Some Jerome clocks for viewing

[Pat L.]

Here's a Jeromes, Gilbert, Grant & Co clock that was acquired recently. The dial, glasses, and doorknob are not original to the clock. The dial (not pictured) is a painted steel modern repro. But it runs okay.

 

[harold bain]

Nice clock, Pat. Looks like a prequel to the OG clock, perhaps just a bit earlier.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Here's a Jeromes, Gilbert, Grant & Co clock that was acquired recently. The dial, glasses, and doorknob are not original to the clock. The dial (not pictured) is a painted steel modern repro. But it runs okay.

This particular model of Jerome clock has been previously posted and discussed on this thread. See posting # 97. Find further information and recommendations for additional reading there.

I've posted a teaser pic below.

RM

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

This particular model of Jerome clock has been previously posted and discussed on this thread. See posting # 97. Find further information and recommendations for additional reading there.

I've posted a teaser pic below.

RM

PS: note the religious imagery on the label in you clock. Mike (aka, Jerome Collector) has written about this interesting phenomenon on Jerome labels.

RM

 

[Pat L.]

Harold & RM,
Thanks for your comments about the Jerome clock. I returned to the estate where the clock was purchased and found what may be the original dial. It seems to match up well with the original dial holes in the vertical supports. Thanks again.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Just for the record, this clock is shown on a Youtube video. It is a bit interesting, not only because it is a Jerome Empire style clock, but also because it was in Abraham Lincoln's law office. We have seen a few of these in this thread. The case served both for a 30-hour weight movement and an 8-day fusee movement.

[video=youtube;1dZARe8n7kQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dZARe8n7kQ[/video]

See this article in the current Bulletin by Mike Bailey (aka, Jerome Collector): http://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/2010/articles/2017/428/428_309_313.pdf

A good read.

RM

 

[George Nelson]

Mike,

Truly a superior and well-written article. I enjoyed reading it immensely, and it improved my appreciation of an identical clock (save for the tablet art) in my collection. Kudos, indeed!

George Nelson

 

[Jerome collector]

George,

Thanks for the kind words. Although I followed your Sperry & Shaw thread, it was great to see it captured in the Bulletin. I always say that clocks have a story to tell; it's up to us to discover them. The story behind your clock is wonderful.

When you get a chance, you should post pictures of your Jerome "Lincoln" clock.

Mike

- - - Updated - - -

See this article in the current Bulletin by Mike Bailey (aka, Jerome Collector): http://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/2010/articles/2017/428/428_309_313.pdf

A good read.

RM

RM,

Thanks for the pointer to the article. I wasn't aware it was out yet.

Mike

 

[Steven Thornberry]

It was an excellent article, Mike. I even managed to stay awake past my 8 p.m. bedtime to finish it. It adds history to both Jerome and Lincoln. I am fortunate to own one of the 30-hour weight models, shown in post # 25 of this thread.

 

[Jerome collector]

It was an excellent article, Mike. I even managed to stay awake past my 8 p.m. bedtime to finish it. It adds history to both Jerome and Lincoln. I am fortunate to own one of the 30-hour weight models, shown in post # 25 of this thread.

Steven,

Thanks, appreciate it. What I don't understand, though, is how you managed to go to sleep after reading the article. It's such a gripping story!

Your clock has beautiful book-matched veneer. Certainly one of the nicest cases I've ever seen.

Mike

 

[George Nelson]

George,

Thanks for the kind words. Although I followed your Sperry & Shaw thread, it was great to see it captured in the Bulletin. I always say that clocks have a story to tell; it's up to us to discover them. The story behind your clock is wonderful.

When you get a chance, you should post pictures of your Jerome "Lincoln" clock.

Mike

Jerome Collector:

I posted my example of the Jerome Empire style clock a few years back. It is a bit of a long thread, but has a good deal of pictures of my clock:

Jerome Empire Case Refinish

Hope this helps! If you have further questions, don't hesitate to ask away! I know you are the 'go-to' person for all things Jerome, and I love to learn all I can about my clocks.

Best to all,

George

 

[Steven Thornberry]

This cottage clock is identified simply as "Cottage, 30 hour" in the 1853 catalogue of the Jerome Manufacturing Co. It was offered in mahogany and black walnut and came as either time only or time and strike.



A painted soft-wood example of this case, with a 30-hour time and strike movement, appears in Chris Bailey's Bulletin Supplement 15, Rags to Riches to Rags, on page 88, figs. 189 and 190. My clock has a painted wood dial, which appears to have been repainted not so very long ago. Bailey's clock is said to have a "[p]lain printed paper dial.

