When considering the output of a clock and watchmaking firm it should
always be remembered that it was rarely the case that one man would sit at his
bench and "make" a watch from start to finish. When starting his
business in London James McCabe would no doubt have brought with him some
partly finished pieces along with his tools. He may even have travelled to
London with an apprentice or, if not, would quickly have taken one. Without
records it cannot be known whether he started with raw materials, smelting the
brass and steel, or bought complete movements, to be signed with his name and
cased. Although he was probably capable of producing a watch from brass and
steel it is very unlikely he did so.
Watchmaking, even in the late 18th Century, was already fragmented into a
number of specialised skills. For example the cock might be cast by one man,
pierced by another, engraved, planted to the plate, jewelled and finally
gilded. Six people could easily be involved with this one component although it
is probable he would have planted it and fitted the jewelling (but not made it)
himself. Some rough ebauches were already being produced ready for pivoting and
finishing. Once well established a firm would broaden its activities. McCabe's
firm may well have supplied parts or services (such as springing balances) to
other makers. At the opposite end of the scale it is certain that the firm
commissioned movements from eminent makers. This is shown by a gold consular
cased chronometer with sugar tong compensation signed "James McCabe".
Hallmarked 1807 the case was made by James Richards and numbered 6183. This
movement was undoubtedly made by Earnshaw for the firm but is still consistent
with McCabes' numbering. |
