doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com A Not-Osborne - Mystery Solved: it's an F.T. Baker

1 1/2" 12 gauge, 30" barrels, 6 1/2 lbs. CYL/CYL, 14 1/2", 1 3/8", 2 1/8", a little cast off.

Very shootable.

Listed on the auction site as Charles Osborne, but it doesn't say that anywhere on the gun, and the address on the barrels is "Something-Something-Something Picadilly Circus, London...which is how I know it's not an Osborne...

Your thoughts on what it might be?

Photos, Part II

Wasn’t cyl/cyl when it was new. Disc set strikers, intercepting sears (better than good chance they aren’t there anymore) good quality piece. Looking at the action, I’d guess Webley & Scott sourced and finished in London.

But, it is only a guess.

Best,
Ted

I forgot to mention the Intercepting sears.

I'm interested why you think Webley & Scott?

Its a Scott screw grip, the patent top lever is the give away.

Lever work in common with a few others I’ve seen.

Best,
Ted

The lever is left of center, could be off face or close to being loose. Barrels are blued damascus, is it listed as having damascus barrels? Lots of knocks on the barrel flats and on the barrels in places.

It isn’t loose or off face.

Barrels are steel, not Damascus.

But I'm not looking for an evaluation, I'm trying to figure out what it is.

What makers (or retailers) were in London on Piccadilly Circus?

Have seen same action from william Evans, Powell, army navy and others.

Almost certainly an Anson & Webley action, universally used in the trade at that period . Could have been retailed by any gunshop , let alone maker . Sorry I can't assist further.
Regards,

The damascus pattern can be seen plain as day in the two photos with the top rib street address and also on the bottom barrel flat above the hinge lug.

Yup.

It looks to be a Webley Screw Grip locking mechanism.

Lots of action makers copied the screw grip concept. HB&P, Osborne, etc.
If you can see course threads on the spindle when looking at the recess in the action for the barrel extension/grip, it was more than likely made by Webleys.

The two piece spindle/top lever is Webley patent, but again, lots of makers borrowed this design after the patent ran out.

It’s very possible that Chas. Osborne made the gun/action as they were prolific makers to the trade. There might possibly be clues to the action/gun origin stamped on the inside of the action itself.

why is there a damascus pattern under the bluing?

I see it too Mike. I can see the Damascus pattern on the small screen of my cell phone, and see it much easier on my PC monitor.

But some people only see what they want to see.

The gun was originally proved 1896-1904, and clearly marked CHOKE
Reproved 1955 if the date code is 'FB'; 1964 if 'PB' with bore .729"
The original 12 would be .729 - .739 so likely not honed
Yes, crolle damascus barrels

You might ask the seller to chalk or grease pen the top rib to get the words

Certainly worth a look, thanks for the idea.

I’m always hesitant to say from a couple internet photos that a gun is positively a Webley screw grip. Our own “Gunman” worked in the factory, and pointed out that there was a second action, that was common, and similar, but NOT a Webley Screw Grip. That action didn’t have a proper name, as he recalled. It was used all over the place, also.
I think Dustin is right on the money with how to properly I.D. a Screw Grip, but, I can’t see inside the action in these photos.

Best,
Ted

Thanks - that's where I am on the proofs as well.

Between the wizardry of 4x optical zoom and the macro lens on the iPhone 17 Pro...and an "Ansel" action I built in Photoshop, I'm going with it being "FB":



...so 1955.

Getting the gun out into sunlight makes it more visible.

I appreciate almost everyone who pointed that out for me - it makes the gun more interesting to me.

Who would that be, sweetie pie?

I already have the gun here - can you run me through what doing either - or both - of those processes looks like?

Much appreciated.

I'll work on finding time to take it apart in the next few weeks and will post what I find.

All good stuff so far, thanks!

...what makers/retailers had a Piccadilly Circus address in the 8 years between 1896-1904?