The decalcomania door glass shown on Bailey's clock appears very like, if not identical to mine. Of particular interest is the notation on the glass that reads

FROM
C. JEROME
NEW-HAVEN
CONN.​

The same notation is shown on my clock.



Bailey states "There is no evidence the clock had a label other than the Jerome notation on the glass." I also found no evidence of a label on my timepiece; so, an interesting feature, the tablet serving as the label.

The movement is a simple 30 hour time only, winding at 11 o'clock. It is mounted to the case by means of a wood strip attached to the back plate.



If you look closely at the picture of the back of the movement, you will see that the mainspring is attached by being wrapped around the upper post of the movement.

Lee Smith's article on Cottage Timepieces and their Movements (Dec. 1998 Bulletin) shows this movement on page 730, fig.71. Smith states the movement was used by Charles T. Foote (cottage clock shown in fig. 69) and E. Ingraham and Co. (Venetian case). He further states that Ingraham "possibly made" the movement, a statement I don't believe to be correct. Smith also shows a time and (between-the-plates) alarm version of the movement in his follow-up in the June 2002 Bulletin (see page 339, figure 12).

Mention of Charles T(hornton). Foote, led me to Joyce Wahler's article on him in the July/August 2012 Bulletin, pp. 378-86. According to Wahler, Foote was in the clock business from 1852 to 1865, in Bristol, CT. Wahler shows pictures of both the 30-hour time-only and time-and-alarm movements. A time-only version is shown from a Foote cottage timepiece (fig. 19) and has the same type of wood mounting strip that I posted above. The time and alarm movement is shown from a Foote timepiece and has two wood strips attached to the back plate for mounting (figs. 20-21).

Wahler states that E. Ingraham & Co. did not use the "wood-strip" method of attachment. Ingraham's movements had metal feet riveted to the back plate, and the feet were then attached to the case with screws (p. 383). Figure 25 on page 384 shows a time and alarm movement from an E. Ingraham & Co. timepiece with the metal mounting feet. Perhaps the metal mounting feet were a later development for this movement?

Since E. Ingraham & Co. did not begin production of its own movements until 1865, Wahler suggests that either Foote himself or Noah Pomeroy might have made the 30-hour timepiece movements. She appears to favor Pomeroy. That is an attractive suggestion, since we know that Pomeroy provided movements to Ingraham prior to Ingraham making their own movements. Pomeroy also provided some movements to Chauncey Jerome as well as to Jerome's son, Samuel B. Jerome.

Neither Smith nor Wahler mentions Chauncey Jerome as a user of the 30-hour movement shown above. In fact, Wahler specifically states that, in addition to Foote, "E. Ingraham & Co. is the only other known user of these particular timepiece movements." (p. 385). So, it seems there was a third.

FWIW, another example of this timepiece can be seen here. Similar Jerome timepieces, but with more interesting movements can be seen in posts # 105 and 183 of this thread. View attachment 412708 View attachment 412709 View attachment 412710 View attachment 412711

 

[Jim DuBois]

I have been thrashing about to learn more of the work of Joseph Ives and his family, 1800-1862. One of the more rare Ives movements was made for and cased by C. Jerome. These clocks are not very common. I owned one many years ago and I recall it was in an OG case with the Jerome label. Roberts pictures the movement in a cornice and column case, as does Chris Bailey, so my memory is at best suspect. I recently came across a loose movement so I thought I would share at least that much.

Anybody have one of these clocks with this A frame movement on hand? If so, is it in the cornice and column sort of case? Gong or bell? Or a different case style? Printer of the label? I notice Mike (Jerome Collector) has a good photo of one of these on his site.

This was a very short lived relationship as far as we know. The A frame was replaced by the 8 day rack and snail movement thought to have been loosely copied off the movement of a Fredrick Heisley clock. A very similar movement to that of the Jerome was offered by R and JB Terry. We have recently discussed the Jerome vs Terry versions, so no need to beat on that again. It is not entirely clear which movement preceededwhich as the labels refer to repeating clocks when they have the Ives count wheel movement, and at least one of the repeating clocks refers to roller pinions, which they don't have.

 

[Jerome collector]

Jim,

Don't hurt yourself (or any of your clocks) in your thrashing about.

Herewith the clock of mine that you referred to. It's obviously of the column & cornice variety. I was surprised to see you mention a Jerome ogee with the A-frame movement. I was not aware that Jerome used ogee cases prior to c. 1840 (shortly after the Noble Jerome patent movement was introduced). Live and learn. By the way, in Brooks Palmer's The Book of American Clocks there's an example of an Ives ogee with the A-frame movement (figs. 243 and 244).

My clock strikes on a gong. The label printer was P. Canfield of Hartford, CT.

A previous owner had Tom Moberg paint replacements for the lower glasses. Unfortunately, for reasons I don't understand, the choice for the middle glass uses the words "Eight Day Repeating Brass Clocks", and, of course, the movement is not a rack & snail movement. The movement matches the label, and I'm as certain as I can be that it's original. I have no idea whether the middle glass was based on the original, but it just adds to the confusion you mention regarding labels not matching movements.

In case anyone wonders, unlike the example that Jim posted, mine does not have feet and never did.

I hope others will post examples to flesh out the story of the use of Ives A-frame movements in Jerome clocks.

Mike

 

[Jim DuBois]

Jim,

Don't hurt yourself (or any of your clocks) in your thrashing about.

Herewith the clock of mine that you referred to. It's obviously of the column & cornice variety. I was surprised to see you mention a Jerome ogee with the A-frame movement. I was not aware that Jerome used ogee cases prior to c. 1840 (shortly after the Noble Jerome patent movement was introduced). Live and learn. By the way, in Brooks Palmer's The Book of American Clocks there's an example of an Ives ogee with the A-frame movement (figs. 243 and 244).

My clock strikes on a gong. The label printer was P. Canfield of Hartford, CT.

A previous owner had Tom Moberg paint replacements for the lower glasses. Unfortunately, for reasons I don't understand, the choice for the middle glass uses the words "Eight Day Repeating Brass Clocks", and, of course, the movement is not a rack & snail movement. The movement matches the label, and I'm as certain as I can be that it's original. I have no idea whether the middle glass was based on the original, but it just adds to the confusion you mention regarding labels not matching movements.

In case anyone wonders, unlike the example that Jim posted, mine does not have feet and never did.

I hope others will post examples to flesh out the story of the use of Ives A-frame movements in Jerome clocks.

Mike

I am not 100% certain the A frame I had was in an OG by Jerome. That is how I recall it, but I also had an A frame movement with a cast iron backplate at about the same time. Sadly, no photos of either and while I sold many more rare and unusual OG's to a fellow by the name of Frank Underbrink in the midwest, I don't know if they went to him or not. Sadly much of his collection was more or less given away at a (Iowa?) country auction a couple of years ago and I understand the really rare stuff was missing. Ralph, of this forum, bought some of the more common OG's for very little $$$. The others? Who know where they went. I tossed this into the Jerome discussion as these movements are of interest, and like you suggest, the hodge podge of movements and labels is already quite confusing. I would love to see the A frame in something besides the cornice and column cases.

Your pointing me to the Brooks Palmer photos of an Ives OG clock with the A Frame in it is a complete breath of fresh air. It could be what I had rather than a Jerome. From what little I can gather from Palmers comments and photos I am guessing the Ives OG clock with A frame to be circa 1835-36. I have spent many hours researching Ives and this is the first time this clock with an Ives label has been brought to my attention. Thank you for your ever useful research!

And your thoughts on a start date for Jerome using OG cases circa 1840 may very well be correct. I have noticed many times you are correct on all things Jerome. A machine to make OG molding was patented in 1828 and OG mirrors became an immediate craze. I think the earliest date we think we know OGs were being offered was about 1835...... as I recall one of the so called suitcase OG's has the label of Eli Terry Jr. and Co. (wood works) and it could date at the earliest to about 1835-36. This subject OG is a true OG and has a gong rather than bells, as in other known examples so far. All of which has nothing to do with Jerome's first OG...the case style was in play at more than one maker, flat / bevel cased suitcase clocks were made at the approximate same time. Some of them have bells.

 

[Jim DuBois]

hmm, had I bothered to read Roberts on Ives a bit more carefully I might have found this;

"Before Ives owned Pond's former shop, he may have worked at his brother Chauncey's shop
on Federal Street. This was the shop he had several years ago sold to Ives & Lewis. Chauncey was
working at the factory of C. & L. C. Ives since this firm began in 1830. In any event, in 1836, or
possibly 1835, Joseph is believed to have designed and manufactured a new eight-day rolling
pinion movement, which he sold with his label "Patent Brass/Eight-Day/CLOCKS/ MANUFACTURED
BY/JOSEPH IVES/BRISTOL'. Such a clock, with the truncated A-frame strap
movement, has been previously illustrated. The label was printed by Joseph Hurlbut, Hartford,
CT. Since this clock had a cathedral gong instead of a cast iron bell , the date of 1836 is favored."

