Time for a change of pace, something modern. This is another long time Holy Grail for me. As a satisfied long time user of Beretta over/unders for competition I kept looking at the 687EELL Diamond Pigeon model as my dream gun (this was before the internet and I had never seen an ASE or SO model), someday I would find a way to get one, preferably a Trap or Sporting Clays version or better yet a small bore. Never dreamed that I would be lucky enough to actually find and acquire a 20/28 EELL combo! So here it is, both barrels are 28" with 5 choke tubes each, and it has the small slim forend which I much prefer, I'm not a fan of the silly looking bump on the end that some forends have - I also prefer 28" barrels over 26". These all have very high grade wood of different grain configurations, this is a very nice dark burl walnut. Copious amounts of fine quality hand chased engraving, very pretty but nowhere near the quality of that on my fine vintage English guns. This is still under the skin just a Beretta 686 with upgraded wood, engraving, fit and finish and handles and shoots the same too which is just fine with me. This isn't a field gun for me, I love my English side by sides for that, it gets some range time on fine days, is an investment and is a pleasure to use or just to look at.
Let's see some pic's of your SxS's & O/U's
- Thread starter Win/64
- Start date
fishslinger
CGN Regular
- Location
- southern ontario
Very nice EELL, I would like to get one like that one day.
gunsaholic
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Winnipeg, Manitoba
Very nice over/under. Wonder if it would help me break clays?? Probably not cause I'd be too busy looking at it!
Here’s to keeping this sticky going, and hoping that the great current threads on gun cases and single-shot guns get the same recognition.
The first breech-loading guns were slow to use by modern, hammerless-gun standards. To open the gun each hammer had to be brought to half-####, in order for the rotating barrels to clear the overhanging noses of the pinfire hammers. Opening the action required another series of movements, more or less awkward depending on the design. Unloading/reloading was simple, a dexterous reversal of hand movements brought the gun closed, and the hammers could be pulled back to full-#### in readiness to fire.
Feathered game hunting in the 1850s and early 1860s was mainly with walked-up game, with limited shooting opportunities during a day’s hunt. The speed of reloading was not really a factor in selecting a breech-loader, which in any case was much, much faster than with a muzzle-loader. With the emergence of the driven shoot where shooting opportunities were greatly increased, guns that could quickly be opened, emptied, reloaded, and brought to fire were advantageous, as were pairs of guns to be shot with the help of a loader. Before the driven shoot, there simply was no reason to have perfectly matched pairs of guns, and in any case, before the days of large-scale pheasant breeding on private estates, a pinfire gun of any type was sufficient to deal with the day’s shooting. As driven shoots increased in totals of birds, having a snap-action gun was a decided advantage though, if a second gun was out of the question. In the period before John Stanton’s patents for a rebounding lock (firstly in 1867, and improved in 1869 and 1877), various gunmakers tried their hand at improving the efficiency and ergonomics of gun actions, and the assisted part-cocking of hammers. One of the more successful designs was that which appeared in the guns of London gunmakers Cogswell and Harrison.
The ‘typical’ formation of a gunmaker started with an apprenticeship under a recognized gunmaker, and in time the apprentice would become a gunmaker, possibly be taken on as a partner, or move on to set up on their own. In this way the ‘pedigree’ of most gunmaking names can be traced back to the Mantons or other famous 18th Century or early 19th Century gunmakers. However, there were notable exceptions, the tobacconist Harris Holland being one, another being Benjamin Cogswell, the pawnbroker.
