Most expensive Model 3 Ever?????

Register to hide this ad
I remain skeptical of the provenance. The handwriting expert states the signature within is "highly probable". Okay, butthatdoesn't mean it is. Plus, if you have ever written on something like a grip vs a flat sheet of paper, the appearance of the writing will appear different. Also, I think a larger writing sample would be necessary to prove this was truly written by Jesse James.

Conveniently, a packet if pertinent information is missing.

I'm not buying it. Shaky provenance at best. In order to spend that kind of money, I need definitive proof, such as a document detailing this revolver, as written in Jesse James' time, with serial number or other unique identifying feature.
 
I hear tell some smart old guy once said, "Buy the gun, not the story.". I reckon these folks'd heard about that too, and decided if they made the story long enough, they might could wear folks down to the point they'd just forget that warning----or just give up.

I sure am glad I didn't know anything about this until now when it's too late to run down there and get that gun.

Ralph Tremaine
 
Province of the TRUE gun OWNED by ...

Province of the TRUE gun OWNED by ...


A note I have seen in the past - could not verify with google:

We do not have the gun that shot Billy the Kid. Two other museums have it.

Also remember reading that the dime novel writer Ned Buntline
in his later years would buy Colt revolver at pawn shops
and resell as "the one he carried in the west".
(IRRC this was said by john Amber of Gun Digest)

Bekeart
 
Jesse's mother Zerelda Samuels had quite a little business selling Jesse's guns to visitors to her farm. She usually provided a letter with it . . .

I visited the farm in the very early 1970s and that story was relayed by tour guides to all who visited the home in that era. The truth about the story of Jesse's mother buying junk guns into the Twentieth Century, before her death in 1911, is legendary, but not proven to be true or false. Mostly because any and all who reportedly bought those guns are dead.
 
It bothers me also that they are claiming this revolver was a surplus item in 1880? Only 5 years Military service? Roy Jinks Book confirms it. I know they became surplus but only 5 years? I wonder why? Then poor Jessie somehow obtained this pistol "nickel plated" just prior to his death in 1882? I guess he didn't carry it for very long? Or perhaps not at all!
Or perhaps it was plated at some later date? But somehow during the re-Nickel process " The Blood" somehow remained on the grips. That's why they were " Stuck" to the gun as claimed in the description. That's a stretch I think.

I'm currently doing research on the firearms owned by the Wyoming State Museum. In the collection is a nickel plated Schofield with what appears to be an authentic Wells Fargo stamp as verified by knowledgeable members of this forum.

Our research indicates that the five-year period of military use is correct. As you probably know, the Colt Single Action Army revolver chambered for the Colt .45 was adopted by military in July 1873. The Schofield came into military service in 1875 and was chambered in proprietary .45 Smith and Wesson caliber, a shorter round which chambers in the SAA. But the "long" Colt cartridge will not chamber in the Schofield. This created problems in the supply chain and I believe is the reason the Schofield was declared surplus after only five years.

The Museum has two revolvers with the owner's name inside the grips, an 1875 Remington and a 1907 vintage Colt SAA, so it was not an unusual practice.

In my limited experience, establishing provenance with 100% accuracy is almost impossible. The donor of the Colt SAA above claimed the revolver was owned the infamous Tom Horn at the time he was a range detective in Wyoming. Horn was hung in 1903, the Colt was shipped in 1907. The true story of revolver is more interesting than the myth.
 
I can't remember for sure, but I think I saw a Jesse Schofield at the NRA museum at Bass Pro in Springfield MO. Wonder if it's the same one? Johnny Morris bought perhaps?
 
I appreciate this thread. Having watched the auction since it began on May 1, I had some concerns about the provenance - glad to see that others shared the skepticism.
 
I think I smell overripe carp.

It will be interesting to see if the buyer can sell it for, say, $2 million. Maybe he isn't a sucker after all, unless the DNA kills the deal.
 