 

[Ralph]

"Sadly much of his collection was more or less given away at a (Iowa?) country auction a couple of years ago and I understand the really rare stuff was missing. Ralph, of this forum, bought some of the more common OG's for very little $$$."

It was actually in Antioch , Illinois at an obscure auction house. What attracted me to go to the auction, which I had planned to skip, was curiosity regarding a strangely proportioned mini-OG timepiece with a fusee movement. When I went to the auction, and saw all the OG's, I planned to sit it out until a miniature OG came up. It was lot #19, and it looked like it had a cracked glass. I ran up to check it out and the glass was striated and I couldn't help but notice the pulleys on top... a Henry Terry. That opened the floodgates and I ended buying 33 lots, if I remember right.... for around $3400 total. The auction ended around midnight. The auction house had a small door with a about 50-75 foot ramp leading to a muddy parking lot. Totally unprepared, no packing material, no way to cart the clocks, I had to carry them one by one to the unlit muddy parking lot.

I thought I scored a number of rare clocks, upside down movements, Davies patent, a giant dovetailed case, round movement, Welton, Kirks Patent, Alarms, mini wood works, Pennsylvania shelf clock, Terry's, Jerome, Mallory, Brewster, Downs, Goodrich, Owens, Jerome & Darrow, Dutton, Terry/Thomas, Frost, Hoadleys, Pettibone and Peters giant Sperry looking 4 column.... etc.... and of course, the best prize, the mystery mini OG timepiece, the inside proudly labeled and emblazoned with the little known maker's (to me at the time) name, situated in the midwest. "Dubois Clocks, Custom Clocks Built To Your Specifications, by James B Dubois, Indianapolis."

Ralph

 

[Jim DuBois]

Ralph, thanks for rising to the occasion. I might as well add photos of the strange little OG since I did build it expressly for Frank something like 40 years ago. He was crazy about OGs and I sold him many, perhaps 30 or 40, each was special in its own way. I think you saw / bought enough of them to get the general idea. He always paid the asking price with a smile. He was not independently wealthy. So, I made the little OG for him and gave it to him. He was floored. When you called me about it when you bought it I was most pleased it had found a good home.......my wife wants to buy it by the way........

The fusee was an old loose one from someplace, I think I made the movement out of half of a Forestville weight movement, the glass was a cut down damaged glass featuring the Jerome factory I think, the dial was a Xerographic copy. Never any intent to fool anyone, just a thank you to a good guy....

And yes, before New Hampshire and then Texas we spent nearly 40 years in Indiana, 10+ of those years in Indianapolis.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Once again, some interesting discussion for a change.

On the heels of the Ives exhibit @ the just passed National, Jim has started a discussion about Ives and the "A-frame" strap brass movement.

I thought I would introduce Mr. Heisl(e)y, Frederick Heisely, Sr. to be exact. Sometimes spelled with that "e". He was a clock maker from Dauphin County, PA.

I won't get into all the particulars here. But HIS A-frame movement may have served as the basis for that by Jerome and others?

See LaFond, Jr. and Harris, "Pennsylvania Shelf and Bracket Clocks: 1750-1850", an excellent NAWCC publication that should serve as a model for an Ives publication.

See pages 61-71.

Also see the following Bulletin articles: http://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/2000/articles/2006/362/362_350.pdf and http://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/1990/articles/1990/265/265_164.pdf

I've come into possession one of Mr. Heisely's clocks. Very rough. Wrong dial (any one have a Jerome 8 day ww dial lying around they can part with??), fragment of a label, but otherwise real. Broke my own rule about not exceeding my limit at an auction so I paid the stupid price. An eBay buyer whom I will NOT buy from again, but here it is:



I do like that it is a fully carved case. See the links above for similar examples.

Here's the front of the movement:



Here's the back:



This is how it mounted in the case:



There are examples of this movement, which apparently was Mr. Heisely's attempt at limited mass production, in locally made cases. Most are in Jerome 8 day ww cases which he adapted to this 8 day brass works with an overpasted label. He also used the Jerome dials and weights!

RE: the recent posting about the simple Jerome cottage clocks.

I think that another aspect of the story is how Jerome developed one basic case style into which a myriad of movements could be placed. The ogee, "Union" and this cottage style come quickly to mind. There are others. I think it's part of his genius.

These little cottage clocks never had labels in my experience. The identification of the maker is part of the decalcomania glass.

