The allure of the British gun
- Thread starter Pinfire
- Start date
While we are on this can I ask the significance of the 1 in this picture? Is it 1 of 2 or ???
There is a gun seller in England who used the name Matched Pairs, IIRC, and he tries to offer the service of matching up pairs and triples that have been separated over time. He has a data base of guns and if you have a single from a pair, you can go on the site and see if the other has been registered.
Ah, pairs. These became a ‘necessity’ for battue, or driven bird shoots, most commonly involving two guns and a loader to assist the shooter. Look at any European driven-shoot video on YouTube to see such a ballet in action. As Sillymike says, this could be extended to sets of three and four guns, but generally with entirely different purposes. Yes, a few sportsmen of old partook in driven shoots with three guns and two loaders, but this was usually seen as greed unbecoming of a gentleman, leaving fewer birds for others to shoot. Sets of three or four guns might involve guns with different gauges and chokes, but from one maker – identified as a set, but completely contrary to the philosophy of paired guns.
Using the terminology of British gunmaking, a pair are true twin guns: built at the same time, by the same craftsmen, consecutively numbered, and made as identical as humanly possible in terms of dimensions, weight, balance, trigger pull, barrel constriction and point of aim, and even stock figure. These would be numbered 1 and 2, and usually cased together. To the shooter, he/she should not be able to tell the difference between the two, at all, other than the number. Most makers charge a premium percentage above the cost of two separate guns, for the work required to make them perfect twins.
Continuing on the subject of terminology, there are other kinds of pairs. The first of these is a matched pair. They were not built at the same time, or necessarily by the same craftsmen, and are not consecutively serial numbered: one gun was later built as a copy of the first. A companion pair is a second pair of guns, made in a similar manner to the first pair. These can be consecutively numbered, marked 1,2,3,4, etc. A subsequent pair can be purchased subsequently, as a set. A composite pair is made by the same maker and has the same style and specification, but is not consecutively serial numbered or numbered 1 and 2; they are similar but not identical. Finally, a composed pair is where the original gun is the number 2 gun, and the number 1 gun is made later. If buying from a British auction or dealer, such distinctions need to be made to know what you're buying.
A pair of game guns is made for a single purpose – driven birds. Such guns were not intended to be carried for walked-up shooting, or aimed at quarry other than pheasants and red grouse. Of course no one is stopping anyone from doing so, but usually numbered pairs are made for a specific charge (if a 12-bore, it would be 1 1/16 oz shot from a 2 ½” case, or 1 ¼ oz from a 2 ¾” case, I believe), and typically (for a double) choked improved cylinder and improved modified (3/4).
As with so many shotgun advances, the concept of paired guns took off with the arrival of the pin-fire breech-loader. Loading a muzzle-loader was too slow for the driven shoot, especially if shooting opportunities were plentiful. This is where the cartridge gun came into its own, with the ability to reload in a flash. There were pairs of muzzle-loaders, for which a loader (usually a footman) was essential. However, a person with a single pin-fire breech-loader could outshoot speed-wise someone with two muzzle-loaders and a loader. At the time the pin-fire emerged, there were very few estates in Britain that produced enough birds to give enough battue sport to justify a second gun – so pairs of muzzle-loaders were unusual, and pairs of pin-fires even more so. There simply weren’t enough birds to justify it. As gamebird husbandry improved and the number of driven shoots increased in number and capacity through the 1860s and 1870s, a second breech-loader could be justified. However, the central-fire gun had appeared on the scene, and anyone going to the expense of a new pair probably opted for the even quicker-loading central-fire system, especially once ejectors appeared in the mid-1870s. As a result, pairs of pin-fires are almost unheard of. Here is one that is presumed to be of a pair, a Harris Holland 12-bore pin-fire numbered 963-A, built in 1863. Presumably, Number 963-B is out there somewhere.
Using the terminology of British gunmaking, a pair are true twin guns: built at the same time, by the same craftsmen, consecutively numbered, and made as identical as humanly possible in terms of dimensions, weight, balance, trigger pull, barrel constriction and point of aim, and even stock figure. These would be numbered 1 and 2, and usually cased together. To the shooter, he/she should not be able to tell the difference between the two, at all, other than the number. Most makers charge a premium percentage above the cost of two separate guns, for the work required to make them perfect twins.
Continuing on the subject of terminology, there are other kinds of pairs. The first of these is a matched pair. They were not built at the same time, or necessarily by the same craftsmen, and are not consecutively serial numbered: one gun was later built as a copy of the first. A companion pair is a second pair of guns, made in a similar manner to the first pair. These can be consecutively numbered, marked 1,2,3,4, etc. A subsequent pair can be purchased subsequently, as a set. A composite pair is made by the same maker and has the same style and specification, but is not consecutively serial numbered or numbered 1 and 2; they are similar but not identical. Finally, a composed pair is where the original gun is the number 2 gun, and the number 1 gun is made later. If buying from a British auction or dealer, such distinctions need to be made to know what you're buying.
A pair of game guns is made for a single purpose – driven birds. Such guns were not intended to be carried for walked-up shooting, or aimed at quarry other than pheasants and red grouse. Of course no one is stopping anyone from doing so, but usually numbered pairs are made for a specific charge (if a 12-bore, it would be 1 1/16 oz shot from a 2 ½” case, or 1 ¼ oz from a 2 ¾” case, I believe), and typically (for a double) choked improved cylinder and improved modified (3/4).
As with so many shotgun advances, the concept of paired guns took off with the arrival of the pin-fire breech-loader. Loading a muzzle-loader was too slow for the driven shoot, especially if shooting opportunities were plentiful. This is where the cartridge gun came into its own, with the ability to reload in a flash. There were pairs of muzzle-loaders, for which a loader (usually a footman) was essential. However, a person with a single pin-fire breech-loader could outshoot speed-wise someone with two muzzle-loaders and a loader. At the time the pin-fire emerged, there were very few estates in Britain that produced enough birds to give enough battue sport to justify a second gun – so pairs of muzzle-loaders were unusual, and pairs of pin-fires even more so. There simply weren’t enough birds to justify it. As gamebird husbandry improved and the number of driven shoots increased in number and capacity through the 1860s and 1870s, a second breech-loader could be justified. However, the central-fire gun had appeared on the scene, and anyone going to the expense of a new pair probably opted for the even quicker-loading central-fire system, especially once ejectors appeared in the mid-1870s. As a result, pairs of pin-fires are almost unheard of. Here is one that is presumed to be of a pair, a Harris Holland 12-bore pin-fire numbered 963-A, built in 1863. Presumably, Number 963-B is out there somewhere.
Hey Mike, it is surprising at times to realize how many ‘obscure’ names were involved in gunmaking in the 19th century. How many gunmaking names/companies are current today? It would be interesting to make a list. Anyone out there want to try?
As a background exercise, I tried to figure out how many British builders of pin-fire shotguns there were in the period between 1853, when they first appeared in Britain, and 1870, when central-fire guns had all but eliminated the pin-fire. Discounting all the names of persons only involved in individual task work such as barrel-making, lock-making, stocking, etc., and counting only persons and firms identified as gunmakers, and excluding persons/firms identifying themselves solely as pistol or rifle makers, I tracked down 944 names of gunmakers making shotguns. This is from census data, business directories, advertisements etc., and several comprehensive reference works and databases, cross-referenced against each other as much as I could. I have no doubt the real number is a bit smaller, owing to my almost certainly including names of makers who stopped making muzzle-loaders and closed shop, lacking the know-how to make the more complex breech-loaders. A few might have started building central-fire guns only, during the period of system overlap. Some makers were only in business for a year or two – and therefore would have sold a very small number of guns with their name on them. Most market towns had a gunmaker, though bigger towns and cities had potentially more clients, and therefore attracted more gunmakers. Almost half the gunmakers on my list had addresses in Birmingham and London, with 296 and 110 gunmakers respectively. The rest were scattered throughout Britain.
Against this list I have checked off every pin-fire shotgun illustrated, mentioned in print and online, and every one I’ve seen or handled, to help validate the data. I have occasionally added new names to the list, as existing records are far from perfect, and 19th-century gun knowledge is always incomplete. All in all, there were a large number of potential pin-fire makers, but with very low production capacity. A gunmaker, with an apprentice and a journeyman worker, could only produce a handful of guns a year. Output of sporting guns was always small, compared to the more lucrative military contracts. Even the serious firms could only produce and sell about 20 to 70 guns a year. Respected names, like Westley Richards, struggled to sell any pin-fires at all in the first years they made them, and some big names waited until well into the 1860s to begin doing so, when it was clear there was a growing demand. It is said that before the public trials of 1858 and 1859, and maybe even 1860, there were no more than a few hundred pin-fires in all of Britain; many would have been foreign-sourced. Production and demand grew in the 1860s, and by 1870 or so, maybe a few thousand British pin-fire game guns had been built, at most, if I’m feeling optimistic.
Most of these guns were eventually converted or scrapped, though enough survived to the modern day to provide a glimpse of what was available back then. It is a twist of fate that most of the surviving examples have come out of the gun rooms of the richest sportsmen, the few who could afford to set their still-working pin-fire guns aside and purchase new central-fire guns to replace them. Shooting then was a mark of one’s social status, especially for driven shoots attended by royalty and nobility. Having a gun by a respected maker was essential, and keeping up with fashion, such as having the latest snap-action, was also important. For those without the purse to afford London makers, provincial craftsmen were a cheaper alternative, able to produce equal quality. Some provincial makers, like Horsley, Pape, Powell, and Paton, were highly sought after, and owners of their guns suffered no social embarrassment. But there were smaller firms, who could still produce quality guns.
Here’s a name that is uncommon, Niebour. Charles Frederick Niebour was born in Faversham, Kent, in 1818. He is said to have established his business as a gun maker in 1831 at 124 High Street, Uxbridge, but this cannot be correct, assuming a 7-year apprenticeship at age 14, completed somewhere around 1839. The business was definitely in operation by 1855. Charles Frederick had a son, William Henry, born in 1843. He joined the business around 1865, probably after completing his apprenticeship with his father. William Henry had a son in 1866, also named Charles Frederick, and around 1869 the firm took on a new apprentice, Herbert G Gudgin from Canterbury. As was typical, the apprentice lived with the master. Charles Frederick the younger joined the family business around 1883. The elder Charles Frederick died in 1888, and the business closed its doors in 1890. Uxbridge is now contained within West London, but in mid-Victorian times, it was a small Middlesex market town just outside of London. Being close to London meant access to the superior craftsmen attracted to the city, and Uxbridge was also well served by the Grand Junction Canal, linking Uxbridge with Birmingham and the Thames. It was a good location for a gunmaker.
