Tillotson Rip Saw

Discussion in 'Forum: Saw Identification and Discussion' started by wilji3035, Oct 9, 2014.

  1. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Regarding the TMs -
    I think that we might be confusing ourselves by being too literal with the TMs discussed so far. The more I read, the more I am scratching my head. So, I have tried to break this down somewhat scientifically:

    Observations thus far:
    1.) TMs found on Tillotson labeled tools:
    a.) Crown above left facing Harp
    - Saw (Tillotson, Sheffield)
    - Saw (T.Tillotson & Co., Sheffield)
    Tillotson 16in -ebay_Crown-Harp-left.png

    b.) Crown above right facing Harp
    - Found on saw (Thos_Tillotson & Co., Sheffield)
    - Saw (Thos_Tillotson & Co., Sheffield, Best Refined, Spring Temper, Cast Steel, Warranted)
    Tillotson_Simon_Crown-Harp-right.JPG

    c.) Crown above X above Heart
    - Saw label screw (Patent Crystallized Cast Steel, Extra Quality)
    - Anvil (__Tillotson, Sheffield)
    - Most label screws found are W/S or blank
    Tillotson_Medallion Crown-X-Heart.jpg The ABANA Forums_Tillotson_anvil_1.jpg

    d.) Heart above X above Crown
    - Saw (Tillotson, Sheffield)
    Tillotson_Simon_Heart-X-Crown_1.JPG

    f.) Crown next to X both above Heart
    - Countersink brace bit (Tillotson, Sheffield)
    eBay Tillotson_brace bit_1_d.jpg

    e.) "SomeMark" above X above Heart
    - Chisel 1 (T.Tillotson, Sheffiled, Patent Crystallized Cast Steel), Chisel 2
    - Gouge (T.Tillotson, Sheffield)
    - Plow plane iron (T.Tillotson, Sheffield)
    - Countersink brace bit (T.Tillotson, Sheffield, Dower, Cast Steel)
    eBay Tillotson_plow plane iron_1_a.jpg eBay Tillotson_countersink_1_d.jpg

    f.) "SomeOtherMark" above X above Heart
    - Straight razor (Tillotson's, Celebrated Razor, Sheffield)
    eBay Tillotson_razor_5_c.jpg

    g.) 2 Crowns only, possibly 3
    - Saw w/ 2 Crowns (Tillotson, Cursive Sheffield, Cursive Cast Steel)
    - Saw w/ 3 Crowns (Thos_Tillotson, Sheffield, Cast Steel)
    - Saw w/ 3 Crowns (Tillotson, Cursive Sheffield, Cursive Cast Steel) [3rd Crown not confirmed]
    eBay Tillotson hand saw_1_c.jpg


    Assumptions: (OK, I know this is dangerous... Please note that this is only for the purpose of furthering discussion.)
    1.) Crown above right facing Harp is a replacement stamp for Crown above left facing Harp.
    2.) Crown above X above Heart is same as Heart above X above Crown is same as Crown next to X both above
    Heart. My inclination is the same as Simon's, that we will find out the order does not matter.
    3.) Label screws are formed, and thus can be more easily detailed than a punch created for much smaller tools. Note that one object (the label screw) is a separately "created mark" used only on saws, while the other (the stamp punch) is a tool that "creates a mark" on small tools. Thus, the label screw is very important in that it gives us perspective as to the intent of Tillotson's TMs listed above as "SomeMark" and "SomeOtherMark". These marks can be considered representative of crowns.

    Therefore:
    1.) TMs found on Tillotson labeled tools:
    a.) Crown and Harp
    - found on saws
    b.) Crown-X-Heart
    - found on numerous tools, including saws
    c.) 2-3 Crowns surrounding some version of "Tillotson" stamp
    - found on saws

    This was an attempt to pull all the various bits of information together for all to see. I hope it helps.

    Wiktor, where did the Tillotson label screw come from? Do you have a picture of the entire saw and saw plate/back stamps?

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  2. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill, the medallion I posted came from one of the forums and I downloaded it long time ago. I do not have a picture of the saw. It is, however, not that important to me since I was and am interested more in solving an origin of the trade mark and the harp stamp on saws.

    At this point I want to see if Simon will find out anything at the Cutler's Company or not.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2014
  3. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Thanks anyway Wiktor, I can't give a reason for wanting to see that particular Tillotson saw other than it seems to be a unique example for us to view.

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  4. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill, although it seems that only you and I left to continue this debate, I still think it is worth to discuss few points on your comments about terms. Here are some more points to think about:
    1. Label Screw - this term was used only by one saw screws designer. There are at least five other core patents for saw screws and in none of these the term Label Screw was used.
    2. Disston, who I would consider a good sawmaker to accept some terms from, never used a Label Screw term. He simply called these screws a Large Saw Screw.
    3. I have to admit that I don't recall where the term TOTE came from, but I know that Disston used term HANDLE.
    4. As far as I know other sawmakers from the "Golden Era" also used term HANDLE.
     
  5. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Hi Wiktor,

    I can remember so many conversations with my crew at work, with deer-in-the-headlights looks because of incorrect use of terms. I just want to make sure that I am communicating correctly, and tried to open this up for discussion between those of you who have a great deal more knowledge of saw history. I am not someone who has ever looked into the issue of terminology for saws. So, thanks for that information! :)

    I do have one thought, though. I understand what you are saying about Disston and his contemporaries. Of course, I've seen these terms used in their publications as well. I'm assuming that the patents were U.S. and in this same time period? In addition, I can also agree that Disston was a massive manufacturer of saws, and therefore one to set standards. However, could terms like "medallion", "escutcheon" and "handle" be newer, perhaps "Americanized", versions of "label screw", "register plate" and "tote" that might have been used previously by older English saw makers?

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  6. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Wiktor, I have spent some time, while we're waiting for the Cutler's Company to respond, searching for two things. One of those things is the Tillotson related tool marks origins, and the other is Tillotson business in North America.

    What I keep running into with the "crowned harp" is marks for Irish goods. The marks are very similar. Do you think it's plausible that these saws were meant for sale in Ireland? As for the Crown-X-Heart sequence of marks, I've found nothing. My one thought is that the crown symbol might stand for Sheffield manufacture and the X for "extra quality", but I have no idea what the Heart could symbolize. I know these thoughts are very long shots...

    I've spent most of the time on Tillotson business in America, but have found little to go on. We discussed earlier the addresses in NYC I found for Tillotson and [Edward] Marshall. There was also a July 1860 copy of "D. Plumb & Co. Record of Mercantile Credits" that listed Tillotson, Thomas & Co. as "Hardware" and having an A1 rating ("Most Wealthy Houses - Credit unlimited and beyond contingency"). In addition, I found the following message in a California newspaper (California exemplifies the reach that Tillotson had?):

    "DISSOLUTION OF COPARTNERSHIP. Public notice is hereby given that the copartnership heretofore existing between the subscribers, THOMAS TILLOTSON, of Sheffield, in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and EDWARD MARSHALL, of the city of New York, in the United States of America, and which has been heretofore carried on in England and California, under the name, style and form of THOMAS TILLOTSON & CO., and in the city of New York, under the firm of TILLOTSON & MARSHALL, is this day dissolved by mutual consent. The affairs of the late firm will be liquidated in the city of New York by the undersigned EDWARD MARSHALL, and in California by JACOB UNDERHILL, the duly authorized agent for that purpose.
    (Signed) THOS. TILLOTSON, EDWARD MARSHALL.
    San Francisco, January 1,1857.

    The Importing Hardware and Sheffield Cutlery business will be carried on under the same name and style as heretofore, by
    THOS. TILLOTSON & CO.
    JACOB UNDERHILL, Agent,
    No. 48 Battery street.
    San Francisco, January 1,1856."


    Not sure if any of this helps, but I thought it interesting anyway...

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  7. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill,
    The patents for saw screws I refer to are American and they were awarded in second part of 19th Century. You can read about it here: http://tinyurl.com/n6dwyon. As to TOTE - I already mentioned that I don't know where this came from. The Register Plate, as Simon explained, is an English term.

    As to your second post - the rating info is interesting and I haven't seen that before, although I am familiar with D. Plumb & Co. publications. As to the announcements in California press - yes, Tillotson had a rep in San Francisco. Tillotson & Marshall had a partnership to conduct trade in US and dissolved it in 1857. Underhill continued as a local rep for San Francisco for a while. I am familiar with California Newspapers website and use it as needed. However, it is very difficult to take a clip of original message fromt heir site and I like to have these clippings on my puter. ;-)
     
  8. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Wiktor,

    1.) Thanks for clearing up the patents question. I really have been reading the posts on this thread... :) I simply included "tote" and "register plate" with "label screw" while writing because those are the three terms being discussed. I'm trying to think of another way to ask the question I posed above - were these three terms (maybe there are others we should be considering as well?) in common use prior to the growth of large American saw makers of the last half of the 19th century? If so, then I would tend to think of these as more historically correct terms in a worldwide sense. Are the terms such as "handle", "escutcheon" and "medallion" newer terms, as of mid 19th century, and used primarily by Americans? If these were newer terms used mostly by Americans, then I have to think of them as historically correct in reference to American history only.

    2.) Here is an enlarged image of the California newspaper clip:

    Daily Alta California_1857-01-01_Enlarged.JPG

    I can send you the whole newspaper page in pdf if you would like. For viewing purposes, here is the page from D. Plumb:

    D Plumb Co Record_1860_Tillotson.jpg

    3.) I am not sure if you attempted to contact Davistown museum, and I know this isn't exactly your primary quest, but here is a picture (although not great) from a Davistown publication of the Tillotson saw that we found earlier in their "Maritime III" listing:

    Davistown_Tool Teach_Tillotson Saw.JPG
    TCW1003 Backsaw
    Cast steel with solid brasses, 14 3/4" long, 11 3/8" blade, signed "T TILLOTSON SHEFFIELD (FIN)EST REFINED CAST STEEL
    SPRINGTEMPER WARRANTED", 1800 - 1820.
    The unusual markings also include a crown touchmark and brasses.


    This one looks rather unique, compared to others we've seen thus far. Note the description is a little different in the image, but the item number is the same:
    Figure 410. Hand saw. Saw
    steel, wood (rosewood), brass.
    T. Tillotson. DTM. TCW1003.


    Regards,
    Bill
     
  9. summerfi

    summerfi Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    184
    On p.708 of BSSM is a list of prices for saw handle making prepared by the Saw Handle Makers Trade Protection Society, Sheffield. It is a 1891 reprint of an 1847 document. So the term "handle" in reference to saws has been around for a very long time and is not just an Americana term. I'm not sure where the term "tote" originated, but personally I prefer the term handle because I feel it is more descriptive of what it actually is.
     
  10. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill, Looks like there is one documented (see above post) istance for Saw Handle. Also, try to search Google Books for Saw Tote and you get results like this: "I saw tote on the road" and similar. If you search web for "saw tote" you get bunch of blogs where this term is used. Hardly authoritative sources.

    As to saw screws - attached is the document from 1738, Palladio Londinensis or the London Art of Building, describing various tools needed in building trades. I am attaching a page describing different kind of saws and saw screws and associated prices. As to Label Screws, I already explained what I know and gave examples of the term used by Disston and Nicholson. Also, in English documents I found term "Fancy Screws" used by one saw screws maker and I assume he meant what we today call Medallion. Unfortunately I can't find right now this advertisement. I will see if I can post it later sometime.
    As to escutcheon vs. register palate, I also said what I think about it. Simon mentioned the documented source. There is no sense repeating it. If you find your self any info, share it here.

    1738-Palladio_Londinensis_Or_the_London_Art_of Building.jpg
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2014
  11. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    I found one advertisement by Taylor Brothers and on the bottom there are several line describing some of their products. One of them is - Fancy Screws. Two images attached, first - a full ad, second - lower portion of the ad with description highlighted. However, this is not the record I had in mind originally. I know I have it somewhere - an ad for Henry Smith and his Fancy Screws... I will look for it anyway and post it when I find it.