I have seen the movement Mr. Thornberry discusses, ie, mounting with a wood block, in small unlabeled iron front time pieces as well.

Here's an example similar to Mr. Thornberry's with a similar movement:



The case is pine (rather crude with wire hinges) veneered in mahogany. Wonderful crusty original finish which I will not touch. The dial is wood.

The glass:



Finally the movement. Note how it mounts with a brass bracket which is riveted to the back plate. A bit different than what was described in the earlier posting:



Here's a group shot along with the 2 clocks discussed in posting 103 on this thread:



The first 2 are very similar cases with subtle differences. The last grain painted and stenciled one is actually quite different. The glass is different, it is about 1 inch deeper and the back board is held in place by turn buckles so that it is removable which is necessary to hang the pendulum bob. A rather inconvenient arrangement.

RM

 

[Jerome collector]

.... and of course, the best prize, the mystery mini OG timepiece, the inside proudly labeled and emblazoned with the little known maker's (to me at the time) name, situated in the midwest. "Dubois Clocks, Custom Clocks Built To Your Specifications, by James B Dubois, Indianapolis."

Ralph

the glass was a cut down damaged glass featuring the Jerome factory I think....

Ralph,

Any chance you can post an image of the tablet on your DuBois mini-ogee? I have a bit of an obsession about depictions of the Jerome factory.

Mike

 

[Jerome collector]

To all recent posters,

What a wonderful mix of clocks accompanied by some careful research and thoughtful discussion! Just shows what the message board can be when its potential is reached.

Steven,
Thanks for putting together all of the info on the Jerome cottage clock. I had never made the connection between the movement and Charles T. Foote. And trust RM to spring an unusual variant on us (with the brass bracket).

RM,
Full of surprises! A Heisely? Those are about as common as a snowfall in Nebraska in July. Striking similarity between the shapes of the Heisely and Ives front plates. With respect to the placement of your Heisely, you may want to get a new interior designer. The clock deserves more respect than to be perched on the toilet.

Mike

 

[George Nelson]

I noticed the toilet placement as well. RM, it is becoming quite obvious that you are running out of room! Time for a bigger house, young man!

George

 

[Steven Thornberry]

Steven,
Thanks for putting together all of the info on the Jerome cottage clock. I had never made the connection between the movement and Charles T. Foote. And trust RM to spring an unusual variant on us (with the brass bracket).
Mike

Thanks for the comments, Mike, and my thanks to RM for the brass bracket. I had been thinking that the metal mounting feet found in the Ingraham clocks were a later development, produced because the wood mounting strips were found to be somehow unreliable or undesirable (too flimsy? a PITA when removing and servicing the movement?). Now we see the brass bracket, and in a Jerome no less. An intermediate step between the wood strips and the mounting feet? Perhaps the answer lies in the dates of the Jerome and Foote cottage timepieces, which might prove difficult to uncover with any specificity. The E. Ingraham & Co. timepieces we can date to 1861 to 1865. In any event, interesting variations.

And if I may, I will post here the following New Haven movement, which winds at 11 o'clock and which was discussed along with others in this thread from last year. Note the iron mounting strip, two screws to the left (looking at the front plate), one screw to the right. Just to mix it up a bit.

 

[Jim DuBois]

I noticed the toilet placement as well. RM, it is becoming quite obvious that you are running out of room! Time for a bigger house, young man!

George

RM told me that was his showroom. I should have been suspicious as it seemed a bit small. And the OG came from me 30+ years ago. I had better watch it or I will have to sign on as Mr. Ogee? But, to the point RM does have a bodacious collection that could be approaching some physical limitations....an 8 car heated garage might be a good idea for future growth...RM

RM, please send me some dimensions on the dial you need for the Heisely if you would. Center shaft to winding arbors, over all size of the dial etc. And of course some of these period clocks originally have a large opening in the front of the dial so as to show off all the brass work and new technology. That might be an option in the short term? While that option is questionable as to original or not, I have 2 clocks right now with large cut out dials that appear original, as they have what seems to be original dial paint in the cutout. And of course you already know all that, so I will be on the look out for something proper. The COG picnic and Syracuse regional may yield something.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

To all recent posters,

What a wonderful mix of clocks accompanied by some careful research and thoughtful discussion! Just shows what the message board can be when its potential is reached.

Steven,
Thanks for putting together all of the info on the Jerome cottage clock. I had never made the connection between the movement and Charles T. Foote. And trust RM to spring an unusual variant on us (with the brass bracket).

