Taylor, London or Taylor Brothers

Discussion in 'Forum: Saw Identification and Discussion' started by fred0325, May 3, 2011.

  1. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Hello all,

    There have been a few Taylor's (London) on Ebay just recently and one of which sold for quite a reasonable amount about a couple of weeks ago and so when I saw this at substantially less, I went for it.

    Now, in HSMOB there are two Taylors from London. Taylor and Co. 1914 to 1915 and Joseph Taylor, (whose mark is I Taylor) 1831 to 1852. This saw does not fit into either category because it has the Paschal Lamb/Advance trade mark which, of course is Taylor Brothers Sheffield and which I did not find out until I actually got it in my hands. I hoped that I was getting a Taylor 1831 to 1852 but, alas, disappointment yet again!:( ;)

    So where does Taylor London, fit into Taylor Brothers? It is not in their list of brand names in HSMOB. It was not a bad saw in its day - a heavy brass back and a handle 1" thick so was "London" an indicator of quality rather than place.

    I will stick my neck out with the date of this saw and put it around the 1880+ mark, but perhaps not as late as 1914/15. So it is too late for an association with Joseph Taylor and possibly too early for Taylor and Co.

    Any ideas anyone? Are any of the Taylor companies related?

    Fred

    If you are thinking of bidding for the one currently on offer, note that this has a Lamb on it as well.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: May 3, 2011
  2. kiwi

    kiwi Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    352
    Very nice crook'ed (lamb's tongue) handle Fred. Looks good for c1880 (your neck is safe with me)

    Note that plain TAYLOR was one of the registered trademarks of Taylor Bros. (see picture)

    I don't know if TBs just added LONDON for style (or for their London office), or if there was an independent London merchant with the Taylor name re-selling Taylor Bros Sheffield products
     

    Attached Files:

  3. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Thank-you Kiwi,

    A wonderful advertising graphic. It is a pity that HSMOB didn't have access to it. It would have doubled or tripled their published brands list. I particularly liked the "Bombay" trade mark. I think that Ray remarked in the discussion of "USE" that the Victorians had a sense of humour over their marks.

    I do notice (and this is in HSMOB but I missed it because I wasn't looking for it) that Taylor Brothers are skirting around the the Taylor (London) 1831 to 1852 mark. I.e Joseph Taylor and J and I Taylor, but they never quite get to duplicate it.

    These two companies do overlap by three years and so they (Taylor Brothers) may have been trying to piggy-back onto the earlier company's reputation (if they had a good one and depending upon when the Taylor Brothers' marks were used) or did they take them over?? Had this been the case then they would probably have used the full trade mark.

    This is another example of a fascinating discovery process (to me at least and I hope to others) that can come out of a very ordinary saw.

    Fred

    The handle is a beauty isn't it? (Although it is a little too chunky for me). The horns look substantially undamaged. No chips and not truncated.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2011
  4. ray

    ray Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    668
    Hi Fred,

    Nice saw Fred, that handle is in perfect condition.

    I have a Taylor Brothers marked "Melvin London" with the advance paschal lamb mark.

    My understanding is that "London" was often used as a quality indicator rather than a place name. Like "London Spring" and so on.

    Whenever you see the paschal lamb with "advance" you can be certain it's a Taylor Brothers. They seemed to have more brand names than most.

    Would it be possible for you to scan that handle. If you have a flat bed scanner that is? I'd like to use that pattern on a new saw I'm planning.

    Regards
    Ray
     
  5. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    I was beginning to think at one stage that "Taylor London" as in the 1831 to 1852 variety in HSMOB didn't exist until I found a record for him as a saw manufacturer in the Post Office (small edition) of 1852 at 67 Thomas Street, Grosvenor Square. (P1018). But this is the only mention that I can find.

    There is a Joseph Taylor in the Post Office Directory of 1841 at 15 and 16 Noel Street, Soho but he is described as an "iron plate worker" - a description which can cover a multitude of sins and which is reminiscent of Joe's "Barnard, saw plater" of a fair few decades earlier. So he may have made saw plates, if it is the same man.

    Now the source of Joseph Taylor (London) in HSMOB is Goodman and Rees British Planemakers from 1700. Never having seen a copy of this book, I don't know how accurate it is or what information pertaining to saw makers that it contains, but there is no record of this Taylor being a saw manufacturer in the Online Directories before 1852.

