doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com The pinfire game gun

Steve, I've sent you pictures of my Fuller gun.

As to conversions I have single 20 bore that says 'Converted by E. Roberts, Birmingham' in the top. Careful examination just reveals that he took a single muzzle loading barrel, brazed on the breech hook and fitted it to an action with top lever and then stocked it. The only original piece from the conversion appears to be the barrel!

I have an interesting Murcott double 20 bore hammerless that is not a 'Mousetrap' but has the general appearance of a box-lock although the cocking is unusual. I showed it to Graham Greener and looking at it it bears some similarities to the Greener 'Facile Princeps' model. It was always though that Greener bought out Murcott for the London address and rights to the 'Mousetrap' although Greener never seemed to have used that patent nor made guns under the Murcott name unlike his use of Needham's name. Could Murcott have inspired the Facile Princeps and this is what interested Greener? Another Gunmaking mystery! Lagopus�..

This is from "The Field" 28 Dec 1856. It is from their anonymous "let-me-answer-your-question" section and is the "Field"'s explanation for the then current state of center-break fowling pieces. - the Beringer under-trigger lever is prominently mentioned. The whole explanation, however, is confusing. And these were the authorities at the time.

The use of cartridges with a nipple and cap instead of a pin - sort of like a removable chamber for a muzzle-loader - is something I've only seen in pictures, such as those provided by Tinker and Mr Helsley on pages 11 and 12 of this thread. I suppose if one ran out of pinfire cartridges, such devices could temporarily turn the gun into a muzzle-loader, but I'm guessing that with the increased availability of prepared cartridges and primed hulls and reloading tools, especially towards the end of the 1850s, such retrograde devices would no longer be needed and would have fallen by the wayside. If you happen to have a copy of Macdonald Hasting's slim book English Sporting Guns and Accessories, there is another picture of one on page 66.

OK, I went back and picked up the single-barrel conversion, and it does feel wonderful in the hand, the weight and balance seem just right. The owner must have been very pleased with the conversion work, and it is always good to remember that these old guns were once someone's pride and joy, and they delivered satisfying days in the field.

A repurposed barrel is one thing, but what about purpose-built pinfire singles? There was a very limited demand, as rarely was one barrel preferred over two. As breech-loading began appearing on more mundane guns, not surprisingly this included single-barrel guns, and the moderate-to-cheap single-barrel pinfire was popular on the Continent, judging from the number that have survived. Singles were popular in France, where walked-up shooting was the norm. Better and best-quality singles did appear on the Continent and in Britain, but in Britain at least, a best-quality single would have been more expensive than a lesser quality double, and a good-quality single would not have cost significantly less than a double gun. I have not encountered many singles in my years of searching.

Here are two 'best-quality' singles to consider today. The first is a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary-underlever pinfire sporting gun by Boss & Co. of London, ordered by Sir John Harpur-Crewe (1824-1886), 9th Baronet of Calke Abbey and High Sheriff of Derbyshire, on 1 July 1864 and completed on 5 October the same year. I believe the gun was purchased for his son Vauncey, for his 18th birthday (on October 14 of that year). Sir Vauncey Harpur-Crewe (1846-1924) became the 10th (and last) baronet. He was a very avid shooter and collector of natural history specimens (a hobby for which this would have been the perfect gun). The gun has a short sighting rib at the breech signed "Boss & Co. 73 St James Street London," and the back-action lock is signed "Boss & Co.." It has a 30 1/16" damascus barrel, which still has a mirror bore. The gun has a standard LOP of 14", and weighs a very light 5 lb 4 oz. If I'm not mistaken, Boss & Co. only made three pinfire singles in their entire history. Like the two Boss guns covered on page 14 of this thread, it is beautifully made, but understated in its appearance.

The Wikipedia entry for Vauncey Harpur-Crewe notes "...Sir Vauncey concentrated on building up his enormous collection of stuffed birds, bird's eggs and Lepidoptera. His collection included birds shot by himself, and rare or abnormally coloured specimens bought from dealers and taxidermists. By the time of Sir Vauncey's death, the taxidermy collection numbered several thousand cases. Although some of this was subsequently sold to meet heavy death duties, much remained at Calke, only coming to light sixty years later."

Vauncey Harpur-Crewe


If you take a moment to Google 'Calke Abbey' and 'taxidermy', and I suggest that you do, you will see many specimens which I expect were collected with this gun. The Victorians did like their taxidermy displays!