RM,
Full of surprises! A Heisely? Those are about as common as a snowfall in Nebraska in July. Striking similarity between the shapes of the Heisely and Ives front plates. With respect to the placement of your Heisely, you may want to get a new interior designer. The clock deserves more respect than to be perched on the toilet.

Mike

I noticed the toilet placement as well. RM, it is becoming quite obvious that you are running out of room! Time for a bigger house, young man!

George

Thanks for your kind comments.

I use the full bath upstairs as a place to take photos. It's well lit and provides a neutral back ground, almost like taking pix in front of a white screen. I just have to remember to flush first. I've actually used it a number of times before for postings.

Just a note about the bathroom. For a number of years after I moved in, it had the Grossman's (a local MA home improvement store like Home Depot but they went out of business at least 20 years ago) cheapo fixture weekend warrior special. It was awful. The only remaining original fixture was the 1920's tub. Several years ago, using the excuse of ice dam damage, the bathroom was basically gutted and returned to something inspired by what I considered a "modern" and "sanitary" bathroom of the 1920's might look like. In fact, after it was done, I found a period framed advertisement for American Standard bathroom fixtures that was probably used in a show room. To my pleasant surprise, it looked a heck of a lot like my renovated bathroom!

RM told me that was his showroom. I should have been suspicious as it seemed a bit small. And the OG came from me 30+ years ago. I had better watch it or I will have to sign on as Mr. Ogee? But, to the point RM does have a bodacious collection that could be approaching some physical limitations....an 8 car heated garage might be a good idea for future growth...RM

RM, please send me some dimensions on the dial you need for the Heisely if you would. Center shaft to winding arbors, over all size of the dial etc. And of course some of these period clocks originally have a large opening in the front of the dial so as to show off all the brass work and new technology. That might be an option in the short term? While that option is questionable as to original or not, I have 2 clocks right now with large cut out dials that appear original, as they have what seems to be original dial paint in the cutout. And of course you already know all that, so I will be on the look out for something proper. The COG picnic and Syracuse regional may yield something.

Thanks for your kind comments!

My downstairs 1/2 bath could qualify as a showroom. The walls are full of stuff as you may recall.

After renovating the upstairs, I decided not to make any new holes in those walls.

I have sent you an email with the dimensions for the dial. As noted, Mr. Heisely used Jerome 8 day ww dials with solid centers along with his cases and weights...clearly some interaction between the 2. I suspect that Jerome may have had some ulterior motives and knew a good thing when he saw it.

Thanks for any assistance you can render re: a replacement dial.

RM

 

[Ralph]

Mike,

It turns out that the tablet image on the little clock Jim made is actually of Buckingham Palace.



Ralph

 

[Jim DuBois]

Mike,

It turns out that the tablet image on the little clock Jim made is actually of Buckingham Palace.


Ralph

So much for that failsafe memory, huh? What did I have for lunch yesterday?

 

[Jerome collector]

Mike,

It turns out that the tablet image on the little clock Jim made is actually of Buckingham Palace.

Ralph

Ralph,

Thanks for checking.

So much for that failsafe memory, huh? What did I have for lunch yesterday?

Jim,

Don't feel bad. I'm the same.

Mike

 

[Jim DuBois]

Ralph,

Thanks for checking.



Jim,

Don't feel bad. I'm the same.

Mike

It has only been about 37 years since I made the little clock, and that was the last time I saw it.....other than Ralph's photo.

 

[Ralph]

Jim, we suffer from the same thing, a good memory, but it's short.

...and don't count the clock out yet... I thought about bringing it to Arlington, but got distracted.

Cheers, Ralph

 

[Oled]

Hi Colleagues!

Please kindly take a moment to have your expert opinions on the movement here: https://mb.nawcc.org/threads/post-your-lenzkirch-clocks-here.10370/page-11#post-1166142 All your ideas are highly appreciated!

Best regards,
Oleg

 

[MLS]

I grabbed this Jerome today. Just wiped it down with a wet rag so far.....still spider webs in the case.

Using jeromeclockcollector's website I see the label is from 1853. It's actually in Decent shape just faded. The case looks like many on the website but no match for the glass. Aftermarket?

Would appreciate any insight.

I'm sorry but I can't can't get a picture of the movement know due to the misses being out of town and daddy with the 3 yr old.

Also, it was missing the weights so does anyone know the proper weight?

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

I grabbed this Jerome today. Just wiped it down with a wet rag so far.....still spider webs in the case.

Using jeromeclockcollector's website I see the label is from 1853. It's actually in Decent shape just faded. The case looks like many on the website but no match for the glass. Aftermarket?