    Can anyone point me to any other sources online, or information online that I have missed?

    Why am I going on about Taylor (1831 to 1852) again - because I am still trying to find a saw made by him and not by Taylor Brothers.

    In this context I offer up the saw pictured below. It has "Taylor London" on it, but lacks the "I Taylor" mentioned in HSMOB, or the paschal lamb of Taylor Brothers. Looking at the saw, I hope and would suggest that it is a little earlier than 1849, the start of "Tayor Brothers" in HSMOB - but whether it is Joseph Taylor, there is no way of telling, and of course, I have been wrong on my dating before.

    Someone somewhere must have some idea on all of this, or, better still have a saw and mark that is demonstrably Joseph Taylor. An image of this would be greatly appreciated. I do have a sneaking and nagging suspicion that this, again, is a Taylor Brothers but for some reason without the lamb.

    Fred
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Joe S

    Joe S Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    371
    Hey Fred et al
    I don't have a lot to add to the discussion except that is a very nice saw. I look at it and get the impression it seems to be older. It is hard to tell if the nose of the handle has been worn away, otherwise it would seem to be a naive expectation that the saw nut would last very long so close to the end.
    I went to check the Goodman and Rees reference you mentioned and it unfortunately doesn't have a picture of the stamp to show the later Joseph Turner. It does say "I Taylor/ London (incuse). I don't know if only the London was incuse where your saw has that lovely serration around the Taylor. It doesn't have the "I" as you already alluded to which seems to be a deal breaker.
    History sort of suggests a time of association and this may have been something to separate them before their distinctive corporate branding that was to come later. I don't own or know of any others like this so I think it is unique and very attractive.
    Great stuff there.
    Joe S
     
  7. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Thanks for the reply Joe,

    Just to confirm that the front of the handle has been worn away, which is why part of the front nut is protruding.

    I am not sure that I will ever get to the bottom of this particular saw, but I hope at some time to find a "proper" J Taylor.

    There are of course many other Taylors listed in HSMOB, some of which may have used "London" as a quality indicator rather than place of manufacture and this can but complicate matters. I still think that, on balance, it may be a pre 1850's saw which would narrow the field down, but with my luck it will be a lot later.

    Thanks also for the word "incuse". I had to look it up in a dictionary to find out what it meant. But my dictionary defines it only as a stamping as per a coin (my paraphrase). Does Goodman mean that the name was merely stamped or does he use incuse to refer to the frilly bit around the edge, :confused: which has a little of the Barber Genn or Hill late Howell about it although not so pronounced or deeply indented (incused?).

    Could this less complex stamp indicate an earlier saw, or a cheap stamp to try to tart up a later cheap saw? (Although this does not have the look of a cheap saw). This question is purely rhetorical. Please don't try to answer it anyone. For those of you who have not read "The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy", the Vogon Guard, on capturing Ford and Zaphod kept repeating "Resistance is useless". This can perhaps be profitably re-defined within the Universe of Saws to "speculation is largely useless".

    Fred
     
  8. Joe S

    Joe S Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    371
    Hey Fred
    I laughed when you mentioned you had to look up the word "incuse" because I had to do the same thing. The definitions were unsatisfactory and confusing and I had the same response. I then returned to look in the rest of the Goodman and Rees book to find a great explanation... eight pages with pics. (I can't recommend the book highly enough).
    I find it easier to understand when it is explained as to how the stamp is made. The corollary to "incuse" is "embossed". An embossed stamp is created where the lettering is hammered out in the stamp and the subsequent creation when struck is a positive image that is raised above the floor of the area that has been pressed. The incuse stamp has all the material around the lettering removed and the letter would stand up like a printer’s type. When struck a negative is created below a surface. Goodman goes on to further explain variations of embossed and incuse with explanations of borders. Embossed borders sometimes were decorated and it seems this was an earlier method. Your "Taylor" has a decorative border that looks like an incuse stamping and this was more frequent than an embossed border. "Tarted up"......nah...simple yet effective.
    You mentioned the "Hill late Howell" stamp which is a combo of the embossed and incuse method. Five stamps may have been used. The embossed ZB {zig zag} bordered "J V Hill" and embossed ZB {zig zag} bordered "Howell" flank an incuse stamp "*" "Late" "London".
    Hope this helps.
    Joe S
     

    Attached Files:

  9. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Thanks again Joe,

    It took me three readings of your previous literary effort to get to grips with the concepts, and another visit to the dictionary. But I think that I am there now.

