S&W .44 Hand Ejector 1st Model #15

[CptCurl]

Back to #15-
What do you know of the gun?
I assume you bought it in the US and did not import it. Is any history available, even recent?
I was hoping someone else might broach the subject, not wishing to be indelicate. No one has, and it is such a significant gun, I have to raise the discussion-
I'm reasonably sure the gun is reblued, and I wondered if you knew it. Being familiar as you are with Brit sporting arms, I'm sure you're aware of their fetish for 'freshening' guns when they show wear. Do you think one of the English houses did it? I think that may be the most likely possibility since it is such a high quality job.
No offense intended, and I hope you were already aware of it.

Lee, thanks for your comments about the double rifles. I can go on-and-on about them, but not here.

No, you have not offended in the least. It does not embarrass me to discuss the condition of a firearm. They are machines, not family relations. I have no trouble being objective about them.

And yes, I was aware the finish has been freshened, certainly following application of the proof stamps, as they are blackened. There are areas of the gun that have been polished lightly while other areas don't appear to have been polished and seem to have original finish underlying. The "reblue" clearly is rust blue and not a hot dipped caustic finish. All lines of the gun are preserved.

You mention the British penchant for "freshening up" their guns, and that is exactly what came to my mind when I received this gun. My theory is that there was a bit of "freshening up" after the application of the proof stamps, and not because it was down in condition.

I have had the pleasure to correspond with David Wilson about this gun on several occasions, both before and since acquisition. What follows is a passage from an email message I sent him the day after I received it:

Yesterday evening I took it home, cleaned it inside and out, and closely inspected it. The refinish truly is "light". On most surfaces I can still detect the original underlying factory polish marks. I would conjecture that the finish was touched up in 1952 after it was imported to England and submitted for proof. The Brits pretty well know how to do such restorations, and this is well done. One of my "litmus tests" of yesterday evening was to put the .44 beside my 2nd Model that unquestionably has original finish to see how they compare. The .44 is refinished, but it didn't fail this test.

I have never seen higher quality wood on the handle of a pistol. The stocks are marblecake English walnut of outstanding quality and they are in pristine condition. I thought the stocks on my 2nd Model were nice, but these put them to shame.

Incidentally, it was after cleaning the TL and comparing side-by-side the two revolvers referred to, that I took the photo with which I started the other thread with my play on words about "placing 1st and 2nd".

My "guts" photos from that evening aren't very good. I took them hand-held under the bright glaring lights of my workbench. Nevertheless, I'll post them for what it's worth:

There is slight evidence of light pitting, assumably from storage in a holster, in very limited areas of the gun. What little polishing was done in the "freshening up" was not heavy enough to undermine this very light pitting. This can be seen most prominently on either side of the barrel, just behind the muzzle.

The revolver is absolutely pristine on the inside, and its bore and chambers are flawless: like new. You can see that almost all the color hardening remains on the hammer and trigger. The locking cam on the yoke is darkened somewhat from the "freshening" but it still retains colors and was not polished.

I don't know anything of the history and hope somehow to find more on it myself. I just recently bought the gun from a dealer in Louisiana. He didn't seem to have any background on it either. I do intend to request a factory letter. I've not done that and would appreciate any pointers on how it's done and how to get the most information. My last factory letter was from Purdey's about a .303 double rifle.

1897 Purdey .303 British

(Ha ha! I ended up with a double rifle after all!)

Please keep the comments and information coming.

 

[deadin]

I'm reasonably sure the gun is reblued

Lee,
What's the give-away?? The only thing I could see is that the current blueing just doesn't seem to have the "luster" that S&W put on their guns of the period.
(Or could that just be because of being 100+ years old??
I don't have the luster I used to either...)

 

[Hondo44]

Curl,

Not that it matters, I too suspected a refinish when I noticed the darkness of the triple lock cam insert and the extended plug for the front locking bolt. It's still a splendid, rare and unique piece of S&W history.

 

[44R]

I'm glad to see someone bought this revolver. I had my eye on it for a while but hesitated because I could not inspect it in person. It is even better than I thought it would be. I just want to add my praise to the chorus and say thanks for the clear, professional pictures.

 

[CptCurl]

We are having a good time discussing what we observe about the condition of this wonderful revolver. I mentioned in a post above I had discussed it by private email with David Wilson before buying it and then just after I received it. I quoted a passage from one email above, but there was a more detailed account of my observations in another email. I've just looked that up and found it.

My photos are a pretty good representation of the revolver, but it might be interesting to other members for me to post my verbal description from the first inspection I had. Even though "a picture is worth 1000 words" there are times that words describe things a photo won't show.

So for the sake of discussion, here is a quote of an email I sent to David only moments after I opened the shipping package on January 25 (date stamp on the email is 1/25/12 @ 4:13 pm):

The Triple Lock .44 arrived this afternoon, and I thought I might share my observations.

First, it does appear to be refinished, just like the seller said, but very lightly so. There are no date stamps, stars, or other indication of work by S&W, and I would surmise the finish was touched up in England. It actually takes some effort to see the evidence of refinishing, but there are some very light pits that weren't polished out (fortunately), and the big S&W logo on the sideplate is soft on the edges. The locking cam on the yoke has had blue applied. Obviously what was done was slow rust blue and NOT caustic hot dip blue. The hammer and trigger are untouched and have almost all their original finish. There aren't any waves or dished out places.

The serial number is "15" and matches on all parts - frame, barrel, yoke, cylinder, back of extractor star, and top inside of the right stock in pencil. There are no military marks at all. Correct commercial Birmingham England proofs are present.

The bore and chambers look like new. Mechanics are perfect except that the bolt drops onto the cylinder soon after cylinder rotation commences, leaving a drag line. They seemed to set them up that way back then. Lockup is tight, and every chamber indexes perfectly. The barrel to cylinder gap is quite tight. One thickness of paper can be inserted; but not two. There is almost no fore and aft movement of the cylinder in the frame. The action is glassy smooth with a very nice pull both SA and DA. There is no provision for a lanyard ring and the serial number appears in the very center of the butt. The stocks are fabulous with nice figure and no significant damage or wear. They fit perfectly. The frame screws all show some mishandling or "buggering." The screw attaching the thumb latch is perfect, as is the screw that attaches the stocks.

So in the final analysis, it's a damn nice piece with its only shortcoming being the light polish and refinish. I've seen many I would classify as "worse." To find a better one it would have to be original finish in high condition. That's my objective report.

I was hoping against hope it would prove not to be refinished, so I have to express some disappointment. But all-in-all I have to say it's not an obnoxious refinish like so often encountered. Light reflecting off the surfaces of this gun does not offend. I have seen many "NIB" S&W revolvers with more waves and irregularities.

Here let me point out that the seller had represented it as refinished. However, his photos weren't the best, and they left open the possibility, however slight, that the seller was wrong. That's why I said I had been hoping against hope it was just the description of an overly cautious seller. In short, I was hoping for an unlikely windfall.

Here's a passage from a followup email I sent later that same evening (9:00 pm):

You might be interested to know the Triple Lock has no martial marks whatsoever. Now that I have it in hand I can confirm it was proofed in Birmingham with civilian marks in 1952. The mark just behind the trigger on the left is the Birmingham private viewer's date stamp with crossed swords, a "B" to the left, a "C" to the right, and the number "5" below. "BC" is the date code for 1952, and the gun was proofed by the viewer 5th in rank at the Birmingham Proof House.

I knew from the earlier photos that the proofs were much later than manufacture because I could see it was marked "Not English Make". That mark came into use in 1925 and was discontinued in 1954. It corresponds with the "Crown over circled BM" and the "Crown over circled NP".

This revolver, S/N 15, clearly has some history. I think it should be lettered. What do you think?

Earlier I said I thought the cam plate appears to be blued. It's dark, but it still has colors.

So now, not only do you have my best effort at photos, but also my candid observations of the gun in hand. Again I want to thank David Wilson for his kindness in letting me "gnaw on his ear." His advice and opinions have helped me. David, I hope you don't mind my saying that!