    1858-General & Commercial Directory of Borough Birmingham.jpg 1858-General & Commercial Directory of Birmingham-530-Fancy Screws-530.jpg
     
  12. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Thanks summerfi and Wiktor! I tend to like the word "handle" for saws, too. "Tote" somehow just doesn't seem right; handle being a more descriptive term makes sense. It looks like someone at Taylor Brothers really liked the word "Fancy". It seems a fitting description, though.

    The historical aspect of these tools is very intriguing. Unfortunately, I haven't researched this topic any further recently. I'll try to get back on track this week. I got caught up trying to find some historical information about Moore Bros saws, because of a saw handed down to me from my grandfather's collection. I've really been caught up in saw history lately, and wish I could more knowledgeably respond to your insights. Thanks for the knowledge you've shared thus far. I hope I have contributed in return in some small way.

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  13. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill, it is interesting for me to see you coming around and back to the beginning of our conversation about the terminology.

    Now, if you are in any way serious about saws and gaining some knowledge about them, you need to buy some books. For English saws and sawmakers get a British Saws and Sawmakers from 1660 by Simon Barley (yes, the same Simon you met on this forum) and Tweedale's Directory of Sheffield Cutlery Manufacturers 1740-2013: Revised and Expanded 2nd Edition by Geoffrey Tweedale. These two book are complementing each other and are a "must" for anybody interested in English tools.

    For American saws there is nothing more substantial then Hand-saw makers of North America by Erwin L Schaffer. It is older (1999) and limited publication, but this is all we have. Once in a while there are some good articles in trade publications like The Chronicle, The Gristmill, and the section on American saws on www.wkFineTools.com.

    Good luck!
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2014
  14. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Wiktor, thanks for the book recommendations. They are all already on my list. Fred highly recommended Simon's book, which is the first on that list.

    I would like to clear up the confusion about my thoughts on terminology. I do have personal preferences - being "handle", "register plate", and "label screw". A month ago, it would have been "handle", "escutcheon" and "medallion". I've already learned a lot. However, I believe historical precedence should outweigh my personal preferences.

    Simon noted earlier in the thread, "there are clear terms used in the Sheffield saw making industry". I believe this to be true for every industry. For example, people often call concrete "cement", where cement is actually just one ingredient in concrete. Also, people often talk about pouring concrete, where a professional would say that he "placed" concrete, which is the proper term. So, regarding saws, my argument is for the idea that proper terminology comes from the original source, which I understand to be the British saw makers from before Disston's time, when America relied heavily on British steel and steel goods - pre ~1850. Didn't the early American saw makers learn their trade mainly from British teachers/masters and learn to apply and enhance that knowledge later on?

    I accepted that "register plate" is the proper term for "escutcheon", because Simon is obviously an authority on British saw history.

    As I read the "bunch of blogs" where "tote" and "handle" are used interchangeably, I have found no cited references for the use of those words as they pertain to saws (I obviously agree - hardly authoritative reading). Summerfi has noted that there was a Sheffield saw related organization's use of "handle" by 1847. Perhaps that is a late indication to earlier standardization of that term. In addition, I have found the term "handle" used in numerous catalogs and advertisements from ~1850 to present, as did Wiktor. On the other side, I did find some modern woodworking/tool books via Google Books using "tote" in my search, including work from Christopher Schwarz, but none referencing the historic use of that term. Beyond Chris Schwarz, being well versed on historical tool literature, and Ray's description of "tote or handle" on this site's Nomenclature page, I have not found anything authoritative for the term "tote". Given the above, I could surmise my hypothesis that "tote" is the older, proper term for "handle" should be dismissed altogether as an applicable term for hand saws. However, my capacity to research this subject is hardly exhaustive, and so far we have nothing earlier to go on.

    As for "medallion", I am guessing that "label screw" is the older, proper term. My thought about screws described as "Fancy" in 1858 is simply this: "Fancy" tended to be an overused adjective in the time period of the given example (2nd half of 1800s), as applied to all sorts of marketed goods. While interesting, unfortunately the 1738 "London Art of Building" page doesn't tell us much, as it lists only "Hand-Saw Screws" per gross, and "Hand-Saw Setts" per dozen. BTW, only Fred noticed that the label screw on my Tillotson saw was blank with exception of the "L" stamped into it. In my opinion, that doesn't bode well for "Fancy Screw" or "medallion" being proper historic terms for "label screw", as both imply a decorative part. Decorative label screws did not show up until mid 19th century? I seem to remember reading that somewhere. At that point, I can see where terms like "fancy" and "medallion" would start to show up.