The first Benjamin Cogswell started as a pawnbroker in London in 1770, and his son, also Benjamin, was born in 1796. Benjamin Cogswell the younger continued the pawnbroker business, and gradually became involved in the selling of guns, perhaps those held in collateral against loans. In 1842 he bought the pawnbroker business of Edward Benton at 223 Strand. Benton had previously bought this business from Robert Essex, a silversmith and dealer in firearms, who had inherited it from Hector Essex, a gunsmith and jeweller at 223 and 224 Strand. Cogswell advertised himself as a “gun and pistol warehouse”. At some point from these premises Benjamin Cogswell found his talents as a gunmaker, and as an inventor. In 1848 Benjamin Cogswell registered a design (No. 1378) for a cap magazine for revolvers, and in 1852 he registered a design (No. 3389) for a six shot revolving pistol. In 1851 his ‘shopman’ was Edward Harrison, and in 1857 Benjamin Cogswell started advertising himself as Gunmaker. By 1860 Cogswell had retired and the business was continued by his son, also named Benjamin. Harrison became a partner in the business, and it 1863 the firm was re-named Cogswell & Harrison. Edward Harrison was a prolific inventor, and on 1 February 1864 he registered patent No. 271 for a part self-cocking, rotating bolt, single bite, snap action pinfire gun, that was very similar to the William Fletcher patent of 1863. The gun pictured here is the 26th gun built on Harrison’s patent.
It is a 12-bore with the self-half-cocking underlever action, serial number 5904 made in 1864 or 1865. The 30 3/16” damascus barrels carry the barrel maker’s mark of Amos Elvins (Elvins worked for James Purdey before establishing his own business in 1864 at 64 Wells Road, Oxford Street, and he supplied barrels to Thomas Boss and other top makers). The top rib is signed "Cogswell & Harrison 223 & 224 Strand, London", and the back-action locks are signed as well. The push-forward underlever single-bite snap-action with half-cocking feature is Edward Harrison’s patent No. 271 of 1864. The round fences have rising rods operating off the under-lever, which push the hammers back to half-#### when the underlever is pressed forward. This allows the gun to be opened in one smooth movement, and once re-loaded, the gun snaps shut with the hammers still at half-####. The action bar is signed "Harrison's Patent No 26" within an acanthus-leaf cartouche, and this patent use number is also marked on the action table, under the barrels, and the fore-end iron. This action was popular, so a low use number indicates the gun was made early in its run, in 1864 or 1865 at latest, depending on the number of guns built on this design. Unfortunately Cogswell & Harrison no longer have the records for guns made during this period, so it is not possible to know how many sporting guns were made each year, or to trace the original owner. The barrels still have mirror bores, and the gun weighs 6 lb 13 oz.
The first breech-loading guns were slow to use by modern, hammerless-gun standards. To open the gun each hammer had to be brought to half-####, in order for the rotating barrels to clear the overhanging noses of the pinfire hammers. Opening the action required another series of movements, more or less awkward depending on the design. Unloading/reloading was simple, a dexterous reversal of hand movements brought the gun closed, and the hammers could be pulled back to full-#### in readiness to fire.
Feathered game hunting in the 1850s and early 1860s was mainly with walked-up game, with limited shooting opportunities during a day’s hunt. The speed of reloading was not really a factor in selecting a breech-loader, which in any case was much, much faster than with a muzzle-loader. With the emergence of the driven shoot where shooting opportunities were greatly increased, guns that could quickly be opened, emptied, reloaded, and brought to fire were advantageous, as were pairs of guns to be shot with the help of a loader. Before the driven shoot, there simply was no reason to have perfectly matched pairs of guns, and in any case, before the days of large-scale pheasant breeding on private estates, a pinfire gun of any type was sufficient to deal with the day’s shooting. As driven shoots increased in totals of birds, having a snap-action gun was a decided advantage though, if a second gun was out of the question. In the period before John Stanton’s patents for a rebounding lock (firstly in 1867, and improved in 1869 and 1877), various gunmakers tried their hand at improving the efficiency and ergonomics of gun actions, and the assisted part-cocking of hammers. One of the more successful designs was that which appeared in the guns of London gunmakers Cogswell and Harrison.
The ‘typical’ formation of a gunmaker started with an apprenticeship under a recognized gunmaker, and in time the apprentice would become a gunmaker, possibly be taken on as a partner, or move on to set up on their own. In this way the ‘pedigree’ of most gunmaking names can be traced back to the Mantons or other famous 18th Century or early 19th Century gunmakers. However, there were notable exceptions, the tobacconist Harris Holland being one, another being Benjamin Cogswell, the pawnbroker.
