That is one interesting rifle. I have never seen that 'F/W' marking before.
Also what is interesting is that your cocking piece has much later date marking from RSAF Enfield. The EFD mark appeared around 1897. The marking that I would have expected to see was a broad arrow over 'WD' for this time period. So either it was marked by the factory after that time, or, I did ponder on whether it might be a Mk.II Lee Metford cocking piece which is a very similar unit (but not interchangeable without mods). I would need to see the knub on the cocking piece that fits into the trackway on the end of the bolt to tell. Knub is smaller and different position on a Mk.I than that of a Mk.II.
The screw in the side of the receiver that you show is an ejector screw to flip out live rounds. With ejection, the fired empty case is flipped out as the mouth of the case clears the breech. The rotation of the casing is created by the drag of the case rim on the left side wall as the bolt is drawn back, the rim pushed against the wall by the extractor claw and spring. There is a tapered groove machined in the wall for this purpose, it has a ramp built into it to increase the pressure as the rim moves back. With a live round, the bullet sticking out the end of the case prevents it from flipping, so a secondary eject happens when the cartridge base is drawn further back and bumps into the screw. Try it with a live round and with an empty case, its very ingenious. I believe that this was one of J.P.Lee's innovations, and was used on all Lee Metfords and Enfields onward.
The safety catch that I am talking about mounted underneath the rear long range volley sight in much the same way as that on a Short Lee Enfield which was not new, but a re-introduction of the design updated. It engaged in those half moon cutouts in the cocking piece.
As I understand, the feature of the safety catch was first introduced to the Brit Army on the MLM Mk.I. Previous to that a safety catch was tried on trails series of martini rifles but never made it to production. Previous to that was the Snider which had a half #### notch on the hammer. So the new concept of a safety catch was introduced on the MLM Mk.I in 1889 and subsequently removed on the Mk.I* circa 1891. The updated design of the Mk.II (1892) did not have it at all, however, it was not a popular move with certain powers in the military to not have one. So the Mk.II* (1895) was fitted with the bolt safety design taken directly from the LMC Cavalry Carbine. The Mk.I Lee Enfield (1895) perpetuated this feature and was basically the same rifle as the MLM Mk.II* but with different rifling. The MLE Mk.I* (1899) was an updated by simply removing the clearing rod feature. The next one out of the pipe was the Short Magazine Lee Enfield in 1903, which revived the original receiver mounted safety concept but with updates. So the safety feature went full circle to come back pretty much to where it had started, mounted at the back of the receiver body on the same axis as the volley sight. (phew, try saying that paragraph without taking a breath).
Another member, Coggansfield, is doing a survey of Mk.II and Mk.II* Lee Metfords to confirm his hunch that the evolution of the Mk.II* was simply Mk.II rifles pulled from stores at semi random, new bolts with safety fitted and the * markings added to metal and wood. He is tracking serial numbers to verify this theory. All very interesting stuff to detail freaks like me.
Anyway, I'll stop babbling. It's because I am just as excited about your discovery as you are, if not more so!
You have a prize. I love to spend time just looking at old rifles like this. Almost like detective work. I even use a magnifying glass just like Sherlock Holmes!
As for the bobbed barrel, unlikely done by the factory as the ring on a bayonet would have nothing to mount to. This tells me that the rifle was use for shooting sometime in its post service life as is witnessed by the extra holes for mounting a rear sight.
