Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

For information you'd like to share - Post it here - not for questions
dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:42 am

Spurious Sheffield Plate and Other Silver Goods


U. S. Consul Maxwell Blake, in writing from Dunfermline, Great Britain of the frauds that are still perpetrated on the inexperienced collectors of old silver and china and period furniture by dealers throughout the United Kingdom and continental Europe, says:

"The United States is reputed by the well informed to harbor more 'artistic atrocities' that were purchased as genuine than any other country in the world, and we may see even a greater flux of pseudo works of art to American shores unless these frauds are detected by government experts or rejected by the public taste.

"The forger of old English silver has been somewhat restrained by fear of the law, which makes the sophistication of hall-marks in Great Britain a very hazardous occupation. Likewise, the almost prohibitive prices for which Early English silver is offered confine its collection, generally speaking, to connoisseurs. The ingenuity of the fakir, however, is none the less occasionally exercised to insert into some late piece or modern copy old marks taken from an article of little value. Beyond the actual intrinsic value of the metal, specimens of the Late Georgian period are worthless, yet they are now being extensively collected by many dealers throughout Great Britain for sale to American customers, who willingly pay from ten to twenty times their trade value.

"It is a difficult undertaking to attempt to dispel the threefold illusion that old Sheffield plate is to be found almost anywhere in the United Kingdom; that it is as valuable as silver of the same period, and that the genuine can easily be detected from the spurious by the fact that it has a discernible subsurface of copper. Now the truth of the matter is that much modern electroplate is done on a copper body, as was the case with the old. The precise difference, however, between the old and the new is that, with respect to the former, the silver was first fused and beaten on to a copper block, the whole slab afterwards being worked into shape by hand; whereas, the discovery of the process of electroplating in 1840 or thereabouts, the article to be silvered was mechanically evolved and the silver instantaneously applied by means of the electro process. The results of these two methods are vastly dissimilar, for instead of the play and accident of light on a beaten and uneven surface, which imparts one of the chief charms to the hand-wrought process there is, when the silver has been mechanically applied, only an assertiveness and garish regularity of surface. Genuine old Sheffield plate in its original and unrenovated condition is worth about 80 per cent as much as modern silver, and about 25 per cent of silver of a contemporary period. It is, however, worth five or six times the commercial value of 'faked' Sheffield plate, with which in no other way can a comparison be made. Literally tons of faked Sheffield plate are now being manufactured, most of which, sooner or later, finds its way to America and the colonies.

"With respect to pewter, the love for which did not assert itself until long after most of it had disappeared in the melting pot, it might safely be said that 95 per cent of all one could find through England and Scotland has been made within the last ten years. Likewise, practically all the 'old Dutch' brass articles, such as alms dishes, plaques, candlesticks, and jardinieres are of modern make, although they may reach the dealer via Holland. The production of 'old masters' and ancestors continues a lucrative industry in Great Britain, it being a matter for serious regret that the talent, and sometimes even genius, suggested by these fraudulent works of art should be abased to such mean ends.

"'Old' armor, medals, and medallions, all of modern origin, abound in rich profusion. 'Antique' Spanish, Portuguese, and English paste jewelry everywhere intrudes itself. A flood of cheap and inartistic Japanese ware is also pouring out over the country; prints, gold lacquer, cloisonne enamel, ivory, and bronze contributing a full share to the swelling volume of alloys and commercial antiques."


Source: The Brass World and Platers' Guide - December 1909

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Fri Mar 18, 2016 5:27 am

RICHARD STAMFORD

London


Gilded Watches.—Richard Stamford, a purveyor of flash jewellery, was sentenced last month to five years at the Old Bailey for imitating the Goldsmiths' Hall Mark. He bought some silver watches, coated them over with gold, and marked them in such a way as to represent they were 18-carat gold.

