Identification of a Gold 18k Pocket Watch. Please, help.

Hi everyone!!I have a gold pocket watch dated around 1880 with the FM hallmark of Frank Moss.
The case was made by him. I was wondering if it was a IWC watch as at that time, he traded with them.
Please, I would be very happy if anyone could give me with some information.
 Attached images and information.
 Many thanks!! and have a great weekend!!Frank Moss1884..1887
(registered Aug 1882)Watch caseFrederick Street, Birmingham www.iwc.com/forum/en/discussion/60395/ Early IWC watches with British hallmarksI had an interesting discussion with Adrian van der Meijden, a well known IWC collector and expert, concerning a number of early IWC watches. During the Seeland period most IWC watches were sold in the UK and their cases have UK hallmarks. This has lead to speculation that UK made cases were sent to Switzerland to be used in these watches. But this would not have made financial sense; UK wages were higher than Swiss wages at the time, and UK made cases would have been more expensive than Swiss made cases. As I noted above, Seeland was trying to cut costs and produce watches that were cheaper to make than those of F.A. Jones; it would not have made economic sense to import expensive UK made cases. So how did the Seeland watches get UK hallmarks?From the year 1300 in the reign of King Edward, all gold and silver items made in the UK have been required to meet legally defined standards of purity, i.e. minimum gold and silver content. Items were tested (assayed) to prove that the purity of the gold or silver met required standards and items, at first only silver but later gold as well, were marked to show that they had passed the test. From the middle of the sixteenth century this was done at the hall of the Goldsmiths Guild in London, hence the term "hallmarked".At first the law applied only to items made in the UK and there were no explicit requirements for assaying and testing foreign made items. An Act of 1738 extended the law to all items that were "exposed to sale", which by implication would include foreign items, but this implied requirement was not enforced, probably because of the small volume of such trade. However, in 1842 a proposal to reduce the duty on imported items lead to protests that cheaper foreign items of lower purity would undermine UK trade, so a statute was passed requiring that imported items be assayed and marked in the same was as UK made items. This made the law explicit that foreign items must have hallmarks that were indistinguishable from those of UK made items! A consequence of this was that dealers, not just makers, were for the first time allowed by law to register with the assay offices to send items for assay and touch, a privilege that the assay offices had previously restricted to only members of goldsmiths guilds.Swiss watch makers were not slow to see the opportunities that this presented and sent unpolished watch cases to the UK to be hallmarked, then returned to Switzerland to be finished and made into complete watches. These watches were then often sold as English made watches, because at the time English watches were very well regarded and commanded high prices. Naturally the English watchmakers objected to this and so a law was passed in 1867 that all foreign made gold and silver items should be marked with an "F" in addition to the normal UK hallmarks.The early IWC watches in Adrian's collection, such as the one pictured here, have full UK hallmarks for sterling silver, but do not have the "F" mark even though were hallmarked after 1867. IWC factory records for these watches contain both the watch movement serial number and the watch case serial number, showing that the movements were definitely put into the watch cases at the IWC factory in Schaffenhausen.   
IWC watch with the sponsor's mark of Antoine Castelberg. Image © Adrian van der MeijdenWhen I examined the hallmarks in the cases of five of Adrian's IWC watches, this is what I found:·                   Two of the cases have Chester Assay Office hallmarks with date letter "o" for the hallmarking year 1877/1878 and "r" for the hallmarking year 1880-1881 (hallmarking years do not correspond to calendar years but start when a new Warden of the assay office was elected). The sponsor's mark is "AC" incised within an oval. This mark was registered at the Chester Assay Office on 17 October 1877 and was the mark of Antoine Castelberg of 58 Holborn Viaduct, London, a watch dealer and importer from La Chaux-de-Fonds. Castelberg had several London addresses, his sponsor's mark was first registered with the London Assay Office on 25 August 1875 with the address 90 Newgate Street London. On 2 August 1876 he moved to 58 Holborn Viaduct. You can see the case back of one of these watches in the picture. The incised mark registered to Castelberg is unusual because UK makers usually used cameo (relief) marks like the other assay office marks.·                   Two of the cases have Chester Assay Office hallmarks, both with the date letter "p" for the hallmarking year 1878/1879. The sponsor's mark is "FP" incised within an oval shield very similar to Antoine Castelberg's mark. This was the mark of Fritz Petitpierre, 58 Holborn Viaduct, London. This mark was registered at the Chester Assay Office on 18 June 1878. Petitpierre was also a watch dealer and importer from Chaux-de-Fonds, and a business partner of Castelberg's, sharing the same London address.·                   One case has Birmingham Assay Office hallmarks with the date letter "i" for the hallmarking year 1883/1884. The sponsor's mark is FM in a rectangular shield. This is probably the mark of Frank Moss, 48 Frederick Street, Birmingham. Frank Moss was a partner in the firm of J. Blanckensee & Co., watch manufacturers and importers. In 1876 Joel Blanckensee & Co. registered a trademark of a a bee and were listed as chronometer and watch manufacturers, importers of Swiss (Geneva) watches ; Regent Street, Birmingham, England. The bee trademark is seen on watches produced by IWC during the period that Louis Tschopp was Technical Director.So four of the five watches had the sponsor's marks of the watch dealers and importers Castelberg and Petitpierre. These gentlemen were not watchmakers or watch case makers and had no factory, so these cases were not made by them. If the cases had been made by an English watch case maker they would carry his sponsor's mark. Castelberg and Petitpierre would not have arranged for English made cases to be hallmarked because there was no need to, the case maker could do that, and there was always a risk that an item might fail the assay and be broken. The Castelberg and Petitpierre sponsor's marks show that these cases were not made in the UK, and it seems most likely that they were imported from Switzerland and hallmarked before being returned to Switzerland to be assembled into watches in the IWC factory.The fifth case has the sponsor's mark of Frank Moss, a watch importer. It is known that in the period after the second collapse and the departure of Seeland that there was a considerable stock on hand at the factory of cased and uncased movements and that Rauschenbach sold these off cheaply to bring in much needed cash. The fifth watch appears to be one that was sold uncased and was put into an English made case in Birmingham by Moss.The question remains as to why the four Swiss cases did not carry the "F" for "Foreign" as required by the 1867 British Act of Parliament. I asked The Goldsmiths' Company about this, and I learned that there was considerable difficulty in enforcing the 1867 act, to the extent that hardly any items of silver are known to bear the "F" mark until the early 1880s. The reason for this is that there was no provision made to ensure that the law was complied with, and UK agents of Swiss manufacturers continued submitting Swiss made cases for assay without declaring that they were made abroad. The assay offices were not able to check this and so the cases were hallmarked as if they were British made, without the foreign "F" mark. This situation continued until 1888 when a new Act required a statutory declaration of the country of origin for all watch cases submitted for assay and that that imported watch cases be marked with new "Foreign" hallmarks.I understand from Adrian that Seeland designed his new cheaper calibres to look like existing British and American models. It was possible that these watches in cases with a full set of British hallmarks could then be passed off as being British made and thereby command a higher price. At the time, British made watches were regarded as the best available. This was certainly the sort of thing that Seeland would have been capable of doing - perhaps this was why he valued his IWC stock above its market value, he thought the watches could be sold as British made and thereby command a higher price?Funnily enough, these Swiss watch cases are actually unusual in having UK hallmarks at all although UK required that imported watches should be hallmarked. The Goldsmiths' Company were reluctant to mark cases that were not made by their members, and the UK Customs officials misinterpreted the law and thought that watches that were imported complete, that is rather than an empty case, were exempt from hallmarking. This wasn't discovered until 1905, and the law wasn't changed until 1907, so the vast majority