Let's see some pic's of your SxS's & O/U's

Sourcing of barrels... Now there's an interesting subject. There were a number of forges capable of putting out welded tubes, but that was only part of the process towards a finished gun barrel. While water- and steam-powered machinery was in use at the time, the process of producing damascus barrels involved a great deal of twisting and hammering by hand, before grinding and polishing. The Rose Brothers of Halesowen patented a system by which damascus barrels could be produced by machine, and such barrels, which appeared on some pinfires, are stamped "Roses Patent" or just "Roses", often with a "No. 20". I have several of these, and that will be the subject of another post. As to actual sourcing, the easy answer is that both British and Belgian tubes were used in British gunmaking. In 1882 John Henry Walsh (Editor of The Field) wrote "We think that quite three-fourths of the tubes used in Birmingham are Belgian make, and nearly all the London trade use them, with this difference, that they use the best quality, which are no doubt harder than the cheaper kinds, but are still softer and less durable than those of English make, and cost as much."

But for today, I'll stick to the subject of provincial gunmakers.

There are many provincial gunmakers for which remarkably little is known, yet a variety of their guns have survived. Robert Watmough was born in Lancashire in 1821, and he and his wife Elizabeth had a daughter named Anne on 5 November 1845. Robert worked for the gunmaker Thomas Conway, who operated at 4, and later 15, Blackfriars St. in Manchester. Conway was a well known gunmaker who was renowned for his pistols. Whether Watmough apprenticed under Conway, or was a journeyman in his employ, is not known. Robert Watmough set up his own gunmaking business at 13 Blackfriars Street in 1854, closing in 1869. That is about all than can be traced for this maker.

Thankfully a few of his guns survive. Here is a 16-bore double-bite screw-grip rotary-underlever pinfire sporting gun number 4029, made 1865-1869. The 27 3/16” damascus barrels have Birmingham proofs, and the top rib is signed “RobT. Watmough. 13. Blackfriars. St. Manchester.” The barrels also have a maker’s mark “W.M”, which I believe is for W. Marshall, gun barrel maker of 10 & 14 Vesey St., Birmingham, who was in operation from 1865 to 1868 – which helps to date the gun. The back-action locks are signed “R. Watmough” and are nicely decorated with dog and game scenes (curlews and pheasant). The bores are still very good with only slight pitting at the breech, and the gun weighs a slight 6 lb 8 oz.

Despite its obvious attractiveness, game scenes are uncommon on pinfire guns, with acanthus leaf patterns predominating. Price may have been a factor, though I don’t think so – talent came at very little cost back then. A similar Watmough pinfire recently sold at auction in the US, so perhaps game scene engraving was part of a ‘house style’, as it was for John Blissett of London. When executed well such scenes are very attractive and, when done crudely… Um, to paraphrase comments on another board, who wants to look at flying turnips?

U74gCdI.jpg

RlJmfs6.jpg

CnClo2E.jpg

OfYDgUU.jpg

RDAYoWI.jpg

94J0X2u.jpg

SOoFPsG.jpg
 
Well I had never heard of a Watmouth gun, it makes you wonder why when you look at this gun, it just drips quality. I guess the business never had the all important 'important' patronage to promote it and died with the owner. Pity.
 
I worked out there were over 900 gunmakers active in Britain during the period 1855-1869 capable of putting up a pinfire game gun (I keep a list). I tried to exclude from that list ones who advertised themselves exclusively as pistol or rifle makers. Of course, a number of these might have only made percussion guns and closed shop before the rise of the breech-loader, some might have kept to repairs only, and some might have started their business at the later end, making centre-fire guns - I’ll never know, as so few records of smaller makers have survived. In addition, some of these smiths might have only made a mere handful of guns, and the odds of any surviving intact to this day are pretty slim. The odds are much better for finding guns from makers who would produce 40-70 guns a year, for 5 to 10 years, though it is no guarantee. I have yet to get my hands on (or see in the flesh) an original James Purdey pinfire, or a Pape for that matter, though both were strong proponents of the pinfire system. And it was only in recent years that I got my hands on a W W Greener pinfire - but that’s for another day.

150 years of being unloved and ignored has taken its toll on the survival of pinfire game guns.
 
I'm going to try posting every day for a while, to keep my sanity in these trying times... stay safe, everyone.

As a business in the Victorian era, making sporting guns was usually a small affair, involving a few craftsmen and apprentices, making a small number of guns a year. After all, the market was limited, those having the time and space to enjoy leisurely pursuits were few, and guns were built to last.

