Thread: Stubtail + Smith George?

Hi,
In the directory 1787 (Gales & Martin) it says that Thomas Smith used the mark " +SMITH "
This razor has " +SMITH " AND " GEO SMITH MAKER "


Could this be Thomas' father?
After searching "Sheffield records online" the only logical GEO Smith, father of a Thomas Smith (that could be the one in the 1787 directory) is: George Smith, cutler, father of Thomas Smith (F 1763)
Could this George Smith possibly be: George Smith (F 1734), which father was Thomas Smith (maybe being the grandfather of Thomas Smith (F 1763))?
Maybe this George Smith was also the one that was the MASTER CUTLER OF THE COMPANY OF CUTLERS IN HALLAMSHIRE in 1749 ?

Don't know if I'm right...

That there is a lot of history!!

Jesus that thing looks old.

Originally Posted by artp47

That there is a lot of history!!

Thanks! I hope this information will be confirmed by some well known members

Originally Posted by scag315

Jesus that thing looks old.

Yep, due to its form, older than 1775, and if it is that George Smith, between 1734 and 1775...

Hi Fikira,

Your razor was definitely made by George Smith, elected Master Cutler by the Cutlers Guild in 1749. His company was in Peacroft and was called 'George Smith and Sons' and the makers mark was a cross over the word 'Smith; as shown on your razor. It seems that Thomas must have been one of his sons and used the same mark.

Bailey's Northern Directory list George as 'razor cutler, penknife cutler, cutlery maker, surgical instrument maker'.

From Robert Leaders book:



Note the reference to great grandson Albert Smith, son of George Smith. In 1813 Albert became clerk to Benjamin Burbeary, a Kings Council at Law in the Chancery. His father accompanied him - Reverend George Smith, and the document was witnessed by Thomas Smith, a coincidence, as he appears to be a legal clerk or commissioner of oaths. Reverend George Smith was the Curate of Eccleshall, Sheffield 1804 - 1817. He died in 1817 at the age of 53.



So it appears that George Smith, cutler was father George Smith, reverend. The article says he had many sons, and at least two of these (George Smith & SONS) took up the trade and worked with or for him.

So, a lot of words that merely confirm the relationship (taking consideration of your own research) and a narrowing of the date.

Regards,
Neil

Neil, again so much great information!
Thank you very much!

Kindest regards,

Jethro

Neil,

"Bailey's Northern Directory list George as 'razor cutler, penknife cutler, cutlery maker, surgical instrument maker'."

Do you mean the 1781 Bailey's Directory?

Regards

Found it, In the Bailey's Northern directory 1781 is George Smith as a razor and penknife cutler, Smithfield, Sheffield

And in the article of Lummus there is a razor (that looks a bit younger, not sure...) of around 1775, George Smith & sons, Sheffield,
1770 - 1785, Trademark, cross and "Smith"
I can only presume that Lummus means that George Smith & sons was in business 1770 - 1785 (and that George died in 1785, which
is maybe confirmed by George being in the directory 1781, and Thomas in the directory 1787 with the mark cross and "Smith")

So George Smith alone could mark its products with cross + smith, earlier than 1770

Having said this, Lummus also talks about razors in the Revolutionary time, having a slight hollow in the back of the back of the blade, near the toe. Revolutionary time is 1763 - 1787 if I'm right...

Making this razor dated between 1760 - 1780 ???

Originally Posted by Fikira

Found it, In the Bailey's Northern directory 1781 is George Smith as a razor and penknife cutler, Smithfield, Sheffield

And in the article of Lummus there is a razor (that looks a bit younger, not sure...) of around 1775, George Smith & sons, Sheffield,
1770 - 1785, Trademark, cross and "Smith"
I can only presume that Lummus means that George Smith & sons was in business 1770 - 1785 (and that George died in 1785, which
is maybe confirmed by George being in the directory 1781, and Thomas in the directory 1787 with the mark cross and "Smith")

So George Smith alone could mark its products with cross + smith, earlier than 1770

Having said this, Lummus also talks about razors in the Revolutionary time, having a slight hollow in the back of the back of the blade, near the toe. Revolutionary time is 1763 - 1787 if I'm right...

Making this razor dated between 1760 - 1780 ???

Personally, i wouldn't pay to much attention to Lummus article, full of errors...