Would appreciate any insight.

I'm sorry but I can't can't get a picture of the movement know due to the misses being out of town and daddy with the 3 yr old.

Also, it was missing the weights so does anyone know the proper weight?

View attachment 464033 View attachment 464034

That's a nice clock. Looks pretty "ship-shape".

I can't tell whether it's the perspective of the photograph or not, but the clock looks tall? How tall is it? Looks like it may be an 8 day version which is really good.

There have been a number of recent threads commenting upon how really nice the "dissed" ogee can be.

The tablet of your clock depicts, I believe, the Crystal Palace. It was the site of the 1851 Great Exhibition or World's Fair in London. The building stood in Hyde Park until 1936 when it fell victim to fire.

In it's day, it was considered a marvel of engineering using that new wonder material that helped to make the industrial revolution possible, cast iron. It was known world wide. In fact, here's a Currier and Ives lithograph of the building:



So, it was a well known building in the US, too.

There was also a somewhat later Crystal Palace in NYC, but it had a different appearance.

Absolutely 100% correct image for your clock. I strongly suspect original. It should be held in place by undisturbed wooden strips fastened with brads. Famous structures from both sides of the Atlantic were depicted in the tablets of these clocks all the time. I've seen the Crystal Palace tablet before and in different sizes.

Many of these clocks were exported to the UK and many have made it back across the ocean. The common teaching is that tablets depicting UK buildings were reserved for the ones destined for export. I in fact don't believe that's really true. I do think that many of the "foreign" tablets were actually placed clocks destined for domestic consumption as well.

The image was produced using a transfer process called "decalcomania". It tends to lift and flake. Yours looks very nice. NEVER clean the back of that tablet.

A word of caution. Wet rags/moisture and veneer are not good friends. The hide glue is water soluble. The old shellac finishes used on these clocks can become cloudy with moisture. Dry soft cloths to wipe down cases are best. One could apply a quality clear paste wax, too.

Anyhow, nice clock with a great tablet depicting a wonder of the age.

Enjoy.

RM

 

[MLS]

Thank so much for the info RM. I didn't not know it was the crystal palace.....although it seems very familiar for some reason. Thanks for the tip about the damp rag, it was a very quick wipe and quick dry towel afterwards. I have an old buffet that will turn white at the thought of water on it. The angle of the picture is deceiving as I was trying to get the shadow of my head out of the way.

Thanks for your help. Some extras of length and inner glass.

I will have to get some weights one day. It is for display for now since I have a few others to disassemble and clean before I get to this one.

 

[PatH]

Very nice clock! I can't say whether this is original, but I have seen pictures of this tablet on a Jerome OG. Although I'm pretty sure it was an auction, I didn't document which auction or the date. Is there any writing visible at the bottom of the image? When this image was used, I think it often included a description at the bottom, which identified it. As RM said, it is the Crystal Palace at the Great Industrial Exhibition in Hyde Park.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Thank so much for the info RM. I didn't not know it was the crystal palace.....although it seems very familiar for some reason. Thanks for the tip about the damp rag, it was a very quick wipe and quick dry towel afterwards. I have an old buffet that will turn white at the thought of water on it. The angle of the picture is deceiving as I was trying to get the shadow of my head out of the way.

Thanks for your help. Some extras of length and inner glass.

I will have to get some weights one day. It is for display for now since I have a few others to disassemble and clean before I get to this one.

View attachment 464066 View attachment 464067 View attachment 464068

Thanks for the info.

@ 26 inches, it's a 30 hour clock.

To me, that glass looks right as rain.

Nice find! Very decorative and a bit of history, too?

Enjoy.

RM

 

[Jeremy Woodoff]

Just a bit of a correction about the Crystal Palace. After the Great Exhibition closed the building was deconstructed and rebuilt in an enlarged version at Suydenham, a suburb of London, where it remained until it burned as RM said in 1936. The picture on the tablet appears to be of its original form in Hyde Park.

 

[MLS]

Excellent call on the picture PatH. I was able to put a flashlight on the opposite side and get a picture. Zoom in on the bottom.

Thanks everyone for the help.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

Just a bit of a correction about the Crystal Palace. After the Great Exhibition closed the building was deconstructed and rebuilt in an enlarged version at Suydenham, a suburb of London, where it remained until it burned as RM said in 1936. The picture on the tablet appears to be of its original form in Hyde Park.

Thanks for the info!

RM.