The first Benjamin Cogswell started as a pawnbroker in London in 1770, and his son, also Benjamin, was born in 1796. Benjamin Cogswell the younger continued the pawnbroker business, and gradually became involved in the selling of guns, perhaps those held in collateral against loans. In 1842 he bought the pawnbroker business of Edward Benton at 223 Strand. Benton had previously bought this business from Robert Essex, a silversmith and dealer in firearms, who had inherited it from Hector Essex, a gunsmith and jeweller at 223 and 224 Strand. Cogswell advertised himself as a “gun and pistol warehouse”. At some point from these premises Benjamin Cogswell found his talents as a gunmaker, and as an inventor. In 1848 Benjamin Cogswell registered a design (No. 1378) for a cap magazine for revolvers, and in 1852 he registered a design (No. 3389) for a six shot revolving pistol. In 1851 his ‘shopman’ was Edward Harrison, and in 1857 Benjamin Cogswell started advertising himself as Gunmaker. By 1860 Cogswell had retired and the business was continued by his son, also named Benjamin. Harrison became a partner in the business, and it 1863 the firm was re-named Cogswell & Harrison. Edward Harrison was a prolific inventor, and on 1 February 1864 he registered patent No. 271 for a part self-cocking, rotating bolt, single bite, snap action pinfire gun, that was very similar to the William Fletcher patent of 1863. The gun pictured here is the 26th gun built on Harrison’s patent.
It is a 12-bore with the self-half-cocking underlever action, serial number 5904 made in 1864 or 1865. The 30 3/16” damascus barrels carry the barrel maker’s mark of Amos Elvins (Elvins worked for James Purdey before establishing his own business in 1864 at 64 Wells Road, Oxford Street, and he supplied barrels to Thomas Boss and other top makers). The top rib is signed "Cogswell & Harrison 223 & 224 Strand, London", and the back-action locks are signed as well. The push-forward underlever single-bite snap-action with half-cocking feature is Edward Harrison’s patent No. 271 of 1864. The round fences have rising rods operating off the under-lever, which push the hammers back to half-#### when the underlever is pressed forward. This allows the gun to be opened in one smooth movement, and once re-loaded, the gun snaps shut with the hammers still at half-####. The action bar is signed "Harrison's Patent No 26" within an acanthus-leaf cartouche, and this patent use number is also marked on the action table, under the barrels, and the fore-end iron. This action was popular, so a low use number indicates the gun was made early in its run, in 1864 or 1865 at latest, depending on the number of guns built on this design. Unfortunately Cogswell & Harrison no longer have the records for guns made during this period, so it is not possible to know how many sporting guns were made each year, or to trace the original owner. The barrels still have mirror bores, and the gun weighs 6 lb 13 oz.
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
How ingenious of Edward Harrison. Lovely engraving and a richly figured piece of walnut as well.
What a simple logical way of automatically attaining half ####, especially suited to the push forward lever. Not hard to see why this action gained acceptance although this is the first one I've seen so the popularity must have been short lived. Not really workable with center fire hammers and also redundant with the new fangled rebounding locks, it's popularity would have been brief. A truly rare find today.
I don’t know how many Cogswell & Harrison half-cockers were made, for exactly the reasons you mention, Ashcroft, and unfortunately the current Cogswell & Harrison couldn’t tell me either. If at the time C&H moved rapidly into making centre-fires, it might be a very low number.
I should add that Cogswell & Harrison didn’t have one in their collection!
I should add that Cogswell & Harrison didn’t have one in their collection!
Very nice combo set. What does the assembled gun weigh---I ask as a light gun of say 6-61/2 lbs is an upland bird gun---if it's in the 7 lb range then it can be used for sporting clays and skeet.
