doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Historical Database for English Makers

In the course of 50 plus years of collecting, I have encountered several guns bearing the name of defunct gun makers of an earlier age. I came to the conclusion that these guns, made with fraudulent names, usually accompanied by a ficticious London address,were so named to enhance the prospects of sale by a struggling gun maker and/or some tradesman making a "Foreigner "at home.The issue of spurious guns bearing the names of reputable makers became a serious problem fo the British trade during the 1880,s. The sporting press of the day published extensive lists of active makers with complete descriptions of how to identify guns of their manufacture.In my opinion the Lacey is a case in point.

Roy:
We have known for generations that the Belgians were tarred with that brush, but this is the first that I have read that the English might also be.
It has been my impression that the English trade laws, guild system and the very competitive nature of the gun business most likely precluded any such fraudulent practice.
It is one thing to buy in actions, parts or even a completed gun and mark it as your product and another to fraudulently mark it with a name (with address)that is completely fictitious.
To buy in Birmingham guns and mark them as London, by a well known London maker, was and is an accepted practice. Then and now. But, if there were no W.Lacey in London, would this not have caused a furor in the trade?
Just some thoughts.
Perhaps we should pursue this train until it is either safely discounted or wrecks said train.LOL
Best,
John

This was IN THE 1880,s, a significant problem for the principal gunmakers in the U.K.[Over and above the Belgian imports.]So much so, that in the March 9 1887 edition of the English magazine, "Shooting," 122 of the princioal gunmakers of the day saw fit to publish a list of the identification marks on their guns in an effort to stamp out the trade in spurious guns.
Member Canadian Guild of Antique Arms Collectors.

Roy,

That is fascinating information. I had never heard that before. Is there any indication of how long this had been going on? It obviously must have been pretty wide spread, else why would 122 makers come together to stop it.

Pete

I'm not so sure that this was an accepted practice - guns known to be wholly made in Birmingham with the London address have always lacked at the cash register of desire!

I can,t tell you when spurious guns of English make first entered the market. It must have been significantly ealier than the report in the 1887 article in the magazine "Shooting". The problem must have been serious enough to provoke concerted response by the principal gunmakers of the day. Below is the summation of the issue, printed in "Shooting magazine":-
"We wish to thank the majority of gunmakers for their assistance in helping us to put a stop to the spurious gun trade.The means we have adopted[ that of informing the public how gunmakers mark guns of their make] renders it well-nigh impossible for dealers to sell guns as genuine which bear names and addresses nearly, but not quite, like those used by the makers whose guns they are intended to represent. The only source left to them is to use the exact names ,and this,we are happy to say, brings them within reach of the criminal law.
The few Gunmakers who have not given us information have been those who make for the trade, and whose names,there-fore,are not usually found on guns in this country."

The use of names of long deceased, but noteable gunmakers,on spurious guns is a different issue to that of spurious copies of of the work gunmakers who were still in business. [For example W. W. Greener had constant problems] The following is an illustration from my own experience:-
I was offered a 12.G Hammer Gun, engraved on the rib of this gun was "Nock Fleet Street London."The last date that any business operated under the name Nock in London was 1863, at which time they were at, 116 Jermyn street. The gun had a Deeley fore end latch, which was patented in 1873. This gun was clearly spurious
Hope this clarifies this issue.

Thank you, Roy. Always something more to learn.

Pete