    I think that I may have "incuse", incused on my gravestone (along with "paschal lamb") in honour of this process of discovery - provided that a suitable material can be found. :)

    Fred
     
  10. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joseph Taylor

    I have a William Fletcher Saw (On ebay at the moment) Did some research and for those interested in Joseph Taylor this is what I found out. It is from the London Gazzette date 1852.


    "NOTICE is hereby given, that George Jubilee Stilwell, of No. 3, Alfred-street, Vauxhaul-bridge-'road. in the county of Middlesex, and William Fletcher, of Leader Street, Chelsea, in the same county, Saw Makers and Co- Partners, carrying on business at No. 27. Thomas-street, Oxford-street, in the same county, under the name or style of "Joseph Taylor, have, by indenture, bearing date the 6th day of May, in the year of our Lord 1852, and made between he said George Jubilee Stilwell, of No. 3, Alfred-street, Vauxhall-bridge-road, in the county of Middlesex, and William Fletcher, of Leader-street, Chelsea, in the same County, Saw Makers and Copartners, carrying on business at No. 27, Thomas-street, Oxford-street, in the same county, under the name or style of Joseph Taylor, of the first part; closes Ea'don, of Norfolk-street, Sheffield, in the county of fork, Cutler, trustee for himself and the rest of the credi-……."


    Now Im not sure what exactly its telling me but it seems Certain that William Fletcher was operating under J Taylors name from 1852. The saw I have is marked Leader Street which is also mentioned above.

    Thought this might be of interest
     
  11. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Hi,

    I have very definitely seen it and I assumed that it was you despite the missing letter in your ebay name.

    I have even asked you the cost of postage to the UK. This really does open up a new line of enquiry re the proper London Taylor. I wonder how he ties in with the J Taylor, sawmaker in the Post Office 1852 directory. A successor company perhaps?

    I will leave you to guess as to whether or not I will be bidding!!

    Fred
     
  12. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    58
    slaps head!

    How funny,
    I got your email Fred, (I hope you got my reply) but unlike you didn't make the connection. This thread came up in a search while I was looking for more info.

    Its a nice saw by the way, needs a sharpen but it is 150 odd years old.

    The decade this saw was made saw

    The Crimean War, Charles Darwins origin of species and the introduction of the "Bessemer Process" 1n 1858.
    So it is likely that this is"pre bessemer" Crucible Steel.

    Al:)
     
  13. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Hi all,
    I'll try to put more of the article on.

    VTOTICE is hereby given, that George Jubilee Stilwell,
    i.^1 of No. 3, Alfred-street, yauxhaU-bridge-'road. in the
    county of Middlesex, and William Fletcher, of Leadertreet,
    Chelsea, in the same county, Saw Makers and Co-
    >artners, carrying on business at No. 27. Thomas-street,
    )xford-street, in the same county, under the name or style of
    "oseph Taylor, have, by indenture, bearing date the 6th day
    f May, in the year of our Lord 1852, and made between
    he said George Jubilee Stilwell, of No. 3, Alfred-street,
    fauxhall-bridge-road, in the county of Middlesex, and
    William Fletcher, of Leader-street, Chelsea, in the same
    ;ounty, Saw Makers and Copartners, carrying on business
    at No. 27, Thomas-street, Oxford-street, in the same county,
    under the name or style of Joseph Taylor, of the first part;
    closes Ea'don, of Norfolk-street, Sheffield, in the county of
    fork, Cutler, trustee for himself and the rest of the credi

    page 2
    tors of the said George Jubilee Stilwell and William Fletche
    r,
    party thereto of the second part; and the several other persons
    whose names and seals are thereunto subscribed and
    set, being respectively creditors of the said George Jubilee
    Stilwell and William Fletcher, of the third part; bargained,
    sold, assigned, transferred, and set over unto the said
    trustee, his executors, administrators, and assigns, all and
    every the stock in trade, goods, wares, merchandize, household
    furniture, fixtures, plate, linen, china, books of account,
    debts, sum and sums of money, and all securities for money,
    vouchers, and other documents and writings, and all other
    the personal estate and effects and real estate whatsoever
    and wheresoever (including the right and title to imprint
    the name of Taylor upon all saws and other manufactured
    articles in the same mode as they then had the same), of
    them the said George Jubilee Stilwell and William


    It looks to me as though Stilwell and Fletcher were trading as "Taylor" and went bankrupt, with their assets passing to Moses Eadon of York(shire) and others, including the ability for said Moses Eadon and others to use the name "Taylor" in the same format as Stilwell and Fletcher used it. Although we still do not know whether this was just "Taylor London" or "I Taylor" or any other Taylor for that matter.

