Hello folks, i have pictured my new Army&Navy CSL at long last as i promised. This is the particular gun which i bought records from University of Glasgow and the maker of the gun is unknown. This gun was purchased by Esquire Batton in 1889 for a sum of 42 pounds. Any educated guess on the maker will be much appreciated.

All the best!

















Sorry for the pictures if they are unclear. The gun has 30" damascus barrels. The barrels new rebrowning but they are in very good condition and apperantly seems unfired. The barrels shows no pitting and the overall condition of the gun is very good.

All the best,

Kem

My guess would be Webley. 1889 was before they merged with Scott, and that looks like a Webley screw grip to me. All the pieces seem to fit. The screw grip was patented in 1882, and the doll's head was used in conjunction with it on higher grade guns. And that's certainly a higher grade gun.

One of Messer's Webley's .As stamped with the Anson & Deeley patent on the action date is about right .
I would suspect it has been restocked and I am a little curious about the additional extractor stop pin, one in the back lump and one in the extension also to the what appears to be spring around the extractor leg .I also notice there are two sets of bore size's on the proof marks 12 & 13 over 1 but can not make out the rest so possible reproof for Nitro at an early date ?

It was restocked by me and father mate you are right . The gun has an unusual ejector system ( at least for me ) which is called Deeley ejector Mechanism. And the pin in the back lump might have something to do with that since the ejector is working fine we didn't have the need to dissasemble it. that 13/1 is the bore diameter 719" but i don't have any idea when it was nitro proofed.

13/1 and 12 ? The ejector system does ring a bell ,one of the many short lived inventions that all died out around the turn of the century.

http://www.vintageguns.co.uk/articles/proof-sizes here is the info about the bore diameters explaining 13/1 as well.

Wonderful restock! Bobby

I'm guessing that 13/1 was the original bore diameter; 12 was the diameter after a subsequent reproof. 12 is larger than 13/1. Highly unlikely to go from 12 to 13/1 (larger to smaller bore size).

I can't make out chamber length on the flats, although I think I see shot charge. If either or both are present, that would help estimate when the gun was reproofed.

Fences remind me of the Harkom style. Very nice.

Thanks I agree with L. Brown i think they changed the bore diameter in 1896 when they nitro proofed it but i am not sure. Still it works great

All the best,

Kem

Kem I do not need to read a book to know what the 12 and 13/1 mean . What I am curious about is why there are two bore sizes stamped ? Only reason I can think of is that the gun has been bored up and reproofed .

Kem,
Beautiful shotgun, great job on the wood

Reproofed to Nitro Proof and 1 1/8 ounce of shot, now marked 12

I see the London C, VP, and NP (and sword) proof marks but no R proof mark, might it be there?

http://proofmarks.tripod.com/englishproofs.html

Mike

p.s. are there any markings on the face near to where the face meets the action flat? Picture?
Thank you

Kem, I have a similar, but not as nice, Army & Navy from the same time period. We both have the intercepting sears. Roughly 1888 to 1890. I have not had it lettered yet. It has the original wood and fluid steel barrels with black powder proofs. Obviously mine does have the Webley patent. I love your sculpted fences!

Your Army & Navy is also beautiful mate use it in good health . I took a complete picture of the whole thing Mike here it is,





There is a " 2 MD " in the middle of the barrels i dont have any idea what that should mean, and a proof on the barrels on both side which i cant figure out that one either.

Best,

Kem

According to my sources, that nitro proofmark (arm with a sword over NP) didn't appear until 1904. I'd say that the reproof was done some time between 1904-1925. I can see the shot charge in the latest photo, but can't make out a chamber length. Those proofmarks would be consistent for that time period.

I have a Cogswell & Harrison made 1892 with identical carved fences. I wonder if they ever did work for Army & Navy? Lagopus.....

Kem
Thanks but what I wanted pictured is the breech face, some times makers hid their code on the lower part of the breech face of the action and not the barrels.
Thank you
Mike