"Why?" One of my favorite questions. Sometimes there just isn't a satisfactory answer.
But consider this. The December 29, 1914 patent date relates to internal engineering changes in the M&P revolvers that were implemented in 1915 (the so-called 4th Change). This revolver model did not undergo another significant engineering change again until September, 1944. So, even though the patent expired, the guts of the gun contained the same parts in the same configuration as had been covered by the patent. So, why not continue to denote the patents, even though there is no real patent protection left to you? The parts are still being machined according to those patent drawings, even if the legal protection has run out. That makes sense to me, and I've observed this same practice on other pieces of machinery, beyond firearms. It really was a common industrial practice well into the 1950s.
Besides, there is always inertia as part of the explanation . . .
Jack