of Swiss watches imported into the UK before July 1907 don't have UK hallmarks. You can read more about this on my "Assay and Hallmarking" page. (www.vintagewatchstraps.com/IWC.php#IWCSeeland )  The 1867 Customs Amendment ActIn the 1867 Customs Amendment Act11 a requirementto stamp a letter “F” in an oval shield alongside the usualhallmarks on all foreign-made silver and gold items wasintroduced. That statute was repealed by the CustomsConsolidation Act, 1876;12 but the requirement for the “F”stamp on foreign items was reenacted in the same wordsby the Customs (Tariff) Act 1876.13 I have been unable toestablish the reason for this new requirement or who wasbehind it, but I am sure that it was not watchmakers orwatchcase makers, for reasons that will become plain later.I have never seen a piece of silver with this foreign “F”alongside the normal hallmarks, so I asked The Goldsmiths’Company about this and was told that there wasconsiderable diffi culty in enforcing the 1867 Act, to theextent that hardly any items of silver are known to bearthe “F” mark until the early 1880s.14 The same problemexisted with these acts as with the 1842 Act. Parliamenthad laid down a law without mechanisms for its implementationor specifi cally charging anyone with putting itinto effect. It seems rather extraordinary that this couldhappen, but communications then were not as effectiveas they are today.Watches with the “F” mark appear to be even rarerthan the comments by the Goldsmiths’ Company suggest;Philip Priestley told me that in handling more than4,000 watches over 30 years he has seen only one exampleof the “F” mark on an imported watch and case.15Watches with foreign-made cases with British hallmarksdated after 1867 certainly do exist, but from the rarity ofthe “F” mark it is evident that agents of foreign manufacturerswere able to send items for hallmarking withoutdeclaring that they were of foreign manufacture.Examples of this are the so-called IWC “Seeland”watches, produced while Frederic Francis Seeland was incharge of the IWC factory between 1876 and 1879. TheSwiss-made cases of some of these IWC Seeland watcheshave British hallmarks but without the letter “F.”I examined the hallmarks in fi ve IWC Seeland watchesthat Adrian van der Meijden owns. They all have dateletters showing that they were hallmarked between 1877and 1884. Four were hallmarked at Chester and one atBirmingham. Two carry the sponsor’s mark “AC” incisedwithin an oval: the mark of Antoine Castelberg of 58 HolbornViaduct, London. Castelberg fi rst registered his markwith the London Assay Offi ce on August 25, 1875,16 andseems to have represented himself as an English watchmanufacturer; he even appeared as part of the Britishrepresentation at the Sydney International Exhibition in1880.17 However, in a court case at the Old Bailey, he saidin evidence that he was a watch dealer and importer atChaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland, and Clerkenwell.18 Castelbergwas certainly not a watchcase maker, and the presenceof his sponsor’s mark in these watchcases show thatthey were made in Switzerland.Two carry the sponsor’s mark “FP” incised within anoval shield, very similar to Antoine Castelberg’s mark.This was the mark of Fritz Petitpierre, an associate ofCastelberg’s and also of 58 Holborn Viaduct, London.The fi fth, the one marked in Birmingham, has a sponsor’sFM in a rectangular shield. This is probably the mark ofFrank Moss, 48 Frederick Street, Birmingham, a partnerin the fi rm of J. Blanckensee & Co., watch manufacturersand importers. As with Castelberg, Petitpierre and Mosswere certainly not watchcase makers, and the presence oftheir sponsor’s marks in these watchcases show that theytoo were made in Switzerland. (www.incorporationofgoldsmiths.org/content/media/David-Boettcher-Hallmarking-of-Watches-Imported-into-Britain-during-the-Nineteenth-and-Early-Twentieth-Centuries-NAWCC-Watch-Clock-Bulletin-November-December-2014.pdf)   

The story you are referring to was written by David Boetcher after had seen some calibre Seeland watches in British hallmaked silver cases.
The watch you you show is 100 % sure not an  IWC.
Regards,
Adrian v d Meijden,
(alwaysiwc).

Hi Adrian,

Many thanks for your post. Please, could you help me to identify the brand or mark of this wathc?
I would be very grateful.
Many thanks in advance.
Have a good weekend

We (us IWC Collectors) cant help here, for as Adrian correctly says, this watch is for sure (100% sure), not an IWC.

We do have some members here, like Cellar who are expert on other Manufacturers as well... so you may get lucky.

calling on Cellar

This is a for the period typical Stauffer & Son from La Chaux de Fonds.

Regards

Th. Koenig