Hello all, I have probably come unstuck this time. Again an unamed saw that had to be older than its description (circa the Melhuish era). And a saw of sufficient quality that it had to be named. And so I believe it is (both). The problem is that the only mark on it that is discernable is "Cast Steel" with there being only partial first and last letters of the maker, and possibly the 1st and 3rd letters of "Warranted" So I am stuck. Judging from the placement of the marks and their simplicity, the saw is possibly around the late 1820's/early 1830's. There is no dot in cast steel and so this would put it rather later than earlier. The name probably has between 6 and 8 letters and the last may be L or T. The first may or probably may not be an M. So not a lot to go on and too many in HSMOB to be of any real help. From the looks of the photo, and trying to decipher shadows, it is possible to guess Marshall from it and there is one that fits the dates. Grasping at straws, any suggestions?? Fred
Hey Fred, et al Wonderful looking saw that I'm sure each of us would love to have, identification frustrations or not. One of those behemoths that might require a second can of spinach to get that baby started. My first inclination to a maker is in the third pic which seems to suggest the last few letters might be a very faint "ELL" . That would then be "Mitchell and Co" and also put it quite nicely in the date period you figure it is. You can reference a saw I asked about in 2009 and see the similarities in the handle even though my saw only has two saw nuts. I would guess yours is a larger saw and required a little extra support, thus the three nuts. Ray did a little digging and came up with some possibilities on the Mitchell history. Again only a guess Fred but this is my initial take on it. Enjoy it Fred, I'm envious. Joe S.
Joe, Thanks for the post, and I can see what you mean about possibly, but very remotely possibly an ELL at the end of the name. However I am almost certain that there is no & Co. after the name and so this cuts the options down markedly. The serifs on my saw are also different to those on yours, but that may be expected with yours being so much earlier but the handles do have similarities with the obvious "London Flat" exception. I would have to go for a much later date for a Mitchell (only) or go for Robert Mitchell 1837 to 1855 and I am not so sure that it looks as late as 1837 even. I am sticking my neck out here because a date around the turn of the 20th C (Melhuish era as espoused by the seller) would give me more Mitchells to choose from. But it just does not look as late as that. And again, looking at shadows only, I may be barking up the wrong tree entirely. I think that I am resigned to not knowing. Never mind. The saw is a fair size - 19 1/4 inches along the blade but do not be too envious as the hairpin bend in the blade will need a lot of work before it could ever be used. And, of course your saw is probably 30 or 40 years older than mine. Now a saw of that age is real envy. And I am still kicking myself for being outbid on the Kenyon Hutton and Co. A mark that is not even in HSMOB. Fred
Fred, You would have a better sense of what you have and the looking at the "shadows" with the light and the feel of the saw. I could see it being as late as 1837 so I wouldn't rule out Mitchell somehow. You can't beat youself up over the Kenyon Hutton. You weren't the only one who thought long and hard about it but there were some real issues. I have come to the realization that another will appear. I picked a Kenyon Sykes just a month prior to the auction for a 1/4 the price and in much better shape. (it is a little later but it suits me just fine for the time being.) Enjoy the adventure and the hunt. Joe S.