Bill, my EELL is an upland field gun, weighs 6 lb 2 oz as a 20 gauge, 6 lb 7 oz with the 28 gauge barrels, this differential in favour of the 28 is pretty standard on combos because the smaller bore barrels are thicker at the breech end to mate correctly with the standing breech. The important thing is that even though both barrel sets are 28" they balance exactly the same, 1/4" ahead of the center of the hinge trunnions, perfect on a field gun for me and obviously the result of careful manufacture. Not necessarily so on the SP I combos. Strangely, on the range I seem to shoot it better as a 28!
The Trap, Skeet and Sporting clays versions of the EELL can be spotted at a glance, they have the replaceable barrel shoulders, fore & aft adjustable trigger, a right or left handed palm swell and center bead like the 682 models. Depending on the intended purpose, they may have the finger grooved target forend, adjustable comb or other features found on the 682 series target guns. The EELLs are basically special order, you can get pretty much anything you want. I know of a couple of 20 gauge EELL Sporting models, never heard of one as a combo but I guess you could get one if you wanted it, dig deep.
The Trap, Skeet and Sporting clays versions of the EELL can be spotted at a glance, they have the replaceable barrel shoulders, fore & aft adjustable trigger, a right or left handed palm swell and center bead like the 682 models. Depending on the intended purpose, they may have the finger grooved target forend, adjustable comb or other features found on the 682 series target guns. The EELLs are basically special order, you can get pretty much anything you want. I know of a couple of 20 gauge EELL Sporting models, never heard of one as a combo but I guess you could get one if you wanted it, dig deep.
Thinking outside the box
The last gun I posted on this thread, the Cogswell & Harrison self-half-cocking gun, was an attempt to speed up the loading/reloading process. A much earlier design also tried to speed up the reloading process, by selectively extracting the fired shells. This is the Bastin System, and in terms of chronology it is contemporary with the Lang-type forward-underlever (which I will post next) of the mid-1850s, though unlike the latter the former design was popular in Britain well into the 1860s, including guns built by James Purdey and others. In a historical note, one of the guns participating in the Field Trials of 1859 was a Bastin System gun, built by Auguste Francotte of Liege, Belgium.
The first pinfire gun made by the inventor of the pinfire system, Casimir Lefaucheux, was a hinge-action gun. At the time it was revolutionary, but it was not the only breech-loading system that had been tinkered with. Makers were experimenting with fixed barrels and lifting breeches (such as the Pauly and Robert systems), and many a CGNer has tried, or at least held, a modern Darne with the butter-smooth rearward sliding breech. The Europeans can certainly think outside the box.
In 1855 the Bastin Brothers of Hermalle-sous-Argenteau, Liège, patented an action where the breech remained stationary and the barrels slid forward (Liège provincial government patent 2149 of 1855, and patent 2395 of 1856). An added feature of the gun was having a recess under the hammer noses which ‘grabbed’ the pin upon firing. When opening the action the fired hammer would keep the fired cartridge from moving with the barrel, thereby extracting it – a flick of the wrist ejects the spent case. If one or both barrels were unfired, the cartridges would stay in the chambers. The cleverness of this selective extraction is that no additional mechanism or modification was required.
The Bastin underlever action has a forward-pivoted, pull-down underlever with a hinged catch on the distal end. While it looks ungainly, it is remarkably smooth and easy, and while not as time-efficient and ergonomic as the later snap-actions, it has a certain elegance. The Bastin Brothers were inventors and they made actions used by other gunmakers, but I am unaware of any complete guns made and sold by them. Perhaps they made a good living off of royalties and partial builds.
This gun is a 14-bore pinfire sporting gun by the Masu Brothers of London, made @1865-69. It has 30 5/16” damascus barrels signed “Masu Brothers 3a Wigmore Street London & Liege”, and uncommon for a London-retailed gun sold to the British market, it has Liège proof marks. The action is stamped “Bastin Frères Brevetée 598”, so it is the 598th gun built on the Bastin system – probably towards the end of its popularity. The gun has very thin fences, a decided weakness. The back-action locks are unsigned, and metal parts have simple border and open scroll engraving. The trigger guard has a chequered spur grip extension, another Continental flourish. The figured maple stock might be a contemporary re-stocking job, and the gun weighs 6 lb 13 oz, heavier than it looks, but that front end is all metal.
Here is the patent specification:
The Belgian gunmaker Gustave Masu was established in London in 1864 at 3a Wigmore Street, and the firm became Masu Brothers in 1865. Wigmore Street is in London’s fashionable West-End Marylebone district, and a stone’s throw from Cavendish Square. In 1869 the firm was renamed Gustavus Masu and moved to 10 Wigmore Street. In 1882 it returned to the name Masu Brothers, and ceased trading around 1892. It appears that Masu guns were built in Liege (the other brother?) and retailed in London by Gustave. I should add that every Masu Brothers gun I’ve handled has been of very high quality.
The last gun I posted on this thread, the Cogswell & Harrison self-half-cocking gun, was an attempt to speed up the loading/reloading process. A much earlier design also tried to speed up the reloading process, by selectively extracting the fired shells. This is the Bastin System, and in terms of chronology it is contemporary with the Lang-type forward-underlever (which I will post next) of the mid-1850s, though unlike the latter the former design was popular in Britain well into the 1860s, including guns built by James Purdey and others. In a historical note, one of the guns participating in the Field Trials of 1859 was a Bastin System gun, built by Auguste Francotte of Liege, Belgium.
The first pinfire gun made by the inventor of the pinfire system, Casimir Lefaucheux, was a hinge-action gun. At the time it was revolutionary, but it was not the only breech-loading system that had been tinkered with. Makers were experimenting with fixed barrels and lifting breeches (such as the Pauly and Robert systems), and many a CGNer has tried, or at least held, a modern Darne with the butter-smooth rearward sliding breech. The Europeans can certainly think outside the box.
In 1855 the Bastin Brothers of Hermalle-sous-Argenteau, Liège, patented an action where the breech remained stationary and the barrels slid forward (Liège provincial government patent 2149 of 1855, and patent 2395 of 1856). An added feature of the gun was having a recess under the hammer noses which ‘grabbed’ the pin upon firing. When opening the action the fired hammer would keep the fired cartridge from moving with the barrel, thereby extracting it – a flick of the wrist ejects the spent case. If one or both barrels were unfired, the cartridges would stay in the chambers. The cleverness of this selective extraction is that no additional mechanism or modification was required.
The Bastin underlever action has a forward-pivoted, pull-down underlever with a hinged catch on the distal end. While it looks ungainly, it is remarkably smooth and easy, and while not as time-efficient and ergonomic as the later snap-actions, it has a certain elegance. The Bastin Brothers were inventors and they made actions used by other gunmakers, but I am unaware of any complete guns made and sold by them. Perhaps they made a good living off of royalties and partial builds.
This gun is a 14-bore pinfire sporting gun by the Masu Brothers of London, made @1865-69. It has 30 5/16” damascus barrels signed “Masu Brothers 3a Wigmore Street London & Liege”, and uncommon for a London-retailed gun sold to the British market, it has Liège proof marks. The action is stamped “Bastin Frères Brevetée 598”, so it is the 598th gun built on the Bastin system – probably towards the end of its popularity. The gun has very thin fences, a decided weakness. The back-action locks are unsigned, and metal parts have simple border and open scroll engraving. The trigger guard has a chequered spur grip extension, another Continental flourish. The figured maple stock might be a contemporary re-stocking job, and the gun weighs 6 lb 13 oz, heavier than it looks, but that front end is all metal.
Here is the patent specification:
The Belgian gunmaker Gustave Masu was established in London in 1864 at 3a Wigmore Street, and the firm became Masu Brothers in 1865. Wigmore Street is in London’s fashionable West-End Marylebone district, and a stone’s throw from Cavendish Square. In 1869 the firm was renamed Gustavus Masu and moved to 10 Wigmore Street. In 1882 it returned to the name Masu Brothers, and ceased trading around 1892. It appears that Masu guns were built in Liege (the other brother?) and retailed in London by Gustave. I should add that every Masu Brothers gun I’ve handled has been of very high quality.
What a brilliant simple design Pinfire. I have only seen pictures of these guns but I have seen a newer Masu Brothers gun and the quality was very high, as you would expect from a respected London maker of the time. That maple stock is gorgeous.
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Hmm, I'm not sure if that is a tiger maple stock or a tiger walnut stock. I have a friend with a bird's eye walnut stocked gun and never before knew such a thing was a thing. Pinfire, please do not be disheartened when the audience does not give immediate feedback because most of us are speechless with the quality of the guns you present. Uh, pretty much all of us are speechless.
Last edited:
Pinfire you keep posting these obscure but important guns, many in beautiful condition. It always sends me running to my library - yup, there it is, I guess there really is more than one left in the world and amazingly it's in Canada! Thank you so much? J.
The reason I suspect the Masu gun might be a contemporary restocking is that the inletting under the locks is somewhat crude. On these guns the inletting for the back locks is usually precise and impressive to behold - even going so far as cutting out dimples to match the screw heads. While I’ve read maple is much harder to work cleanly than walnut, I expected better. It might have been re-stocked during its working life, but I can’t be sure.
Londonshooter and Ashcroft, while I know there is little interest in pinfires as shootable guns, I hope to at least encourage an appreciation of the pinfire’s role in the evolution towards the fantastic guns of the late Victorian, Edwardian and later periods, and of today. So many features and designs we take for granted started with those early breechloaders, at a time when most everything was still made by hand.
Londonshooter and Ashcroft, while I know there is little interest in pinfires as shootable guns, I hope to at least encourage an appreciation of the pinfire’s role in the evolution towards the fantastic guns of the late Victorian, Edwardian and later periods, and of today. So many features and designs we take for granted started with those early breechloaders, at a time when most everything was still made by hand.
Last edited:
So, here's going right back to the beginning of British breech-loaders
At the Great Exhibition in London in 1851 an example of Casimir Lefaucheux’s pinfire was on display, and Eugene Lefaucheux was on hand to answer any queries about its features. The British shooting press didn’t make any notable mention of Lefaucheux’s gun prior to the Great Exhibition, despite the gun being in use in France since the 1830s. Perhaps it was believed the British sportsman would stick to the muzzle-loader, and leave the ‘crutch-gun’ to foreigners. With the benefit of hindsight it is easy to differentiate a curiosity from a real developmental step, but it was clearly not obvious back then.
British gunmakers could have just copied Casimir Lefaucheux’s pinfire, much as the earlier generation of makers copied the French flintlock. The pinfire gun was, after all, a design in working use and not just a prototype. A straightforward copy with recognisable names on the lock plates might have been reassuring enough for at least some sportsmen to try the new system, and to make this possibility easier Lefaucheux did not patent his invention in Britain. This left the door open to anyone copying the gun and the cartridge system. That this didn’t happen is an indication of the tremendous reluctance that existed towards this invention, pre-dating the Great Exhibition. Trusted names spoke ill of the French breech-loader, which seems to have deterred even the slightly curious. Who would want to try a gun boldly proclaimed by the experts to be unsafe? The muzzle-loader was also at its highest level of refinement, with quick-firing locks, strong barrels and quality craftsmanship. There would have to be a change to the design to make it palatable to the shooting community.
Giving a British character to the Continental pinfire was indeed the first step towards its acceptance. Not just a respected name, but a design make-over was needed. This is what Joseph Lang accomplished, by having a wooden fore-end instead of an iron one, substituting a discrete lever to release the barrels instead of the long Lefaucheux lever, limiting decoration to tasteful acanthus-leaf engraving and fine chequering, and, most importantly, sticking to the lines, proportions and dimensions of the British double-barrelled muzzle-loader.
The version offered by Lang is believed to have been first built by Edwin Charles Hodges, who convinced Lang to market it. Hodges became the most sought-after actioner of early breech-loaders, and his work was used by the top makers (this is not surprising, few knew how to accomplish this task well). The Lang gun has the lever engaging with a single notch or bite on the barrel lump, relatively close to the hinge pin. This proved adequate but less robust than the later double-bite fastening mechanisms. The original Lefaucheux patent of 28 January 1833 clearly shows a double-bite fastener, and the addendum of 13 March 1833 shows the typical double-bite fastening mechanism found on Lefaucheux sporting guns. The Lefaucheux gun illustrated in The London Illustrated News of July 1851 appears to have had this typical double-bite mechanism, so it is anyone’s guess as to why this decidedly superior engineering feature was not copied by Hodges and Lang. Perhaps they surmised that a single bite was sufficient to the task. It was nevertheless a good working design, as guns with this mechanism have survived hard use, and single-bite guns were made by many noted makers well into the 1860s, even after the double-bite fastener (the Henry Jones double screw grip) came into widespread acceptance.
The following is a good example of the early design, a 16-bore forward-underlever pinfire sporting gun by John Blissett of London, made some time before 1860. This is an early Lang-type single-bite forward-underlever action with the assisted-opening stud, and the action is signed by Edwin Charles Hodges. When the lever is opened fully, a rising stud on the action bar lifts the barrels slightly and makes it easier to fully open the gun and load/remove the cartridges. Curiously, Hodges or Lang never patented this feature. The 29 7/8” damascus barrels, signed “John Blissett, 322 High Holborn, London,” still have mirror bores, despite the gun showing signs of great use and period repairs. The gun has thin serpentine percussion fences typical of pre-1860 gun, and the hammers have prominent stylized cap guards, a hold-over from percussion. The back-action locks are signed “John Blissett London” and have foliate scroll engraving, with dog and game scenes. The stock escutcheon is vacant, making it difficult to determine the original owner, but it is in gold instead of the usual silver.
John Blissett was the son of Isaac Blissett, a gun maker and jeweller. John's father set him up in business as a gun maker and jeweller at 74 High Holborn, around 1834. In 1835 John Blissett moved to 321-322 High Holborn as a gun maker and repository for guns (selling second-hand guns), but his principal business address was 321 High Holborn. The 322 High Holborn business address started to be used in 1851. In the 1861 census John was recorded living at 322 High Holborn with his son, William, also a gunmaker. In about 1866 the firm was re-named John Blissett & Son. John Blissett died in 1872, and William died in 1876. William James Tomes took over the business re-naming it Blissett Son & Tomes. In 1883 he moved the business to 98 High Holborn where he changed the name to Tomes & Co., and ceased trading in 1885.
At the Great Exhibition in London in 1851 an example of Casimir Lefaucheux’s pinfire was on display, and Eugene Lefaucheux was on hand to answer any queries about its features. The British shooting press didn’t make any notable mention of Lefaucheux’s gun prior to the Great Exhibition, despite the gun being in use in France since the 1830s. Perhaps it was believed the British sportsman would stick to the muzzle-loader, and leave the ‘crutch-gun’ to foreigners. With the benefit of hindsight it is easy to differentiate a curiosity from a real developmental step, but it was clearly not obvious back then.
British gunmakers could have just copied Casimir Lefaucheux’s pinfire, much as the earlier generation of makers copied the French flintlock. The pinfire gun was, after all, a design in working use and not just a prototype. A straightforward copy with recognisable names on the lock plates might have been reassuring enough for at least some sportsmen to try the new system, and to make this possibility easier Lefaucheux did not patent his invention in Britain. This left the door open to anyone copying the gun and the cartridge system. That this didn’t happen is an indication of the tremendous reluctance that existed towards this invention, pre-dating the Great Exhibition. Trusted names spoke ill of the French breech-loader, which seems to have deterred even the slightly curious. Who would want to try a gun boldly proclaimed by the experts to be unsafe? The muzzle-loader was also at its highest level of refinement, with quick-firing locks, strong barrels and quality craftsmanship. There would have to be a change to the design to make it palatable to the shooting community.
