Got me thinking on another tangent: is a 'proof mark' considered a 'trade mark'?? If it is and someone faked a proof mark... would that constitute a trade mark infringement? Or are there separate laws governing the improper use of a proof mark? Just curious.
I believe that there are laws relating to the faking of Proof Marks in England. Am I sure? No. Proof Marks are not a Trade Mark, they are essentially a certification of fitness for use, by a Government appointed agency. Like as not ( a pure supposition on my part, this) they would fall under the Laws relating to Forgery, if there are not specific laws that relate entirely to Proof Marks.
The Whole Proof House concept is tied in to the use of assorted cottage industry manufacturing methods to make guns and gun parts. With essentially no control over materials or methods used, it was a logical construct to ensure that the firearms were fit for their intended use.
Not a thing in North America, as by the time folks started worrying about that likes of that, the manufacturing of firearms was essentially a factory affair, rather than piece work. Steel came from a mill, rather than from a blacksmith forge welding leftover bits and pieces together.
Buy decent quality steel, or better yet, a barrel made by a reputable maker, don't try to cover any new ground as far as design criteria goes, and you can reasonably expect to produce safe firearm.
If making entirely from scratch, buy quality known steel, and a calculator, and sit down and learn what you need to know about pressures and hoop stresses, etc., so that you can design a factor of safety in to your work.
As close as we get to a Proof House here, is "Have a gunsmith go over it before using". If you can find one that knows about more than where to look up the mounts he needs to stick a scope on it.
Cheers
Trev