The real business was in fulfilling military contracts involving thousands of arms, and in cheap-but-serviceable guns as items of trade and barter in distant lands. A firm meeting these demands would have a large in-house capacity, afford water- or steam-powered machinery and factory space, as well as provide work for hundreds of outworkers supplying the trade. Of this type of business operating in the 1850s, I can’t think of a better example than Barnett’s. John Edward Barnett established his business in London in 1796, stocking pistols for the East India Company. In 1842 the firm was recorded as John Edward Barnett & Sons, in business at 134 Minories until 1859, and additionally at Brewhouse Lane, Wapping, from 1860 to 1874. Barnett’s guns were usually simply marked “Barnett.” Barnett supplied flint and percussion trade guns for the North American fur trade (notably to the Hudson’s Bay Company and the North West Company), and Barnett was also the most prolific of English manufacturers associated with the American Confederacy, having made and sold to them thousands of Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle-Muskets and P-1856 cavalry carbines.

With such a profitable business in martial and trade arms, you wouldn’t think Barnett would bother with the tiny sporting gun market – but they did, though Barnett sporting guns are rarely recorded. Perhaps with the emergence of the pinfire breech-loader in the 1850s the firm saw an opportunity to expand its trade, though in practice it never did go in that direction. They nevertheless sold the gun below under their name, but whether they made the gun from a barrelled action, or bought a ready-made gun and added their name to it, is anyone’s guess. As to who would have wanted a Barnett-signed pinfire, rather than a gun from a respected sporting gun maker, is even more of a head-scratcher. The adage “buy the gun, not the maker” is sometimes hard to put into practice, even if it is a sensible approach. While a provincial maker far from London could produce high-quality work on demand, in London itself there was no lack of makers specializing in sporting arms. Aye, a real head-scratcher.

The gun is a very early 12-bore forward-underlever pinfire, number 7076, likely made in the late 1850s. It has the Lang-type single-bite forward under-lever with assisted-opening stud, and the action bar is signed "Joseph Brazier". The back-action locks are signed "Barnett", and the top rib is simply signed "Barnett London". The 28 7/8” barrels are marked with London proofs. The gun is decorated with bold foliate-scroll engraving, and I particularly like the detail on the classic ‘dolphin’ hammers. It has seen hard use and a few screws look to have been replaced, but it is in generally good order for an 1850s pinfire. The bores are moderately pitted, and the gun weighs 6 lb 11 oz.

Ck9Ya5V.jpg

slQaIRy.jpg

FjGMrnC.jpg

NXPckOJ.jpg

VO1CHeR.jpg

3jacQpK.jpg


While the Brazier name is welcome information, it does not clarify how much of the gun was provided, or made, by him. Joseph Brazier was recorded as a gunlock maker and gun and pistol maker at The Ashes, Brickkiln Street, Wolverhampton, since at least 1827, and in the 1861 census he was listed as a master gunmaker employing 70 men and 20 boys. His firm might have provided the barrelled action and the locks, or it could have made the entire gun to Barnett’s wishes. Brazier locks have always been in particularly high regard, and it is a testament to his workmanship that the locks on the Barnett still ‘speak’ beautifully.

I did consider whether it could have been made by another ‘Barnett’, but there were no others in the 19th Century. I also considered whether it was a spurious naming, as simply having ‘London’ on a rib without a street address usually sends up a red flag – but such guns are usually of a lesser quality (they wouldn’t have Joseph Brazier parts), the name might be misspelled (eg. ‘Barnet’), the proof marks might be suspect, and so on. Such guns tended to show up in the 1870s and 1880s, and not in the 1850s when so few craftsmen were able to action a breech-loading gun. And at the end of the day, why choose a maker such as Barnett to plagiarize, when many other names would be better used in a scam? Last year at Holt’s auction a superb percussion double-barrelled sporting gun signed Barnett was sold, so the firm did indeed make a small number of sporting guns. I’ve not encountered any other.
 
Picked this one up a couple of weeks ago. Many of you likely saw it. It's an Emil Kerner 16 gauge. Gun has 2 9/16" chambers. Weighs in at around 6lb, 6oz with the sling. It has a proof date of August, 1929. None of the screws are buggered and overall in very nice condition for the year. Excellent bores.
YnFNHGE.jpg

i6IUEZw.jpg

6yzOyOk.jpg

cz9BDNB.jpg
 
Very nice Kerner Brian. Good score.

And Steve, at one a day I think you will keep us entertained and educated right through this pandemic. Thanks for doing your part!;)
 
Another builder of military arms that dabbled in sporting guns is Benjamin Woodward. Starting out in 1838, in 1840 he moved his business to 10 Whittall St. in Birmingham’s Gun Quarter, an address he maintained until 1883. In the 1841 census, Benjamin was described as a gunmaker, and two of his sons, Frederick and Benjamin, then both 15, were listed as gunmaker’s apprentices. The younger Benjamin quit his apprenticeship and another son, Henry, was taken into the business. In 1842 the name was changed to Benjamin Woodward & Sons. The firm is best known for producing military arms, notably the .577 three-band 1853 Enfield rifle-musket. Benjamin Woodward was also one of the founders of the Birmingham Small Arms Co. (BSA) on 7 June 1861, “a company to make guns by machinery,” an effort to compete with Enfield on the production of military arms. In addition to the main business of government contracts, Benjamin Woodward & Sons continued to make a small number of sporting guns. I should point out that there is no family connection to the more famous James Woodward of the London gun trade.

The gun shown here is a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary-under-lever pinfire sporting gun, serial number 134, made some time after 1863. The 29 13/16” damascus barrels have Birmingham proofs and barrel maker’s marks “C.H.”, which I believe to be for the Birmingham barrel maker Charles Hawkesford of Court, 2 Summer Lane (in operation 1859-1869). Other marks include “B.W.” (Benjamin Woodward) and “J.F.” (which I’ve as yet been unable to trace). The upper rib is signed “B. Woodward & Sons Makers to the War Department No. 134”, reflecting the firm’s main area of business, in case anyone wondered! The back-action locks are signed “B. Woodward & Sons” and have game scenes on both lock plates. The foliate scroll engraving on the action body is quite pleasant, nice starburst patterns around the pin holes, and the game scenes on the lock plates are particularly well executed. The low serial number is a good indication of the small number of sporting guns made by the firm. The gun still has mirror bores, and weighs 6 lb 12 oz.

fiDqZ68.jpg

DmxcqmT.jpg

Ch2HbFp.jpg

BEMX3B6.jpg

at9wRfJ.jpg

aVGj5rz.jpg
 
Picked this one up a couple of weeks ago. Many of you likely saw it. It's an Emil Kerner 16 gauge. Gun has 2 9/16" chambers. Weighs in at around 6lb, 6oz with the sling. It has a proof date of August, 1929. None of the screws are buggered and overall in very nice condition for the year. Excellent bores.

Brian, a very nice addition to your collection.
 
Small-town gunmakers could be creative, inventive, and builders of high-quality guns. As covered earlier with the Edward Paton gun, a local maker could obtain royal warrants and develop a reputation amongst the nobility, British and foreign. Today’s gun is from another Scottish maker that fits this description, James Erskine.

James Erskine was born in 1812 near Newton Stewart, in Scotland. He may have apprenticed with Edward or Jeremiah Patrick, before working for a while as a gun finisher for Williams & Powell of Liverpool. James returned to Newton Stewart and opened his business at 61 Victoria Street, though the exact date is not known. James was an exhibitor at the Great Exhibition in 1851, and was awarded a Bronze Medal for a muzzle-loading shotgun with recessed hammers. In 1859 he obtained a patent (No. 1703) for a slide-and-drop breech loading action. He entered at least one gun in the Field Gun Trials of 1866, and received "the highest award" for superior construction. In 1866 he obtained another patent (No. 1585) for a drop-down barrel action. Soon after 1866 James Erskine was appointed Gun Maker to Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (the elder brother of Albert, Queen Victoria’s consort), and to an Austrian prince. So, not exactly your typical small-town gunsmith. James Erskine died in 1891.

The gun is not one of James Erskine’s patent actions, but a standard 12-bore rotary-underlever double-bite screw grip pinfire sporting gun, no serial number, made sometime in the mid-1860s. The top rib is signed “J. Erskine Newton Stewart”, and the bar locks are signed “J. Erskine”. The 29 1/16” damascus barrels have only a London provisional proof mark only, with no definitive proofs, and no bore stamp. The barrel maker’s initials “T.B.” could be those of Thomas Barnsley or Thomas Bowen. The action bar is also lacking the usual proofs. However, it is a good quality gun made with attention to detail and styling, with a sculptured action body, flat-sided sculptured hammers, fluted fences, and a well-figured stock with heel and toe plates. As is often the case with guns of this period, it is all about the unnecessary details – I really like the dimple in the action to accept the raised edge of the fore-end iron when the gun is opened. While most makers leave the trigger guard plain, or with a raised edge or clip to locate the under-lever, Erskine raised both sides to create a channel to center the under-lever, a style I had not encountered before. Also, the trigger plate screw and surrounding is engraved, even though it would be hidden by the closed lever. Detail.

I wish I knew more about the history of this gun, and the reasons why it escaped normal proofing. This is a gun that has seen hard use and the bores are pitted, and it weighs 7 lb 4 oz.