    At this point, I think the proper terminology "debate" is over for "register plate". However, "tote/handle" and "label screw/medallion" are still up in the air, where summerfi's example is pointing us toward "handle". I am certainly open for more thoughts and evidence.

    Regards,
    Bill
     
  15. David

    David Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    308
    Hello Bill and Wiktor,
    I've been following your conversation with interest. I also agree with the concept of using original trade terms when we can find out what they were, and the uncertainty that has been expressed by everyone participating in this discussion is a problem we all share in trying to find out just what the original terms were.

    One term under discussion that I find difficult to accept for universal use is "register plate" I realize that the plate that seems to me to have caused that term says on it that it is "registered" followed by the single, unique registration number assigned to the use of that side plate by the British government. It's sort of like a patent or copyright number I assume. If the consensus among those of us who concern ourselves with this arcana is to call that particular plate a "register" plate (rather than a registered plate) I'll happily go along with it. But I can't bring myself to call any reinforcing plate on the cheek of a saw a "register" plate without some much more definitive proof.

    With all due respect for Simon's wide and deep historical knowledge, which I gratefully acknowledge and am in as much debt for as anyone, I think we'd be better off, and not risk developing a possible wrong term, by denoting those other varieties of side plates by their physical description; a sand-cast brass side plate, an inlet steel plate, etc. etc.

    As one often says when presenting a slightly contradictory opinion, "Just my two cents".
    Regards,
    David
     
  16. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Bill, the differences of approach in this discussion became obvious with words you use. I operate in the universe of documented historical examples. You, as stated above, injecting "hypothesis" and "guessing". Although these "fancy" (!) terms are popular jargon in some "intellectual" exercises, I am not in a position to either accept or continue the discussion on these terms. The same note applies to your declaration of - "debate" is over for "register plate". If you simply review your statement about "tote" and "handle" from the beginning of this post, you will hopefully understand that I have doubts as to the basis of your declarations.

    Years ago, when I began developing interest in old tools and their history, it was rather difficult for me to understand statement on importance of time in this game I heard from long-time tool collectors. After digging some more into historical material, I realized that my discoveries taking more and more time to complete, and even more time to draw any "final" conclusion from these discoveries. Something to think about...
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2014
  17. wiktor48

    wiktor48 Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    97
    Hello David,

    The point you bring on "register plate" is obvious and I am glad you bringing it up. I was hoping to hear from Simon some expansion of his original statement in this regard, but this did not happened so far. Your comment brings this portion of discussion to specificity I was expecting from Simon, but...

    I fully agree with your point that the term, as far as I know so far, was applied to specific item and expending it to all other instances of any side/decorative plate would be hard to justify.
     
  18. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    David, many thanks for your reply. Your response is exactly what I was hoping for. I think Wiktor and I were getting bored (running out of things to add) writing between ourselves. Your thoughts are a very interesting addition to the topic. Given your insight, should we consider a "register plate" just one variety/type of "escutcheon", where there are many varieties, like those you listed? (11-07-2014 - I removed a couple of lines in this paragraph that no longer sounded l like jokes about myself for assuming.)

    Wiktor, your reply just came in while I was typing, and I agree that nothing can be confirmed by guesses or hypothesis, but they lay the groundwork for discussion. They form the "question" that directs the search for a provable answer. Please note that I also use these words so that my guesses are not construed as fact. I am an engineer - believe me, I know black and white, fact from opinion, and I dislike grey areas and opinion as a final outcome, but had to learn they are necessary to in order to get to an answer. However, using historical documentation from only American sources misses a great deal of saw making history. That is why I have tried so hard to ask for historical evidence prior to the emergence of large American saw makers - which I realize is much harder to find. I have noted that I am not able to research farther, and if you are not either today or tomorrow, no problem. But, it seemed a good time to "regroup", to take the information available thus far and re-form the ideas. Of course, the questions are open to anyone willing to reply, and I am hoping there is someone out there with evidence to prove me either right or wrong. I am so glad David has contributed his "two cents", adding a new element to think about. As much as would like to, I'm not sure we will ever find a real documented answer to the assumptions I've posed, but it seems worthwhile to try.

