Grading System
|
| The grading system of "first" and "second"
line watches noted by Britten and generally accepted by most authors does not
seem to accord with the evidence. Of the few examples examined bearing only the
surname, none would appear to be of inferior quality. It is reported that a
number of repeaters have been seen bearing the "second line"
signature, surprising if these were to be thought of as second quality. |
| Second line watches seem to
be far more uncommon than the "first line" watches and there are only
four examples in this catalogue. One other example seen at this time is a
spring detent chronometer which has been re-cased, its serial number dating it
around 1825. However it is signed "Cornhill" and therefore
cannot be regarded as above suspicion. The quality of these four watches is not
dissimilar to the majority of the "first line" except they are fitted
with garnet endstones to the balance, whereas most of the "first
line" have diamond endstones. They are fitted to gold and silver cases
(one with a fine, and expensive, decorative gold dial) and all have endstones
to the escape wheel pivots. What is striking however is that they are all full
plate levers with silver sector indexes made after the change to numbers with
leading zeros. Only No. 16213 of 1841in this catalogue is similar in
configuration. This is signed "Ja"s M"cCabe" and
has a diamond endstone. By 1850 full plate levers were possibly regarded as a
little out of date but still made for those who preferred them. The decision
may have been made to alter the signature and refer to them as "second
line" watches when the new series of numbering was started. The limited
sample available suggests caution is needed about the theory which may well be
disproved by a single genuine late example falling outside the type. |
| Third line watches, said
by Britten to be signed "Beatson" appear even less often and
therefore difficult to verify. One example reported is a verge number 1710
which is hallmarked 1790. The number is a little low for the hallmark which
could be expected to be around 2600 at that date. Another watch is known,
number 18892, hallmarked 1849 (Maker Cornelius Brook Holiday) which, like the
only example examined, fits precisely into McCabes numbering system. The rumour
that they were named after James McCabe's wife's maiden name is not true as she
was named Burn. |
 |
| Beatson
watch number 18616, hallmarked 1847 |
|