Maybe it's an Ozzy Osborne

Charles Moore who later became James Woodward & Sons??

I humbly admit that the aliens running AI are impressive

Around the turn of the 20th century (c. 1900), the area around Piccadilly Circus in London was a hub for high-end sporting goods, gunmakers, and specialized retailers, particularly on the adjacent streets of Jermyn Street, Pall Mall, and Piccadilly itself.
Key gun makers and retailers in this immediate area included:
Leuchars & Son (38, 39, 47 Piccadilly): Established in 1794, they were renowned luxury retailers known for dressing cases and specialized in high-end sporting items, including guns. Although acquired by Asprey in 1888, they continued to operate under their own name at this location until 1902.
Henry Atkin (2 Jermyn Street): Located very close to Piccadilly Circus, Henry Atkin was a highly regarded maker of "best" guns. In 1905, they moved from 2 Jermyn Street to 41 Jermyn Street due to the demolition of the original premises for the Piccadilly Circus underground railway station.
Charles & Henry Egg (1 Piccadilly): Historically located at the corner of Piccadilly and Haymarket (1 Piccadilly), the Egg family was renowned for producing high-quality pistols and "Baby Eggs" miniatures. While the brothers died in the 1860s, the location at 1 Piccadilly was synonymous with the gun trade for decades.
Rowland Ward Ltd (Piccadilly): Known as "The Jungle," their Piccadilly shop was a renowned retailer of taxidermy and big-game hunting equipment, catering to colonial hunters and safari enthusiasts.
Buchanan Ltd (Piccadilly/Pall Mall): In 1900, this firm moved from Piccadilly to 15 Pall Mall, located just off Piccadilly Circus, where they continued to operate as high-end gun and sporting goods dealers before their decline in the years surrounding World War I.
William Evans (4 & 63 Pall Mall): While their gun room is now in Mayfair, William Evans operated close by on Pall Mall in the late 19th/early 20th century, catering to the same elite clientele in the immediate West End area.

I just realized I hadn't provided the serial number.

It is 7868

nicely played!

That would make it...

...wait for it...

...a little batty.

Geoff: I haven't used the white grease pen technique, but the (white) chalk is easy. Lightly rub the (dry) rib then wipe with a soft cloth until the letters stand out.

I agree on the impressive part.

I asked: "What British gunmakers or retailers had a Piccadilly Circus address in the 8 years between 1896-1904?"

I got:

This is a quite specific and narrow historical research question. The searches have turned up two strong candidates with documented Piccadilly Circus addresses in the 1896–1904 window, and I want to be transparent that the broader database evidence here is limited without access to specialist references like Nigel Brown's British Gunmakers or the Internet Gun Club's full subscription database. Here is what the sources confirm:

• F. T. Baker — In 1899, the Cockspur Street and 88 Fleet Street premises were given up and a new shop was opened at 29 Glasshouse Street, Regent Street. Glasshouse Street feeds directly into Piccadilly Circus, and guns from this period are marked "29 Glasshouse Street, Piccadilly Circus, London." In 1913 the firm became a limited liability company, F T Baker Ltd, and moved to 64 Haymarket. So Baker had a Piccadilly Circus address from 1899 through at least 1912, squarely covering the latter part of your window.
• John Wilkes — A gun forum thread records a shotgun with proof marks circa 1904–25 engraved "John Wilkes, 1 Lower James St, Piccadilly Circus, London," with barrel flat proof marks looking to be circa 1904–25. Lower James Street (later renamed) ran immediately off the Circus. The company later moved through Soho — 31 Gerard Street 1913–1924, then 21 Broad Street 1924–1925, and Beak Street from 1926. This puts Wilkes at a Piccadilly Circus–adjacent address right at the tail end of your period, around 1904 and into the years following.

A few important caveats worth noting:

The term "Piccadilly Circus address" in the Victorian/Edwardian era was somewhat loose. Streets like Glasshouse Street, Lower James Street, and the Haymarket all fed off the Circus and were sometimes described as "Piccadilly Circus" on gun labels and trade cards, even if they were technically distinct street names.
The best scholarly sources for this question — Nigel Brown's British Gunmakers: Volume 1 (2004) and the Internet Gun Club's full historical database — would be the definitive places to look for a comprehensive list. Both catalogue London gunmakers by address and date range in exactly the kind of detail your question requires.
The well-known makers of the era such as Purdey (South Audley Street), Holland & Holland (Bond Street/Bruton Street), and James Woodward (St James's Street) were not at Piccadilly Circus in this period.

Thank you. I'll root around here for some chalk.

Why that would be you TransGomer Geoff... not surprised you couldn't figure it out.

But you'll have a LOT harder time seeing that than some obviously blued-over Damascus. And it will take more than an Opthamologist to help you.

The only thing I can really get out of the chalking is that whatever is before the "Piccadilly Circus, London" ends in "ST."

Lots more pictures.

Even more pictures

This "H" is the only mark I can see inside the action

The last of the new pictures.

Observations from taking it apart and reassembling:

• It's a solid bet, IMO, that the stock is a replacement. Wood is proud everywhere.
• The gun has been maintained. All the screws tighten to proper orientation.
• While there was some opportunity to clean things up inside, it was less than I expected.

Intercepting sears are long gone…

Best,
Ted

That's the gap here?

Yup.

Best,
Ted

It ate the bait again!



Good troll...but not very bright. Really predictable though.

...and it's "ophthalmologist," not "Ophthalmologist." Caps not needed.

Interceptors seem to be there to me. The gun looks to be nicely finished inside.

What is the best way to tell? I've put the gun back together, but can take it down again easily.


Testing Intercepting Sears

Testing the intercepting sears (also known as safety sears or interceptors) on an English boxlock shotgun—typically found on higher-grade models—ensures that the hammers are caught if they jar off the primary sear due to a drop or shock.

⚠️ Safety Warning - Ensure the shotgun is completely unloaded. Perform all tests with snap caps to prevent damage to the firing pins and mechanism.

How to Test Intercepting Sears

The goal is to determine if the interceptor catches the hammer when the main trigger mechanism is bypassed.
1. Verify Presence: Check if your boxlock has an extra pin/screw located just behind the action fences (the vertical wall of the action), in addition to the standard pins for the triggers/sears.
2. Cock the Gun: Close the gun with snap caps inside to cock the action.
3. Engage Safety: Put the top safety on "Safe".
4. Test One (Jarring Test): With the safety OFF, hold the gun securely. Use a rubber mallet (or the heel of your hand) to strike the buttstock firmly, simulating a drop, or tap the sides of the action.

• Result: The hammers should stay cocked. If they drop, the interceptors are not working, or the main sear is worn.

5. Test Two (The "Slip" Test):

• Cock the gun and take the safety off.
• Pull the trigger slightly to release the main sear, but immediately release the trigger before the hammer strikes the snap cap.
• If the interceptor is functioning, it should catch the hammer, preventing the firing pin from hitting the snap cap.

6. Final Check (Safety Mechanism): With the gun cocked, put the safety on. Pull the trigger. The trigger should be locked, and the gun should not fire.

What to Look For

• Failed Test: If the gun clicks (fires) during the jarring test or when you slip the trigger, the intercepting sears are either worn, dirty, or missing.
• "Soft" Action: If the gun has a very light trigger pull (under 4 lbs), it is more likely to fail this test.
• Dirt/Rust: Old oil can gum up the small springs controlling the interceptors, making them sluggish or non-functional.

If the interceptors fail these tests, the gun should be taken to a qualified gunsmith to have the sear angles re-cut or the springs replaced.

Poor Terminally Triggered TransGomer Geoff.

