|
Clearly, the wealth of information available to us today through books,
publications, and the Internet seems endless, but the fact of the matter is
that there is relatively little information on most clock and watchmakers and
an abundance of information on relatively few. I suppose it is not surprising
to realize that being in the right place at the right time has a lot to do
with the names that survive the test of time—that and a critical mass of
wealthy patrons, perseverance, long life, and let’s not leave out true genius.
Many, however, lay in relative obscurity until we find reason to appreciate
their artifacts and research their contribution. This article is about one
such watchmaker working in London at the end of the eighteenth century, John
De Lafons. Recently I had occasion to purchase a clock-watch signed John De
Lafons, London, No. 1112. I was immediately taken by its fine craftsmanship
and unique dial. Clock-watches, which strike each hour and the quarters, like
a striking clock, are relatively scarce. This watch, like many made for the
Middle East and Turkey, was designed to appeal to local tastes. It sports a
second hand in the form of a snake, with cut stones and an equally glitzy
case. These features and the Turkish numbers clearly identify this watch as
being made for the Turkish market. The off-set center wheel for the time
completes the symmetrical dial face, which also has calendar days and
strike-silent hands, in addition to the “snake” second hand that rotates
around the outer dial edge (Figure 1). The dial is signed Royal Exchange
London, which was established in 1566, and so named by Queen Elizabeth in 1571
to compete with, and later overtake, the leading European marketplace at the
time, Antwerp. Located at the corner of Threadneedle and Cornhill, and flanked
by the Bank of England and the London Stock Exchange, the Royal Exchange was
at the center of English commerce and world trade by the time this watch was
made in about 1805.
John De Lafons
There were several De Lafons working in London in the eighteenth century.
The maker of this watch, John De Lafons, worked at Pinner’s Court, Old Broad
Street, from 1790 to 1794; Threadneedle Street in 1800; the corner of
Bartholomew Lane in 1810; and at St. Swithin’s Lane in 1815. Clockmakers’
Records, courtesy of British Horology Chapter 159, indicate that De Lafons was
free of the Clockmakers’ Company on July 6, 1789. The records also indicate
that he had two apprentices: George De Reimer, for seven years ending about
1788, and Henry Peter Burning De Lafons (his son) in 1807.
In 1801, John De Lafons received 30 guineas from the Society of Arts for
inventing a new remontoire escapement, and in 1805 he patented a marine alarm
chronometer. Ironically, one of the most comprehensive works on De Lafons’
contribution can be found in Rees’s Clocks, Watches and Chronometers, where
his escapement is detailed—somehow Rees neglected to put John De Lafons into
the index! Through good fortune, I was able to acquire the original 1802
Society of Arts Transactions that announces the award and details what Lafons
describes as a more economical and perfected constant-force escapement design
than those of Mudge and Haley. Clearly, De Lafons was a very capable
watchmaker; however, his contribution in the literature ends with this
description.
The Watch
This watch employs a verge escapement, not the escapement invention that
was the subject of the Society of Arts award. Verge escapements were not
unusual for export trade, even at this late date, due to their reliability and
ease of maintenance. The Lafons watch is large and fairly typical of the early
1800s, and is of high quality construction. If one were only to see the back
side of the watch it would be rightfully claimed as English, however, viewed
from the front, under the dial, it would be most certainly identified as
French. It appears that Lafons started with a French ebauch; the case, dial,
and all the motion and striking work are of French design. The time train is
English, and the whole was finished in London, where he worked.
The calendar section of the watch is what is known as “simple” since the
setup is for a 31-day month every month, with corrections being made for
months of a lesser number of days. This is very consistent with most of the
calendar watches of the period, which seem to be almost exclusively of French
or Swiss origin.
The clock-watch striking mechanism is a different matter altogether (Figure
3). Both the hour and quarter hammer blows are determined by one wheel in the
upper right of the dial (A). It has 12 sets of steps with each set having four
notches, three of which are the same and serve to actuate the 15-, 30-, and
45-minute quarter-hour strikes. The fourth notch, controlling the hours,
becomes progressively deeper for each hour of striking with 1:00 having the
least depth. The rack tail (C) determines the depth of the step and regulates
the number of blows to be struck. The strike control lever (D) in the center
of the movement is cocked by the cannon pinion and slips off the cannon pinion
with enough force to release the rack (B), which in turn strikes the quarters
or hours as the case may be.
The two hammer levers are located at (F) and strike the respective quarters
in a ting-tang fashion. However, an unusual feature of this watch is the long
hammer lifting lever (E) that extends from the left side of the cannon pinion
all the way to the bottom of the watch, and ensures that only one hammer
strikes the hours. On the hour strike only, a single projection on the cannon
pinion moves the top of this lever to the left, causing the bottom of the
lever to move to the right, which lifts one hammer just enough to prevent it
from actuating. Therefore, only one hammer strikes the hours and the same tone
is heard for each hour struck.
Like most complicated watches of this period, this one reflects a design
that is unique to this watch. Overall, it is an interesting watch both
visually and mechanically. Mechanically—due to the rather unusual combination
of both French and English qualities, as well as the features described—and
visually, due to the outstanding dial and finishing. Is it a French or English
watch? The answer is on the dial “Lafons Royal Exchange London”: Take your
pick.
Bibliography
Baillie, G. H. Watchmakers & Clockmakers of the World, Volume 1.
London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1929.
Britten, F. J. Old Clocks and Watches & Their Makers, Seventh
Edition. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1956.
Chamberlain, Paul M. It’s About Time. New York: Richard R. Smith,
1941.
Rees, Abraham. Rees’s Clocks, Watches, and Chronometers: (1819-1820); a
selection from the Cyclopaedia, or Universal Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and
Literature. Rutland, Vermont: 1970. pp. 255-256.
Transactions of the Society for the Encouragement of Arts (extract),
Volume XVI, 1802. London: James Phillips, 1783. |
 |
Figure 1. The dial of Lafons’ clock-watch,
showing a unique snake second hand and subsidiary dials for the time,
calendar, and strike-silent (the lower two sub-dial hands are
replacements). Signed: DE LAFONS ROYL EXCHANGE LONDON. |
|

|
| Figure 2. A side view of the pierced case. |
|

|
| Figure 3. The clock-watch strike works. |
|

|
| Figure 4. A close-up of the step wheel that controls the quarter hour
and hour strike using 12 series of four steps and rack tail. |
Richard Newman is a diverse collector of British and American clocks with a
special interest in eighteenth- century watches, including pre-mass production
American watches. He became interested in clocks and watches at an early age,
following in the footsteps of his father. The author recalls his father
telling him a wonderful story of attending a New England auction in the early
1950s with his mother and buying their first clock for $6. The price would
have been less if his mom and dad were within sight of each other when the
bidding started, because well into the excitement of twenty-five cent raises
they realized that they were actually bidding against each other. Six dollars
back then was a lot of money, but he sure wishes they had bought a
Massachusetts shelf clock or two! Mr. Newman can be reached at
rrpnewman@yahoo.com.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the following people who contributed information
or assistance in the preparation of this article: David Cooper for performing
the mechanical observations on the clock-watch and for his photographs. Don
Dahlberg, NAWCC Library and Research Center research volunteer, Roger Gendron
and Phil Priestley (British Horology Chapter 159) for helping to locate and
contribute information about John De Lafons.
|