doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com John Blissett & Son island lock hammer gun, #1108

Not much information available online for this early 1870s (guessing) wedge forend, non-rebounding 12-bore London gun. Does anybody here have a copy of the 3-volume Dallas book available with the Blissett serial numbers and production dates (it'd save me a drive to downtown Denver).

A petite (slim & light, under 7 lbs) round body gun in seemingly very good original condition with lovely wood and good dimensions, I'm really looking forward to walking some trails with it next Fall.

Your gun is listed at 1832, but the John Blissett and Son label is from 1878. Could your gun be a conversion?

1832 seems a little early for this one. The seller (very knowledgeable) speculated early 1870s.

Doesn't appear to have been converted in any way (other than for a modern recoil pad on the stock). It actually seems to be shockingly original. Went through London nitro proof to 850 BAR in 2021. Reportedly no chokes (so I presumed pre-1875). Pictures to follow.

Lloyd,

Sounds like a very nice gun!

I hope that you will be posting pictures but if you still use Imgur we on this side of the pond can’t see them.

I have switched to JMGBOX which still works over here.

Parabola: Imgur is all I know at the moment.

What does the United Kingdom have against It?

Adrien,
If you have any trouble, I’ll see that you get the images.

Best,
Ted

Correction, peninsular backaction non-rebounding locks (there is some contact with the action body.

Still on my 1st coffee here.

Lloyd, your exact 4 didgit serial no. Is listed in Brown’s book as near when Blissett started in 1832 or so. You must have the wrong number, or your gun is a conversion since John Blissett and Son naming began in 1878 [or possibly 1866 according to IGC].

Daryl:

Thank you, I get it. I'll look under the forend to confirm things...

It's definitely 1108, marked on the action flats and the rear barrel lug as well. There is also a patent use number 824 1870 if that helps?

This gun is clearly post 1878. John Blissett & Son, 322 High Holborn, London is the script on the top rib.

Maybe you have someone else's gun rebarreled by Blissett and Son. Serial no. 1108 makes no sense for the 1870s as Blissett would have been in business for 40 years by then. Is your gun marked Blissett on the locks ? Are you sure of the "use number" actually being such ? In 1878 Blissett's serial numbers were in the 5000 range.

Finally...







Nice wood, eh? and I love those percussion fences.


Daryl: No, it says "John Blissett & Son" on the locks and the numbers match on every section of the gun (trigger guard, action flats, and barrel lug). Perhaps the number range changed when the son joined? Perhaps the records have some issues? No matter really.

Can't go much further with it at the moment.

What else...6lbs11, 14 3/4 LOP, 30-inch 2-bar damascus tubes, nice bores, no chokes. Looks like a bit of cast off with some toe twist, somewhere close to 1 1/2 and 2 1/2.

I'll measure it more thoroughly and then troll through the books at the shop next week sometime.

An obscure one, for sure.

I think the 1108 is a patent use number, not a serial number. Without info on the actual serial number and proofmarks it would be just a guess.

Just for you info it's not an island lock it's a peninsula lock. Island locks are completely surrounded by the stock wood. A very nice looking hammergun.

I believe I mentioned that earlier, but thankyou.

I am not sure of the numbers from the pictures, but could it be Pat. 324 from 1870 ?

British Patent 324 of 1870, registered in England, was granted to J. Thomas, a Birmingham gunmaker, for an improved single-bite, snap-action mechanism for shotguns. This patent, often referred to as the Thomas patent action, was significant in the development of breech-loading firearms and was licensed or used by various gun manufacturers during that era.

Daryl: Thank you, that makes sense as this unit has a curious lock-up on the back lug.

I can understand why you might think the 1108 number is the use number here but why would it be stamped everywhere?

Thanks , Ted!

Lloyd, Imgur decided to restrict access to UK users as they were concerned that they might incur liabilities under our new Online Safety Act.

Paul Roberts of J. Roberts and Son has just bought in a Jones hammer 12 bore by John Manton and Coe (sic) 1869+1871 vintage with a wedge fore-end retainer.