Here is one of Charles Frederick’s guns, a 16-bore game gun, made in the early 1860s. It has no serial number, this being typical for such a small operation. However, this was no amateur job. The action is signed by Edwin C Hodges, the best breech-loading actioner of London. It is a single-bite screw grip, the type favoured by Hodges/Joseph Lang, but it lacks the assisted-opening stud of the earlier Lang pattern (all of which had been copied from the Frenchman Beatus Beringer). The 29 7/8" damascus barrels have London proofs, and the top rib is signed “C. F. Niebour Uxbridge.” It is beautifully made, and it has some unusual features. The hammer noses have exaggerated flanges of a style I've not often encountered; the finial of the under-lever is left smooth; and the splinter fore-end is unusually long, almost certainly a special request. The gun also has a very brief action bar, resulting in the distance between the hinge and the bite being shorter than usual. Still, Hodges must have judged the action sufficiently strong, and the gun is tight and on face. The gun still shows some vestiges of heat-bluing and case colours. With its lightened frame, it weighs just over 6 ½ lb. I know of no other Niebour guns, of any age or type, mentioned or illustrated anywhere. I wonder how many he actually made?
Last edited:
No comments, questions, or trolls, but the view count keeps climbing, so there must be some interest out there about the allure of British guns. I guess I’ll continue my musings... Anyway, there are too many black flies to do yard work.
It is impossible to write about British gunmaking without invoking history, invention, class structure, and larger-than-life characters. Other countries may share similarities and exhibit significant differences. In France, gunmaker-inventors were respected, admired, and had a high social standing. In Britain, to the upper classes, gunmakers were mere tradesmen, and even the very best were treated rather shabbily by comparison. A British gunmaker might provide a new gun in time for the beginning of the August shooting season, only to be paid with the butcher, carriage maker, and others at Christmas time, when accounts were usually settled. Or the gun might be returned to the maker months later, with the claim that it wasn’t quite right, and no compensation given. To the gunmaker, there were many up-front costs for materials, manpower and rent, and chasing after Lord So-and-So to get paid was always a problem, with little recourse if wronged. It was not an easy business, explaining why so many did not last or went bankrupt, and why the successful ones kept the operation closely held in the family, and sometimes banded together.
In the Victorian Age, there were captains of industry who saw the big picture of the gun trade and who focused more on partnerships, production methods, and new horizons. Unlike certain makers, theirs are not household names, but they were most influential in the evolution of gun manufacturing from cluttered workbenches to factory production. One of these is John Dent Goodman.
The story starts with Clement Cotterill, who was a merchant at No. 1, Old Square, Birmingham. He started in business as a leather seller in Edgbaston Street, and by 1780 he was established as a hardware merchant and manufacturer. He founded the firm of Cotterill & Francis, a partnership that lasted ten years. In 1795, Cotterill entered into another partnership with Thomas Ketland of Philadelphia, “for the collection of hardwares, buttons, buckles, and all other articles manufactured in this and the neighbouring towns, and exported to the United States of North America and elsewhere.” Cotterill’s sons William and Thomas joined the business, first trading as Ketland, Cotterill, & Son (until 1802), then as Clement Cotterill & Sons (until 1806). In 1825, following his daughter Mary’s marriage to Joshua Scholefield, the Member of Parliament for Birmingham, the firm traded as Scholefield & Sons.
John Dent Goodman became a partner in the business, and in 1861-1862, Scholefield Sons & Goodman operated from Liverpool. In Birmingham, the firm of Scholefield, Goodman and Son, merchants, worked from 5 Minories, and in 1877-1878 the business moved to 135 Edmund Street. At some point, the firm expanded to 31, Great St. Helens, London. The original Scholefield business may have traded in guns as part of their hardware business, but the involvement of Goodman firmly linked the company to the gun trade. Goodman was the Chairman of the Birmingham Small-Arms Trade Association, formed in 1854 by Goodman, John Field Swinburn, Isaac Hollis, Thomas Turner, Joseph Bourne, Thomas Wilson, John Rock Cooper, William Tranter, Charles Playfair, Benjamin and Henry Woodward, and others. In 1861, the association members decided to establish the Birmingham Small Arms and Metal Company Ltd. (B.S.A.) to produce arms by machinery and thereby compete with the government operations at Enfield. Goodman was elected Chairman of the Board of B.S.A. in 1863, a position he held until 1900. Goodman was personally involved in all the trade contracts with the U.S. government over provisions of arms during the period of the American Civil War. Scholefield, Goodman and Son was one of the companies involved in shipping Enfield-pattern guns; Goodman also secured the contract to convert 100,000 Pattern 1853 Enfield rifles using the Snider action, giving the story a Canadian connection. Goodman was also in partnership with Joseph Rock Cooper & Co. of pepperbox pistol fame.