    Wiktor, please note that "debate" was used because of a post you wrote addressing me - "Bill, although it seems that only you and I left to continue this debate,..." (post #24). You hadn't responded to the issue of "register plate", except to refer to Simon, and neither had anyone else. I can see where I caused confusion with that statement. I apologize to everyone for that.

    Regards,
    Bill
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2014
  19. summerfi

    summerfi Most Valued Member

    Messages:
    184
    This has been an interesting discussion about saw terminology. Handle/tote, escutcheon/register plate/side plate, medallion/label screw, and to that I will add plate/blade. Like the rest of you, I prefer to use the historical terms of origin if they can be determined. However, in thinking about this pragmatically, does it really matter? The purpose of terminology, indeed the purpose of language itself, is communication. If we all understand what the communicator is saying, regardless of which term he uses, then what is the difference? We know that language changes over time. We use words for certain things today that were named by completely different words in times past. Likewise, the same object may be described by totally different words in different geographical regions. This may be confusing at times, but it is inevitable. It is fine to have personal preferences for terminology, as we all do. But trying to standardize terminology so that it never changes, while perhaps an admirable goal, is probably akin to trying to stop the tides.
     
  20. wilji3035

    wilji3035 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Summerfi, I like your addition of "plate/blade" to the list of saw terms. This may sound strange coming from me, but I agree with you - in that I still believe people will continue to use the words they are most familiar with (post #20). Luckily, English is not a dead language like Latin. :) My hope has been to find what the proper historic terms were, more than try to change current terms. I believe that understanding the terms used, in context with the time period they were used, tells us a little bit about the train of thought of the saw makers of that time. The changes that occurred to terminology over time, is a little bit of history of its own. Historic terms are also something to fall back on when a conversation does become confused (although, now, we could just post a picture, I suppose).

    As much as I have asked for any additional historic material to work from, I do have my doubts that there will ever be some set of documents that undeniably answers any terminology questions. But that seems a rather pessimistic view to take. The excitement for me came last night with David's remarks. Maybe he's on to something, at least with the "escutcheon/register plate" and now "side plate" terms. In addition to that, the Merriam-Webster website definition of escutcheon is, "a protective or ornamental plate or flange (as around a keyhole)". The Oxford Dictionary website defines escutcheon as, "(also escutcheon plate) A flat piece of metal for protection and often ornamentation, around a keyhole, door handle, or light switch." I have to think then that there is support for "escutcheon" as at least a logical modern term, where there is an understanding that it could refer to any more specific type of plate. Perhaps that is why "escutcheon" became a common saw related term to begin with? So, then I wonder just how many known specific types of plates were produced, using the idea that physical characteristics (and purpose if necessary) define a type of "escutcheon"? Is there another naming convention that already exists for plates that were not government registered? If so, maybe that is where our historic terms are found for "excutcheon/register/side" plates.

    Seems like one question just leads to another sometimes, but I think it's something to keep in the back of my head while reading.

    Along this line of terminology - I was recently reading a copy of Moxon's Mechanicks Exercises, 3rd ed. 1703. There is a section that states:

    "Master-Workmen, when they direct any of their Underlins to saw such a piece of Stuff, have several Phrases for the sawing of it: they seldom say Saw that piece of Stuff; But Draw the Saw through it; Give that piece of Stuff a Kerf; Lay a Kerf in that piece of Stuff; and sometimes, (but most unproperly,) Cut, or Slit that piece of Stuff: For the Saw cannot be properly said to cut, or Slit the Stuff; but it rather breaks, or tears away such parts of the Stuff from the whole, as the points of the Teeth prick into, and these parts it so tears away are proportionable to the fineness, or rankness of the setting of the Teeth."

    According to Moxon, it's improper to say "cut" a piece of wood?! :confused:

    Regards,
    Bill
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2014