Interestingly it has later been converted (circa 1890) to selective ejectors.

Coming at you….

Best,
Ted

Pretty sure our English Brothern will have a high degree in interest in this gun. Hopefully, these pictures are viewable in Olde Blighty.

Best,
Ted

Thanks Ted, yes those can be seen on this side of the pond (much better than “content not viewable in your region”).

Patent No. 374 of 1870 is certainly J. Thomas’s Patent.

I have previously seen it [SEE CORRECTION BELOW], usually on Rook rifles, in a triangular surround as on this Thomas made Rook Rifle, originally a .380, bought in by Greener’s in 1881.



Curiously, although the Thomas Patents were for a single bite bearing on the rear lump this (the one re-worked by WWG’s son Charles for his daughter May Greener) and apparently the rest of the batch of about 12 bought in by Greener’s in 1881 had Purdey type double under bolts.

Oops! The triangular mark related to Thomas’s Patent No. 3091 of 15th November 1871 (again for a single bite action).

I’m wondering which book lists the serial numbers for John Blissett? I haven’t found them in any of my English gun books. I have John Blissett and Son serial # 4356 on the way to me and I’m wondering what year according to the records it was built.

Blissett serial numbers are in British Gunmakers, Vol. 3 by Nigel Brown. The list is not complete, but 4356 is in the group of 1867-1876, Brown's list of examples is quite small, so lots of interpolation might need to be done. The Internet Gun Club states that the firm used the name John Blisset and Son from 1867-1872. Somewhere between 1872-1876 the company was renamed Blissett Son and Tomes.

I'd guess then that this one falls into the 1867 to 1872 timeframe (as did the fellow who owned it before me). But because of the J. Thomas patent (#324 of 1870) that was employed to secure the barrels to the action, it is clearly now post 1870, so... that narrows it down to just 3-years of production, 1870, 1871 and 1872.

This is some fun, eh?

Someone could try doing what was done with Reilly -
-- Run Blissett's name through the London newspaper archives,
-- record dates when they moved and addresses;
-- compile a list of all known Blissett guns and their serial numbers;
-- then match the addresses on the ribs to the known move dates.
That's a lot of work though. (And believe there were several Blissett's)

Example: "London Illustrated News," 13 April 1847. Blissett occupies Reilly's former building at 316 High Holborn:

The 2nd underbite closest to the action is the barrel component of the J. Thomas patent (#324 of 1870).

I can't make out much from its 1st pass through proof here but the 2021 trip thru the London proof house is readily apparent.

I have to sit with some guns for a bit to fully understand them, and then... only in good light. Sixtyeight and sunny here yesterday (set yet another record) so I spent some time in the end-of-day sunshine, looking this artifact over more closely.














This weapon has seen very little use, and even more important...it has been well cared-for over the years (roughly 150 of 'em). With these high hammers being so close together (& w/non-rebounding locks) I can easily bridge them with my left thumb and sweep them both to full cock in one motion(!). I also see that the hammers nestle deeply into the percussion fences when closed and then these hammer faces are also recessed...so nice! (a remnant of percussion caps and eye protection needs I'm sure).

Lastly...I never seem to recognise laminated steel when I first see it. While it's almost always stronger than damascus it just isn't as pretty.

Oh well.

(Ted: can you work your magic so Parabola can see this?)

Lloyd,
Surely a perfect way to spend a beautiful day's end, with that lovely lady as well!
Karl

Lloyd, glad to see you enjoying it to the fullest. Your post entices me to reflect on my possessions with greater care.

Thanks, Harry

Lloyd,
I actually got your photos off to Adrian a few minutes after you posted them. They went to his Email, as, I was thinking after the first round of duplicate photos that the bandwidth consumption might be an issue.

Parabola has seen everything you have posted.

I’m here for you. Smart assed comment I use on my employer a few times a week.

But, true.

Best,
Ted