In 1856, Goodman became Chairman of the Birmingham Proof House. Then, in 1867, Abingdon Works was formed, a manufacturing partnership located on Shadwell Street to supply the trade with ready-made guns and gun parts. The Abington Works partners were Goodman, Thomas Bentley, William Bourne, Charles Cooper, Charles Pryse, Richard Redman, Joseph Smith, Charles Playfair, Joseph Wilson, John Field Swinburn and Fred and Henry Woodward. Together, these firms could pool their resources, undertake contracts with the government, and supply gunmakers across Britain. But, despite Goodman’s widespread involvement in the gun trade and being a partner in several companies that made and sold guns, his name rarely appeared on them.
Here is a game gun retailed by Scholefield, Goodman & Sons, a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary under-lever pin-fire sporting gun of typical form. It has no serial number, and I estimate it was made in the late 1860s. The 29 13/16” damascus barrels have Birmingham proofs, and the top rib is simply signed “Scholefield London” (the London reference might be false advertising, but at some point, the company did have a London address). There is a gun/barrel maker’s mark “J.W.,” which I believe is the mark of Joseph Wilson of 67 1/2 Great Charles Street, Birmingham, one of the Abington Works partners. Wilson may have supplied sporting guns to Scholefield, Goodman & Sons directly or through Abington Works. The gun has an elongated top strap, thin percussion fences, back-action locks signed “Scholefield,” and about 30% coverage of foliate scroll engraving. It is a medium-quality sporting gun produced by the Birmingham trade, retailed by a general merchant, but it was nevertheless built with care by craftsmen. The gun weighs 7 lb 2 oz.
Scholefield, Goodman & Sons supplied Scholefield-marked rifles to the Newfoundland sealing trade, many of which were single-shot Field’s Patent side-lever in .450 calibre; I’ve seen a few of these turn up at local auctions. Goodman visited Newfoundland several times, perhaps seeking new business opportunities. A few Scholefield-marked shotguns are known, but this is the only pin-fire game gun so marked that I have come across. The Newfoundland trade connection might help explain how a Scholefield-marked gun ended up in Canada.
John Dent Goodman
It is impossible to write about British gunmaking without invoking history, invention, class structure, and larger-than-life characters. Other countries may share similarities and exhibit significant differences. In France, gunmaker-inventors were respected, admired, and had a high social standing. In Britain, to the upper classes, gunmakers were mere tradesmen, and even the very best were treated rather shabbily by comparison. A British gunmaker might provide a new gun in time for the beginning of the August shooting season, only to be paid with the butcher, carriage maker, and others at Christmas time, when accounts were usually settled. Or the gun might be returned to the maker months later, with the claim that it wasn’t quite right, and no compensation given. To the gunmaker, there were many up-front costs for materials, manpower and rent, and chasing after Lord So-and-So to get paid was always a problem, with little recourse if wronged. It was not an easy business, explaining why so many did not last or went bankrupt, and why the successful ones kept the operation closely held in the family, and sometimes banded together.
In the Victorian Age, there were captains of industry who saw the big picture of the gun trade and who focused more on partnerships, production methods, and new horizons. Unlike certain makers, theirs are not household names, but they were most influential in the evolution of gun manufacturing from cluttered workbenches to factory production. One of these is John Dent Goodman.
The story starts with Clement Cotterill, who was a merchant at No. 1, Old Square, Birmingham. He started in business as a leather seller in Edgbaston Street, and by 1780 he was established as a hardware merchant and manufacturer. He founded the firm of Cotterill & Francis, a partnership that lasted ten years. In 1795, Cotterill entered into another partnership with Thomas Ketland of Philadelphia, “for the collection of hardwares, buttons, buckles, and all other articles manufactured in this and the neighbouring towns, and exported to the United States of North America and elsewhere.” Cotterill’s sons William and Thomas joined the business, first trading as Ketland, Cotterill, & Son (until 1802), then as Clement Cotterill & Sons (until 1806). In 1825, following his daughter Mary’s marriage to Joshua Scholefield, the Member of Parliament for Birmingham, the firm traded as Scholefield & Sons.
John Dent Goodman became a partner in the business, and in 1861-1862, Scholefield Sons & Goodman operated from Liverpool. In Birmingham, the firm of Scholefield, Goodman and Son, merchants, worked from 5 Minories, and in 1877-1878 the business moved to 135 Edmund Street. At some point, the firm expanded to 31, Great St. Helens, London. The original Scholefield business may have traded in guns as part of their hardware business, but the involvement of Goodman firmly linked the company to the gun trade. Goodman was the Chairman of the Birmingham Small-Arms Trade Association, formed in 1854 by Goodman, John Field Swinburn, Isaac Hollis, Thomas Turner, Joseph Bourne, Thomas Wilson, John Rock Cooper, William Tranter, Charles Playfair, Benjamin and Henry Woodward, and others. In 1861, the association members decided to establish the Birmingham Small Arms and Metal Company Ltd. (B.S.A.) to produce arms by machinery and thereby compete with the government operations at Enfield. Goodman was elected Chairman of the Board of B.S.A. in 1863, a position he held until 1900. Goodman was personally involved in all the trade contracts with the U.S. government over provisions of arms during the period of the American Civil War. Scholefield, Goodman and Son was one of the companies involved in shipping Enfield-pattern guns; Goodman also secured the contract to convert 100,000 Pattern 1853 Enfield rifles using the Snider action, giving the story a Canadian connection. Goodman was also in partnership with Joseph Rock Cooper & Co. of pepperbox pistol fame.
In 1856, Goodman became Chairman of the Birmingham Proof House. Then, in 1867, Abingdon Works was formed, a manufacturing partnership located on Shadwell Street to supply the trade with ready-made guns and gun parts. The Abington Works partners were Goodman, Thomas Bentley, William Bourne, Charles Cooper, Charles Pryse, Richard Redman, Joseph Smith, Charles Playfair, Joseph Wilson, John Field Swinburn and Fred and Henry Woodward. Together, these firms could pool their resources, undertake contracts with the government, and supply gunmakers across Britain. But, despite Goodman’s widespread involvement in the gun trade and being a partner in several companies that made and sold guns, his name rarely appeared on them.
Here is a game gun retailed by Scholefield, Goodman & Sons, a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary under-lever pin-fire sporting gun of typical form. It has no serial number, and I estimate it was made in the late 1860s. The 29 13/16” damascus barrels have Birmingham proofs, and the top rib is simply signed “Scholefield London” (the London reference might be false advertising, but at some point, the company did have a London address). There is a gun/barrel maker’s mark “J.W.,” which I believe is the mark of Joseph Wilson of 67 1/2 Great Charles Street, Birmingham, one of the Abington Works partners. Wilson may have supplied sporting guns to Scholefield, Goodman & Sons directly or through Abington Works. The gun has an elongated top strap, thin percussion fences, back-action locks signed “Scholefield,” and about 30% coverage of foliate scroll engraving. It is a medium-quality sporting gun produced by the Birmingham trade, retailed by a general merchant, but it was nevertheless built with care by craftsmen. The gun weighs 7 lb 2 oz.
Scholefield, Goodman & Sons supplied Scholefield-marked rifles to the Newfoundland sealing trade, many of which were single-shot Field’s Patent side-lever in .450 calibre; I’ve seen a few of these turn up at local auctions. Goodman visited Newfoundland several times, perhaps seeking new business opportunities. A few Scholefield-marked shotguns are known, but this is the only pin-fire game gun so marked that I have come across. The Newfoundland trade connection might help explain how a Scholefield-marked gun ended up in Canada.
John Dent Goodman
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Hope the black flies are done soon. I was thinking of going to bad black fly land on Thursday and have been hiding out from them in the city since early May.
This thread gets two views a day from me whenever I have internet. That's about half the time and that's the way I like it really. One view when I'm browsing and don't have time to absorb it, then the other view when I come back and read it with all my attention.
So I have a question. Well, one for now. Are you really a retarded Fudd like that other guy said?
I must be. One does not post and give opinions on CGN lightly, and furthermore, I'm told the Internet does not lie.
Next thing, I'll find out I'm an AI bot.
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Back to theme of British guns, my own interest lies mostly in pre-WW1 shotguns. This past year found me buying 3 hammerguns. 2 of them are not British but rather German and Belgian. They are each fantastic in their own modest way and I'm working on getting two of them in era-appropriate cases while the other is in its originally very nice maker's case to be restored.
By the way, this is why my vehicle is a 2008 since I'm not affluent but trying hard to live with a gun addiction.
Quick pic of the Brit:
By the way, this is why my vehicle is a 2008 since I'm not affluent but trying hard to live with a gun addiction.
Quick pic of the Brit:
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
It's at the Dr.'s office presently to have the crosspin rebuilt. Otherwise in mostly fine condition.
Licensed to kill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Peace Country Alberta
A cross pin in a muzzle loader?
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Yes, is that not the correct term?
Licensed to kill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Peace Country Alberta
Don’t know. I thought you were referring to a hinge pin which muzzleloaders lack. Perhaps you were referring to the wedge that holds the barrels to the stock? Pictures don’t show much on my phone. Too dark.
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Crosspin = wedge. Better pictures to follow when I have it back.
Licensed to kill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Peace Country Alberta
many muzzle loading full stock rifles used cross pins to hold the barrel to the stock and some used wedges. Most (all?) half stocks use wedges as do most (all?) sxs shotguns. Wedges became more popular in the caplock period on rifles, shotguns and revolvers like the Colt C&B revolvers. For some reason, when I saw “cross pin” I thought perhaps that was the proper term for what I always called the hinge pin which, as you well know is a not incommon repair item on old sxs’s. But then the pic showed a ML so I got confused. Appreciate the clarification. Nice gun BTW.
It certainly is. From Hallowell & Co.’s illustrated firearm dictionary: Crosspin Fastener - A horizontal wedge, press-fit through the forend of a vintage gun, through a loop attached to the underside of the barrel and out the other side of the forend---to secure the forend in position. Also called a key or a wedge fastener.
I highly recommend their webpage to anyone interested in the use of correct terminology, at least as applies to British guns:
https://www.hallowellco.com/abbrevia.htm
That Manton is gorgeous, Londonshooter. I look forward to seeing it. Anything from Joseph Manton deserves to be looked at in detail, and reverently admired. All hail the Master!
I was in a Cabela’s today, picking up a carrying case. I glanced at the display of guns as I made my way through the huge store, and it made me think about how buying guns has evolved. Nowadays, you buy from a big-box store or chain, or online from an e-store or importer. Local gun shops might have a few second-hand guns to peruse in person, but again, online transactions dominate the second-hand market, from the CGN Equipment Exchange to unnamed external sites.
Turning back the clock some 165 years, how different was the act of purchasing a gun? The picture of someone ordering a bespoke gun directly from the maker is practically a cliché. But is it accurate?
One way to order and buy a gun was indeed to visit a gunmaker’s shop, be measured or provide measurements, specify features, agree on a price, and several months later, pick it up. What was also common was to try the gun first, especially if the gunmaker had a testing range. With a fixed shooting season and several months’ lead time in which to build a gun, there were bottlenecks when orders would accumulate for delivery in time for the next season. Many sportsmen leased shooting grounds, and these leases were expensive, to say nothing of other associated costs, so not having your new gun ready in time would be a major problem. From the gunmaker’s point of view, building a gun required the up-front costs of the materials, payments to in-house workers (usually daily) and outworkers (usually by the piece of work), to say nothing of rent and other operating costs. A few might try building guns on spec, hoping someone might buy them ‘off the rack.’ While logical to our modern eyes, this involved investing time and money with uncertain return, hoping for clients with generic requirements. With profit margins very tight, building up stock in this way was risky business. A gunmaker who had no orders to fill still had to pay workers, so they often built guns or made parts for other gunmakers as a side business. This is one of the reasons the name engraved on the rib only identifies the retailer, and not necessarily the builder of the gun —that, and the fact that a gun and all of its parts went through many specialized hands before being handed to the client.
Aside from gun makers were gun dealers and gun agents. Consider these the middlemen in the shooting world. They could provide a coveted London address to Birmingham and provincial makers, without the investment in bricks and mortar. This provided access to well-heeled London clients, who could choose from a selection of gunmakers’ wares in one location, at any time of year. This could include new guns built on spec, but especially second-hand guns, for which there was a thriving market. Used guns could be had at a lesser cost; while many society gentlemen would not want to be seen penny-pinching, complaining about the cost of guns, ammunition and shooting access were dominant concerns voiced in letters and the shooting press. No one likes to pay more than they have to, and everybody loves a bargain, then as now.
Second-hand guns could be had directly from gunmakers, who might take back one of their own when selling a new gun, or could be a gun from another maker taken as a trade-in. Pawn brokers did a good amount of business, and they often took in guns as collateral or payment. Jewellers frequently had a similar client list to a top gunmaker, so many jewellers also traded in guns, new and used.
When gunmakers went out of business, through debt or the passage of time, unsold stock found its way to resale, bought up by gunmakers, gun dealers, or directly to sportsmen looking for a deal, as auctions of such stock were announced in newspapers. Here is an advertisement for the sale of a stock of guns that appeared in the 15 April 1854 issue of The Field:
I mentioned earlier that Benjamin Cogswell started as a pawnbroker (later advertising himself as a “gun and pistol warehouse”, before declaring himself as a gunmaker). Westley Richards’s London agent was William Bishop, aka “The Bishop of Bond Street”, who was a jeweller. Then there was Edward Whistler, a silversmith, pawnbroker, and dealer in guns and pistols at 11 Strand, London, who operated from 1844 to 1875. In 1867, his business was advertised as “Edward Whistler, Gun and Pistol Repository,” offering new and second-hand guns from “the most approved London makers.” Whistler was one of two London agents used by the Birmingham maker William Wellington Greener.
Whistler's advertisement in the 21 May 1853 issue of The Field:
WW Greener gun, with the address of Edward Whistler (11 Strand):
The gunmaker of greatest interest to me is Joseph Lang, because of his importance to the pin-fire story. Lang started his apprenticeship in 1812 when he was 14 years old, to William Henry Wilson or Alexander Wilson, at Wilson's Gun and Pistol Warehouse at 1 Vigo Lane, London. Lang became manager of William Henry Wilson's gun dealing business at some time, probably in about 1820, when he would have been 21 years old. By 1823, Lang started to trade as “Joseph Lang, Gun and Pistol Repository” at 7 Haymarket. In May 1826, Lang bought the bankrupt stock of Joseph Manton, and in September 1826, he again advertised the fact that he was the only gun dealer in London who did not deal in “Birmingham and other Country-made guns”, an interesting insight into the London trade at the time. In 1828, Joseph Lang married James Purdey's daughter Eliza, further cementing his links with the top gunmaking world; at that time Lang finally described himself as a gun maker, and in 1852 the firm moved to 22 Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, one year (possibly two) before he started making his pin-fire gun.
William Westley Richards was born in 1788. He was the son of Theophilus Richards, a gunmaker and silver gun furniture maker, formerly of High Street and John Street, Birmingham, who himself was descended from a large and wealthy family of gunmakers, silversmiths, jewellers, cutlers, and merchants. In 1815, Richards appointed William Bishop, of 170 New Bond Street, as his London agent. Bishop had done gold and silver inlay work for several London gunmakers and, from about 1800, gold and platinum lined touch holes for John and Joseph Manton. From 1823 to 1825 William Bishop was in partnership with John Wicks, trading as Wicks & Bishop, jewellers, goldsmiths and sword cutlers, also gun and pistol warehousemen. Richards probably gave him guns to work on and Bishop probably sold some of them and thus became William Westley's London agent. From 1826, street directories recorded the firm of Westley Richards as the occupant of 170 New Bond Street. William Bishop died in 1871; for the next two years a sign in the window of the shop at 170 New Bond Street stated “Westley Richards (Minus Agent).”
Early Westley Richards, note William Bishop named on the label:
Guns could also be bought from hardware stores and general merchants. Guns might be built at a nameless Birmingham work bench, to be sold by a hardware shop (known then as ironmongers). Such guns were usually the lowest-cost ones, and often had spurious names and addresses, such as this fake Jeffery (marked “Jeffrey London”):
General merchants included outfitters one might find at the docks, selling to those shipping out, as well as more ‘department store’ merchants. I just covered one of the latter, Scholefield, Goodman & Sons, few days ago. Of the former, a good example is Fidele Primavesi of Cardiff, Wales, a general china, hardware and leatherware merchant. An immigrant born in Italy in 1839, he settled in Cardiff around 1850 and built up his business there and eventually to Swansea, Newport, and London. The business was initially named Primavesi & Son, changing to Primavesi & Sons, and it was active until 1915. He sold anything a person might need, from nautical instruments to Welsh and Staffordshire pottery, carriages and serviceable arms, and much more. As a well-to-do merchant and high-society personage, he did not live in a cramped gunmaker's shop, but rather in a grand mansion, Pen-y-Lan House, which cost £5000 to build, a considerable sum in those days. The coal trade was the primary source of commercial prosperity for Cardiff, and in 1881 the 250-ft cargo steamship named the SS Fidele Primavesi was launched to carry coal – a pretty good indication of the influence and regard the man held in the business community. Here is one of his guns, a 16-bore.The top rib is signed “F. Primavisi & Sons Cardiff” (note the different spelling of the family name), and the back-action locks are signed “F. Primavisi & Sons.” While some trade goods marked Primavisi are known, what is unclear is whether this is an alternate spelling, or an engraver's misprint not worth the time and money to correct.
Here is a more common example of his wares, his stamp on some pottery:
I was in a Cabela’s today, picking up a carrying case. I glanced at the display of guns as I made my way through the huge store, and it made me think about how buying guns has evolved. Nowadays, you buy from a big-box store or chain, or online from an e-store or importer. Local gun shops might have a few second-hand guns to peruse in person, but again, online transactions dominate the second-hand market, from the CGN Equipment Exchange to unnamed external sites.
Turning back the clock some 165 years, how different was the act of purchasing a gun? The picture of someone ordering a bespoke gun directly from the maker is practically a cliché. But is it accurate?
One way to order and buy a gun was indeed to visit a gunmaker’s shop, be measured or provide measurements, specify features, agree on a price, and several months later, pick it up. What was also common was to try the gun first, especially if the gunmaker had a testing range. With a fixed shooting season and several months’ lead time in which to build a gun, there were bottlenecks when orders would accumulate for delivery in time for the next season. Many sportsmen leased shooting grounds, and these leases were expensive, to say nothing of other associated costs, so not having your new gun ready in time would be a major problem. From the gunmaker’s point of view, building a gun required the up-front costs of the materials, payments to in-house workers (usually daily) and outworkers (usually by the piece of work), to say nothing of rent and other operating costs. A few might try building guns on spec, hoping someone might buy them ‘off the rack.’ While logical to our modern eyes, this involved investing time and money with uncertain return, hoping for clients with generic requirements. With profit margins very tight, building up stock in this way was risky business. A gunmaker who had no orders to fill still had to pay workers, so they often built guns or made parts for other gunmakers as a side business. This is one of the reasons the name engraved on the rib only identifies the retailer, and not necessarily the builder of the gun —that, and the fact that a gun and all of its parts went through many specialized hands before being handed to the client.
Aside from gun makers were gun dealers and gun agents. Consider these the middlemen in the shooting world. They could provide a coveted London address to Birmingham and provincial makers, without the investment in bricks and mortar. This provided access to well-heeled London clients, who could choose from a selection of gunmakers’ wares in one location, at any time of year. This could include new guns built on spec, but especially second-hand guns, for which there was a thriving market. Used guns could be had at a lesser cost; while many society gentlemen would not want to be seen penny-pinching, complaining about the cost of guns, ammunition and shooting access were dominant concerns voiced in letters and the shooting press. No one likes to pay more than they have to, and everybody loves a bargain, then as now.
Second-hand guns could be had directly from gunmakers, who might take back one of their own when selling a new gun, or could be a gun from another maker taken as a trade-in. Pawn brokers did a good amount of business, and they often took in guns as collateral or payment. Jewellers frequently had a similar client list to a top gunmaker, so many jewellers also traded in guns, new and used.
When gunmakers went out of business, through debt or the passage of time, unsold stock found its way to resale, bought up by gunmakers, gun dealers, or directly to sportsmen looking for a deal, as auctions of such stock were announced in newspapers. Here is an advertisement for the sale of a stock of guns that appeared in the 15 April 1854 issue of The Field:
I mentioned earlier that Benjamin Cogswell started as a pawnbroker (later advertising himself as a “gun and pistol warehouse”, before declaring himself as a gunmaker). Westley Richards’s London agent was William Bishop, aka “The Bishop of Bond Street”, who was a jeweller. Then there was Edward Whistler, a silversmith, pawnbroker, and dealer in guns and pistols at 11 Strand, London, who operated from 1844 to 1875. In 1867, his business was advertised as “Edward Whistler, Gun and Pistol Repository,” offering new and second-hand guns from “the most approved London makers.” Whistler was one of two London agents used by the Birmingham maker William Wellington Greener.
