ORME, John I (Grimwade p.610)

[silverly]

7 July 1742 John Orme of Saint Andrews Holborn watch chain maker paid apprentice duty for John Howbroyd.

28 August 1742 John Orme of Saint Pauls Covent Garden silversmith paid apprentice duty for John son of John Williams of Monmouth.

[silverly]

12 October 1742 John Orme of the Parish of Saint Andrews Holborn Watch Chain Maker will proved at London. There is no mention of a son in this will. John Orme's working tools belonging to his trade were left to his son in law Henry Phillips Watch Chain Maker.

[agphile]

I guess I'm stating the obvious but I take it that this means there were two contemporaneous John Ormes, the watch chain maker of St Andrew's parish who died in 1742 and the other of St Paul's parish who is presumably the one that Heal records as still being in business in 1743 and 1744. I'm trying to pin down the likely owner of an IO mark on a spoon of c.1750 (not matching the mark for John Orme 1 listed in Grimwade so presumably from the lost register). The St Pauls John Orme is the best I can come up with.

[silverly]

I'm not in a position to verify any of the information from my posts at this time, but as a guess, I'd say there was only one person involved. I will be able to look into the matter further in the coming year.

[agphile]

Thanks Silverly. It is Heal's references to a John Orme in business in 1743 and 1744 that make me think there were two of the same name. If your references all prove to be for the one person it still leaves the 1743/44 silversmith as a possibility for my IO mark. It would be nice if your research proves to have turned up a bit more about about him. Be that as it may, it is incredibly helpful to be able to access all the information you provide for which I am most grateful.

[silverly]

John Orme is listed as a Silversmith at Exeter Street in the Parish of Saint Martin in the Fields in the 1749 London Poll, so I was wrong. I don't see anymore on this second John Orme as yet, but I'll keep looking.

[agphile]

Thanks, Silverly. It was good of you to go to the trouble of checking this.

David