I believe that it is generally accepted that Jesse wasn't wearing his guns at the time of his murder. Where did all of this "blood" come from?

Griff

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
 
Griff, The seller has a lengthy video explain his version of where the blood came from. He says Jesse's wife ran into the room where Jesse was shot, when she heard the shot, and found him on the floor bleeding. She tried to stop the bleeding and got blood on her hands and then grabbed the Schofield and wanted to shoot Charlie Ford ( Bob had already run away ) but Charlie said it was an accident. etc. , so the seller claims the blood under the stocks is Jesse's, transferred from his wife's hand which were bloody from touching Jesse's wound. ( Yeah, right !) Ed.
 
Ah. I see. I only watched most of the video, but apparently lost interest too soon. I should have guessed that he'd have an answer for everything...

Griff

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
 
I agree that the provenance may be a bit thin, however people who spend $600k on something like that are probably not going to go broke over it.

As my brother put it recently after we discussed someone buying some item or another for zillions of dollars - "Rich people are different".

I know about Bat Masterson and his selling the gun that killed Luke Short or someone and that he routinely sold it over and over again. It's pretty funny if true. The parallel story I read many years ago was that Zerelda James, Jess's mother, sold stones from his grave and every so often she would get more stones, replace them onto the grave, and continue selling them. Also very funny if true.

Jesse James did carry a Schofield. That is a fact. Whether it is this million dollar item or not is definitely subject to a question mark.
 
Reminds me of Dave Allen's story about the Irishman trying to sell a stranger what he claimed was the skull of Brian Boru. The mark said, "But that skull is much too small." The reply was, "This is the skull of Brian Boru when he was twelve!"

I'm not convinced. But then I don't have nearly $700,000, so it doesn't matter what I think.
 
Last edited:
The Schofield came into military service in 1875 and was chambered in proprietary .45 Smith and Wesson caliber, a shorter round which chambers in the SAA. But the "long" Colt cartridge will not chamber in the Schofield. This created problems in the supply chain and I believe is the reason the Schofield was declared surplus after only five years.

While the 'Schofield' was retired, the cartridge that fit both was not. So, the supply problem would only apply if going to civilian sources for ammunition.

Also, while the .45 Colt cartridge used in the trials was the 255gr bullet over 40gr of BP, I could find no evidence it was issued to the troops. Certainly by early 1874 the Army Ordinance Department had reduced the loading to a 250gr bullet over 30gr BP. Most, civilian ammunition suppliers offered both the 40gr and 30gr loading until the BP loads were phased out in the early 20th century.

On August 20, 1974 the Frankford Arsenal stopped production of the .45 Colt revolver cartridges. Then in early 1875 the Government "Revolver Ball Cartridge, Caliber .45" was introduced. The case of this cartridge was shorter, with a slightly wider rim, as to fit in both the Colt and S&W. It used a 203gr RNFP bullet over 28gr BP. Around 1882 the cartridge was changed from Berdan to Boxer primer. Finally, the M1887 Ball Cartridge was issued, again a compromise cartridge, and was the sole Government Cartridge until it was replaced by the .38 Long Colt iin 1892.

45Colt1874.jpg

45ColtSchof1875.jpg


The Army's using the reduced loading compromise cartridge is better understood if the physical requirements for Cavalry recruits is looked at. Cavalry recruits were restricted to able bodied men of good character, between the ages of 16 to 35, between 5'5'-5'10" in height, and weighing not less than 120 and not more than 155 pounds.
 
Last edited:
This supports the Continued use of the Schofield

This is why I'm not convinced the dis-similarities between the 45 Schofield and the Colt 45 would require the U.S. Army to discontinue or send to "Surplus" the Schofield model after only 5 years of service?
Although I suppose it's not beyond the poor decision making practices of the Army at that time since they also decided to replace the 45 caliber with the 38 in the early 1890's. That wasn't very smart was it.
 
Back
Top