that it was probably made while he was an apprentice. As such, it may be unique. I know of no other watches carrying his signature.
The firm that became Rotherhams, can be traced back to a number of C18th Coventry watch makers, some of whom had family connections, through marriage, to the Liverpool trade. The earliest, Samuel Vale (snr), formed the partnership, Vale & Howlett, with a former apprentice. The latter subsequently formed a partnership with the son, Samuel Vale (jnr), and John Carr. Separately, John Rotherham, a Coventry watch maker born ~1758 joined the partnership to form Vale, Howlett, Carr and Rotherham. I believe this was shortly after 1810.
However, this was not the first relationship between the Vale and Rotherham lines.
Richard Kevitt Rotherham was one of seven? sons resulting from the marriage of John to Bridget Kevitt, a widow from her earlier marriage with Thomas Platt. Richard was baptised on 28 March, 1789. As was normal, he left school when he was 14. The Coventry apprentice records show that on 16 May, 1803 he was apprenticed to Vale & Howlett, presumably for a period of seven years. Interestingly, the Coventry Apprentice Register records more than 60 apprentices assigned to Vale & Howlett over a ~30 year period.
As can be seen in the photographs, the watch is clearly signed Richard Hewitt Rotherham, both on the back plate and the unusual brass, spring-loaded dome. On the back plate the signature is followed by AD1807; this form is normally taken to imply the date when the engraving was done. I believe this is a reasonable assumption here, despite the implication that Richard would have only been four years into his apprenticeship at the time. My current thoughts are that the rather unique features of the watch, are an expression of Richard practicing various skills as part of learning his trade.
I have tried to show these unique features in the photographs, which I believe speak for themselves.
The dial is not original and at this stage I am not absolutely certain of the exact nature of what appears to be a transfer print.
The open face silver case carries a set of rather worn London hallmarks that I have interpreted as for 1805/06 {K} with the inverted incuse maker's mark of James Richards {IR}, who at that date was operating from City Road in London.
The watch works, but is in need of service & repairs to the case and dome.
Comments on its unique features and my inferences would be appreciated.
John


The firm that became Rotherhams, can be traced back to a number of C18th Coventry watch makers, some of whom had family connections, through marriage, to the Liverpool trade. The earliest, Samuel Vale (snr), formed the partnership, Vale & Howlett, with a former apprentice. The latter subsequently formed a partnership with the son, Samuel Vale (jnr), and John Carr. Separately, John Rotherham, a Coventry watch maker born ~1758 joined the partnership to form Vale, Howlett, Carr and Rotherham. I believe this was shortly after 1810.
However, this was not the first relationship between the Vale and Rotherham lines.
Richard Kevitt Rotherham was one of seven? sons resulting from the marriage of John to Bridget Kevitt, a widow from her earlier marriage with Thomas Platt. Richard was baptised on 28 March, 1789. As was normal, he left school when he was 14. The Coventry apprentice records show that on 16 May, 1803 he was apprenticed to Vale & Howlett, presumably for a period of seven years. Interestingly, the Coventry Apprentice Register records more than 60 apprentices assigned to Vale & Howlett over a ~30 year period.


As can be seen in the photographs, the watch is clearly signed Richard Hewitt Rotherham, both on the back plate and the unusual brass, spring-loaded dome. On the back plate the signature is followed by AD1807; this form is normally taken to imply the date when the engraving was done. I believe this is a reasonable assumption here, despite the implication that Richard would have only been four years into his apprenticeship at the time. My current thoughts are that the rather unique features of the watch, are an expression of Richard practicing various skills as part of learning his trade.
I have tried to show these unique features in the photographs, which I believe speak for themselves.



The dial is not original and at this stage I am not absolutely certain of the exact nature of what appears to be a transfer print.

The open face silver case carries a set of rather worn London hallmarks that I have interpreted as for 1805/06 {K} with the inverted incuse maker's mark of James Richards {IR}, who at that date was operating from City Road in London.
The watch works, but is in need of service & repairs to the case and dome.
Comments on its unique features and my inferences would be appreciated.
John
Last edited: