doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Army & Navy Double Rifle/Shotgun

Clint,

You can convey all this to Farhad if you are interested in the gun and bargain for a best price. I had told him the gun, in its condition, was probably worth about $400. But, I'd get a serious idea of what rifle cartridge and what shotgun gauge and chamber length before getting serious.

As to who bored it out: believe Kabul had an armoury that made all those Martini Henry rifles so abundant here. Fellow who owned the double rifle, might have had some problem with the right barrel and decided to have the armoury bore it out. Hard to say.

Regards,
Tim

Well, found some interesting history on this, formerly a double rifle. Appears a certain P. Lumsden bought it in 1884. He was General Sir P. Lumsden who led the British Afghan Survey Mission the next year that effectively prevented war between Britain and Russia. Below are relevant citings from Army & Navy Records at the U. of Glasgow and from the Hansard (Parliamentary Minutes) on the issue.

Oh, the dealer said someone (likely CLH) had bought it. I left the paper copies of all this with him in case the buyer shows up again. You all will find the exchange in Parliament, notably PM Gladstone's reply a marvellous example political/diplomatic non-speak...

Regards, Tim

QUOTE: According to the Army & Navy records that we hold, gun number 937 was a double express rifle, originally purchased by Sir P. Lumsden in 1884 for £19.10.00. UNQUOTE

QUOTE:
CENTRAL ASIA—THE RUSSO-AFGHAN FRONTIER.
HC Deb 05 March 1885 vol 295 cc126-9 126
§ MR. ONSLOW
asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If he could state to the House the precise determination arrived at by Her Majesty's Government regarding the Afghan frontier; what is the present position of Sir P. Lumsden's Mission, and how long it is proposed to 127 keep him on the borders of Afghanistan, I and for what purpose; and, if he can now state the purport of the visit of the Amir to His Excellency the Viceroy; on what basis any understanding respecting the relative positions of England, Russia, I and Afghanistan on the Afghan frontier is to be framed?
...
MR. GLADSTONE
What I have to say upon these Questions is this—I will first take the Question of my hon. Friend 128 (Mr. Heneage), and I wish to speak explicity to the House. On the part of Her Majesty's Government I am bound to say that, at the present moment, Questions relating to policy or to future contingencies on the subject of the Afghan Frontier cannot, in our judgment, be answered without prejudice to the public interest.UNQUOTE

Very interesting, Tim. Thanks for posting it. The A & N records confirm what was apparent from the proof marks. I had failed to mention that U of G would provide that basic information via email free. Nice service to have.