I would like to find out more info on the maker of this watch I have posted it at a few other forum's with out any luck.Here is what I know it's a liverpool fusee movement, serial no 184,maker Gladstone?,hall mark look's to date watch around 1845.I like the silver hands on this one and it has a nice dial.I did get some info at another forum on the case maker ID are the case maker's mark's.And if you look at the case it has 184 the same as the movement so it all original case and movement.

None of my books show a Gladstone working in Liverpool. It is possible that Gladstone was the retailer, and not the maker. I can't make out the casemakers mark!


Jerry Freedman

You could be right.Have you ever hear of private label liverpool fusee before?
Here is a web site for date and case maker's marks there are three case maker's using ID ,
http://www.925-1000.com/dlLondon5.html#M
I think the case maker was James Daquits JR on the bottom of photo is ID.

Maybe John will chime in here in the next few days with some info., until then I was wondering if the Gladstone might be either a street or something in Liverpool. There was a William Gladstone born in Liverpool in 1809, he served as Prime Minister four 4 terms & there are several places named after him in Liverpool. Just a wild guess by a Yankee.

Tom

Nice example of an early Fusee Mike, I'd see about getting that ugly big screw changed on the balance endstone though.

The date looks good for the hallmark and London assayed, and the hands are 'Fleur de Lys' style, beautiful, and nice to see some with the tips intact!

The casemaker is most likely John Joseph Dyer,(pendant and Casemaker) who first registered 'ID' in that shield 1st Jan 1836 at 55 Bath St, City Road London, and finally 15 Dec 1841 when he moved to 11 Gloucester St, Clerkenwell, London - smack in the heart of the watchmaker's quarter of London.
His previous address was also in Clerkenwell at 21 Red Lion St.

There are other 'ID' marks registered, but either incursive (no shield) or far too early for your watch.

Gladstone was most likely the maker, and maybe the only reason he's not in any reference books, is that being a 'Provincial' maker, no apprenticeship records etc have been found yet.
He may figure in Brian Loomes' second edition of 'Watch and Clockmakers of the World' - unfortunately too rich for me to buy yet.

Tom you could well be right about the Gladstone link too, being from the same town in that era, there's a very strong likelyhood of family ties.

I don't think there was such a thing as 'Private label' watches back then, in the same way they figure in American horology.
It usually implies a watch made by a 'big name' manufacturer with a retailer's name on it.
Watches weren't made that way or in sufficient quantity back then, and were almost totally hand built by small - often 'one man bands' from components bought in from specialist manufacturers.

A maker would generally want his own name on it if there was going to be one I think - but always happy to be proven incorrect.
I would guess H.Samuel could be an exception as they had quite a big chain of stores, but I think they were a tad later anyway, and had their own craftsmen.
Retailers often inscribed the dust cover.

Nice watch though, thanks for posting it.

Best regards

John

Thanks John for the info you are right about the screw getting replaced it's surprising it still works after all these year's had it service once last year.

Hi All

quote:

He may figure in Brian Loomes' second edition of 'Watch and Clockmakers of the World'

I have checked he doesn't I am afraid.

kind Regards