The Fourth Muffineer (London 1700s)

PHOTOS REQUIRED - marks + item
Aguest
contributor
Posts: 1325
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 1:26 am

The Fourth Muffineer (London 1700s)

Postby Aguest » Sat Jun 07, 2014 2:34 am

The Fourth Muffineer:

Image
Image

Aguest
contributor
Posts: 1325
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The Fourth Muffineer (London 1700s)

Postby Aguest » Sat Jun 07, 2014 2:36 am

Just for clarification, the "A P" stamp is on the top, which is next to an erased HB hallmark.

I am not sure if these muffineers are legally overstamped or illegally overstamped.

dognose
Site Admin
Posts: 50679
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: England

Re: The Fourth Muffineer (London 1700s)

Postby dognose » Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:18 am

Hi,

I'm not sure that is an erased 'HB' mark, it looks to me like a worn Lion Passant (upside down in your image). Hester Bateman is likely to be the maker, with the partnership of James Sutton and James Built retailing the item.

From memory, the over-striking of the maker's mark was quite legal, providing that the over-striker was registered with the assay office, as the Sutton/Bult partnership was.

The year of assay was 1780.

See: viewtopic.php?f=74&t=34083&p=87727&hilit=bateman#p87727

and: http://www.925-1000.com/dlLondon6.html#M

and: http://www.925-1000.com/bx_hBateman.html

Trev.

buckler
moderator
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 6:52 am
Location: England, Warwickshire

Re: The Fourth Muffineer (London 1700s)

Postby buckler » Sat Jun 07, 2014 10:48 am

Re overstriking.


I believe that an overstrike is entirely legal if done BEFORE assay , as basically the overstriker would then be the responsible sponsor of the item for assay . If done after ASSAY then I think an overstrike would be an offence , as if any query arose then the original sponsor might not be identifiable.
I doubt if the guys in the 18th century worried very much about it though !


Return to “London Hallmarks”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests