Featured Antique Grandfather Clock

Hello, I'm just curious what your thoughts on this grandfather clock I picked up recently. I paid $190 for it, I got it to run, and it chimes on the hour. Wooden case felt unstable when I purchase it, but I was able to get it to be a little better. The brass movement was restored recently from the looks of it. Maker is unknown unfortunately, though engraved in large writing on brass face "Benjamin Goldsmith", along with the town, "Halsham". I am not sure when exactly it was made, but if I had to guess I would say late 18th century, can anyone confirm this? I'm not very familiar with clocks, so I'm not sure if I overpayed or not, what do you guys think?

 

i doubt you overpaid......
the clock guys here will want to see clear pics of the guts...
@afantiques

 

It appears to be a brass dial 30 hour cottage clock from around 1760 -1780, made by Benjamin Goldsmith of Halsham (or possibly Hailsham). It strikes on the hour, the word 'chime' means four or more notes and it only has a single bell. Fine misinformatuon on this other thread, comparing it with a much better 8 day clock is not helpful
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/what/592904-thinking-buying-old-grandfather-clock-value-age.html

More and better pictures would help.

 

Without better pictures, impossible to say something precise for the price, if it functions and you like it it's a bargain for Chrismas.
More seriously the case in oak is "provincial" design and on those I've repaired it seems that they are often a marriage to reuse a good clock mechanism in a functional design more robust and less expensive than make in non english or american woods, the use of oak is a guarantee when you let the clock in a house which is not always maintained in a constant humidity and temperature level as if you live permanently here.

 

Thanks, that is also my post. Now that I joined an antique forum, I figured I would ask here too.

 

That is a handsome clock; very gentlemanly. And...it works!?!

 

Sounds like a Win/Win for you.....you got it to run to boot!!!! What more could you ask for!!!!!

 

Thanks for the reply, here's a photo of the mechanism.

Also, I love your avatar, which seems to be the frame of the Wizard of Oz which is shown on ELO's Eldorado album cover.

 

I was surprised that it did, considering seller said that it was "As-Is", which normally means that it something doesn't work. The only issue when I bought it was that one of the chains slipped off of the gear where it was supposed to be (not sure of the proper term for the gear/pulley in mechanism for chain), and kept it from working properly. With a quick 30 second fix, I was able to easily put it back on that gear and found that it runs fine! I am very happy to find out that it is likely 1760-1780, the seller wrote "C. 1800" on the tag, so this is a bit earlier!

 

Why yes.....Dorothy's shoes protecting her from the Wicked Witch !!

Time for you to throw up a cool avatar too !!! Maybe ???

Nice clock !!!

 

That is what is called a birdcage movement and is an earlier form directly derived from the lantern clocks of the 17th C. so your clock may be a little earlier than I said above. Have you carefulluy checked the dial to see if it says Hailsham?
It is a 30 hour movement so you will need to haul on the chain to lift the weight once a day. There should be a small lead ring weight on the 'spare' loop of chain. This helps maintain tension so the chain does not come off the pully.

It is sometimes possible to detect if a clock is a marriage by looking inside the case for pendulum marks on the back or places where the weight has rubbed and see if they correspond with the existing weight and pendulum positions.
Usually marriages are intended to 'up-cycle' the clock, from 30 hour to 8 day most commonly, and this is and probably was always a very humble clock, any mixing and matching would not have had any but utilitarian intent.

About the striking being out, there is a count wheel for the strike, lift the lever that drops into it and let the clock strike, repeat till hands and strike agree.

 

It's a very simple way to know if the movment is 18 or 19th century, on the pillar on the left of your picture, measure it on each end and in the middle, if there are same value, as it seems to me on the picture, this is machine extruded profile, when you have variations, it's a 18th century movment.

 

Photo from a different angle.

 

Thanks for the great information, its great to hear from an expert about my clock. The lead ring confused me until now, as I had never seen a clock with it, now it makes sense why this clock has it. The clock came with two 10 pound weights, probably iron, and they both look different, and are probably not original. What size weight would this clock originally have came with, is 10 pounds good? I will make sure to fix the striking as soon as I get the chance, as it still is off by an hour two. The face almost surely says Halsham, though I couldn't find a single clock maker by that name there, I even emailed the historical society there and they searched for a Benjamin Goldsmith living there from the 1500's until now and couldn't find one. Perhaps they mean't to write Hailsham? Thanks again for the help!

