Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
martyn

C.jeffries

Recommended Posts

I don't know much about concertinas, but I like them and history generally and enjoy this section. I do however know a little about Trade History, and thought I might add a contribution. Although its true that tradesmen often did travel to improve themselves both financially and in their knowledge of their trade, as well perhaps to see a little of the world, the true sense of the word is from the French "journee" meaning a whole day- a journeyman originally being a tradesmen paid by the day.

 

In addition I have on my shelves an interesting and perhaps rare publication "Brushmaking by Hand" which gives a comprehensive overview of the hand trade, which essentially it was in the 19c. This shows the trade to be a multi-skilled one. Although at first glance very different from concertina making, I have no doubt that they are, in scale(small workshop, bench operations) and in the dexterity necessary, very similar. I doubt the transfer of skills, in the case of someone interested in and knowledgable about concertinas, would have been difficult, particularly if they were engaged in the luxury part of the trade - toilet brushes, shaving brushes etc. of fine fibres set in hardwood and ivory handles.

The introduction mentions a publication that may be of interest "The Old Trade Unions" by William Kiddier, a brushmaker.

 

I hope some of this is of use to others whose contribution I have enjoyed.

Edited by red

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although at  first glance very different from concertina making, I have no doubt that they are, in scale(small workshop, bench operations) and in the dexterity necessary, very similar. I doubt the transfer of skills, in the case of someone interested in and knowledgable about concertinas, would have been difficult, particularly if they were engaged in the luxury part of the trade - toilet brushes, shaving brushes etc. of fine fibres set in hardwood and ivory handles.

To me, this is a most illuminating comment, thank you.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...my own 28 button, C/G metal-ended C. Jeffries anglo...has very finely done filigree work on the ends -- much better than the work I've seen on Crabb's and Ball Beavon's from around the turn of the century..

For those of you able to get to London, the Horniman Museum has an extremely fine 'White Lion' metal ended Jeffries on display showing the sophistication of the earliest of his output. For those of you not able to visit, I've attached a picture.

post-9-1082131248.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a warning for anyone taking Wes's advice to visit the Horniman, especially if travelling a long way. They are having trouble with the lighting in the display cases and when I was there a couple of weeks ago the concertinas were very poorly illuminated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although its true that tradesmen often did travel to improve themselves both financially and in their knowledge of their trade, as well perhaps to see a little of the world, the true sense of the word is from the French "journee" meaning a whole day- a journeyman originally being a tradesmen paid by the day.

That is the derivation of the word "journeyman", but as I mentioned, a couple of times, it more significantly denotes someone who has "served their time" (usually 7 years) as an apprentice, hence John Crabb was a "Cabinet Maker - Journeyman", or my own great-great-grandfather Earp was a "Bricklayer - Journeyman", around that same time.

 

However, the brushmakers do seem to have had to travel more than most to make a living, there is a very interesting genealogical website for the Society of Brushmakers' Descendants which gives a lot of information about the brushmaking trade, the Society of Brushmakers and "The Tramp", in the article "Brushmaker, or Tramp ?".

 

The "Interests being searched by SBD Members" page shows that one of their members (224) is researching the names Jefferis [sic ?] and Jeffries.

 

... a publication that may be of interest "The Old Trade Unions" by William Kiddier, a brushmaker.

The same website makes frequent reference to the work of Kiddier, and includes his List of Brushmakers, 1790-1890.

Edited by Stephen Chambers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... my late friend Paul Davies (a confirmed Jeffries player) did meet one of them, and (after his stroke, so I couldn't check any details with him) gave me some (cryptic) notes that he had written as a result of this.

 

From what I can make out ... It seems that Charles snr. gave his occupation as ... "Musician" in 1861, when he was living at 70, Devonshire Street, Lisson Grove ...

In fact it is unclear, on Paul's note, if Jeffries was living at 10, or 70, Devonshire Street in 1861, but I have now found him on the 1861 Census at 10, Devonshire Street, Lisson Grove, with his occupation given as "Musician", confirming what Paul wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... my late friend Paul Davies (a confirmed Jeffries player) did meet one of them, and (after his stroke, so I couldn't check any details with him) gave me some (cryptic) notes that he had written as a result of this.

 

From what I can make out ... It seems that Charles snr. gave his occupation as ... "Musician" in 1861, when he was living at 70, Devonshire Street, Lisson Grove ...

In fact it is unclear, on Paul's note, if Jeffries was living at 10, or 70, Devonshire Street in 1861, but I have now found him on the 1861 Census at 10, Devonshire Street, Lisson Grove, with his occupation given as "Musician", confirming what Paul wrote.

And in the meantime I have discovered that they were living at both 10 and 70, Devonshire Street during the 1860s:

 

On the 1861 Census Charles and Maryann Jefferies [sic] were enumerated at 10, Devonshire St., as also were Charles' mother Eliza, and his 8-year old sister Elizabeth Caroline Jeffries. They are listed as two seperate households, seemingly in different rooms of a tenement building.

 

But the Birth Certificates of their first four children, Charles (20th February 1862), Eliza Ann (6th February 1864), William (13th July 1866) and Mary Ann (8th April 1869), all give the address as 70, Devonshire Street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the 1861 Census Charles and Maryann Jefferies [sic] were enumerated at 10, Devonshire St., as also were Charles' mother Eliza, and his 8-year old sister Elizabeth Caroline Jeffries. They are listed as two seperate households, seemingly in different rooms of a tenement building.

 

But the Birth Certificates of their first four children, Charles (20th February 1862), Eliza Ann (6th February 1864), William (13th July 1866) and Mary Ann (8th April 1869), all give the address as 70, Devonshire Street.

Possibility #1: Two different addresses on the same street.

Possibility(?) #2: One address, but even back then 1's and 7's could be mistaken for each other in handwriting. (Are these census records composed of the original notes of the census takers, or later copies into a central registry?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are these census records composed of the original notes of the census takers, or later copies into a central registry?

Hi Jim,

 

The returns were compiled by the enumerator at the time, from the householders' schedules (which were then destroyed). Anyway, number 10 is preceded by 9, and followed by 11, so I don't think there's too much room for error there. :unsure:

 

But in those days people seem to have been always moving from one rented home to another and they have commonly moved by the next census that you look them up on (and the notorious "moonlight flit" was seemingly a common resort if you couldn't pay the rent!)

 

Maybe Charles and Mary Ann simply wanted somewhere bigger/better, in the same area, when they started to have a family?

 

By the way, did you notice how Eliza's name was recorded as Jeffries, and her son Charles as Jefferies, by the same enumerator and when they were living in the same building? (Though probably not helped by the fact that neither could write, signing documents with their "mark".) There are so many potential spellings that the name is an absolute nightmare to research!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The returns were compiled by the enumerator at the time, from the householders' schedules (which were then destroyed). Anyway, number 10 is preceded by 9, and followed by 11, so I don't think there's too much room for error there. :unsure:

I suppose not.

 

...the notorious "moonlight flit" was seemingly a common resort if you couldn't pay the rent!

Unlikely to be the case here, though. Moving from #10 to #70 on the same street doesn't seem a particularly effective way to escape the first landlord's collection agents.

 

By the way, did you notice how Eliza's name was recorded as Jeffries, and her son Charles as Jefferies, by the same enumerator and when they were living in the same building?

There have been periods in history when fixed spellings were not considered important. I've seen claims that Shakespeare never spelled his own name twice the same, and it's rumored that he could write. :D I think we're going through another of those periods now, as evidenced by the internet, where people lose the ability to spell and loose the results upon the world. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...