As I said two days ago when you felt the need to calculate Ed's dollar rounding error down to a fraction of a percent, you are an internet anal nitpicker. You also used a current pound to dollar conversion Mr. Perfect, instead of one from the correct time period 12 years ago, you dimwit. All done in a hypocritical effort to join in a deceptive pile-on of Ed, a guy who never wronged you or insulted you . You are everything you claim to abhor on this forum.

Let's make that Anal nitpicker... with a capital A.

Take the gun apart like in your photos on page four. Trigger plate removed and the locks cocked. Hold the breech face against a block of wood and trip the sears only, without moving the interceptors. If the interceptors are working properly there should be no marks on the block of wood from the firing pins.

Both intercepting sears are present. It’s very obvious.

So I don't do something stupid that causes a problem, how do I trip the the sears?



Can you share why you think this so I can learn about it?

This made me laugh.

If you don't know something this basic, you really shouldn't be poking around inside of a gun. Seriously.

You trip the sears with the gun cocked, by applying upwards force on the sear tails to disengage the sear tip from the tumbler notch. If you also disengage the interceptors, the hammers will fall all the way (normally) and the firing pins will leave a mark on the wood block. If interceptors are present and working, they will engage and prevent the hammers from falling all the way, and firing pins will not make an indentation on a wood block or primers.

They provide a somewhat similar function to the fly and half-cock notch in better quality flintlock and percussion locks. They are an adjunct to the safety in a shotgun, to prevent some accidental discharges.

Since you have previously said I have no knowledge to offer here, I'll let you figure out why they are often removed, or not even present in cheaper guns.

With certain things like firearms and high voltage electricity, if you don't know what you're doing, you really shouldn't do anything. This is how dogs and hunting partners end up getting shot.

I would hold the action vertically, tang up, and use my thumb or a dowel to push just the sear. That's if you feel that you need to test them. The gun seems to be in fine condition. I would probably just trust them to work.

Can you share why you think this so I can learn about it?[/quote]


Sure. I don’t think they’re there, I know they are. Here’s why:
I took your photos and marked them to show what I’m talking about.
The arrows in red are pointing to your intercepting sears. If the interceptors weren’t there, you would not have the interceptors resting on top of the sear legs and the space where the interceptors are currently mounted would be vacant. Furthermore , the pins that hold the interceptors in place would just be screwed into the action frame and not be holding anything in place.
Often times when an English double is equipped with these interceptors, upon inspection you might find that they have been removed. A few reasons for this: Some gunsmiths say that the interceptors can make a trigger pull feel sluggish and more difficult to adjust to a customers preferred pull. Or, the interceptor has stopped working correctly and has been removed because it’s not worth repairing.

Thank you - this is the first time I've taken a gun with intercepting sears apart.


Seems like sound advice, thanks.

Hello, contradictory replies regards intercepting sears, present or removed. Ted says long gone, others state still present. I have no technical knowledge but always enjoy learning about subjects I am interested in. Clarification required as to correct information. Thanks
Mr w Martin

Sorry I blew up.’ Shoulda looked harder at the tails.

Best,
Ted

You didn't blow up.

...and then - rare for social media - you didn't dig in and start calling people names when there was a challenge.

Adult conduct, all around.

That's been the case for this entire discussion...for almost everyone.

It's been very educational for me. I think you got a nice gun, too, Geoff.

Thanks for update and clarification.

Sure. I don’t think they’re there, I know they are. Here’s why:
I took your photos and marked them to show what I’m talking about.
The arrows in red are pointing to your intercepting sears. If the interceptors weren’t there, you would not have the interceptors resting on top of the sear legs and the space where the interceptors are currently mounted would be vacant. Furthermore , the pins that hold the interceptors in place would just be screwed into the action frame and not be holding anything in place.
Often times when an English double is equipped with these interceptors, upon inspection you might find that they have been removed. A few reasons for this: Some gunsmiths say that the interceptors can make a trigger pull feel sluggish and more difficult to adjust to a customers preferred pull. Or, the interceptor has stopped working correctly and has been removed because it’s not worth repairing.


[/quote]

Great, thanks.

It ate the bait again!



Good troll...but not very bright. Really predictable though.

Found a clue.

This F.T. Baker has a rib inscription that ends the same way.

F.T. Baker it is.

Using the macro camera on my iPhone 17 Pro, and 8x optical magnification, I can make out part of the F and T, the 29, and the beginnings of "Glasshouse" in the inscription.

i'll add an opinion regarding the question of the source of the action;
several pages back, in some of your photos, there are two different serial numbers shown. one is a four-digit number that is repeated on several parts, the other appears to be 56555. numerous of the market supplied actions will display double serial numbers - one from the firm that produced the action, the other from the concern that finished and sold the completed gun. i would wager that the four-digit is the baker number - and that the 56555 is a webley-scott production number. that would put production of the action in 1899, after the amalgamation of webley and scott, when the screw-grip action was widely marketed, in the time period when damascus barrels were frequently nitro proofed, and during a fairly short interval when overhanging sears were not uncommon on their guns.

i have a 1902 webley screw-grip with both nitro proofed damascus, and overhanging sears - built for mahillon in brussels

Glad you figured it out, Geoff.

Thank you for that detail.

I've added it to my document for the gun.

Just a quick point. Overhanging Sears (such as those usually found on many Teutonic made actions) are not the same as intercepting Sears.

The action hasn’t been determined to be built by W&S. Geoff, can you see course threads when viewing the slot in the action meant for the barrel extension? If you can see course threads on the spindle, then the action was more than likely to have been made by W&S. If you cannot, then the action was likely produced by another maker.

Dustin,
In the first series of photos a two piece top lever with the word "patent" engraved in the outer piece is clearly shown. I know Scott later made up guns on the screw grip action without the screw grip feature, but have you ever seen that top lever arrangement and the "patent" engraved on the outer piece on a gun not built by Scott? I do not recall ever encountering one myself.
Steve

Yes, the coarse threads are present - thanks for this detail.

Another bit of detail for my document on the gun.

I'll stick with my original suggestion, an A & W 51 action (or variant 52, special etc) supplied by Webley. Nice gun.
Regards
Mr w Martin

of possible interest:

http://wrleeson.co.uk/design1a.htm

http://www.heritageguns.co.uk/Webley%2016%20BLE/Webley%2016%20%20BLE%20Details.htm

https://internetgunclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=75

https://www.armsresearch.co.uk/The%...chive/Webley%20and%20Scott%20Archive.htm

Thank you.

Steve,
I have. HB&P made actions that are extremely similar to this one. I’ve also seen a Ford set up the same way that had Joseph Asbury’s mark inside the action. Only difference was, they didn’t have a threaded top lever spindle like W&S did. Another thing that I don’t recall seeing that often, that seemed a bit odd to me was the locking or set pin on the top lever. I don’t usually see too many British guns with that feature. The W&S screw grips that I have owned (mostly 400’s) didn’t have that feature. You have probably seen many many more of these than I have so I’ll defer to your knowledge on these.

Dustin

Dustin,
You are a better historian than I am, I'm always impressed with the deep dive you do into the history behind the guns. I am fairly certain that I have had a W&S screw grip through with the locking screw on the top lever, but I'm not 100% on that. In reading through some of the links recently posted, it appears the two piece top lever with the word "patent" in the outer circle was used by P. Webley. This has been an interesting thread.
Steve

Here is a nice one- very tempting, nobody I know just stumbled on it
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1171609063

That is Michael Murphy & Sons
https://www.michaelmurphyandsons.com/
Unfortunately no image of the flats of the sleeved barrels. They are typically responsive to requests for more information.

Interesting...that gun is very similar to the one I have.

It is sleeved, this one is not.


I like where they're starting the bidding.