Also be sure to visit:

My friend's website:

Feb 22, 2011

VINTAGE HANDCUFFS WALTON BROTHERS NY 1876

Here is a set of Palmer Manacles:



VERY RARE SET OF 1876 PALMER'S MANACLES WALTON BROTHER NEW YORK FIRST THE BAD NO KEY AND THATS IT ON THE BAD Patented January 1876, the Palmer family of manacles is among the most interesting and bizarre of all the older shackles produced in this country. You see Houdini photos with type of cuffs on him. Each shackle consists of three stamped metal sections, which are hinged together and which can be closed to form a circle.......This set has a great patina, and is marked Palmer's Pat Jan 1876 Walton Brothers N.Y. They measure 6" long x 3" in diameter & are 1-7/8" high. I don't know what size number they are. The hinged cuffs are made of hand hewn steel & had a triangular ended opener [not keyed]. Overall really nice antique condition, in an item rarely seen for sale...only in pictures of other people's collections....These came from a collector & are guaranteed authentic & original.... THIS WAS TAKEN FROM A HANDCUFF BLOG ON THIS SET OF CUFFS THERE IS NO RESERVE SHIPPING PRICE WILL INCLUDE PRIORITY AND INSURANCE WITH CONFIRMATION i will offer free shipping to anywhere in the world once there is a first bid .

Questions and answers about this item
Q: what will it take to end the item early how much?
A: i am going to honor the auction process so if you want the item please bid thanks robert

Q: What is the condition of the triangular headed screw, and the threads and spring on the spring loaded release pin?
A: the set screw looks to be ok i dont have a key so i have not opened the cuffs they have been sitting in a showcase for 40 years thanks for the question

Q: Hi, The size looks like a #4, this number should be stamped in the center on both ends of the cuff,between Palmer and Walton. could be a#5,but I am pretty sure that it is #4.
A: yes there is a number 4 thanks you for the info

- eBay (19 Feb 2011)


This set of Palmer Manacles had a high bid of $1,375 (Plus free Shipping).
-----

No comments: