Railway watches in silver

In the course of checking through a collection of railwayana it was discovered that a couple of railway watches had been mis-identified as having plated, as opposed to their actual, solid silver cases. An understandable mistake to make as solid silver ones are rather uncommon. Most, like this pair, seem to have come from the L.B.& S.C.R. A couple have come up for auction described as "Southern Railway" although the hallmarks date from pre-Grouping. Perhaps they were not issued until 1923?

One timepiece sold at auction was described as a "station master's watch". Does anyone out there know if this was indeed the case or merely a sensible guess. Also was the issue of such relatively expensive items a Brighton Railway peculiarity or were there other railways which did the same.

Thanks in advance for help.

Paul H

 

Railway watches from any pre-grouping company are scarce and it does seem that most of those that appear are of relatively high quality, often silver and from a a handful of companies, notably the L,B&SCR and LNWR. The latter, being the largest railway company in Britain, is not altogether surprising, but why the much smaller "Brighton"?

I suspect that there are two factors; first, I think that these are guard's watches. As a rule, guards were the only grades of railwaymen to be issued with "company" watches for use on duty. In the past, the guard enjoyed a relatively high status and I think that it is no coincidence that LNWR and LB&SCR guards wore particularly smart, military-style uniforms. Perhaps the silver watches were a reflection of the high status that those railways accorded their guards.

 

Thanks for your thoughts. Both the L.N.W.R. and the L.B.S.C.R. certainly had the reputation of being rather traditional. Actually, judging from auction reports, most survivors come from the G.W.R. although, unless one is an horologist, it is difficult to know whether these are pre or post Grouping whilst the sale particulars do not suggest precious metal cases. Quite a few survive from the L.S.W.R. who, like the Brighton, tended to favour American Waltham movements. The collection I referred to has an L.S.W.R. example engraved "passenger", but it has a plated case. These Waltham movements run with great sweetness and timepieces dating from the B.R. era, which are usually Swiss, are less impressive.

Paul H.

 

I agree re GWR watches. Some that appear in auctions look as if they may be pre-grouping, but as to whether they are, or are silver or not, I've no idea. I'm still intrigued by the preponderance of watches from just three companies that appear in sales. Four pre- grouping companies were of comparable size- LNW, GW, NE & Midland- yet I can't recall ever having seen a NER or MR example. The LB&SCR was a much smaller concern, yet there were many others of the "second rank"- GER, SECR, L&Y, GNR etc. whose watches seldom, if ever appear. Perhaps they didn't mark their watches; this was certainly the case with some companies- I have a North London example which is only identifiable by provenance and a paper "repair" label stuck inside the case.

I find it interesting that the "Brighton" imported "Waltham" watches. Most other earlier British railway watches that I've seen are English-made, my LNWR example is by the Lancashire Watch Co. and I have seen others from this maker. Waltham had a reputation for making watches of very high quality and accuracy, probably because they supplied the N.American railway market, where the "train order" operating system demanded great accuracy. Some of the most consistently high-priced railway watches are those made by Waltham for the Canadian Pacific, which commonly make over $1000 or even £1000 on Ebay, even though they are not uncommon, and are only face-marked with the maker's name, the railway's name being inside, on the movement.

 

Could survival rate also be influenced by return policy - some railways insisting on return of the watch on retirement and others allowing retired staff to retain them?

 

Very likely you have a point. However it can be argued that three of the four post-Grouping companies might not be particular exercised if they did not get back something marked for their pre-decessors.

Incidentally I have just heard a (non-railway) Waltham described by a T.V. antiques expert as "a pukka job". Not surprising therefore if someone issued with one endeavoured to keep it and pass it down the family. Certainly they have that indefinable feel of "good" machinery about them

Paul H.

 

Can I just say that it is important not to confuse 'nickel silver' (an alloy of copper, nickel and zinc), which has been used for watch cases for many years, with real silver, which is rarely used for Railway watches, certainly from the 1880's.

Real silver will, virtually always, be hallmarked in some way.

Robin

 

This is rather as I had thought. However my original posting was prompted by the discovery of an L.B.S.C.R. watch hallmarked for Birmingham 1899/1900. Looking at one then on display revealed it had been mis-identified as nickel silver when it was actually solid silver hallmarked for 1890.

The "Brighton" seems to have done things like this as witness a photograph of c.1900 showing the guard (by sheer coincidence) of the Hayling Island branch sporting wing collar, frock coat and leather bandoleer. A watch chain runs from high up the bandoleer to coat pocket. Presumably this chain, like the one at Havenstreet, is a heavy duty one with hallmarked links. The latter is all of 16 ins. long. It all seems a bit of a throwback to road mailcoach days although without the blunderbuss!
Paul H.

 

You may be right.

Remember also that the assay conditions are satisfied on something with moveable parts like the links of a chain if the full hallmark appears at least once and the smaller joined items just carry the assay stamp (lion, anchor etc)

Robin

 

I am certainly right about the blunderbuss!

However I understand from the knowledgeable person I consulted that very small items didn't/don't need individual marks although the links in the chain I referred to are sizeable ones and are marked. Something I didn't know is that the individual assay offices have different marks for the same year and that assay years have not always corresponded between offices. Chester assay office helped out Birmingham at times of stress which accounts for Chester pieces bearing Birmingham maker's marks.

Not as straightforward as might be expected.

PH