5Byp27T.jpg

5oGqBXc.jpg

tTjamB3.jpg

CEFCqDf.jpg

ob9LzHC.jpg

cUFDIcS.jpg

bHJDqnk.jpg
 
Some very distinctive features on that Erskine, Pinfire. These styling details would help his gun stand out at an important shoot. I see a lovely gun that appears to be heavily worn, suggesting an unbelivable amount of use. All the metal and wood finishes and the checkering look untouched and original but heavily worn. Even if used for years by someone with rough calloused hands by a second or third ( or more) owner, how much use does it take to wear the checkering down that much? I have seen dozens of trap guns
( Berettas, Perazzis, Ljutics ) with sometimes a hundred thousand rounds or more, none showed that amount of just plain wear. How many modern guns could stand up to that? Very very few.
 
Some very distinctive features on that Erskine, Pinfire. These styling details would help his gun stand out at an important shoot. I see a lovely gun that appears to be heavily worn, suggesting an unbelivable amount of use. All the metal and wood finishes and the checkering look untouched and original but heavily worn. Even if used for years by someone with rough calloused hands by a second or third ( or more) owner, how much use does it take to wear the checkering down that much? I have seen dozens of trap guns
( Berettas, Perazzis, Ljutics ) with sometimes a hundred thousand rounds or more, none showed that amount of just plain wear. How many modern guns could stand up to that? Very very few.

Looking at statistics from the earliest driven shoots, the numbers are hard to grasp. Lord Ripon's totals for 1867 included 265 red grouse, 1179 partridges, 741 pheasants, and 1600 hares and rabbits. By 1870 his totals had risen to 498 red grouse, 2309 partridges, and 2117 pheasants. His 1881 totals included 1566 red grouse, 3465 partridges, 5014 pheasants, and 1800 rabbits/hares. in 1890 his totals included 2006 red grouse, 7002 partridges, and 6498 pheasants.. In 1906 his totals were 2179 red grouse, 2019 partridges, and 8478 pheasants. In his entire shooting life 1867-1923, he bagged 124,193 red grouse and 241,224 pheasants.

Looking at daily game numbers for some of the great estates (there would have been several shots on the day), there are daily tallies such as 3114 pheasants (Sandringham, 4 Nov 1896), 1671 partridges (Holkham, 7 Dec 1905), 2929 red grouse (Lord Sefton's Littledale, 12 Aug 1915), 6943 rabbits (Duke of Marlborough's Blenheim, 7 Oct 1898). Some daily tallies by just one person include numbers such as 780 partridges (by Maharajah Duleep Singh, Elveden House 8 Sept 1876), and 1070 red grouse (by Lord Walsingham at Bluberhouses, 30 Aug 1888). (All numbers from the book The Big Shots, Edwardian Shooting Parties, by Jonathan Ruffer)

And that doesn't cover practice shooting. Aye, Victorian and Edwardian game guns were put to hard use. Unfortunately there was little reason to care for the outdated and obsolete pinfire, so it is not surprising some of the finest guns, the ones used at the great estates, show signs of much use. And while guns can be clearly worn out and carry period repairs, I rarely encounter a British pinfire that is off-face.
 
Last edited:
I rarely encounter a British pinfire that is off-face.
My thought on that is the pinfire guns are most likely to have experienced only the charges they were built for, as compared to vintage center fires that into the 20th century suffered the abuse of inappropriate smokeless loads. Very seldom is a well-used vintage center fire found that is not off face.
 
My thought on that is the pinfire guns are most likely to have experienced only the charges they were built for, as compared to vintage center fires that into the 20th century suffered the abuse of inappropriate smokeless loads. Very seldom is a well-used vintage center fire found that is not off face.

Good point!
 
Another point to consider... if a vintage gun has been in Canada from maybe 1900, 1920, even 1950, it was most likely considered to be just another old gun and treated as such. Gramp's old hammer gun went hunting every year, ducks, geese, pheasants, whatever was legal and available and it would have been used with commonly available ammunition which would be 2 3/4" smokeless including the old Maxums and Imperials. The older guns weren't marked 2 1/2" and most Canadian hunters had never even heard of it, they used what they could buy at their local hardware store, same as everybody else. A 12 took 12 gauge shells, the more powerful the better. The wonder to me is that more of them aren't loose considering the pounding they took. We have a few old family photos of 2-3 happy hunters with a WAGON load of birds from a day in the field. Many if not most of the guns proudly displayed in these vintage photos were likely short chambered black powder proofed, they didn't know and didn't care, as long as it worked, these guns were tools like an axe to them. Pinfire use faded quickly in Canada due to scarcity of ammunition and by 1890-1900 most of these guns would have been retired, replaced by American repeaters and a flood of affordable doubles from Europe, primarily Belgium. When I was a kid every barn in the Fraser Valley had an old barn gun, a single shot .22 or an old hammer double, all rusted to $hit. There could easily have been a Purdey in the mix, just another old gun! The parents sometimes removed the firing pins and gave these old clunkers to us kids to play cowboys and indians and of course we quickly destroyed them.
 
Back
Top Bottom