I have a question about markings on the aforementioned revolver.

I am looking to buy one that shipped to Canada rather than Britain. This one listed on Mr Salter's website is advertised as one such gun, but it lacks the 'C' with broad arrow.

https://www.joesalter.com/category/p...ver-item-13842

The only aftermarket stamping is what appears to be a British property stamp on the butt.

Has anybody lettered a .455 Hand Ejector with such a marking? Did it ship to Canada?

As it's being represented as Canadian, I don't know how you could verify that without the C-broad arrow marking, other than by getting a factory letter. Why does Salter say that it is a Canadian order? He must have some reason. Is he willing to guarantee in writing that it is? If not, I wouldn't buy it.

In looking through the web site you will notice that many of his Canadian guns bear import stampings in the barrel flat. Most likely, since they also have a canadian shop, the guns may be coming from Canada through their Canadian location.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Interesting comments. But just because it wound up in Canada, does that make it "Canadian"?

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

And that is what I am concerned about. I would like one that shipped to Canada, not the UK or one of it's purchasing agents, i.e. Remington.

It may have shipped to Canada, or someplace else in the commonwealth, but not been accepted for issue and therefore not stamped. Nor does it appear to have the BNP proof marks to indicate that it was released from service for commercial sale.

Were it my guess, I would say that this gun came to Canada through something other than 'official' channels.

Of late, Joe Jr's descriptions are, how shall we say, "generous".

As earlier, I'd say if Salter can't back up his description or will provide a written guarantee that it can be returned if it does not letter as what you want, then I'd walk on by.

By no means do all the Canadian-shipped .455 HE 2nd Models have a C-broad arrow proof - which, in fact is the stamp that declares a gun 'decommissioned'. My money would be on Joe's staff member's description for one primary reason; that of the single proof mark on the butt - almost always indicative of Canadian shipment and issue, not to mention that the cataloguer, who I'm very familiar with, 'knows his stuff' on the various military S&W's of WW I and WW II.

Joe has imported thousands of Canadian military issue / civilian used guns, his company is actually the importer, it's their house mark that you see on the barrel-flat in their website photos.

Given that there are ' no absolutes' in S&W collecting, I could as easily be wrong as right, but my best guess is that this gun shipped to Canada in 1916-1917.

FWIW...
David

Good to see you on the Forum, David.

I know you stay busy, but your imput would be very helpful at times, as it was on this thread.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

I respectfully disagree with that. The C surrounding a broad arrow is an ownership mark. This mark indicates that the firearm was accepted into service for the Canadian military.

I believe that a revolver without the acceptance / ownership mark may have been privately purchased by a Canadian and used in WWI. That may be harder to document.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

I think that there are basically three remedies to this quanrdy.

1. Ask the seller to guarantee the Canadian shipment and make the sale conditional upon it. If it turns out not to have Canadian provenance, then the gun can be returned.

2. Get the serial number, call Roy Jinks and verify Canadian shipment.

3. Pass.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Not all S&W revolvers received the Canadian ownership mark of a broad arrow in a C. Looking at the badly stuck inspectors mark on the base of the butt strap, a crown with a number under it and the lack of British proofs, I would say this is almost certainly a Canadian issue revolver.

Regards

AlanD
Sydney

If my statement is in error re: the proof, Jack, I gladly stand corrected. My info on that subject is 30 years or so old, and came from a Canadian dealer I did business with for many years in the 80's and 90's.

Regardless, it is a well-established fact that the large majority of Canadian-govt. issue / shipped .455 2nd Models had only one proof, and it was located at the toe of the butt. Granted, there are exceptions, though far and few between. At the risk of being completely wrong, I still believe that the gun in question is a Canadian govt. purchased / shipped - issued example. I'm also sure that Joe and his staff know when they are handling a previously govt.-owned firearm, as they are required to operate under much more strict rules on the Canadian side of the border concerning former martial weapons.

David

These are the markings on my 455.

__________________
George Jamison

Quote:

the proof, Jack

It’s one of those things I’ve picked up over the last 20-30 years. Talking to people at gun shows, in gun shops, on the internet, it just seemed like it was pretty much common knowledge.

But that is not really proof. Bear with me. Back in the days when I was interested in Lee-Enfield rifles, I read what was widely considered to be the “Bible” of the LE: The British Service Lee by Ian Skennerton. I still have a copy.

On page 392, Mr. Skennerton has the various “Ownership Marks” that other countries (besides England) have applied to the rifles in this series. The C surrounding a Broad Arrow is listed as a Canadian Ownership Mark.

Naturally, one could argue that Skennerton’s book is about rifles not handguns, but it sure seems reasonable that the same mark applied by the same country at about the same time would have the same meaning, whether the mark is on a rifle or a handgun.

Looking around the internet, I found this on “the unofficial website of the British Army”:
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/th...y-mark.206933/

I also sent an e-mail to Steve Redgwell at 303British.com to ask if he can help out. Steve served in the Canadian military as an armourer for many years so he may be able to shed some light on this. I'll post his response here.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Thank you for the information. I went ahead and purchased the revolver in question. Once it arrives I will send for a letter from Mr Jinks.

That is probably not a bad decision. If it does turn out that there was some mistake about it, you will still have a fine revolver to trade toward something else later.

Or sell it here. There would be a lot of interested buyers.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

I am happy to report that it did ship to Canada. Here is the marking in question.





Thanks again for all the advice, I appreciate it.

Thanks for the letter! I learned something new. I always thought that all of the .455 Contract guns went through the Remington purchasing agent. Now I know different.

BTW George,that first MkII that you pictured looks like it went to Canada via Great Britain....

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

According to Clive Law's book these .455 Mk II HEs were shipped to Canada in 5 separate shipments divided as follows

1915
- Shipped September 25th#
- Shipped December 4th#
- Shipped December 10th*
- Shipped December 24th*

1916
- Shipped February 11th#
- Shipped February 26th*
- Shipped March 31st
- Shipped May 5th^
-Shipped June 2nd#
- Shipped June 9th#
- Shipped June 17th#
- Shipped June 24th^
- Shipped July 4th#
- Shipped July 8th^
- Shipped July 13th#
- Shipped July 15th #
- Shipped July 17th#
- Shipped July 22nd*
- Shipped July 29th#

1917
- Shipped February 10*

Initially the Canadian government was billed $12.70 per revolver but by 1917 that had risen to $15.75.

*Dates pilfered from other letters posted on the website.
# Letter seen on Gunbroker.
^ Other source

It appears there were more shipments than previously thought.

First range trip complete. The .455 round is much more pleasant to shoot with factory stocks than its .45 AR counterpart.

I think you have that backward. The Broad Arrow mark indicates govt. property! One sold "out of stores" has additional opposing Broad Arrow marks. As officers then bought their own sidearms, some will be unmarked as Govt. property and some sold to officers from official supplies will have those opposing arrow points. Or should; they may have let some slip past that procedure. But the officer had better have kept his receipt!

If an officer bought his gun on the commercial market, as Churchill did with his .45 auto in 1915, it will of course have no government markings at all; it was personal property.

How true! Magna stocks were long overdue.