    A very nice step forward. Thank-you for the pointer.

    Fred
     
  14. Barleys

    Barleys Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    546
    So much fascinating (and to me new) information on this thread
    (in passing, I find the definition of incuse and all those pages about it leave me with the sort of bafflement mixed with incomplete informedness and a very temporary understanding that I remember from algebra lessons)

    The border round the name that Goodman called zb on planes was used on saws until only about 1840 in Sheffield, although Moulson Bros went on a bit later than that and in London Hill (late Howel) used it right through until 1900.

    As far as I know, Bessemer cast steel was not used for saws, as it was too soft (only about 0.2%carbon) and took the place mainly of wrought iron

    Without my database to hand I would hate to even venture into the who's who of the Taylors, except to say in passing that Moses Eadon would have been delighted to be able to make saws with the name Taylor, thereby thoroughly confusing the market (and us collectors), although there is no indication in the directories that they used it (which is not to say they did not!). There is no extant catalogue of M Eadon, and only one of Taylor Bros as far as I know - by far the best source of information about names.
     
  15. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Hello all and especially Al,

    I have taken one step nearer to getting a "proper" J Taylor by buying the above saw. Still not got one with "I Taylor" on it - but the time will come????

    They must be the same Taylor as the Small Post Office Directory of 1852 has Taylor at 67 Thomas Street and so does the bankruptcy notice in the London Gazzette 1852.

    And what a saw it is. I don't think that your description did it justice Al.
    The blade is 14 inches but the back is 7/16 ths inch thick.

    For those of you who are into the mechanics of sawing, you can rest assured that there would not be much need to put any downward pressure on this saw.
    It weighs 1lb 13ozs.

    Fred
     

    Attached Files:

  16. Deesinister

    Deesinister Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    58
    Glad you like it

    Thanks Fred, Im very glad you're pleased.
    I tend to understate on ebay to avoid less disappointment.
    Ill certainly keep an eye out for an I taylor for you although Australia isn't always the best for saws which Ive always found a bit surprising. There are so many Disstons over here But far less English saws yet as an ex English colony you'd think it would be otherwise.
    Enjoy The Fletcher
    Al
     
  17. TraditionalToolworks

    TraditionalToolworks Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    181
    I have a J.I.Taylor saw, from Sheffield. I also have a J.Taylor from Sheffield. The J.I.Taylor is a 16" and the J.Taylor is a 12".

    It is worth noting that both of mine have steel backs on them, while the saw pictured in this thread has a brass back.

    Here's are pics of them.

    This is the J.I.Taylor 16":

    [​IMG]

    This is the J.Taylor 12":

    [​IMG]
     
  18. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Thanks for the post Alan,

    I think that I have a J Taylor somewhere. I really must catalogue and sort my saws at some stage. I see that yours has the paschal lamb on it which means that it is a Taylor Brothers.

    I am particularly interested in the J and I Taylor and which, according to HSMOB is aslo a trade name of Taylor Brothers. It is the first time that I have seen the mark - and without the lamb.

    I am, however still searching for an I Taylor only - if they exist and which I am beginning to doubt. ( I wonder if HSMOB confused their J for an I in their description of J Taylor , London 1831 to 1852.)

    Now one of those really would be a find for me.

    Fred
     
  19. ray

    ray Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    668
    Hi Fred,

    Just thinking aloud, when did the I and J interchanging go out of fashion, I'm pretty sure that at least in the late 1700's the "J"'s were often written as "I" ...

    I wonder how far into the 1800's that practice continued.

    Regards
    Ray
     
  20. fred0325

    fred0325 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    1,084
    Ray,

    I didn't know about "I" and "J"'s but by the looks of it, they were probably separate a fair bit before 1831. (See pics)

    I have a William Perry dictionary with a Preface dated 1777. I have an idea that the body of the text may be slightly later than that (I don't know why I think this but I did research the book when I got it) and by then the I's and J's were distiguishable.

    So if HMSOB is an error, then it is one, or there is an I Taylor out there somewhere.

    Fred
     

    Attached Files: