Originally Posted By: John E
Ken,
I think the H&A (single screw) Boxlocks were on the Forehand design. I don't believe the sideplated boxlocks were. I am more inclined to give credit to W.H. Davenport but have not made a solid connection other than he was H&A's superintendent during those years.John


OK John,

I found one of the things I'd seen before, relating the guns to Davenport. First, info from a post on SGW, from "Bob S"

"Not aware of any connection between H&A and I.J. But from The Standard Catalog of Firearms, 2009:

"DAVENPORT FIREARMS CO.
Providence, Rhode Island
Norwich, Connecticut
DOUBLE-BARREL SHOTGUNS
Text and prices by Nick Niles
William Hastings Davenports company also made and marked double-barrel, visible hammer guns in Providence, R.I. on Orange St., 1880-1882 and in Norwich, Conn. ca. 1890-1909. All are monbloc designs of which there were four models. The 1st model made at Providence, ca. 1881, had hammers rising out of the boxlock frame. The 2nd model, made in Norwich, Conn. about 1898, is a typical boxlock. The 3rd model made in Norwich, Conn., ca. 1909, has small sidelocks set in larger boxlock frames. Its barrels have unnotched extensions and notched underlugs. The 4th model, also from Norwich, possibly made after the 1901 takeover by Hopkins & Allen, also has sidelocks set in boxlock frames but the barrels have half moon lugs and notched barrel extensions. Few Davenport doubles are seen although single barrel guns are often found."

So H&A was at least familiar with 'monbloc' designs and also with the half-moon lugs. Seems H&A is the most likely mfg."

Next, the relevant text and Iver Johnson patents posted by Researcher:

"Looking at the two patents for the Iver Johnson gun, it appears that the Hopkins & Allen gun is built on the first one, Patent No. 1,131,984 granted March 16, 1915", --

http://www.google.com/patents/US1131984 ... 84&f=false"

Interesting that it is an Iver Johnson patent, yet H&A built the gun. With a patent date of march 16, 1915 it means this gun was in production for only a limited time, as H&A went under shortly afterwards when the Germans overran Belgium and they lost their Mauser contract.

So, Rather than describing them as W.H. Davenport guns, especially since they're the "4th Model" wouldn't the Iver Johnson reference would be more appropriate?

Here's the SGW thread, including the reference to Torkelson at the end.

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=350443&start=20

Regards
Ken

I prefer wood to plastic, leather to nylon, waxed cotton to Gore-Tex, and split bamboo to graphite.