The second is a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary-underlever pinfire sporting gun by John Dickson & Son of Edinburgh, made in 1875, late for a pinfire. It also has a short sighting rib over the breech, and the barrel is signed "John Dickson & Son, 63 Princes Street, Edinburgh," and the back-action lock simply "John Dickson & Son." The fine damascus barrel is 31 1/16" in length and still has a mirror bore. Both the barrel and action carry the maker's mark J.D.&S, leaving no mystery as to who built the gun. In pure gunmaking excess, it has two beautifully-shaped percussion fences, neither of which is in any ways functional. It also has the most beautifully-figured stock of any pinfire I've seen. This is another single with standard measurements (LOP etc) and is not a 'boy's gun', as singles are often characterized. According to John Dickson & Son this gun was made entirely in-house, and at the time of this gun the firm employed 18 men and boys, while using some outworkers in Edinburgh to assist with barrel browning and case-making. Unfortunately the sales ledger no longer exists so it is not possible to trace the original owner. Dickson made 5 pinfires in 1875, two singles and three doubles (of the latter, one was built with a Bastin sliding-action). In all Dickson made 10 single-barrel pinfires between 1864 (when he started making pinfires) and 1875. This gun weighs 6 lb 7 oz.




The Dickson has a horn butt plate, a rarity on a pinfire.


Singles being "rare birds," perhaps in a later post I'll cover these in greater detail, with some others. The Dickson in particular has interesting features, in part from being a mid-1870s gun.

Steve, some of the late Dickson pin-fires may have been made for the eccentric collector Charles Gordon. If you have the serial number of the one illustrated I could check that in Donald Dallas's book on Gordon. He was having muzzle loaders and all sorts made long after they were obsolete.

Reference to the Harpur-Crewe family at Calke I can vouch for the large collection of taxidermy. Calke is not far from me and open to the public; or will be again soon when Current conditions allow. Lagopus�..

The single Dickson is number 2820, and using Nigel Brown's book would put it around 1867, which is incorrect. John Dickson & Son informed me that Dickson's built their actions in batches and shelved them to get the build economy when a customer walked in and ordered something obscure. The serial number 2820 was from an earlier batch of actions and therefore out of sync with the the rest of the 1875-dated guns.

I'm told Charles Gordon ordered twelve 12-bore pinfires and two 32-bore pinfire pistols from Dickson's. Thanks in advance for checking the number, Lagopus, I don't have that book.

Stephen could you help with this. This is an under-lever from a Reilly which was originally a single-bite pin-fire...the serial number should date it to March 1858. However, there are a lot of problems with this identification. And this U-L doesn't look like a Beringer. What is it?

Steve, I can't find it listed as a Gordon gun but Dallas's book on Dickson records it as a single barrel 12 bore 32" back lock pin-fire sold by them on 17th July 1875. Lagopus�..

Thanks for looking up the information. Someone must have been very happy on that day!

Argo44, here are some random thoughts after looking at your picture. The thin fences do suggest an early date, and I believe single-bite, rearward-facing underlever actions were beginning to be made prior to Henry Jones's double-bite screw grip patent of late 1859. I've presumed that John Blanch may have used a Beringer gun purchased in 1855 as the inspiration for the lever-over-guard design, with the lever fitting over the fixed trigger guard bow instead of Beringer's combining the lever and the trigger guard, shown previously in this thread. I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this, but I haven't come across anything to counter my speculation. As Reilly was with Blanch and Lang among the first to offer British pinfires in the 1850s, a Reilly gun in 1858 with a rearward underlever would not be impossible, even if most guns being made around the time of the Field trials were said to have the forward-facing underlever.

In your picture, the space between the rear of the trigger guard bow and its 'tail' appears filled in. I've gone back to my collection to look if this particular flourish is found on other guns. Normally this interstice is left empty, but I now notice a few guns in which the space is filled or partly filled: a Dougall Lockfast, a James Erskine underlever, and the single Dickson from my earlier post. Having the underlever shaped to fill the interstice in front of the trigger guard bow is uncommon, but not as unusual as the former. Makers had a lot of latitude when it came to shaping metal, and it is the extra, 'unnecessary' flourishes that fascinate me.

Not trying to hijack this excellent line and this will be my last question about this pin-fire. Yes, the off putting part of the under-lever was the space filled in in front of the trigger guard. That took some work. Reilly did make Beringer-style under levers...sketch on p. 1 is from probably Summer 1859 - and actually that sketch appears to show the very same type of under-lever with the space filled in:



But there are other elements of this Reilly pin-fire, however, that have me buffaloed. It is a strange gun with never before seen features and there's a feeling it actually was made after 1860. A key might be the action maker, "S.Breeden." If the gun were indeed March 1858, the action maker, was active probably in Birmingham and that's a lot earlier than we thought for Birmingham made center-break actions or guns. Any idea who S.Breeden was and when and where he worked? (nothing found on the interned, census records, birth records so far.)