Who he? Not in the trades directories as far as I know under the rubric Saw Makers, but using that invaluable aid to identification British Plane Makers (3rd ed) I can find Thomas Porter at 3 (4) Sutton Street, Soho in 1814-1824, a highly suitable date for this saw, a recent ebay acquisition (it didn't fetch the sort of price a saw of that date would reach if it was not in such awful condition). Porter was a "plane and toolmaker", according to BPM3, but his premises were large enough to be occupied by other plane makers, including Wm Brain, who overlapped in dates, and who is described as a plane and sawmaker, and Spurrier and Co, also plane and sawmakers. So I think it is not unlikely that Porter either made his own saws too (included in "tools", perhaps), or had them made by others on the premises and marked with his name. For what it's worth (not much, I think), the style of the letters on the plane marks in BPM3 are very similar to the mark on the saw; I don't think that the mark on the saw was made by the identical tool that was used for marking wood, however, as the wood-mark letters have a much sharper angle of entry into the material - but at this distance of time, it's almost impossible to tell. The saw itself is like others of its approximate date in having an extremely small handle - it would suit the hand of a 12 year old, but no larger - Why???And the wood is only a bare 11/16inches thick. The brass back is flimsy, and concave curved. The handle's got a hole through which I'm assuming was for hanging it up, and of course it's missing the lower horn. At least the blade is straight... And it's a very early (earliest?) saw with the geographical "London" on it - Sheffield didn't start putting their town's name on until maybe 15-20 years later.
Hey Simon Glad to see the saw went to a very good home. From your description of the saw and so few other examples you might also make an assumption that he was a plane maker for a reason and the talents didn't necessarily cross over into other disciplines. Make errors on the fundamentals such as a handle and it might be hard to sell more. You would wonder if it was made in the shop for a small or slighter woman's hand? Thanks for the info. Joe S.
Hi Simon, An interesting old saw, thanks for posting. I had thought that the short grip length, giving the small hand opening on old saws, was made specifically for the three finger grip advocated at that time, with the forefinger resting alongside the handle and pointing down the blade. (Not the full fist grip of many current users, which might have been the reason for the removal of the lower horns on your saw.) [Disston might have engraved your saw as made "for Mechanics, not Botchers" (as per his No 77 saw).] The three finger grip is the only comfortable method for me to grip some of my oldest saws. That doesn't explain the thinness of the handle though. As Joe says, that, and the flimsy brass back, might indicate that the saw was made for some specific light duty use (or incompetence from an inexperienced or ultra frugal sawmaker)
Hi Simon, It doesn't really matter how ill-made the saw or how flimsy the back it is to me an (almost vernacular) work of art. Especially the mark on the back. Does anyone else think that "London" is separate letters? I am glad that it is on here for those with an interest to see and undoubtedly appreciate. And it has, of course, gone to the only home that is fit and proper for a saw of this lineage. Fred
Thanks for the kind comments - I didn't know the 3-finger grip recommendation, but it certainly makes sense. I agree that is is not impossible that the "London" letters were applied one at a time (although why they should be available singly is less likely than as one word??). I'm certain that this mark was a make-up, though (6inch gent's saw, possibly early 20th cent).