 

I'm really not an expert about English clocks design but I repair them for a lot of reasons as "official" offices can't make escapement wheels or cut a pinion, repair broken teeth etc…
I have seen a lot of modifications, sometimes the worst possible, your seems to be in very good condition then for the weights you have to try with the small possible and go by 100 grams until it functions.
Use water bottle filled with sand for your tests, this is the simplest way, on the last clock of this type I've repaired, it was about 3 pounds-1,5 kilos for the principal weight and modifying profile of the first wheel give me too much amplitude(pendulum touch the wood on each side), now it functions with only 750 grams perfectly…

 

Some rather dubious information from lecollectioneur. This is certainly a mid 18th C movement, the comment about the movement pillars makes no sense, this type of movement was replaced by the plated movement before the end of the 18th C.
This one may even be a conversion from a verge escapement to an anchor escapement.

The weights are from an eight day clock, you only need one and typically that would be 7 pounds, and usually lead. Using heavier weights is a way to keep a well worn clock running but will increase wear on pinions and pivots, the proper cure is bushing the pivot holes, if the pinions are serviceable. Very worn pivots mean the arbours need re-pivoting which is a much bigger job.
Using the heavy weight will not cause immediate failure, it just means it may be too worn to work in 20 years instead of 100.

The first source for makers is Baillies 'Watch and Clock Makers' and the second volume compiled later by Loomis. I have them around somewhere and will have a look for them later when I am up and about.

There are many unrecorded clock makers in the provinces, and some provincial clock makers appear to have used multiple locations.

 

It seems that you don't well understand my bad english, what I say is if you can find anything made with metal which has the characteristics of an industrial product, it cannot be made before certain dates which are known for each type of profile, if you find on a clock big dimensions perfectly laminated plates they cannot be made before 1770 for example, if you find something of iron/steel without a refinished surface which has metric or english exact dimensions, it cannot be made before 1860-70 too(technology simply doen't exist before), but as I have not this movement in hand I give no information about it but the manner to analyze metal to detect period, false or repaired parts.

A contrario makers of anything living in isolated parts of countries can use techniques a century later than they are produced in big centers and it's always something to consider if you have a doubt, as the use of old measures used later than official are normalized by governments.

For the weight I try to explain exactly the reverse you understood, the best way to preserve your mechanism is not to begin with heavy but with lightest as possible to make function.
More your mechanism was bad maintained heaviest are the weights needed too.

We had a good discussion about that together with the workshop from La-Chaux-de-fonds museum, when a revised movement is made we often have to change the "motor" when it's a spring or the weights to guarantee the preservation for the future of the mechanism when it has to be daily functional because a lot of bad workers use more power to compensate bad repairs, original parts have to be conserved with the time keeper/anything when they are totally original as we made with broken parts.
A lot of things changed in the spirit of conservation, for example, if you look on this link, the polishing of all parts is now considered as a destruction by authorities in conservation because it was never the original finish when made, but a lot are made as that each day and learned certainly now in workshops.

 

It seems that you don't well understand my bad english, what I say is if you can find anything made with metal which has the characteristics of an industrial product, it cannot be made before certain dates which are known for each type of profile, if you find on a clock big dimensions perfectly laminated plates they cannot be made before 1770 for example, if you find something of iron/steel without a refinished surface which has metric or english exact dimensions, it cannot be made before 1860-70 too(technology simply doen't exist before), but as I have not this movement in hand I give no information about it but the manner to analyze metal to detect period, false or repaired parts.

This is true but I see nothing unusual in this movement to suggest a later date, examination of the top and bottom plates would probably show typical brass flaws from the rolling process.


A contrario makers of anything living in isolated parts of countries can use techniques a century later than they are produced in big centers and it's always something to consider if you have a doubt, as the use of old measures used later than official are normalized by governments.

This is true, you can find Scottish verge escapement pocket watches long after the lever escapement was universal further south, and conversely makers in Kent and Sussex tended to use the birdcage movement later than others but cumulatively this clock uses mid 18th C. styles sufficient to date it. I have never seen any gross regional exceptions to this.

For the weight I try to explain exactly the reverse you understood, the best way to preserve your mechanism is not to begin with heavy but with lightest as possible to make function.
More your mechanism was bad maintained heaviest are the weights needed too.

I entirely agree with you that the weight should be as small as will drive the clock reliably, but here we are talking normal practice, not best practice,and the 7 pound weight is standard for 30 hour clocks.