Source: The Watchmaker, Jeweller and Silversmith - 1st May 1889

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:22 pm

HALL-MARK AND TRADE-MARK FRAUDS

Yet another raid has been made upon the parties engaged in the bogus antique plate trade, and this time a much more important raid than any that has preceded it. The culprit in the present instance is a Mr. Charles Twinam, of Maton-street, Holloway. He was charged on Thursday last with being unlawfully in possession both of counterfeit dies and of silver and other ware stamped with such dies. Pending the magisterial decision upon his case, one must not prejudge the issue; but assuming, for the sake of argument, that counterfeit dies and plate marked with such dies were actually seized upon Mr. Twinam's premises, whatever may be the result of the proceedings as regards him personally, the case derives special importance from the fact that he is a manufacturing silversmith. In all the recent proceedings of a similar kind, as my readers may remember, the parties charged have been dealers. The cases have therefore begun and ended with them. But in the case of a manufacturer the opportunity is offered of carrying the proceedings several steps further. A manufacturing silversmith must have numerous customers in the trade whom he has supplied, and if bogus dies and bogus hall-marked plate are found in his possession, his books will reveal the names of his trade customers, and will therefore enable the Police and the Goldsmiths' Company to trace any other forged goods which may have been sent out from his premises. If, therefore, the Goldsmiths' Company are able to make out their case against Mr. Twinam, they will have an opportunity of tracing through his books the manner in which other goods have been disposed of by him, and possibly of getting at a whole group of dealers in forged silver ware.

It remains to be seen whether the Goldsmiths' Company will utilise this opportunity. There is a strong feeling among respectable representatives of the trade—a feeling shared also by those of the public who know anything of the facts—that the Goldsmiths' Company has not hitherto shown the energy in this matter which may be legitimately expected of it. The questions recently asked in Parliament on the subject of the Reuben Lyon prosecution gave expression to this feeling, and, as was subsequently pointed out in these columns, the official answers by no means tended to allay it. The trade in spurious antique plate has increased by leaps and bounds within the last few years, and the desultory prosecutions undertaken by the Goldsmiths' Company are altogether insufficient to check its progress. When the market is literally flooded with bogus goods, and when the sale of these goods yields such an enormous profit to the vendor, it cannot be expected that the mere prosecution of one dealer here and there in the course of six or twelve months will deter others from the same class of business. As a representative of the trade remarked to me the other day, after a prosecution like that of Reuben Lyon the stuff disappears from the shop windows for a few weeks, but when matters have quieted down again you will see it gradually reappear.

In order to suppress this traffic, two things are required. In the first place, the fear of pecuniary penalties is not a sufficient deterrent. The profits are so enormous that men will always be found to take the risk of a fine, all the more so when they know that even though detected and subjected to a ruinous penalty, they will be free to start in business again the next day under new names. There are stronger punishments provided by statute for these offences, and the strongest penalties ought to be enforced. The unscrupulous tradesman who will run the risk of a fine looks with a very different eye upon the risk of imprisonment. The fear of detection would be still more potent, if the punishment imposed upon the delinquent, as it does in French law, the necessity of advertising the fact of his conviction in his own shop for a certain period afterwards—an ingenious penalty which affords a safeguard for a long time against the renewal of nefarious practices. But what is even more wanted than a tightening up of penalties is a more efficient system of detecting the offence. At present the work of detection is practically left to the private informer. The only people who are likely to interest themselves in the matter are the honest members of the trade, and few tradesmen care to undertake the invidious task of instituting prosecutions against their trade rivals. The Goldsmiths’ Company, as the official representative of the trade, invested by statute with the power of dealing with offences of this class, ought itself to undertake the business of detection. As things are at present, that business presents no difficulties, for I am told that the traffic is carried on without the slightest disguise, and that there are certain streets of London where an expert may observe for himself any day in the week hundreds of pounds' worth of bogus antique silver exposed for sale. Were an officer of the Goldsmiths' Company appointed for the purpose of watching shop windows, and occasionally inspecting the goods inside the shop, all this bogus ware would disappear like magic. The remedies being so simple and obvious, the Goldsmiths' Company may be justly charged with neglect of its duty both to the trade and the public so long as it fails to exercise the powers it has, or to obtain from Parliament all further powers which it may need for dealing with what is now a serious trade scandal. If this neglect of duty is continued, it can only be because the Goldsmiths' Company is not in reality, a trade organisation, but, like the majority of City Companies, a nondescript imposture, neither formed from nor interested in the trade which it is supposed to represent.

There is another trade besides the goldsmiths' whose shady practices have been unpleasantly revealed to the public during the last week. A few days before Mr. Twinam made his appearance at the North London Police-court, the Kensington Stores, Limited, were brought up at the West London Police-court for infringement of the Merchandise Marks Act by selling sundry wines under a false description. The facts were not disputed, the defendants pleading guilty, and simply urging in mitigation of penalties that the present company was a new one, which had recently taken over the business, and that the irregularities complained of were due to the state of disorder in which the wine department had been left by the vendors. On this ground the defendants excused themselves for selling, as certain well-known brands of Moselle and port, wines of a very inferior quality. As they had pleaded guilty, the excuse merely rested on the statement of their counsel, without any evidence being adduced in support of it, or any attempt being made to test that evidence by cross-examination. Possibly that consideration weighed with the magistrate when he imposed a fine of £10 for each offence, and allowed special costs. A still more striking case occurred a few days later at the Thames Police-court. In this instance Messrs. Timms & Co., Limited, together with Mr. Joseph Timms, who had recently sold his business to the company, were charged with selling, under the designation of “John Jameson's old 1884 bonded whisky,” a mixture composed of twenty-two gallons of John Jameson's whisky of 1891, eight gallons of Bushmills whisky, six gallons of plain spirit, two bottles of "Capillaire,” or sweetening matter, two bottles of “vin de Color" (an awe-inspiring name), and fifteen and a quarter gallons of water—or what passes for water in the mains of the London companies. The summons against the company was withdrawn, in view of the explanations they made, and the assistance they had afforded the prosecutors. The charge against Mr. Timms broke down on a technical ground, the prosecution— apparently through a misunderstanding—being unable to prove the sale. The company, however, had previously admitted to the prosecutors that their books showed the above compound had been sold as Jameson's 1884 whisky; and the other defendant had pleaded in a letter to the prosecutors that at the time when the "John Jameson old 1884 bonded whisky" was concocted in his cellars he was away from business owing to ill-health.

Now whatever may be said on behalf of the particular defendants in either of these two cases, the facts show to what an extent the public are liable to be imposed on in their dealings with wine merchants, and may well cause us all to ask what security there is that the labels on our wines and spirits bear any relation to the contents of the bottles. Here again the position is very similar to what it is in regard to the plate trade. It rests entirely with private individuals to enforce the law, and the only persons who are likely to trouble themselves in the matter are individual members of the trade, who can only do so at the cost of heavy expense and not a little obloquy. A firm like Messrs. Jameson & Co. may be more or less bound in self-defence to prosecute any infringement of their trade marks which may happen to come under their notice; but such frauds are always difficult to detect, and they are most difficult in the case of foreign wines, and I believe every honest wine merchant will bear me out when I say that forgeries of this kind are carried out wholesale. It is all very well to pass Merchandise Marks Acts and similar statutes, designed to prevent organised and systematic frauds on the public; but something more than this is required. If the Acts are to be efficacious, they should also establish a detective and prosecuting machinery. This has been done in the case of the sale of food and drugs, and something of the same kind is obviously needed in the case of all goods bearing marks protected by statute.


Source: The Truth - 16th March 1899

Further information regarding Charles Twinam and Reuben Lyon can be found here:

http://www.925-1000.com/a_OB_Twinam1899.html

http://www.925-1000.com/a_Spurious1899.html

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:27 am

INFERIOR GOLD

The Birmingham Assay Office has lately been displaying considerable activity in dealing with offenses against the Assay Office Acts. A specially obnoxious kind of offense is the substitution of inferior gold upon parts of jewelry which as a whole have passed the standard. A case is still awaiting trial at Monmouth Assizes, to which a Plymouth jeweler has been committed on the allegation that he has removed 18-carat gold from the shoulder of a ring which had passed the standard and had replaced the metal with 9-carat gold. Evidence in this case was given by Arthur Westwood, one of the Birmingham assay masters.


Source: The Metal Industry - August 1907

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Wed Sep 14, 2016 4:53 am

In consequence of the composite character of the Goldsmiths' Court, there appears some difficulty in prosecuting a West-end firm for tampering with hall-marks. It is stated in the trade that the delinquents have made £100,000 by their mal-practices.

.............By the way, the manufacturing silversmiths complain of the harassing mode in which respectable tradesmen are treated in hall-marking matters, whilst those who defy the authorities go scot free.



Source: The Watchmaker, Jeweller and Silversmith - 5th November 1880

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:18 pm

ALBERT D. DULEY

Philadelphia


The rigor of the laws existing in England prohibiting the fradulent marking of wares of gold or silver or metals purporting to be such, is illustrated in the arrest in Philadelphia, Pa., of one, Albert D. Duley. charged by the police authorities of Birmingham, England, with raising the karat marks in jewelry. The Birmingham police department sent the superintendent himself over to this country last June, and during four months the Municipal Government of Birmingham has expended large sums of money, and has used its best police services to run down the man. How do these achievements compare with those of the New York authorities, who having a clear and well defined statute to guide them, seem disposed to quash the indictments against 28 flagrant violators of a silver stamping law designed to foster honest industry and protect the public from the rapaciousness of lying and unscrupulous manufacturers and dealers!

Source: The Jewelers' Circular and Horological Review - 2nd October 1895


NEW YORK

On complaint of the British Consul in this city, Albert Duley was arrested in Philadelphia last week on the charge of forgery, and after a hearing he was committed to prison to await the action of the New York authorities. Duley is said to be wanted in Birmingham for altering the karat marks on gold articles, thereby increasing their selling price. The English police say he is an adept at changing karat marks in jewelry, and has operated extensively in England.


Source: The Jewelers' Circular and Horological Review - 2nd October 1895

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Mon Jun 19, 2017 4:15 am

It has usually been supposed that the Government's Hall-mark as applied by Assay offices to sterling silver goods was a safe and infallible guarantee of quality. The police authorities are at present engaged in investigating a case which shows this to be a mistake. The case is so extraordinary both in its daring and its cleverness as to be absolutely unique. It has reference to one who made articles of every-day use, who had a place of business in the town and a residence in the suburbs. Latterly various pawnbrokers have had offered to them, as security for small loans, well and artistically got up fruit spoons, to all appearance of genuine silver, since they bore the well-known Government mark, and stood the application of ordinary tests. It has been ascertained that the spoons are not silver, but nickel, so ingeniously got up and plated as to deceive men of considerable experience.

The purported Hall-mark was a close imitation of that of the London Assay Office of the year 1808-9, and as it appears to have been stamped on the spoons after they were plated, there was nothing to indicate to any workman employed upon them the fraudulent purpose to which they were to be put. It has been found that in from eighteen to twenty cases the pseudo manufacturer had pawned pairs of similar spoons. Some of them were tested, and then it was that they were found to be what we have stated—nickel silver plated. On one spoon were 3 dwts, of silver, and on another spoon even more. In the plating of them great ingenuity had been shown. The bowls are very lightly plated, as no one would think of testing them there. On the top of the tangs, where the test is invariably applied, the plating is very thick. It took half an hour longer to remove the silver from the end of the tang of one spoon than it did from the bowl. It is evident that this reversing of the practice of plating was done to deceive and to avoid detection.


Source: The British Trade Journal - 1st October 1889

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:33 pm

Watch cases made for the Ottoman market with pseudo London marks:

Image

Image

Image

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:27 am

WALTER ROBERTS

London


FAILURE OF A PROSECUTION

Walter Roberts, 42, engraver, was indicted at the Central Criminal Court for feloniously forging and counterfeiting certain dies, used by the Goldsmiths' Company of London for stamping gold and silver wares. The principal witness against the prisoner was a man named Davis, and he stated that on the 11th of January he met the prisoner at a public-house in Clerkenwell, and he asked him to buy some rings, and he purchased a keeper ring for fifteen pence purporting to be stamped with the Goldsmiths' Hall mark, which mark turned out to be forged. On the 14th of January he went to the residence of the prisoner, in Charles-street, Islington, and saw him stamp, by means of counterfeit dies, an imitation Goldsmiths' Hallmark upon several rings composed of base metal. A number of false dies were subsequently found by the police in the prisoner's room. The Commissioner in the course of the case inquired of Mr. Robinson, the deputy-warden of the Goldsmiths' Company, how it happened that no prosecution was instituted against the manufacturers of plated forks and spoons at Sheffield and Birmingham, who actually placed marks on such articles to represent the Hall mark. He replied that they were not sufficiently close imitations of the genuine mark. The defence was that the marks fabricated by the prisoner were not imitations of the genuine mark, but differed from it in material particulars; and the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.


Source: The Cardigan Observer - 12th February 1881

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Fri Apr 20, 2018 1:45 am

ALFRED WARREN - CHARLES WARREN

Birmingham


FORGERY OF ASSAY MARKS - At the Public Office, Birmingham, Alfred Warren, Charles Warren, John Orbell, and Charles Wingfield have been charged with having many dozens of gold rings in their possession, the mark of the Birmingham Assay Office thereupon having been forged. The two Warrens were committed for trial, and the prisoners Orbell and Wingfield were discharged. In the case of Alfred Warren, bail was refused. Forty-seven dozen rings were found having the forged mark upon them; one ring only bore the genuine mark, it was kept in a separate case for the purpose of imitator.

Source: The Cardiff Times - 3rd April 1869


At the Birmingham Quarter Sessions, Charles Warren and his son, jewellers, have been sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for selling 16 dozen gem rings bearing a false assay mark.

Source: County Observer and Monmouthshire Central Advertiser - 24th April 1869

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Wed May 02, 2018 4:43 am

FRANK SPITTLE - ERNEST PAYNE

Birmingham


TRANSPOSING ASSAY MARKS

Frank Spittle mid Ernest Payne, jewellers, were charged at Birmingham on Saturday with transposing the dye used by the Assay authorities for marking 18-carat gold to 46 rings and with transposing 9-carat marks to 49 bracelets. It was urged that in some cases this was done to save time in sending goods to the Assay Office, but Judge Bigham held that it was equally wrong if the marks were transferred to goods of equal value. Mr. Young, for the Assay Office, pointed out that if this practice were allowed the Assay authorities might as well give jewellers tags and let them he their own assayists. Payne, who was merely the travelling partner, was discharged, and Spittle was sent to a month's imprisonment.


Source: The Welsh Gazette - 20th March 1902

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Sun May 13, 2018 9:37 am

JOSIAH GREGORY - EDWARD BYNES

Bristol


At the last Gloucester assizes, Josiah Gregory, a silversmith, and Edward Bynes his shopman, were convicted of forging the mark for stamping silver, used by the Company of Goldsmiths at Exeter, within whose district Gregory's shop was situated. They had carried on the practice for a considerable time. Gregory was sentenced to imprisonment, with hard labor, for eighteen months, and Bynes for twelve calendar months.

Source: The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser - 30th April 1847

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Sun May 20, 2018 1:51 pm

ROBERT WALLIS

London


FORGING THE GOLDSMITHS' HALL MARK

At the Old Bailey, London, to-day, Robert Wallis, 27, who had been convicted of forging the Goldsmiths' Hall mark to a silver gilt watch, and thereby passing it off as a valuable gold watch, was brought up for judgment, and sentenced to six years' penal servitude.


Source: South Wales Echo - 21st September 1885

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Wed May 23, 2018 4:19 am

MORE SHAM ANTIQUES

We are induced to recur to this subject— to which not many weeks ago we devoted an article—by the fraud that has recently come to light as to the sale of sham "antique" plate bearing hall-marks of the days of Queen Anne, It appears that in the years 1872 and 1873 a silversmith in London, in a large way of business, sold a large quantity of silver plate to a customer. Last autumn, a person who is well acquainted with plate marks saw this plate, and informed the owner that it was spurious.

Hereupon the Goldsmiths' Company were communicated with. Their officers were sent to examine the plate, and over 600 pieces were found to bear counterfeit marks.

Application was then made to the seller, and he was informed that the Goldsmiths' Company would sue for the penalties, unless he could relieve himself under the statute by making known the person, and the place of abode of the person, from whom he received it. After having seen the invoices he admitted the sale, and, after some time, during which he had the plate examined by several persons in the trade, gave the name and residence of a person who, he said, supplied him with all the articles in question. This person is a working silversmith in a small way of business.

The Goldsmiths' Company thereupon applied to the last-mentioned person, who examined some of the plate in a cursory way, and, after some time, replied through his solicitor that he was not prepared to admit that he sold the plate, or that he had ever had the plate in his possession, but that if the wares in question had been sold by him, they must be some of certain wares which in 1872 he either bought or received in exchange from a person whose name he mentioned, who is dead.

The solicitor of the person first applied to was then asked by letter whether he was prepared by production of his books, or in some other manner, to substantiate his statement.

Whereupon he produced invoices which cover about 600 pieces of plate, answering the description of the plate which is the subject of inquiry, and cheques to order for payments made for it, all of which cheques appear to have passed through a bank, and are duly endorsed.

The circumstances bore a very suspicious appearance, but the Goldsmiths' Company were advised that the evidence was such as would be deemed sufficient in a court of law, and that they would not be doing right to continue the proceedings against the person who apparently had cleared himself under the provisions of the Act of Parliament. They there upon commenced proceedings against the person from whom he asserts that he bought the plate in question, and these proceedings are now pending. The defendant has raised a point of law under the Statute of Limitations, which is set down for argument on demurrer. The articles in question purport to be of the time of Queen Anne, before the duty was imposed, and therefore do not bear the duty mark.

This revelation has excited a flutter in many a butler's pantry. Since the mania for what is "old" has seized rich people, prices out of all proportion to its intrinsic value have been given for ancient silver plate. For instance, only recently, 25s. per oz. was paid for a hammered bowl of date 1729, and 30s. per oz. for a cake-tray of 1696. Six tea-spoons, weighing a little over 2 oz., though of unknown date, were purchased for five guineas; and a cream ewer, believed to be of Charles II.'s time, fetched 84s. per oz. These were, however, well authenticated vessels. But since the taste for the antique, apart from its beauty or ugliness, has raged, silversmiths have almost ceased to bring out new designs, finding it more profitable to reproduce copies of Queen Anne or Stuart articles than run the risk of having their shelves cumbered with a dead weight of objects really better, but which it is not the fashion of the hour to buy. Hence, the ancient art of working in silver is rapidly declining. Electro-plating is pushing it hard on one side, and on the other the slavish imitation of the antique is discouraging any budding Benvenuto Cellini from trying a fresh departure. The taste is also producing another effect. It is tempting dishonest artificers not only to prepare avowed imitations of ancient plate—which is quite legitimate—but to cunningly fabricate articles to be sold as the veritable objects of which they are only the counterfeits. These specimens are frequently very exact imitations—so exact, indeed, that it requires a finished judge to say whether they are real or a sham. The "hall marks" are cleverly imitated, in exact accordance with the date to which the plate purports to belong. But the makers go even further. They buy small pieces of old plate of little value, and then skilfully cut out the hall marks from this, and " let them into " their modern manufactures.


Source: The Furniture Gazette - 2nd October 1880

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:38 pm

FREDERICK JACKSON

London


CHARGE AGAINST A JEWELLER

Frederick Jackson, who carried on business as a goldsmith and jeweller in Woburn-place, London, was charged at the Liverpool Police-court on the 1st inst. with having transferred the hall mark or stamp of the Birmingham Assay Company. Some months ago Jackson sold three dozen rings to Mr. M'Clintock, watch-maker and jeweller, of Ranelagh-street, Liverpool, representing to him that they were made of 15-carat gold. They bore a 15-carat stamp. A few weeks since Mr. M'Clintock noticed some marks upon the rings which induced him to send them to Birmingham for examination, when it was discovered that the rings were made of spurious metal, and that the stamps had been cut or transferred from rings of genuine gold that had been assayed and stamped at Birmingham. Upon this fact being made known to Mr. M'Clintock, he communicated with the police, and Jackson was apprehended in London on the 30th ult. After the facts had been proved, the case was remanded until further inquiries had been made. Jackson, it was stated, was in the habit of visiting the principal towns of England periodically, and did a large business amongst the jewellers of Liverpool, Manchester, and Leeds.


Source: The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian - 8th May 1869

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:54 am

The Court of Appeal upholds the right claimed by the Goldsmiths' Company to sue for penalties for the infringement of the statutes with regard to counterfeit marks on plate, and has reversed a decision of Justices Field and Manisty, who had allowed the demurrer of a Clerkenwell silversmith who was sued by the Goldsmiths Company for penalties amounting to over £6000.

Source: County Observer and Monmouthshire Central Advertiser - 9th April 1881

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Tue Aug 21, 2018 4:31 am

DAVID GOOCH

London


At Marlborough-street Police-court, Mr. David Gooch, silversmith. New Oxford-street, has been committed to prison to await his trial on a charge of uttering a mark used by the Goldsmiths' Company from a ware of silver to a ware of base metal.

Source: South Wales Daily News - 13th July 1876

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:56 am

WILLIAM SCOTT

Glasgow


FRAUDULENT STAMPING OF RINGS

William Scott, twenty-three, jeweller, residing in Glasgow, has been convicted in the High Court of Justiciary, Edinburgh, before Lord Moncrieff and a jury, of having in his possession, and having used, a stamp of a crown and the figure 18, used for marking gold plate by the Guardians of the Standard of Wrought Plate in Birmingham, on six gold wedding-rings. He was also charged with representing to pawnbrokers in Glasgow that twelve rings were of eighteen carats' standard, when ten were of nine carats, one of twelve, and one of eight. The prisoner represented to a die-sinker that he wanted punches to put assay marks on rings, sent in for repair, whose marks had been damaged. When questioned as to his right to have these punches the prisoner said all jewellers had them. Henry Buckley, chairman of Guardians of the Standard of Wrought Plate in Birmingham, stated that information was sent to Birmingham by the assay-master at Glasgow regarding rings which, it was alleged, had the Birmingham mark forged on them. He went to Glasgow and saw some of the rings. On these the standard marks of Birmingham had been forged. He knew these to be forgeries. The jury returned a verdict of guilty by a majority of one, and recommended the prisoner to leniency, as he had been in custody three months and had benefited little by his crime. A sentence of six months' imprisonment was imposed.


Source: The Record and Advertiser - 24th January 1903

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:39 am

SOLOMON AND DANIEL CURTIS AND ALFRED GOULD


FORGED HALLMARKS

At the Old Bailey, yesterday, Solomon and Daniel Curtis were each sentenced to three years' penal servitude for having in their possession goods bearing forged hallmarks. A third man, named Alfred Gould, was sentenced to six months' hard labour. It was stated that efforts were now being made to secure the actual makers of the dies stamped on the goods.


Source: Northern Daily Mail - 27th June 1903

Trev.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 40554
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Information on the Forgery of British Hallmarks

Postby dognose » Wed Mar 27, 2019 4:33 am

MORRIS SHIFMAN

Wales


TRANSPOSING MARKS ON RINGS

Morris Shifman, a travelling jeweller, of Russian extraction, was charged at the Monmouthshire Assizes to-day with transferring marks used by the Company of Guardians of Wrought Plate in Birmingham for marking 18-carat gold ware from a ring of 18-carat to a signet ring of less quality; and there was also a charge of altering a snake ring in a similar manner. Prisoner was further charged with uttering the rings to a pawnbroker at Newport in November, 1906, knowing the marks on the rings to have been transposed.

Prisoner pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, with hard labour.


Source: Evening Express and Evening Mail - 26th June 1907

Trev.


Return to “Contributors' Notes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests