It looks like a Belgian copy but without the ELG in the circle without crown, the RCMP will not accept it as antique. Proof marks don't mean anything to them and there were many guns made from 1894 to 1897 which will never be accepted as antique since they do not have the proper ID marking.
I have seen quite a fair number of guns which had the ID marks removed during refinish = prohibited. They are very cut and dry at the RCMP lab.
If it would be a Tranter, it would have the markings. You can speculate all you want.
.
Sorry, I'm not speculating, I am merely saying if it can be shown to be a Tranter gun it would be viewed by the RCMP lab as antique since they also know Tranter guns ceased being made well before 1897. And while I'm fairly certain it is likely a Belgian sourced unfinished frame and a British Tranter finished revolver it would not have the typical Belgian proof markings. Tranter guns are unfortunately one of the many guns of the period to have very few manufacturer markings as they did not have issues with other British arms makers blatantly copying their patient revolvers or guns and often worked on gentlemen's agreements between themselves on infringing each of their own patents. They seemed to care little what the continental arms makers did in copying their guns although.
For those interested here is the History of William Tranter revolvers -
William Tranter was one of the most prominent
Gun, Rifle & Pistol Makers in the Birmingham gun trade during the mid-19th century. Tranter was born in 1816 and died in 1890. During his working life, his name became synonymous with both quality handgun design and manufacture, although he also produced small arms of all types and held patents related to all types of firearm actions. He went into business for himself circa 1840, after completing his apprenticeship with Hollis Brothers & Co, which he had begun in 1830. Tranter continued working actively in the gun trade until 1885, just five years before his death.
After his decade of work learning the gun trade at Hollis Brothers & Co (later Hollis & Sheath), in 1840 Tranter bought the established gun making business of Robert Dugard at 29 ½ Whitehall Street. Over the next decade, he worked for himself and in joint ventures with his old employers John & Isaac Hollis as well as with Isaac Sheath. By 1850 he had located his primary business at 50 Loveday Street, where he was listed as having
“shops, sheds, steam machinery, yard & premises” and became one of the first of the Birmingham gunmakers to utilize steam powered machinery. Tranter secured his first British patent related to firearms in October of 1849 when he registered a
“pepperbox mechanism and lever catch for pistol locks”. In January 1853, he registered British Patent Number 212 (1853) for a pair of
“self-cocking” pistol mechanisms and a safety mechanism. In December of the same year, he registered designs for a double-action revolver mechanism, lubricated bullets and wadding, as well as a breech loading mechanism, all of which were covered by Patent Number 2921 (1853). In August of 1856 he registered the designs for a
“double trigger revolver mechanism”, along with several other designs, all of which were covered by British Patent Number 1913 (1856). Tranter continued patenting firearm designs as late as 1887, after he had left active participation in the gun trade.
One of Tranter’s most successful series of arms were his “self-cocking” percussion revolvers, which were initially introduced in 1853. The earliest revolvers utilized Robert Adams patent for a solid, one-piece frame and barrel that were machined from a single forging. Tranter’s initial production run of revolvers included both Model 1851 Patent Adams style lock works, and Tranter's own patented lock works. The original “Tranter” type revolvers, known to collectors as 1stModel Tranters had no provision for an attached loading lever. Later production 2nd and 3rd Model guns offered improvements to the loading system with attached levers. All of these first three models were based on his “double-trigger” system (initially referred to as his “hesitating mechanism” on the early production guns), which utilized a second “trigger” under the trigger guard to rotate the cylinder and #### the hammer. The trigger inside the triggerguard was used to trip the sear and release the hammer. Tranter then introduced his 4th Model Tranter revolvers (circa 1856), which used a single trigger, and had what would today be called a conventional “double action” lock work. These guns had a projection on the rear of the trigger that entered the frame when it was pulled, which released the sear and dropped the hammer.
The Tranter patent revolver was the primary competitor with the Adams and Adams-Beaumont patent revolvers in England and was also exported widely. Pre-Civil War Tranter revolvers are known with US retailer only marks, indicating that his designs were at least somewhat successful in the United States. The majority of the retailer marked guns are from the south, with the largest majority of them being marked by New Orleans retailers. Based upon extant examples, the firm of Hyde & Goodrich (later Thomas, Griswold & Co) appears to have been the primary importer of Tranter Patent revolvers into the southern United States. Most of these retailer-marked guns were sold cased with accessories, although some guns were certainly sold without the expensive casings and accouterments. During the course of the Civil War, it appears that the importation of Tranter revolvers was somewhat limited, at least in terms of Confederate central government purchases. However, period advertisements in the south and extant examples with southern provenance make it clear that the guns were imported by blockade-runners as speculative items for sale in the south.
Despite his success both in England and abroad, William Tranter kept looking forward to new markets and designs. It was clear to him that the self-contained metallic cartridge was the wave of the future and he put significant efforts in design in that direction. His first cartridge offerings were made available at the height of the American Civil War period. He received English Patent #2067 (1862) for a variety of revolver improvements that he would subsequently include in his new line of cartridge revolvers, and the following year received English Patent #1862 (1863) for more improvements to cartridge revolvers. The first cartridge handguns to be introduced by Tranter were spur trigger, small caliber rimfire pistols in .230 and .320 calibers. The guns had solid frames and were direct competitors to the hinged frame Model 1 and Model 2 revolvers from Smith & Wesson. However, Tranter knew that pocket sized spur trigger revolvers with low power cartridges were not going to win military contracts and he went to work on creating a larger, more powerful revolver. His offering was based upon his large frame 4th Model percussion revolver, and was initially manufactured in .442 rimfire, although a .450 centerfire variant was offered fairly soon after the initial introduction. The most identifiable feature of the new Tranter Model 1863 “Army” revolver was the side mounted, compound ejector mechanism that resembled a percussion revolver’s ramrod much more than an ejection system. The system was mounted on the right side of the barrel and frame and by lowering the lever, a plunger was pushed into the chamber push out the spent cartridge. The plunger was roughly the internal diameter of the casing, as Tranter had discovered that a simple, thin ejector rod could actually punch through the bottom of a soft copper rimfire case, leaving the case hopelessly stuck in the cylinder chamber. A conventional loading gate at the rear of the recoil shield allowed the loading and unloading of the cartridges. A smaller framed variant of his Model 1863 was also introduced as the
“House Defence” Revolver, in small calibers like .230, .297, .320 and .380.
In typical Tranter style, the revolvers rarely bore his own mark and sometimes just a small “Tranter’s Patent” mark on the frame and or on his patent ejector system, and usually were left otherwise blank for the retailer to apply their own mark on the topstrap or barrel. A serial number and sometimes assembly numbers were usually the only other markings besides proof marks.
With the introduction of the .450 CF version of the revolver, Tranter also introduced a floating firing pin in the frame of the gun, which was struck by the blunt nose of the hammer when the trigger was pulled. By 1868 Tranter had received a new patent for a series of improvements to the cartridge revolver (English Patent #282 of 1868) and his Model 1868 revolver quickly superseded the Model 1863. The new Model 1868 was also a solid frame, gate loading revolver based upon Tranter’s 4th Model double-action lockwork. The revolver had a somewhat fragile looking ejector rod mounted on a pivot under the barrel. To use the rod, the revolver was placed on half-#### the loading gate opened, and the rod swivels to the right, allowing it to be used to push empty cartridges out of the chambers. Unlike the ejector on the M1863, the new rod did not have a large head, but was a more traditional thin rod ejector. The M1868 was offered in compact, 5-shot pocket sizes, chambered for the .320RF and .380 CF and RF cartridges, and in a larger frame, 6-shot variant, chambered in .442RF, .450CF and .500CF. These revolvers remained in fairly constant production through the late 1870s, when the new Model 1878 and Model 1879 revolvers superseded them.
The Model 1878 was the last of the Tranter solid frame revolver designs and in many ways did not look like a typical Tranter handgun. It had more the look of a Webley solid frame and Colt 1873 SAA in appearance. The unique features of the Model 1878 for a Tranter cartridge revolver were the attached ejector rod on the right side of the barrel, the self-securing cylinder arbor pin and the fluted cylinder. In the past Tranter had often used ejector rods that were of very different designs, had invariably used more traditional, “percussion” style arbor pin retention systems and had been a devotee to the smooth, round cylinder. The new Model 1878 had the distinction of being the first of the Tranter revolvers to be produced on the principle of interchangeable parts. More importantly, after some twenty five years of producing handguns, he finally received a British military contract for his revolvers. The contract, in and of itself was faint praise, as it was only issued due to the inability of his primary rival, Robert Adams, to delivery sufficient quantities of the newly adopted Adams Patent Model 1872 (MK III) revolvers in .450CF.
The revolver was officially designated
“Pistol Revolver BL Tranter Interchangeable” (List of Changes – Number 3567/19th July 1878) by the British military. In addition to being Tranter’s first official foray into the world of parts interchangeability, it was also the first interchangeable parts revolver to be adopted by the British military. An order for 2,000 was received in 1878 but only about 400 were delivered prior to the cancellation of the contract. Some of the guns were also purchased from the open market, which likely resulted in the contract in the first place, during a military revolver shortage in 1878-1879. However, Tranter’s success was short lived as the M1878 was removed from British service in 1881, in anticipation of the arrival of the new Enfield MkI revolver, which had been adopted the prior year. The Mk1 Enfield was a break-top revolver and the desire to move towards a simultaneous extraction design by the British military had probably inspired Tranter to introduce his Model 1879 revolver, which was also a hinged frame design. However, the British military would decide to stay with their Enfield revolver and Tranter never again received a British military handgun contract. With sales and interest in his designs waning and Tranter entering the final years of his life, he retired in 1885 and formally leased his Aston gun factory to George Kynoch. There some of his designs were still manufactured in very limited quantities, while new Tranter-Kynoch designs were introduced and manufactured as well, although with limited success when compared to other competitors like Webley.