Whistler's advertisement in the 21 May 1853 issue of The Field:
WW Greener gun, with the address of Edward Whistler (11 Strand):
The gunmaker of greatest interest to me is Joseph Lang, because of his importance to the pin-fire story. Lang started his apprenticeship in 1812 when he was 14 years old, to William Henry Wilson or Alexander Wilson, at Wilson's Gun and Pistol Warehouse at 1 Vigo Lane, London. Lang became manager of William Henry Wilson's gun dealing business at some time, probably in about 1820, when he would have been 21 years old. By 1823, Lang started to trade as “Joseph Lang, Gun and Pistol Repository” at 7 Haymarket. In May 1826, Lang bought the bankrupt stock of Joseph Manton, and in September 1826, he again advertised the fact that he was the only gun dealer in London who did not deal in “Birmingham and other Country-made guns”, an interesting insight into the London trade at the time. In 1828, Joseph Lang married James Purdey's daughter Eliza, further cementing his links with the top gunmaking world; at that time Lang finally described himself as a gun maker, and in 1852 the firm moved to 22 Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, one year (possibly two) before he started making his pin-fire gun.
William Westley Richards was born in 1788. He was the son of Theophilus Richards, a gunmaker and silver gun furniture maker, formerly of High Street and John Street, Birmingham, who himself was descended from a large and wealthy family of gunmakers, silversmiths, jewellers, cutlers, and merchants. In 1815, Richards appointed William Bishop, of 170 New Bond Street, as his London agent. Bishop had done gold and silver inlay work for several London gunmakers and, from about 1800, gold and platinum lined touch holes for John and Joseph Manton. From 1823 to 1825 William Bishop was in partnership with John Wicks, trading as Wicks & Bishop, jewellers, goldsmiths and sword cutlers, also gun and pistol warehousemen. Richards probably gave him guns to work on and Bishop probably sold some of them and thus became William Westley's London agent. From 1826, street directories recorded the firm of Westley Richards as the occupant of 170 New Bond Street. William Bishop died in 1871; for the next two years a sign in the window of the shop at 170 New Bond Street stated “Westley Richards (Minus Agent).”
Early Westley Richards, note William Bishop named on the label:
Guns could also be bought from hardware stores and general merchants. Guns might be built at a nameless Birmingham work bench, to be sold by a hardware shop (known then as ironmongers). Such guns were usually the lowest-cost ones, and often had spurious names and addresses, such as this fake Jeffery (marked “Jeffrey London”):
General merchants included outfitters one might find at the docks, selling to those shipping out, as well as more ‘department store’ merchants. I just covered one of the latter, Scholefield, Goodman & Sons, few days ago. Of the former, a good example is Fidele Primavesi of Cardiff, Wales, a general china, hardware and leatherware merchant. An immigrant born in Italy in 1839, he settled in Cardiff around 1850 and built up his business there and eventually to Swansea, Newport, and London. The business was initially named Primavesi & Son, changing to Primavesi & Sons, and it was active until 1915. He sold anything a person might need, from nautical instruments to Welsh and Staffordshire pottery, carriages and serviceable arms, and much more. As a well-to-do merchant and high-society personage, he did not live in a cramped gunmaker's shop, but rather in a grand mansion, Pen-y-Lan House, which cost £5000 to build, a considerable sum in those days. The coal trade was the primary source of commercial prosperity for Cardiff, and in 1881 the 250-ft cargo steamship named the SS Fidele Primavesi was launched to carry coal – a pretty good indication of the influence and regard the man held in the business community. Here is one of his guns, a 16-bore.The top rib is signed “F. Primavisi & Sons Cardiff” (note the different spelling of the family name), and the back-action locks are signed “F. Primavisi & Sons.” While some trade goods marked Primavisi are known, what is unclear is whether this is an alternate spelling, or an engraver's misprint not worth the time and money to correct.
Here is a more common example of his wares, his stamp on some pottery:
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Pinfire, your example of the spurious Jefferey is a good one. Hard to catch as compared to the countless Belgium-proved hardware store guns. They were made for the North American trade in an attempt to cash in on the cachet of famous British maker names.
Sometimes a person finds a gun under the radar because it is assumed spurious. That's the case with one that was on auction last night. It's a wall-hanger according to the description of the bores but I 'think' it is real so I really couldn't help myself but buy it. An exception to my rule about my guns necessarily being shooters. A nice thing about old percussion guns is that being prescribed antiques in Canada, you can literally just hang them on the wall.
Sometimes a person finds a gun under the radar because it is assumed spurious. That's the case with one that was on auction last night. It's a wall-hanger according to the description of the bores but I 'think' it is real so I really couldn't help myself but buy it. An exception to my rule about my guns necessarily being shooters. A nice thing about old percussion guns is that being prescribed antiques in Canada, you can literally just hang them on the wall.
Last edited:
Londonshooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
I don't know though. Sorry, another dark and difficult to make out photo. The stock has a cheek piece so that is a bit of a flag. The trigger bow a little atypical. No mention in the listing of proof marks. I don't know for sure. Real, not real? Is the inscription Westly (they're out there as well as Wesley), or is it Westley? I'm going with real. Or was I duped? 
Last edited:
