nice tongs -- right maker? right date?

[wev]

Ran across these sorting out a box of odds and ends



The marks are quite clear and there's a date letter, which appears to be a lower case i.




That doesn't look like a London lion -- or does it? Is it 1784, George Smith II? Someone else?

[buckler]

Marks of George Smith are varied and some, like this one , are very similar to other GS's. However this does look like one of George Smith II of Huggin Lane. I've a very similar one on several buckles which I've catalogued as "Probably George Smith "
However the Lion Passant and the "l" puzzles me greatly. That oval lion does not look like any pre-duty one for London I've ever seen. There's a small oval one seen on tongs from the early 1790's but not like this. Although we know George Smith was a bit of a rogue, if he had any spurious assay stamps he was never caught,and would have been bright enough to get the details right.
So one puzzle . The odd "l" or "i" or even numeral 1 is also odd. Pre duty tongs did not have date letters and my only thought is that this may be a workmans mark.
Very baffled .

[spobby]

Is that a repair mark above the lion & letter?
Regards
John

[dognose]

I believe what you can see is the solder line which is part of the standard three-part construction of cast tongs. What is of concern is the placement of the Lion Passant, one would expect to see it struck directly on the solder line. The reason for this position of the mark was to prevent a post assay seperation of the piece to allow a sub-standard part to be let in.

Trev.

[buckler]

Good point Trev. Looks even more odd to me.