www.925-1000.com

I can confirm that it is a London import mark. For anybody who is curious about the symbol, it is the astrological sign for the constellation Leo, chosen perhaps because Leo and London both begin with the same letter (?). As it is an import "DP" is unlikely to be the maker, but rather the ...

D&H are Deykin & Harrison of Jennens Row, Birmingham. The pattern is a standard one which would have been in production by several of the manufacturing silversmiths operating in Birmingham. Maybe the company putting the sets together (who would not necessarily have been either Bailey or D&am...

Depending on its size it could be for matches. The ground glass section at the top should allow matches to be struck on it.

This is an electroplate mark of the Forbes Silver Co. See the "F" silverplate marks page on this site.

I agree that it looks like a saucepan lid knob. I have a very similar EPBM tea service, also a family heirloom, but which has unfortunately suffered badly from plate loss. However I think that the teapot lid knob is original. It appears to be made of polished bone: https://www.925-1000.com/pics/Ximg...

Unfortunately it is very unlikely that we will be able to give you detailed information about age and origin of the tea pot. The letters are EPBM which is a generic abbreviation for ElectroPlated Britannia Metal and cannot therefore be pinned down to a specific manufacturer. It probably dates to the...

It's a Dublin import mark for 1960. The maker's mark could be AP&Co - Arthur Price & Co.

Phil

This is a London hallmark. The "pineapple" is the crowned leopard's head mark for the London Assay Office. The date letter "a" is for the assay year 1816/17. The maker's mark is a bit more problematical as it is not complete, but a couple of possibilities are TB, Thomas Wilkes Ba...

The star immediately rules this out from being a British hallmark. "Electric sil" implies that the mount may be electroplated rather than solid silver. What does the label in the case say? Does it give some clue to the origin?

The Birmingham Assay Office's Early Silver Hallmarks pages list this as James George, jeweller, 9 Summer Hill Terrace, Birmingham. Registration date was 24 February 1856. K is the date letter for the assay year 1859/60.

The mark in your link to my site was F over C * L over L but, because of its poor condition, I had mis-read it as F over G * L over L. I have now corrected its location and consequently the link in your post no longer finds the mark. In fact I already had a better example of it: http://www.silvermak...

A similar mark has been identified on another site as Abram Brooksbank & Co of Sheffield.

Yes, this is John Henry Wynn, of 42/44 Hylton Street, Birmingham. He registered a series of near-identical marks with the Chester Assay Office from c1892 through to 1919 where he was initially described as a "ring maker" and then later as a jeweller.

I think it's 1901 so no duty would have been payable. The "b" and "v" are easily confused.

This might help:

This looks like another of those annoying unidentified electroplaters, unless anybody else has any ideas. I read the initials as H & D. It's almost certainly British and would therefore date to the period before the use of the crown was made illegal on electroplate (c1895).

As there is not even any sort of marking indicating electroplate, it may not even be silver plated, just pewter or some other base metal. In addition, as it is not solid silver, the F does not represent a hallmark year; it is some sort of factory code. As the "47" is next to the capacity i...

Of my two pocket references Jackson's Hallmarks Pocket Edition has the "N" and Bradbury's Book of Hallmarks has the "K". The differences seem to arise during the 1631-1654 (2 years out) and the 1655-1678 (1 extra year out) cycles.

I have no explanation for the isolated lion passant. However I can identify the form of the jug as it is a well-known model. It is based on a traditional Jersey (Channel Islands) cream jug. The arms are those of Jersey. The item would most likely have been sold as a souvenir, possibly with other mat...

It looks exactly like 2001 to me. Here is a London 2001 mark from my files for comparison: