|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
3 members (JDH, Chuckster, MattH),
935
guests, and
4
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,489
Posts561,996
Members14,584
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1
Boxlock
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1 |
It was re-barreled in Birmingham in 1953 .J Ross 1890 patent 19395 ejector work .The 574 could be the number of the ejector made under that patent .
As the action is unsigned I would assume that it was a gun made to be sold out to the provincial trade and engraved up as the seller.At the time of manufacture there were little or no requirements for record keeping or gun serial numbers .As a note to this I have had similar guns to which I have made and marked guns with an ID number to meet current UK law . Thank you for your reply - I had an assumption that this was the case. However I am now on the bottom as regards to the origins of my shotgun 😅
Niels Johann Holm Jacobsen
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1
Boxlock
|
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1 |
Welcome to the Forum Johann!
The London view mark and the wording “New Barrels fitted by..” suggests that Adkins was not the original maker, but that it came from a London gunmaker and that the barrels needed replacing.
Perhaps other Forum makers will be able to recognise the likely original maker.
There is sometimes a lock makers name stamped on the inside of the lockplates, but specialist lock makers like Brazier, Chilton and Stanton made locks for many different gunmakers. Thank you ! It is competent advice, hopefully more turn up 
Niels Johann Holm Jacobsen
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 47 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 47 Likes: 4 |
The harpoon gun trade mark is that of Charles Osborn & Co. who at one point advertised themselves as "Wholesale Only."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1
Boxlock
|
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1 |
The harpoon gun trade mark is that of Charles Osborn & Co. who at one point advertised themselves as "Wholesale Only." Hello Douglas Could your explain further to a beginner? Best regards
Niels Johann Holm Jacobsen
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,535 Likes: 451
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,535 Likes: 451 |
I believe Douglas is referring to this mark: ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/ex5KG8p.png) Here is a line on Charles Osbourne & Co. https://doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=428703Since it's been re-barreled, wonder whether the number on the fore-end 18395 might be the original Osbourne SN? Usually if that number is under "Patent" it indicates Patent Use Number (PUN). If this is an Osbourne SN Lagopus will help date it. Charles Osbourne catalogue from probably 1890? https://campaignfurniture.com/artwork/chas-osborne-co-gun-catalogueSee the picture of the harpoon gun: ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/kfoDYu1.png)
Last edited by Argo44; 09/02/25 09:01 PM.
Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1
Boxlock
|
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1 |
It makes great sense for it to be made by Charles Osborne, a huge remaining question is setting a date? The 19395 Patent was presumably ended i 1910, furthermore I've found another shotgun with the same John Ross ejectorpatent but an earlier usenumber being 400, this was built in 1896(circa) - meaning the original gun was probably made somewhere between 1896 and 1910.
Niels Johann Holm Jacobsen
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,543 Likes: 102
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,543 Likes: 102 |
Its a fairly basic back work locked gun and typical of many that were made in Birmingham . This does not mean it was of any lesser quality and the fact that its 130 years plus says something for it .London proof does not necessary mean it was a " London" gun . Possibly supplied in the white to a London or provincial " maker" for them to finish and retail . Possibly some original makers marks inside on the action if you were to strip it down . Otherwise any suggestions would be a guess .
Last edited by gunman; 09/03/25 12:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1
Boxlock
|
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 9 Likes: 1 |
Its a fairly basic back work locked gun and typical of many that were made in Birmingham . This does not mean it was of any lesser quality and the fact that its 130 years plus says something for it .London proof does not necessary mean it was a " London" gun . Possibly supplied in the white to a London or provincial " maker" for them to finish and retail . Possibly some original makers marks inside on the action if you were to strip it down . Otherwise any suggestions would be a guess . Ill have my gunsmith strip it down and we will see what he is avle to find out 🙏
Niels Johann Holm Jacobsen
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 454 Likes: 129
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 454 Likes: 129 |
your final picture of the action appears to be a webley screw-grip third fastener, which should be some help determining the date of the guns origin.
"it's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards."
lewis carroll, Alice in Wonderland
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,543 Likes: 102
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,543 Likes: 102 |
your final picture of the action appears to be a webley screw-grip third fastener, which should be some help determining the date of the guns origin. At first glance yes I see where you are coming from , but I think not and I have seen a lot of Webley screw grip leavers .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
