Menu
Homeof the Sewalot SiteByAlex I AskaroffForantique and vintage sewing machinesby Alex AskaroffBookDating Singer Sewing Machines From Serial NumberAlex has spent a lifetime in the sewingindustry and is considered one of the foremost experts of pioneeringmachines and their inventors. He has written extensively for trademagazines, radio, television, books and publications world wide. You mayhave seen him on The Great British Sewing Bee or How The VictoriansBuilt Britain.Thesimple guide to dating your early Singer sewing machines.(Whereyour Singer has two serial numbers always choose the larger ofthe two to date your machine )Singermachine serial number dating GuidePlease note this is only a guide, not gospel!Some people mail me to say they have a receipt from 1950 so how could myguide have their machine as made in 1948 or 1949? Letme explain. The production runs atfactories like Kilbowie werecomplex and long. The castings were marked with the serial numberduring manufacture.
A product displaying the Serial Number W-117683 was manufactured in 1970. A product displaying the Serial Number JC122376 was manufactured in 1982. A product displaying the Serial Number LG124622 W was manufactured in 2006. Actress and singer Doris Day made nearly three dozen films and more than 600 recordings. At the height of her career, she topped both the billboard and the box office charts. Day died of pneumonia.
The machines were miles fromcompletion, packing and delivery. Then there isdelivery to the depot, storage, sales to the shop,and eventually sales to the customer.The se factors all effect the purchase/receipt date, but not the date ofmanufacture.For example during WW2 it is a well know fact theSingers were making guns and bullets as well as sewing machines. Onlywhen they could spare the time would they continue with sewing machineproduction. I have come across a woman who bought hermachine brand new in 1946 yet the casting was clearly made in 1939 justbefore the outbreak of WWII. During World War Two Singer had back ordersfor over three millions machines!Now to the datingAll Singers up until 1900 have no letter prefixand came from several factories around the world. The company cleverlymanaged their production from all factories to coincide with the serialnumber flow. If you fancy a read on the collapse ofSinger have a go at my blog,Why two serialnumbers?Very early Singers from the1850's up until the start of prefix letters in 1900 had two serialnumbers.
There is a lot of controversy over why there were two lots ofnumbers. The most likely answer is that the larger number was the totalnumber of machines produced by Singers when they only had a fewfactories and could keep up with, and control, the production output fromBritain and America. The lower number may be the total production run upuntil that number of that particular model range.Singers have never manage toshed light on these two numbers especially as many have the last threedigits the same!Note: when two serial numbersare on the machine use the larger of the serial numbers.Anyway here goes nothing. Thanks to your website, I have beenable to date my $2 Trash and Treasure Singer as a 1939 model,manufactured in Scotland. It needed a good soaking in kerosine after Ibought it about 12 years ago, but it continues to give good service inmy workshop/garage.
Thanks for th e researchyou have done.Regards,Brian HarrisHello Alex,I have tried a lot of places to date my singer and finally ran intoyour website. I found mine was made in1897. Thank you so very much for all the hard work you put intosetting up your page.BarbaraA magical tale for all ages.
Singer’s Jewish parents immigrated to from in 1938 to escape persecution following the. Three of Singer’s grandparents were subsequently killed in the. Growing up in, Singer attended Scotch College and the, where he earned a B.A. In and (1967) and an M.A. In philosophy (1969). In 1969 he entered the, receiving a B.Phil.
Degree in 1971 and serving as Radcliffe Lecturer in Philosophy at University College from 1971 to 1973. At Oxford his association with a vegetarian student group and his reflection on the of his own meat eating led him to adopt. While at Oxford and during a visiting professorship at in 1973–74, he wrote what would become his best-known and most influential work, (1975).
Returning to Australia, he lectured at La Trobe University (1975–76) and was appointed professor of philosophy at Monash University (1977); he became director of Monash’s Centre for Human Bioethics in 1983 and codirector of its Institute for and Public Policy in 1992. In 1999 he was appointed Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human Values at.In keeping with ethical principles that guided his thinking and writing from the 1970s, Singer devoted much of his time and effort (and a considerable portion of his income) to social and political causes, most notably animal rights but also and relief, and reproductive rights ( see also ).
By the 1990s his intellectual leadership of the increasingly successful animal rights movement and his controversial stands on some bioethical issues had made him one of the world’s most widely recognized public. Singer’s work in applied ethics and his activism in politics were informed by his, the tradition in ethical philosophy that holds that actions are right or wrong depending on the extent to which they promote or prevent. In an influential early article, “ Famine, Affluence, and Morality” (1972), occasioned by the catastrophic cyclone in Bangladesh in 1971, he rejected the common prephilosophical assumption that physical proximity is a relevant factor in determining one’s obligations to others. Facts Matter. Support the truth and unlock all of Britannica’s content.The publication of Animal Liberation in 1975 greatly contributed to the growth of the movement by calling attention to the routine torture and abuse of countless animals in factory farms and in scientific research; at the same time, it generated significant new interest among ethical philosophers in the moral status of nonhuman animals. The most-important philosophical contribution of the book was Singer’s penetrating examination of the concept of “ ” (which he did not invent): the idea that the species membership of a being should be relevant to its moral status.
To the contrary, argued Singer, all beings with interests (all beings who are capable of enjoyment or suffering, broadly construed) deserve to have those interests taken into account in any moral that affects them; furthermore, the kind of consideration a being deserves should depend on the nature of the interests it has (what kinds of enjoyment or suffering it is capable of), not on the species it happens to belong to. To think otherwise is to a exactly to or sexism. Speciesism was extensively explored by ethical philosophers and eventually became a familiar theme in popular discussions of animal rights in a variety of forums.