# Thomas Russell & Son ladies wristwatch



## Lancman (Jul 1, 2016)

This was yet another discovery made whilst clearing out my mother-in-law's house. There was no paperwork with this and I'm struggling to figure out the true age of it.










The case is hallmarked 9 carat gold, just 24mm in diameter and is very crude, consisting of two halves which push together, trapping the movement between them. The movement is only held in place by the stem.










The back half is unmarked on the outside.










...but makes up for it on the inside.










If I'm right, that hallmark date letter 'C' tells that the case was made in 1851. Can it really be that old, I wonder?

There are also several handwritten numbers and letters scratched into the metal - possibly done by watchmakers during repairs or servicing.

The dial has clearly seen better days and appears to have been enlarged at some point in time, so maybe came from a different watch.










The lettering says 'Thos. Russell & Son', 'Premier' and 'Swiss Made'.

The movement:










I can find no calibre number. The lettering under the balance wheel just says 'Patented' and 'Swiss Made'.

On the face side you can just make out the word 'Buren'. The manufacturer, perhaps? If so, I don't think Buren were around in 1851, adding to the mystery.










The movement is working but I haven't checked accuracy or power reserve.

From my limited research it seems Russell & Son use to just assemble watches using bought in cases and movements, which seems to be what we have here, but I'm not convinced the case, dial and movement are all of the same age. Bit of a 'Frankenwatch' perhaps?


----------



## gimli (Mar 24, 2016)

I would say it's a 1940s watch, Maybe 1930s but I'm not sure if they made such watches back then. Perhaps late 1930s...


----------



## Lancman (Jul 1, 2016)

gimli said:


> I would say it's a 1940s watch, Maybe 1930s but I'm not sure if they made such watches back then. Perhaps late 1930s...


 I think you're probably right as the case patent number dates from 1926:



> _*269,722. Dennison Watch Case Co., Ltd., and Burrows, C. W. April 6, 1926*.
> Cases. A watch case formed in two separate parts 4 and 9 carrying the movement and glass respectively, has coacting flanges 5 and 10 which engage frictionally over a comparatively large surface, the engagement, being limited by a ridge 6 on the lower part 4. The bracelet hinges or loops, in the case, of a wrist watch, are on the upper part 9._










​

​

​
So what date is that hallmark showing?


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

That is definitely not the 1851 B'ham hallmark, different shape. C can be 1902, 1927, 1952 and 1977 with *1927* being the most likely. The cartouche looks wrong but the font looks about right so that would be my guess.


----------



## Karrusel (Aug 13, 2016)

I would go for 1927 also but would agree ^^^^ the cartouche is strange ?

From 1898 H Williamson Ltd of Coventry owned Buren & generally used Coventry, Birmingham case makers (such as Dennison).

From 1932 Rotheram & Sons, Coventry, took over the import/distribution of Buren as H Williamson Ltd had folded.


----------



## scottswatches (Sep 22, 2009)

i'm beginning to understand that not all hallmarks are done perfectly - but concur with 1927. It matches the other clues too.

The case design may be 'crude', but it is well made and has been effective for 90 years


----------



## gimli (Mar 24, 2016)

Also, it doesn't have incabloc which was invented in 1934 so it could have been made prior to that period. There are watches made after 1934 that don't have incabloc as well but it's a possibility.


----------



## Lancman (Jul 1, 2016)

Thanks for the information gents. 1927 would certainly appear to be the front runner given the other clues, but this is what the hallmark should look like:










Compared to what we have:










So whoever stamped it must have been having an off day.


----------