These relics of the past are fascinating. Each one has its own history and its own character. We observe and experience the physical character. Sometimes we can only guess and day-dream about the history. In my mind this 1st Model must have been in the very first production batch of the Triple Locks. It shared the same workbenches at the same time as #1. That's pretty cool in itself.

In all likelihood the only additional history to discover will be the contents of a factory letter. Yet there's the possiblity that someone reading these posts will know a significant tidbit to contribute. Maybe there's a prior owner with knowledge of its history.

Let the discussion continue.

 

[DCWilson]

Curl, my ear is just fine. I assure you that I learned more from our exchange of emails than you did! As I recall all I offered was a couple of thoughts about refinishing and some speculation about proof marks that turned out to be completely off base.

I'm really enjoying this thread, which ought to be listed in the "Memorable Thread" index. The proofing information alone is worth the price of admission. The fine photos are just gravy.

 

[CptCurl]

Earlier I promised to report once I received the S&W letter. After some delay, here's my report.

I must confess having had the greedy hope that this revolver would letter to some prominent and well-known public figure of the time. Fall-back position would be some interesting geographic placement indicated. My luck with S&W is about the same as my luck with the Virginia lottery or at a gaming table at Las Vegas. Snilch.

Golcher B

Yeah, that's right. Golcher B. Could be I'm ignorant and just don't recognize the name. After all, he or she is so prominent as to just use an initial for a last name. Anybody kin?

Ok, it's one thing to be stumped by a name, but what really sets my head spinning is the statement that this revolver was proofed under the 1904 rules and again in 1977. Wow! I thought I had some references on English proofing and I thought I knew something about the subject. The 1952 Birmingham viewer's date stamp is clear as a bell.

Either I need to go back to school or the Birmingham Proof House gave a goofy opinion. And if I'm wrong (which is always a front-row possibility), then Nigel Brown and Gerhard Wirnsberger are all wet too. After all, I got my information from their reference works. My analysis, based on their reference works, is set out above and I won't repeat it here.

I am not privy to the inner sanctum here; and I can't join the S&W Collectors, not knowing anyone in my hick town to sponsor me, but if anyone has the ear of Roy Jinks, I would love to know what information he supplied Birmingham, and what exactly the Birmingham Proof House said back in return.

In the end, it's still the 15th .44 Special ever made in commercial production.

 

[STCM(SW)]

What a neet revolver with lots of questions still to be ans.!

 

[DCWilson]

There was a specialty firearms store on Montgomery Street in San Francisco called Clabrough and Golcher.

It was destroyed in the earthquake:

And I'm not sure of the date of incorporation, but there was a Golcher Brothers sporting goods company, perhaps formed from the wreckage of C&B.

Hmm, an image import link is no longer working. Here's the link to a business letter with a Golcher Bros.letterhead.

http://www.sfgenealogy.com/sf/history/heads/hpltb062.jpg

Rats! Not working now. Seems like there must be an access counter that blocks that page after too many hits. I hope others can see it, but I get a 403 error on my computers.

Sounds like you have a storied California gun!

 

[Buford57]

A quick internet search revealed William Golcher as a US partner of J.P. Clabrough, the Birmingham gunmaker and a family of Golchers as New York gunsmiths of the percussion era.

 

[DCWilson]

Google or Bing will give you some more links for Clabrough and Golcher individually and as partners. Both men came from British gunsmithing families and met in England during a return trip from the US in the 1870s or 1880s. Sounds like travel to and from England was not unheard of for a Golcher.

The last Golcher to run the business was Benned Golcher, who retired in 1949. He might be "Golcher, B" in S&W records, but in 1909 he would have been in his early 20s. Even if working in the gun store, he might not have been the designated recipient for firearms orders.

Anyway, there is enough here to get you started, I think.

 

[ddixie884]

I feel as though I have had a history lesson, complete with a slide show. Thank you, all.............

 

[Frank46]

Thank you all for sharing the histories of the 44 and the 303 found it fascinating. Frank

 

[CptCurl]

So "Golcher B" may well be shorthand for Golcher Brothers. That's interesting. A Google search turns up various pieces of information to indicate that firm was active at the time #15 was shipped.

I suppose it always will remain a mystery, as I have no idea how to pursue it further. Would anybody know whether the records of Golcher Brothers still exist, and where?

Hmm, an image import link is no longer working. Here's the link to a business letter with a Golcher Bros.letterhead.

http://www.sfgenealogy.com/sf/histor...s/hpltb062.jpg

Rats! Not working now. Seems like there must be an access counter that blocks that page after too many hits. I hope others can see it, but I get a 403 error on my computers.

I downloaded the referenced image of Golcher Brothers letterhead and placed it on my server. Here it is:

Frank46, I'm glad you enjoyed the little .303 Brit. It's a peach!

Thanks to all for this interesting information. Please keep it coming. I would still like to unravel the conundrum of Roy's statement about the proof marks.


Cheers!

 

[Raider]

I gained a bucket load of knowledge today. Thanks for posting about your Triple Lock. Its a beautiful revolver and its history is fascinating.

Charlie

 

[Hondo44]

CptCurl,

Thanks again for sharing that unique specimen with us. On a sidebar, you may want to pull the yoke and cylinder using caution not to let the cyl hold open device, a pin and spring 'fly' from the yoke hinge when separated from the frame.

These parts are often rusted in place, especially after a re-blue if salts are not completely flushed from the hole. Extra cleaning and oiling of the hole is great preventative care.

 

[CptCurl]

Jim,
Thanks for the tip. I have had this revolver and my Second Model both completely to pieces for cleaning and lubrication. In each case I was careful about the spring and detent in the yoke hinge. Both were free and without any grime or corrosion in the hole, I'm happy to say. Both went back to where they belong to lie quietly for another generation or two.

Again, good advice. Thanks!

On a very pleasant note, a friend was here for the weekend. We spent Saturday on the range with a number of S&W revolvers. I enjoyed shooting #15 and my .455 Second Model, along with my pre-25 and pre-14 (both 5 screw guns). It was a great day at the range, and #15 stood proud, shooting as accurately as I am able to hold it and see the sights.

 

[Clean Break]

Cpt. Curl,

the photos you took of your .44 are the best I've ever seen documenting a firearm. So many angles, well lit, calm letting the lines of the revolver speak for themselves in ways most guys with guns (or photograpers targeting guns) can't capture. It shows your knowledge and respect for the subject. Craft, documenting craft, well worded and researched ... more craft. I like your loading bench... you like the science of it all too, and evidently, you SHOOT to boot! Do you hunt? Ever tote one of those lovely double rifles to Africa?

I really like your Purdey .303 - the cutaway view of the locks is fantastic, what an indulgence in steel. The curves are nothing short of voluptuous.... the stockwork sublime, and evidently it has balance. Wow, they don't make rifles like that anymore.

I can't help but show off my .303 SMLE that I cleaned up and rubbed 20 coats of boiled linseed oil on, my bayonet & my S & W Military & Police. Living history... Clean Break.

 

[Hondo44]

Jim,
Thanks for the tip. I have had this revolver and my Second Model both completely to pieces for cleaning and lubrication. In each case I was careful about the spring and detent in the yoke hinge. Both were free and without any grime or corrosion in the hole, I'm happy to say. Both went back to where they belong to lie quietly for another generation or two.

Again, good advice. Thanks!

On a very pleasant note, a friend was here for the weekend. We spent Saturday on the range with a number of S&W revolvers. I enjoyed shooting #15 and my .455 Second Model, along with my pre-25 and pre-14 (both 5 screw guns). It was a great day at the range, and #15 stood proud, shooting as accurately as I am able to hold it and see the sights.

Glad to hear that. I got a nicely refinished TL Target for a great price but had to drill out the detent parts and replace them. Turned out good, you wouldn't be able to tell but what a tedious job!
Those old Smiths are so fun to shoot and their accuracy and actions just put a smile on my face.

 

[wbraswell]

Great thread, revolver and pics. Curl, if you want to start a thread and show off those doubles, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit.