That book spends a lot of space telling us that Walter Fearnehough (fern-ee–huff) claimed to make nothing but machine knives, and, more than that, to have made nothing but machine knives ever since the firm's foundation. I have a strong prejudice to believe what people say about themselves so decisively, but I also have a strong feeling that this saw, clearly marked with nothing but WF's name, and the first I've come across with it, was made by WF himself, the main reason for coming down on this side of the fence being that I would date it at about 1860 (mainly on the strength of the italic font of the name – a very superior piece of mark making), and that at that date a name marked like this on a cast steel saw suggests self manufacture, as opposed to a German steel saw, where second quality items seem much more often to have been made for others by a true saw maker. These remarks contain several assumptions, and I'd like to hear if others bear them out or could help me to another conclusion. It's a nice 14inch saw, with an unusually heavy back, and almost intact horns and a nearly straight blade.
Hi Simon, The problem with being Simon Barley means that you must either be a very brave person to disagree publicly with the The authority on British saws, or a lunatic. I am not a brave person and so I will leave the supposition to you. Having said that, I cannot really loose as I will agree that the saw is factored, as per BSSM or will agree with your present proposition. What en enviable position to be in. The rest below is a complete and unsupported WAG from any factual point of view, but it may have some recreational qualities. The first consideration is that this saw is so far unique, i.e. he was no Tyzack Sons and Turner or Groves in his production run. The question therefore has to be asked "Why"? The saw quality is good and so it is not, in all probability, that they have been thrown away or scrapped as useless. May I suggest that one of the reasons for so few saws may be that this is the saw equivalent of vanity publishing prior to the internet age. It would not have been cheap if you did it (could do it) yourself and there would have to be a good reason to take the trouble to do it, or it would be an ego massaging excercise. I do not know the extent of Mr Fearnehoughs ego, but what I do know about Yorkshire men is that they don't like spending money when they don't have to. In this context the crossover between making saws and knives is presumably not straightforward as far as skill-sets and equipment go and there is a cost implication to it. From this point of view alone I would bet that this saw is factored. It is cheaper to stamp a back of a pre-made saw than to set up a manufacturing process yourself for so few saws. If you look at the stamp closely and the deteriorating quality of the mark past the "A" and certainly past the "N", then the stamp itself supports this. Mr Fearnehough presumably had his own stamp maker and when he (the stamp maker) got to the "A", Mr Fearnehough looked over his shoulder and said:- "Na then lad, what tha doin. D'ust'a (doest thou) think a'm made o' money. A canna afford yon fancy letterin' an' t'e time its tekkin thee. Ger it done plain and simple". Hence the deterioration of the rest of the stamp lettering. Getting back to the to the slightly more real world, I would also question why "Sheffield" was not put on the saw for, without the place of manufacture on a saw, I immediately think that it is very early , or it is a brand. This saw is not very early, nor is it a brand as far as we know but it may indicate that it is not a fully manufactured Sheffield saw by the person named on it. I do not know what the naming conventions were (if any) in the 1860's. There must be some reason for the lack of "Sheffield" and I am open to offers. All in all, I have to go with your first impulse, Simon, in BSSM and come down on the side of the saw being factored. Possibly a small run for personal or marketing reasons which would have been too costly to manufacture in-house. I do not think that it would be unreasonable for a person of standing in the Sheffield community (as I am sure that Mr Fearnehough would have been), to have the ability to specify to his manufacturer the quality of the product that was to be marked with his name, especially if said product was to be used for either of the purposes above. Fred