US Property Marked Lee Enfield

cansoldier45

CGN frequent flyer
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Location
Pool-side
So, m into Shooting Sports in Ft Myers and the first thing that catches my eye on the used sale table is a Lee Enfield that;s marked Property of US. Cal was still 303 from what I could tell, bolt was nice and tight, smooth action, nice wood. Original price was like $1,295.00 but "on sale" for $895.00.
I am wonderin the history that would find such a gun in SW Florida. Just curious.

CS45
 
If it is a standard Savaga No.4 Mk.1 or Mk.1*, then you could buy 2 or 3 of them for that much. Look at the prices on the online gun auction websites (as you are in Florida I would suggest gunbroker.com).
 
In short, the Brits needed rifles in WWII, So savage made No.4 rifles under the lend lease agreement. Since these rifles were still technically US property and only lent to the Brits, they were marked "US PROPERTY".

Like Mentioned, Smellie will be along to give a more detailed history. The guy is one of CGN's Milsurp gods, and a high ranking one at that.
 
I have a "US Property," Lee Enfield .303. As listed above made by Savage. But unless it took a shot at Hitler it aint worth $895.00. Up here, +/- $400.00. Heck I'll sell you mine for 500.00 and drive down there. You supply the beer of course !
 
The gentlemen above have it quite right, apart from my own status regarding divinity.

Savage had a big contract to supply the Number 4 but, once the war got going, people were screaming that the contract was against the Neutrality Act, even though the Brits were paying in gold. Prior to the state of emergency, the US could build anything for anyone; in theory, Adolf could have had Mausers built by Remington, although he definitely would have had a hard time getting them back to Germany. FDR ran through a law so that US military equipment which was surplus to the needs of the US military for the defence of America, could be sold. This is where those 50 famous "old destroyers" come in: they were 1918 and 1919 ships and they were fully-reconditioned, definitely not junkers. The ships were traded to Britain for US military bases in Empire countries; the American base at Goose Bay is, I think, the last one still operating. But Britain ran out of money. But FDR had the law in place now. So the US Amy adopted the Number 4 Rifle and forgot to buy any ammo. The rifles kept being built for the US military and so marked. They also forgot to cancel the contract so Savage kept building the things. Ally-samey thing ammo: Navy adopted the .303 cartridge and discovered that they didn't have any rifles for the stuff...... so they "sold" it on the "surplus" market, "forgot" to cancel the contracts, Winchester kept crankin' it out and you still run into the odd round today. Once Lend-Lease was fully in place, there was no need for this kind of shilly-shallying and so we could get on with the War.

People might criticise the Americans for not getting involved in the War until 2 years after we were in, but actual events show that the US military, and the US Administration, were very much ahead of public opinion. And, we must remember, FDR had an election to fight in 1940.... and he was also fighting a Press which was very much opposed to many of his Socialist initiatives. He even had to worry about strongly pro-Nazi diplomats in his own service: Joseph P. Kennedy is an excellent example there. BUT FDR was on our side and so was the military. And so the training aircraft.... and even a few fighters..... "disappeared" mysteriously when they were parked along the Canadian border, the rifles and the ammunition kept on being built...... and, finally, Lend-Lease came through.

At least, that's how it was explained to me.

As to the rifle, it is an interesting specimen but, for that price, it had better have Roosevelt's AND Winston's fingerprints all over it!
.
 
Last edited:
I am wonderin the history that would find such a gun in SW Florida. Just curious.

Check the MKL for an all correct example with photo montage and compare against any you find on tables on the future … ;)

1943 No.4 Mk1* Enfield Riflehttp://www.milsurps.com/content.php?r=179-1943-No.4-Mk1*-Enfield-Rifle-(Mfg-by-Savage)
(Mfg under Lend Lease Act by Savage in 1943)

Here's an especially rare Savage Enfield to keep your eyes open for. They only made about 3,400 of these ...

1942 No.4 Mk1*(T) Savage Sniper Rifle (less scope)http://www.milsurps.com/content.php?r=194-1942-No.4-Mk1*(T)-Savage-Sniper-Rifle-(less-scope)
(Mfg under Lend Lease Act by Savage in 1942)
(Converted to sniper configuration "less scope" by Holland and Holland)

Regards,
Doug
 
Gentlemen

Thank you for the information. I am not a big fan of said family of rifles although like all good Canadian soldiers I do have a couple 3 in my safe (which I'll be getting rid of this summer). But I just thought it odd to see that old girl laying there and had to handle it.

Just to mention that there was also a Springfield SOCOM on the table also priced at $1195.00. THAT caught my eye.

Have a great weekend. You know I will, living here in the land of the gun.

CS45
 
Ah yesss, Joe kennedy. Roosevelt had to threaten to try him for TREASON to shut him up! And how was the Kennedy fortune made? At the time smuggling illegal whisky!
Kennedy quote, "England will have it's neck wrung like a chicken"
Churshill's reply, "Some neck, some chicken"

Note, after December 7th there was no longer any need to mark No4's as U.S. Property.
 
Back
Top Bottom