Help needed to date this silver walking stick Top

merl · Post by **merl** » Mon May 21, 2007 11:08 am

Hi all,

I was trying to discover the Date of this silver topped walking stick , that has been in my family for a long time,

Was hoping to get a date of manufacture, so I could pin point who in my family probably owned it first .

The Markings are very worn, the "sterling silver " can be read, but the manfacter mark if thats what it is, is hard to make out, it is the Letters to the left !

Have looked at alot of different makers marks, but cannot find this one to be able to date it ,

Any help ,will be much appreciated >

Thanks ....

Sorry about the Detail of the picture, not the easiest thing to photograph .
.

Waylander · Post by **Waylander** » Tue May 22, 2007 8:47 am

Don't think it is English - no Lion Passant etc. As an Australian, I often see pieces of Aussie silver marked "Sterling Silver" - don't know how much of a good rule it is, but thought the US used "Sterling" as c.f. with "Sterling Silver".

Maker's mark looks to be ?L/E& C (C = Company?)

Waylander
.

Post by **admin** » Wed May 23, 2007 4:12 pm

Hi,
At a glance, I thought it could not be British, then realized that the knop, generally lightweight and pitch filled, might fall into the "exempt from marking" category. This would have left hallmarking up to the discretion of the maker.
There is a good match for the maker in Culme, R. Landstone & Co. listed as stick mounters, reg. in 1904.

Regards, Tom
.

Waylander · Post by **Waylander** » Thu May 24, 2007 9:19 am

Tom, think you are right, although I have often seen stick "heads" that are fully marked. Guess it depends on the weight of the piece?

Waylander
.

Post by **admin** » Thu May 24, 2007 10:47 am

Hi,
Mountings weighing less than ten pennyweights (.5 ounce), anything too thin to support marking or any item liable to be damaged by hallmarking were exempted. Exemption was not mandatory, it just left it to the discretion of the maker. I think many makers chose to have exempted items marked as it gave the items a tad more prestige and made them more saleable.

Regards, Tom
.

merl · Post by **merl** » Wed May 30, 2007 5:39 pm

Thanks all,

If the date of 1904 is correct , then at least I know no, relatives before that time owned it !

Thanks again
.