 

[Jerome collector]

Not much to add here, except that I'd put the clock closer to 1856, right around the time Jerome went bankrupt. The labels that tout "BRASS" as opposed to "PATENT BRASS" are ones that I believe were introduced in the waning days of the company. That said, it's very difficult to date Jerome clocks from the late 1840s to 1856. I agree with the assessments that the Crystal Palace tablet is likely original. It shows up on other Jerome clocks from the period. What hasn't been commented on is that the title or caption for the tablet is reversed. When read from the front, it's backwards. A wonderful quirky detail about these tablets that I love. The weights should be around 3lbs and are readily available from multiple on-line sources.
Mike

 

[MLS]

Thanks Mike, I am pleased with it. I hope to get it running in couple months when I get more time for personal persuits. I may have the opportunity to buy other jeromes but not quite as good shape as this one. If I do I will show them.

 

[PatH]

What hasn't been commented on is that the title or caption for the tablet is reversed. When read from the front, it's backwards. A wonderful quirky detail about these tablets that I love.

Thanks for that insight, Mike. Another quirky one that I have noticed is the one titled Capital at Albany rather than the Capitol - although it might be argued that the Capitol building is at the Capital of Albany. Keeps us on our toes and our eyes sharp.

Pat

 

[MLS]

Finally got around to my Jerome. Here is a picture of the movement. 1.314?

There is a 4 above the name stamping.

 

[MLS]

Any suggestions on cleaning the dial without damaging? Also what would a correct pendulum look like? I just disassembled the movement and am going to clean either tonight or tomorrow. Hope it cleans up well.

 

[Burkhard Rasch]

just serviced and fit for another period to run:my 8 day Jerome.Just to ad to this thread.
Burkhard

 

[Jerome collector]

Finally got around to my Jerome. Here is a picture of the movement. 1.314?

There is a 4 above the name stamping.

You're correct that it's a type 1.314 movement. The movement is consistent with the label, which was one of the last used by Jerome before his bankruptcy in February 1856. I've never heard a convincing explanation for the numbers stamped on these movements. Numbers other than 4 also show up.
Mike

 

[Jerome collector]

just serviced and fit for another period to run:my 8 day Jerome.Just to ad to this thread.
Burkhard

Burkhard,
Your clock was likely made by the New Haven Clock Co., using the trade name "Jerome & Co.", probably in the late 1850s. The printer's address, which I'm pretty sure lists the Glebe Building, dates it to no earlier than 1856. Some New Haven Clock Co. clock labels, which state that they are successors to the Jerome Manufacturing Co., show an earlier printer's address of 55 Orange St. I can't tell if "Chauncey Jerome/Clock Maker" is printed on the factory. If so, New Haven continued using that feature for an unknown (but probably short) period after they bought out the bankrupt Jerome company.
Mike

 

[Burkhard Rasch]

Mike,You´re correct with the printer Benham and his adress in the "Glebe Building"in New Haven,but there is no trace of "Chaucey Jerome" on the factory building,allthough I have to admit that the paper of the lable is allmost powderized except of those parts impregnated with the printing ink.
I didn´t think this clock to be that early,I allways guessed it to be 1870-1880;I bought it in Sweden long time ago.It´s all original-especially the tablet which attracted me to it at once-but I don´t have original weights for it,so I run it with comtoise weights until period square iron cast weights cross my way.Thanks for the additional information!
Burkhard

 

[Jerome collector]

Mike,You´re correct with the printer Benham and his adress in the "Glebe Building"in New Haven,but there is no trace of "Chaucey Jerome" on the factory building,allthough I have to admit that the paper of the lable is allmost powderized except of those parts impregnated with the printing ink.
I didn´t think this clock to be that early,I allways guessed it to be 1870-1880;I bought it in Sweden long time ago.It´s all original-especially the tablet which attracted me to it at once-but I don´t have original weights for it,so I run it with comtoise weights until period square iron cast weights cross my way.Thanks for the additional information!
Burkhard

Burkhard,
If there's no sign of "Chauncey Jerome" on the factory, then the clock is probably from the late 1850s to no later than about 1866, when the original Jerome factory was destroyed in a fire. New Haven quickly built a larger building on the property and resumed operations later that year. The new factory is featured on labels after this point.
Mike

 

[sylvester12]

Finally took my Jerome Darrow & Co. Flat Pillar and Splat down for cleaning, decided to try and get some better pictures. The strike side of the movement needs a few teeth glued back on, ever since I bought it I wanted to hear that bell ringing. I'll take care of it before it goes back up. Figured it belongs in this thread.