Unit markings MH

C

cie

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Location
Calgary
I have a Martini Henry MkIII which has the following stamped on the buttstock. The obvious answer is BC Rifles, but there are no other markings indicating Canadian service. Any ideas?

IMG_0024.jpg
 
Does it still have the Roundel, or is it sanded off?

Is it "5BCR31 over 5"? The last two digits on the first line aren't very clear in your photo.

Is there a diamond with either "DC" or "MD" stamped anywhere on the stock?
 
By the way, if it's Canadian, the most likely explanation is No.5 Company of The British Columbia Regiment in Vancouver (raised in 1894). Of interest, in the Boer War, the BCR formed A Company of the RCR. Their fist CO was also the mayor of Vancouver and although most of the Dominion was, at that time, armed with Snider-Enfields, I have seen photos of the BCR issued with short-lever Martini-Henry rifles.

Hope that helps.
 
Claven2 said:
Does it still have the Roundel, or is it sanded off?

Is it "5BCR31 over 5"? The last two digits on the first line aren't very clear in your photo.

Is there a diamond with either "DC" or "MD" stamped anywhere on the stock?
Click to expand...

There are no other markings on the stock. And I don't think there are letters or numbers after the R, I think those are just bruises.

The handguard also has a 5 on the side.
 
By handguard, I assume you mean forestock? There should be no hand-guard if it's still a M-H MkIII. If there's a handguard, it would be converted to .303" and no longer be a MkIII rifle.
 
I have had three rifles all marked "5BCR" for the 5th British Columbia Regiment. All would have roundels so, if yours doesn't then someone has sanded it off. The "5" underneath is a rack number. I have never seen one which had the rack number on the forestock but anything is possible. One of the ones I have seen has the "DC". The "MD", I believe, was earlier. I also have somewhere in my literature that none of the rifles went to South Africa as they became redundent almost immediately because they were replaced but the Mk.1 Lee Enfield. They stood in stores for long periods and were used for training and for cadets which explains why most are in VG condition.
RickskitchenandMH010.jpg
[/IMG]
 
Dec 28, 1895, The 5th British Columbia Regiment of Garrison Artillery.
Formerly:
BC Provisional Regt of GA 1883
BC Brigade of Garrison Artillery 1889
BC Batt of GA 1893
5th BC Batt of GA Mar 15 1895

Converted to Two Battalions 5&6 1899

"Concise Lineages of the Canadian Army"
 
Green: You sure they were the "5th regiment"? Their official website doesn't mention that, only that the troops stationed in Vancouver were the "5th Company" in the regiment?

From their website:

In 1886, the City of Vancouver was incorporated just before it was burnt to the ground due to a brush fire which raged out of control. The city was rebuilt and promptly went into such a period of growth, that by 1892 it was a city of some importance. A Drill Hall had been acquired at the Imperial Opera House on Pender Street at the North end of Beatty (now the site of the Shelly Building and commemorated by a plaque just Inside the main entrance). A rifle range had also been cleared at Central Park, all at the expense of the city. When authority was given In 1894 for the raising of Number 5 Company in Vancouver, Major T.O. Townley, who was also the Mayor of Vancouver, was placed in command. Artillery training was carried out mainly by gun squads drilling an the 32 and 64 pounders. "The main event of the year was the gun practice. One gun detachment from each company went down after one day's drill, manned and fired the 6 inch guns at a moving, target, making 60% of direct hits and a ricochet."

Rifle shooting was important and Martini-Henry rifles were used until their replacement by Lee-Enfields.
Click to expand...
 
Looks like a 5th company was added to a 4 co regt in 1894. the above chronology is from the source quoted above. In 1885 the BC Provisional Regt of GA had 3 cos.
 
It might not be refinished. the numbers may only be worn from buffing the stock with oil and possibly from a scraping at the arsenal - I'd need to see it in person to tell. But of the roundel is totally gone, it's likely been sanded - unfortunately.
 
Canada never had enough Martini's to be universally issued. I have seen them marked D.C. [Dominion of Canada], and with the C and Broad Arrow,[ after 1900]. I have not seen them marked M&D [militia & defence] though I am not surprised. This mark is from the 1890's the Long Lee Enfields sent to the Boer War were marked that way. I once owned a Mk3 Martini marked 5 BCR . I don't remember a D. C. however I think most rifles were marked by men on fatigue duties so they don't seem to be marked exactly the same. I think large numbers of Canadian Militia rifles were not marked at all. Most of the Mk1 Martini's I have seen here in Ontario are in great shape and have no markings. They are surely Canadian because all the ones in Britain were converted to Mk2. I believe you are right the mark 5 BCR is garrison artillery. The British Columbia Regt of WW2 was originally the 104th Regt.
 
My Canadian MkIII looks like it was made yesterday and came from an estate where the guy had it for 60+ years. It is not marked at all - was never issued. Probably still never fired since the factory, though I will change that.

I think a lot of these were surplussed between the world wars straight out of the storage crates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom