AX EXPERT THROWS NEW LIGHT ON THEM.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4295, 2 March 1901, Page 5 (Supplement)

AX EXPERT THROWS NEW LIGHT ON THEM.

Tiiere are a good many lapidaries in existence, but very few who are hiteilsctiuu. scientific and learned men The great majority are mere toilers, with a limited mechanical knowledge, working h., i uie and compass within a narrow groove. Thoi-e is a gentleman in the West Enu ot London—the son of a doctor who lias raised the art of stone-cutting to a nigh .scientific level. He has clients in all parts of the world, besides being largely consulted and employed by the loading Loudon jewellers. Ho, hini. sell, moves in that magic circle called •■society/’ the denizens of which he do« ro much to adorn. The writer was recently fortunate enough to obtain a chat with the lapidary. who imparted some interesting mid instructive information. He said—- " The fashion in gems is most peculiar. Altogether there are about 120 different kinds, but so far as I can discover there is no adequate reason why society’s patronage should be almost exclusivelv coiiiined to so few. There are stones of equal, if not greater, beauty than the diamond, the emerald, the ruby, or the sapphire. I doubt if the wearers themselves can give any explanatory reason for their preference. Take this incident, for instance :

•'Some time back a mdy was in a London jeweller’s shop, inspecting some articles. Her _ eye foil upon a jewelled bracelet, which she picked up with an exclamation of admiration. ‘Oh, I should like this,' said she, ‘how prettily the emeralds are arranged.’ At once the shopman proceeded to inform his customer that the stones were not emeralds, but a particular kmd of garnet. Where, upon the lady replaced the bracelet with a look of disappointment. Her reason v, as a. mere nominal one, for the stones had at first greatly pleased her. As a matter of fact, garnets are less durable than emeralds, hut this is not generally known.

“Here is au instance of a jeweller’s ignorance. A gentleman, once purchased from a London jeweller what he supposed to be a gold ring set with an emerald. For some time he wore this on his finger, when one day a casual acquaintance caught sight of it. He evinced considerable interest about it, and finally offered to purchase it. The price being a good one the ring changed hands. The casual acquaintance was a dealer, and his experienced eye had detected that which had passed unnoticed both by the jeweller and his customer, namely, that the alleged emerald was nothing less than a green diamond.”

“How does colour influence the value of a stone ?”

“In its relation to the accepted or correct colour. Gems are valued for their beauty, durability and rarity. If you have one of ah unusual colour you have a rare thing. But it must be a decided colour. The accepted colour for sapphires is cornflower or royal blue; for rubies, ‘pigeon’s blood’; for emeralds, rich, velvety dark green; and for diamonds, blue-white, Russian red, Hope blue and others.

“From time to time I have a great many stones through my hands for testing as well as cutting. ‘Finds’ from abroad are sent to me to judge as to quality, value, etc. For this service I s of course, exact a fee. I recently had a sapphire through my hands, which had once been in a crown of State. Its value was £3OOO, and its weight 59 carats. Another sapphire I received weighed 175 carats, but on account of defective colour .it was worth less than the one weighing 59. One day I may receive a consignment of stones which in the aggregate are of no more value than a single stone received, say, the next day. “There is one tiring I should like to tell you, rnd that is, that- I have a very bad memory for everything but precious stones. Figures, names, places, slip from my mind almost as soon as received ,qnd refuse to return unaided, but once a stone has passed through my hands I never forget it. I frequently go into drawing rooms and recognise on the persons of guests present jewels wdiich have passed through my hands years before. I can. detect my own workmanship immediately. “A few words about family heirlooms. Here, again, ignorance is auwerable for •some strange discoveries. Not very long ago an acquaintance of mine—a lady—knowing the nature of my business, asked me if I would kindly give her a call to inspect, and possibly to value, a jewel which had been in her family for a, great many years. I consented, and duly put in. au appearance. The occasion was made a kind of ‘gathering of the clans,' and the heirloom was introduced with much ceremony and importance. It was a large brooch, principally formed of what was presumed to he a diamond. It was clear that I was expected to stagger everybody present by the mention of a fabulous figure in valuation, and had the stone been genuine such assuredly would have been my mission. But it was a. mere imitation, and I ‘broke it’ as gently as I could. I leave you to imagine the scene that followed.

This sort of thing happens more frequently with family heirlooms than is generally supposed. The fact of the matter is, the genuine stones hare at some time or other been extracted to ‘raise the wind’ by some impecunious ancestor, and the practically worthless imitation substituted.” . “Is there much difficulty experienced in.matching; a. gem?” “Sometimes. The most difficult to match, as a rule, is a pearl. Sometimes years are spent in search before the right one turns up. Diamonds are not so tsoublesome, and if the required stone cannot be obtained in London, a journey to Amsterdam will itrvhrhfbly complete the business.”