Giving a British character to the Continental pinfire was indeed the first step towards its acceptance. Not just a respected name, but a design make-over was needed. This is what Joseph Lang accomplished, by having a wooden fore-end instead of an iron one, substituting a discrete lever to release the barrels instead of the long Lefaucheux lever, limiting decoration to tasteful acanthus-leaf engraving and fine chequering, and, most importantly, sticking to the lines, proportions and dimensions of the British double-barrelled muzzle-loader.
The version offered by Lang is believed to have been first built by Edwin Charles Hodges, who convinced Lang to market it. Hodges became the most sought-after actioner of early breech-loaders, and his work was used by the top makers (this is not surprising, few knew how to accomplish this task well). The Lang gun has the lever engaging with a single notch or bite on the barrel lump, relatively close to the hinge pin. This proved adequate but less robust than the later double-bite fastening mechanisms. The original Lefaucheux patent of 28 January 1833 clearly shows a double-bite fastener, and the addendum of 13 March 1833 shows the typical double-bite fastening mechanism found on Lefaucheux sporting guns. The Lefaucheux gun illustrated in The London Illustrated News of July 1851 appears to have had this typical double-bite mechanism, so it is anyone’s guess as to why this decidedly superior engineering feature was not copied by Hodges and Lang. Perhaps they surmised that a single bite was sufficient to the task. It was nevertheless a good working design, as guns with this mechanism have survived hard use, and single-bite guns were made by many noted makers well into the 1860s, even after the double-bite fastener (the Henry Jones double screw grip) came into widespread acceptance.
The following is a good example of the early design, a 16-bore forward-underlever pinfire sporting gun by John Blissett of London, made some time before 1860. This is an early Lang-type single-bite forward-underlever action with the assisted-opening stud, and the action is signed by Edwin Charles Hodges. When the lever is opened fully, a rising stud on the action bar lifts the barrels slightly and makes it easier to fully open the gun and load/remove the cartridges. Curiously, Hodges or Lang never patented this feature. The 29 7/8” damascus barrels, signed “John Blissett, 322 High Holborn, London,” still have mirror bores, despite the gun showing signs of great use and period repairs. The gun has thin serpentine percussion fences typical of pre-1860 gun, and the hammers have prominent stylized cap guards, a hold-over from percussion. The back-action locks are signed “John Blissett London” and have foliate scroll engraving, with dog and game scenes. The stock escutcheon is vacant, making it difficult to determine the original owner, but it is in gold instead of the usual silver.
John Blissett was the son of Isaac Blissett, a gun maker and jeweller. John's father set him up in business as a gun maker and jeweller at 74 High Holborn, around 1834. In 1835 John Blissett moved to 321-322 High Holborn as a gun maker and repository for guns (selling second-hand guns), but his principal business address was 321 High Holborn. The 322 High Holborn business address started to be used in 1851. In the 1861 census John was recorded living at 322 High Holborn with his son, William, also a gunmaker. In about 1866 the firm was re-named John Blissett & Son. John Blissett died in 1872, and William died in 1876. William James Tomes took over the business re-naming it Blissett Son & Tomes. In 1883 he moved the business to 98 High Holborn where he changed the name to Tomes & Co., and ceased trading in 1885.
Falconflyer
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Pinfire, I sit in astonishment and awe at the seemingly inexhaustible supply of historically important guns and information that you put forth for our education and enjoyment, thank you for your efforts!
Yeah Steve, I'm echoing this. I knew you had a bunch and I have seen more than a few at our annual SxS shoot (so good of you to join us the last couple years) but this series you are showing in this thread is beyond belief. I haven't commented much about them because whatever superlative I use, I'd have to top it for your next post. I'll just leave it at thank you. Absolutely fascinating.
