Most visitors online was 1660 , on 12 Dec 2020
then if you look at Plate 224 in Camerer Cuss there is a Robert Pennington duplex hallmarked 1811/12. and there are probably earlier examples.Might it be, that what you are trying to establish, irrespective of the label 'Liverpool Windows', is the earliest example of an Liverpool ébauche with the mainspring tension setting prawl exposed on the top plate?
Hi Keith, and PL. After Dinner they should always be a sweet. Robert Roskell also made Liverpool Runners, and the one below is a fine example, the only problem, it is re-cased in a pair case. The No.34492 . On the Roskell file the next watch 34652 is in a hall-marked case for Chester 1824/25. No. 34492 could then be the same date or one year earlier. It has a Massey III escapement. Please note the ruby end stone. Best Allan.Easy guys, I enjoy seeing these beauties!
For an interesting read: See Thread: Josh Johnson page 2, PL's Post #65 Nov. 15, 2015.Allan, my photo of #7771 is the watch itself in it's inner pair case. The outer pair case is
in the photo just to the bottom left, open and empty, (if I understand your question correctly)
in post #37.
Now a photo of both shown.
View attachment 463233 View attachment 463234
That was always interesting, but never supported. I'm not sure how
you make an R out of an F. Note, same HM and case maker on inner
case #7771. PL, if you would like to re litigate this watch, why not open
up the Josh Johnson thread and we'll go for round two.
This is Allan's Liverpool thread.
View attachment 465007
The number on my Harrison watch is 5863. On front and back covers there is between the hallmarks 72. (Likely springers number rather than initials, and no space for more numbers.) On the rear cover there is an 8 two little squares and what looks like half a question mark. Mistakes made by the case maker is more likely. This mistake is not repeated. It matters little, we now know watches called Liverpool Runners were made long before my Harrison. Best Allan.And surprisingly Allan's John Harrison suffers one of the same flaws as your #7771. That is the case and movement numbers do not match.
For once we got an idea from the American´s. Opened in 1852.First electric railway.hat appears to be a celebration of a new generating station. I would have thought the overhead lines would have been running before that time and the rails themselves much earlier than that.