Many thanks Daryl. Here's my thinking on patents (and please correct me if I'm wrong). If Reilly built a gun, it's logical that the Reilly company paid for the patents. Thus, if a company's records have Reilly payments - voila proof they made the gun. If Reilly ordered a gun and it was built by say WC Scott or someone else, Scott would have paid for the patents and Reilly would have paid Scott for the gun.

That was what Crudgington & Baker were suggesting with their comment about the "Lock-fast" patent. Does that seem logical? Are there other explanations? For instance, one poster here suggested firms bought whole blocks of numbers rather than taking an order then having to go get a use number. From the looks of use numbers on Reilly Purdey patent 1104, that explanation doesn't fit.

As mentioned, most auction houses or retail sellers do not bother to put patent use numbers found on a gun into their advertisements, Toby Barclay excluded. Here are a few Reilly's using Purdey patent 1104 with the use number. I was hoping that Purdey could confirm who paid for that patent use number:

17393 - E.M. Reilly & Co., New Oxford Street, London and 2 Rue Scribe, Paris; 12bore. Shotgun SxS. Push-forward U-L, hammer gun. Purdey Pat 1104, use #948 (CBL1's gun) (dated on my chart 1872)
17476 - E.M. Reilly & Co., New Oxford Street, London & Rue Scribe, Paris. 12bore. Shotgun SxS. U-L, Hammer gun (Buffum) (Purdey Pat 1104)(use# not mentioned)(1872)
17534 - E.M. Reilly & Co., New Oxford Street, London; 12 bore, SxS shotgun. Pushforward underlever, Purdy 1104 patent use # 1037.(1872)
18523 - E.M. Reilly & Co., New Oxford Street & rue Scribe, Paris. Shotgun SxS 12bore; U-L, hammer gun, Purdey patent 1104, use #2135(1874)
20468 - E.M. Reilly & Co., New Oxford Street, London and rue Scribe, Paris. 10bore. Shotgun SxS. Top lever hammer gun; Purdey patent 1104 use #3463 (1877)
25161 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 502, New Oxford Street, London & Rue Scribe, Paris. .500BPE/12ga. Rifle/Shotgun; side lever, hammer gun. (King of Spain prize - 1880 case; 1883 gun) Purdey double-bite patent 1104 (use # not mentioned)

=========================================================

As for the pinfire SN 11469, it was in the September 2019 auction and did not sell...given its rareness and condition and very moderate price that seemed surprising. I dated the SN to Sprin 1860. I commented on it previously on this line and here is my entry in the extant Reilly list on p.33 above:

11469 - E.M. Reilly & Co., (Address not mentioned). 12 bore; SxS; Pin-fire; under-lever, bar-in-wood.(1st SN'd extant center-break gun using Jones under-lever Sep 1859 patent)

After our discussion on the early days of British center-break guns above with Steve Nash, I'm now wondering if this is a Jones U/L or whether it is a single bite copy of Beringer's system. I wrote to Holts about this and never heard back...since the gun is coming up for sale again, I'll hit them up again. I do know that by 1861 Reilly was advertising a underlever "double-grip" system - see post above.

I've sent the following to Holts:
Sir, re the Reilly pin-fire SN 11469, lot number 2136 in your January 2020 sealed bid auction: Is this a single bite Reilly copy of the Beringer design or a double-bit Jones under-lever? Many thanks for the information.

Last edited by Argo44; 03/07/20 10:39 AM.
Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch