British Bulldog Revolver Question.

[Old Gun Guy]

Hello!
I have just finished working on this British Bulldog revolver, but I don't know much about the markings on it, or the caliber. The chambers are just slightly too small to accept a .32 S&W cartridge. It is a 6-shot, DA only. The left side of the barrel is roll-marked "PARIS". The top barrel flat has the engraving "g. Paul, e??". The right side of the barrel has upside down engraving " C. ?. Magenta, ?08". It has the Liege British proof mark of E over LG over a star, in an oblong circle with no crown on top. (black powder proof for rifles, ??) There is an R above this symbol. Anyone have any info on this beast? Believe it or not, this revolver functions and locks up nice and tight.
Thanks!

[hrf]

There's no such thing as a "Liege British" proofmark. The ELG in oval without a crown indicates it's pre-1893 Belgian and proofed in Liege, Belgium. Thousands were made by anonymous cottage industry workers 1870s-early 1900s. The "Paul" and "Magneta" marks may have been retailers.

If it's centerfire, caliber is probably .32 Short Colt/.320 European.

[Old Gun Guy]

hrf,
The "Blue Book Of Gun Values" lists that symbol as a British proof mark, proof house in Liege. Is this a typographical error?
Old Gun Guy

[hrf]

Originally Posted by Old Gun Guy

hrf,
The "Blue Book Of Gun Values" lists that symbol as a British proof mark, proof house in Liege. Is this a typographical error?
Old Gun Guy

Absolutely an error, typo or otherwise!

[Old Gun Guy]

hrf,
Thanks for the info. BTW, a .32 short colt fits the chamber perfectly.
Old Gun Guy

[Jim K]

Unless they moved Liege when I wasn't looking, the book is in error (I think they got their page headings mixed up). British revolvers had conventional trigger guards, not folding triggers.

Jim

[Old Gun Guy]

Jim K,
Thanks for the additional info.
Old Gun Guy

[jack404]

Britain had as part of its agreements, proof houses, barrel houses and booze ware houses in trading nations , most where run by imperial companies , but authorised to buy local stuff to "brit spec " so to say anything that attracted crown revenue was marked as much as possible out of country for smuggling reasons

sorry its actually possible

[jack404]

they had to have thee accompanying british stamps though too ..


full file is here http://jack404.minus.com/llKw0o

[jack404]

I aint saying it is , but read of some licensed makes and a few have turned up in catalouges and been described as a euro made BB pistol with folding trigger

and all a while ago

[jack404]

and this book will explain how all that went down

http://www.cornellpubs.com/old-guns/...php?item_id=50

[RJay]

Well light my fire and call me smokey, that goes against every thing I knew about proof marks. Well, I guess the next thing you will be trying to tell me is that the world isn't really flat.

[Jim K]

Jack, I know you are far more familiar with British and Commonwealth guns and the gun trade than I am, but are you saying that British authorities were authorized to put Belgian proof marks on guns? That is contrary to everything I know about European proof practices, and seems totally absurd. It also seems impossible, again from everything I know and have read, that the UK proof houses would allow their marks to be used outside their houses and indeed outside the country.

A proof house is a fairly complex operation, not just someone with a stamp and a hammer, and to establish proof houses all over Europe would be a very expensive proposition. And why not in the U.S., which did, and still does, a thriving arms trade with the U.K.?

I wonder if there is not some misunderstanding of the "bond" system, where materials are brought into a country physically, but placed under bond until they can be given any required approval or markings. But that is common commercial practice and doesn't require any proof houses to be established on foreign soil.

As to guns imported into England, at most times, Belgian proof was recognized and British proof was not needed (and vice versa), but at other times, guns imported from Belgium were proved in England and have both sets of proof marks, or Belgian-made guns were exported without proof and proved in the importing country. (U.S. guns were always proved when imported into England, because the U.S. has no government proof law and no recognized proof specifications or marks.)

Again, with all due respect, I think the explanation of a simple typo in the BB is more reasonable and more likely.

Jim

[jack404]

no ,,

please read the book above , i did this before once , everyone yelled and abused the hell outta me ,

some twat called the cops even saying i was trying to pull a fraud ..

its all explained in the book .. again no one will read it . thats a easy bet

belgium folks put on there marks on in one room , then took them to the next room where a brit put on the brit trade marks and put em in a box to ship home .. all under the officials eyes

or thats what i beleived happened under the system ... two officials got to sign a document

read the book its a complex trade thing that was on again off again for almost a century

i know i'll get it wrong and i loaned my copy and its errr been loaned ..

as i understand it they had a deal to buy stuff , they did it this way so there was no funny business, smuggling and fakes , proofs where serious things then

i think this way they kept faith in the proofs system

all that from a book made all way before i was even a possibility , let alone born ..

[jack404]

want to abuse someone? abuse the author the customs officials of britain at the time

if its all lies the lies go back 120 years or more

but again no-one will read it , they'll just make smart jokes inferring i'm wrong ..

i may be . see i went by the book

i also read how they traded with the USA in there , thats all probably wrong too ..

[Jim K]

OK, Jack, I have ordered that book. If I am wrong and there were British proof houses in Belgium and all kinds of British proof officials running about the world stamping guns with London or Birmingham proofs, I will apologize, most humbly. I just wonder how they kept it such a secret from Parliament (which passed the proof laws and designated proof houses) and why all the articles and books on the history of British proof never mention it.

Jim

[jack404]

dunno , how did 2 customs officials get killed in marceilles ??

lots i dont know , just read that it was done .. they even have a suggested desihgn for a place for all this

they did it with wine and alcohol they did it with silver and hall marks on that

they had lots of ways that made no sense to me ,

i just go by what is stated as fact by the government own books

[jack404]

maybe you can explain the 4 US customs guys at port botany here in Australia ,

they dont stamp proof marks that i know of but they do inspect stuff

the furs i sent last time , they signed the inspection report

US customs in Australia !! shocking!!

[Old Gun Guy]

jack404,
Thank you for sticking to your guns. (no pun intended). I posted what I had read, and if it was a typo why didn't BB correct it a long time ago? I'm with you on this one. Thanks again for your inputs.
Old Gun Guy

[jack404]

brits where funny about taxes and duty ,

while police where not armed , customs folks got a horse and a pistol and lantern besides the uniform ..

i could be wrong in understanding , but been in this spot a couple times , even sent someone a book to sort it , never seen the book since nor heard back , ,

so i wish i had it so i could scan it .. my memories not good and 6 years is a long time

[jack404]

did find this on the NRA museum web site

http://www.nramuseum.com/the-museum/...-revolver.aspx

This revolver is a Belgian copy of a British revolver design manufactured by the Birmingham firm of P. Webley & Sons.

The years following the American Civil War saw the rise of host of companies that produced small, inexpensive metallic cartridge handguns. Product lines ran from copies of firearms by established manufacturers including Smith & Wesson, to derringers and pepperbox pistols, small spur-trigger and folding-trigger pocket revolvers and "Velo Dog" pistols.

[jack404]

Now , if i have this right from memory

if a brit company licenced a euro company to make a copy , to be reimported to the UK it had to get a brit inspection stamp and duty paid as thats not included in the licence fee , duty had to be paid as it was a foreign gun , the licence was a civil agreement , not a exemption from statues and levies ( i think was the quote in a ruling at the time )

if no brit marks its a all euro gun ,

and went a different route to you

but belguim made "British Bulldog: marked guns are common here , or where , very few had both set's of marks

black powder cartridges saw them as a common hand in at the buy backs ..

[Jim K]

Jack, when I get my copy of that book, I will try to find out exactly what is written in it, and will share (as best I can) pertient parts. But I have never heard that the oval ELG and other Liege marks are BRITISH proof marks, or that there were any BRITISH proof houses outside the UK applying GP or BP stamps. I really think you misread something or misunderstood something.

Frankly, I think for some reason you have taken a misprint in one book and have gotten some idea that it is correct and that everything else written about proof marks and the proving process is wrong. The inclusion of the Liege marks under "British" in the BB is a simple mistake. Period. Not an international plot with a cast of thousands - just a publishing mistake.

I will let you and the folks know what the 1906 book says.

BTW, it is common practice for countries that trade extensively with each other to have customs officials in the other country. For example, they will (or can) check the contents of containers as they are filled, and then seal them so they can be passed at the receiving end without further checking and delay. All that is covered in trade agreements which are public documents and which you can check any time you want.

Perhaps intelligence agents pose as customs inspectors, or perhaps activists attack customs agents simply because they represent an "enemy" country, but that doesn't mean they are not legitimate.

As to the name "British Bulldog", it was often put on guns made in Belgium and the U.S. solely as a trade name, and I doubt any licenses were involved. The Belgian gun trade, to the chagrin of British makers, dumped thousands of cheap shotguns on the world (primarily U.S.) market with names close to or even the same as those of top British makers, and there was nothing the Brits could do about it.

Jim

[hrf]

Originally Posted by Old Gun Guy

jack404,
Thank you for sticking to your guns. (no pun intended). I posted what I had read, and if it was a typo why didn't BB correct it a long time ago? I'm with you on this one. Thanks again for your inputs.
Old Gun Guy

I must stick to my guns also, as your gun is Belgian, made in Belgium by Belgians, and proofed in Liege by Belgians.

There were a few quality Belgian gunmakers, but because of the mass of low quality, low cost guns turned out by unnamed sources, their reputation suffered, and no British maker or retailer would want their products marked to indicate made in Belgium!

On the contrary, in an effort to compete with the lower Belgian prices, even Webley and other British firms obtained some guns in the white from Belgium, had them proofed and finished in Birminghmam, and marked with their name.

Blue Book is more interested in book sales than accuracy, and I have advised them of other errors that they never bothered to acknowledge or correct.

[jack404]

and this is why they stamped em


http://www.phelbs.com/HRFTX/Copies.htm